I'm not a mathematician, but shouldn't the statistical chance be the same no matter who's figuring it?"NFL.com claim the Bucs have a 33 percent chance to make the postseason, via wild card or division title. . . ESPN says the Bucs have a 22 percent shot at the postseason and the New York Times model puts Tampa Bay at 15 percent"
I'm not a mathematician, but shouldn't the statistical chance be the same no matter who's figuring it?"NFL.com claim the Bucs have a 33 percent chance to make the postseason, via wild card or division title. . . ESPN says the Bucs have a 22 percent shot at the postseason and the New York Times model puts Tampa Bay at 15 percent"
No, because everyone's model (key word) is going to be based on different SUBJECTIVE assumptions. For example, the NYT model is actually The Athletic's model. The Athletic says this about its model:
"The projections are based on 100,000 simulations of the remainder of the season, which factors in each team’s projected strength, current health as well as its remaining schedule."
The ESPN prediction is just that, a prediction form their "analysts," no doubt using different assumptions. One ESPN analyst sees the Bucs bouncing back to 10-7
NFL.com is a Next gen model of 10,000 simulations
