Leave it to our beloved trolls to trumpet the prophetic glory of the Cold, Hard Football Facts.

 

Earlier this week, we published a piece referencing our analysis of Pittsburgh early in the 2005 season that proved quite prophetic. This new update, and our self-congratulatory bombast, prompted a small thread in the Football Forum in which troll jw63 asked us to ante up for the upcoming season.

 

We will, of course, have our 2006 preseason analysis in the coming weeks. But the interesting part is that the Chief Troll took an opportunity in the thread to take a jibe at our staff for its not-so-accurate 2005 preseason predictions. In fact, our lack of faith in our preseason predictions was evident in the title of the piece from last summer: "Fearless and perhaps quite useless predictions."

 

The self-loathing was all part of the humility lessons we're taking, as a way to counter the constant narcissistic chest-thumping that more or less defines the Cold, Hard Football Facts. It turns out that some people think we trumpet our own fusillade of successes just a little too much.

 

Jw63's thread looked like it would turn into a "tool on the Cold, Hard Football Facts session," with our inaccuracy skewered like so many spicy Thai barbecue shrimp kabobs. (Hey, sounds good! Look for a recipe from the 225 Club soon.)

 

It did not. Thanks to some work by troll newcomer More Cowbell, it turned into a paean to the all-knowing superiority of the Cold, Hard Football Facts.

 

While we're not proud of our 2005 preseason predictions, we certainly bested those of many of the nation's most noted "pundits" – and by a wide margin.

 

Here's how we stacked up, according to More Cowbell, based upon number of playoff teams among the actual 12 each "pundit" named correctly. You'll notice that the so-called "independent" football media, like the Cold, Hard Football Facts and our prolifically analytical friends at FootballOutsiders.com, fared pretty damn well compared with the "pundits."

 

Accurate picks: 4 division winners, 2 wild cards – 50 percent

 

3 division winners, 1 wild card – 33 percent

 

1 division winner, 0 wild cards – 8 percent

 

1 division winner, 0 wild cards – 8 percent

 

Hey, even when we're shamed to the point of mocking ourselves, it turns out we're more accurate than the "pundits." The best part is that we didn't look up our respective analysis from last summer. Our loyal trolls made the effort. And it proves once again that, if you want the most accurate analysis found anywhere on Planet Pigskin, there's only one place to turn.

 

Yes, we know. While it's clear we'll earn an A+ in gridiron analysis, it's also obvious that our lessons in humility are destined for failure.