And the next president will be ... ? PACKERS-REDSKINS GAME ON SUNDAY WILL TELL YOU

Kentucky.com ^ | Fri, Oct. 29, 2004 | Joseph White

[Andy from Beaverton]

Posted on Fri, Oct. 29, 2004

 

And the next president will be ... ?

PACKERS-REDSKINS GAME ON SUNDAY WILL TELL YOU

By Joseph White

ASSOCIATED PRESS

ASHBURN, Va. - This election season, Washington Redskins cornerback Fred Smoot has a predicament faced by many NFL players: a Democrat's background and a Republican's income.

"They turn Republican. I see it all the time," Smoot said. "It all goes back to changing your economic value."

Smoot, a black from modest means in Mississippi, has decided to choose his roots over his pocketbook. He is supporting John Kerry for president.

"When you go into a higher tax bracket, all of a sudden you don't want to vote for this candidate because he's going to raise taxes," Smoot said. "I thought about it. I'm not going to solely vote for this candidate just because he's going to save me a couple of dollars and it not turn out to be the best thing for me or my country."

That, however, presents Smoot with another dilemma: For Kerry to win, the Redskins have to lose on Sunday -- at least according to a bizarre statistical correlation that's been accurate for seven decades.

"We've got to win this game no doubt, but I'm hoping John Kerry can kind of reverse the curse," Smoot said. "I'm wishing him luck, man. This is the millennium for all trends to be broken."

Since the Redskins became the Redskins in 1933, the result of the team's final home game before the presidential election has correctly predicted the White House winner. If the Redskins win, the incumbent party wins. If they lose, the incumbent party is ousted.

"It's kind of amazing," Coach Joe Gibbs said. "You wouldn't think something like that would line up that many times."

Gibbs said the statistic doesn't really mean anything, but he can at least pretend that it does -- because he's solidly in the Bush camp.

"Hopefully we'll have a lot of people pulling for us," said Gibbs, who voted when he traveled to his North Carolina home over the bye weekend.

Kerry's vice presidential candidate, John Edwards, has been quoted as saying he's rooting for the Packers. While no doubt thankful for the endorsement, Green Bay Coach Mike Sherman is concerned about more rudimentary matters, such as the health of quarterback Brett Favre.

"It's going to take a lot more than Packers fans to determine the outcome of an election," Sherman said.

Redskins win, incumbent wins -- a history

Since 1933, when the Boston Braves were renamed the Redskins, the result of the team's final home game before the presidential election has always correctly predicted the White House winner. If the Redskins win, the incumbent party wins. If they lose, the incumbent party is ousted. An election-by-election recap:

1936: Redskins (in final year in Boston) defeated Chicago Cardinals 13-10 on Nov. 1. Franklin Roosevelt won re-election over Alf Landon on Nov. 3.

1940: Redskins defeated Pittsburgh Pirates 37-10 on Nov. 3. Roosevelt won re-election over Wendell Willkie on Nov. 5.

1944: Redskins defeated Cleveland Rams 14-10 on Nov. 5. Roosevelt won re-election over Thomas Dewey on Nov. 7.

1948: Redskins defeated Boston Yanks 59-21 on Oct. 31. Incumbent Harry Truman (who assumed office after Roosevelt's death) defeated Dewey on Nov. 2.

1952: Redskins lost to Pittsburgh Steelers 24-23 on Nov. 2. Dwight Eisenhower defeated Adlai Stevenson on Nov. 4, returning the Republicans to the White House for the first time in 20 years.

1956: Redskins defeated Cleveland Browns 20-9 on Oct. 21. Eisenhower won re-election over Stevenson on Nov. 6.

1960: Redskins lost to Cleveland Browns 31-10 on Oct. 30. John Kennedy defeated vice president Richard Nixon on Nov. 8.

1964: Redskins defeated Chicago Bears 27-20 on Oct. 25. Lyndon Johnson (who assumed office after Kennedy's death) defeated Barry Goldwater on Nov. 3.

1968: Redskins lost to New York Giants 13-10 on Oct. 27. Nixon defeated Hubert Humphrey on Nov. 5.

1972: Redskins defeated Dallas Cowboys 24-20 on Oct. 22. Nixon won re-election over George McGovern on Nov. 7.

1976: Redskins lost to Dallas Cowboys 20-7 on Oct. 31. Jimmy Carter defeated Gerald Ford (who assumed office after Nixon's resignation) on Nov. 2.

1980: Redskins lost to Minnesota Vikings 39-14 on Nov. 2. Ronald Reagan unseated Carter on Nov. 4.

1984: Redskins defeated Atlanta Falcons 27-14 on Nov. 5. Reagan won re-election over Walter Mondale on Nov. 6.

1988: Redskins defeated New Orleans Saints 27-24 on Nov. 6. Vice president George Bush defeated Michael Dukakis on Nov. 8.

1992: Redskins lost to New York Giants 24-7 on Nov. 1. Bill Clinton unseated Bush on Nov. 3.

1996: Redskins defeated Indianapolis Colts 31-16 on Oct. 27. Clinton won re-election over Bob Dole on Nov. 5.

2000: Redskins lost to Tennessee Titans 27-21 on Oct. 30. George W. Bush defeated Al Gore on Nov. 7.

2004: Redskins host Green Bay Packers on Sunday. Bush faces John Kerry on Tuesday.

---

Sunday

Green Bay at Washington

When: 1 p.m.

Records: Packers 3-4; Redskins 2-4

[Novel]

You missed my brilliant analysis on this in another thread.

GB has some key injuries on offense, namely Farve, Green and Driver. They are playing hurt. Therefore I think it will be a low scoring game. That favors WA. Not to mention WA's defense is number one in the NFL.

Redskins 17
Packers 14

[Defiant]

Agree. This is so stupid as to be beyond belief, and to have major news outlets pick up this "find" shows how pathetic the thinking faculties of those folks are.

There are literally BILLIONS of events that occur on a regular basis, including right before a presidential election. Some have relevance to the election-the state of the economy and market, polling data, whether we are at war. Some do not, and sporting events are among those that have no relevance to the election.

You could examine any number of mundane events that occurred since 1920, and, out of billions of them, find THOUSANDS if not MILLIONS that predict the outcome of the election. The length of caterpillar fur. The date the leaves turn in New Hampshire. The record of the Susquehanna HS football team. The votes of a 6-person precinct in Idaho. The severity of the flu season. Baby names. Flight travel patterns. The depth of the Mississippi at Vicksburg.

Any number of these things could be 15 for 15 in predicting the winner of the election. And they still would not mean jack.

[joesnuffy]

Go Packers

I repeat...

GW BUSH IS THE MAN WHO BEATS ALL ODDS

What could be ODDER than John F Kerry....

[Castro]

You could examine any number of mundane events that occurred since 1920

Someone did the research on this one, what have you got?

[BlessedBeGod]

But I like the Packers better. *pout*

[lepton]

Just think, if Washington loses today, we will have wiped out two of the longest streaks in sports in one week. First the BoSox and now this.

Three. Don't forget the Patriots.

[sinkspur]

In any year that the Lakers go to the Finals (as they did this year), the incumbent always wins.

[NJ Neocon]

Superstition is a form of idol worship.

[rocklobster11]

Happy Packers Fans = Bush Victory.

I noticed that in the history of Redskins last home games before an election, there was no information on what happens when the last Redskins home game is against a team in the swing state of Wisconsin.

The game means nothing, except in the context of football. As a Cowboys fan, I was hoping they could find a way for both teams to lose.

[lepton]

BTW, the odds are 1 in 131,072 so far, and 1 in 262,144 if it holds.

[Always Right]

If you look at enough sporting events, you will find one with a perfect correlation. This means nothing.

[Snake65]

I'm rooting for the Packers and Bush.

Superstition doesn't trouble me.

[commish]

Packers 10 Redskins 0 second quarter.

[Snake65]

Make that 17-0

[Snake65]

Make that 17-0

[brewcrew]

Redskins 17
Packers 14

Right now, Packers 17, Skins 0.

Kinda blows that theory out of the water.

[Gandalf_The_Gray]

bizarre statistical correlation that's been accurate for seven decades

Statisticians will all tell you that "correlation is not causation".

Regards,
GtG

[takbodan]

The Redskins are missing their two starting safties. That's why Farve is eating them up.

[lepton]

Yep.

Patterns are amusing. No one can say that there is any causality though, until enough people believe it.

My notations on there being 131,000 to 1 odds should be compared to the literally billions of possiblities noted above.