Sports Jeopardy - Episode 5 [Spoilers]

[jeopfansincebirth]

Another episode of Sports Jeopardy! is up. Differences from last week: Dan reading off Final responses and wagers, and a longer introduction with conversation between Dan and Kelly.

Nice to hear that Kelly recently completed Ironman Kona!

My score was 12,000, with 1 correct response on a Daily Double (Patrick Roy), but 4 negs prevented me from having a higher score (I thought Dustin Brown won the 2014 Conn Smythe Trophy).

Instaget Final.

[LeFlaneur]

That was a good show and a nice story about Kelly. I think I got 7 triple stumps but missed FJ. Good game. Loads of fun.

[Ryno]

Good game overall. Yes, nice story about Kelly. Funny crack by Dan about Katerina Witt.

Lach Trash: Michelle Kwan, Ayrton Senna, Patrick Roy, dressage.

Got FJ after three seconds.

[MarkBarrett]

Pedro Borbon was one for the time machine as I had all but forgotten about the incident. It was a big deal back then and would have been huge with the ESPN/internet age of today. Tree Rollins got me though unable to pull the name.

My favorite miss of the game was the quarterhorse racing being drag racing. Three guys playing Sports J! and they get dressage? Even if they knew it I don't blame them for making it a stumper.

The reversal on the Soviets/USA hockey game to accept "one" as the winning margin had to be done based on the clue's wording, but did any of you here say that instead of 4-3?

The FJ! clue was a brow wiper for me. My first thought was to write any coach who very likely had both the Super Bowl and any college bowl game win. Switzer came to me first to at least have a guess on paper.

Matching up the Super Bowl Roman numerals in the later years to the teams playing is not something I can do quickly and I do not always remember them by the calendar year either. Concentrating on the Rose Bowl and perhaps subliminally recally the earlier UCLA clue in the game, I figured out Rams/Vermeil with just enough time to scribble his last name.

Host Dan had fun giving Steve the business for not getting the Chicago-related clues even in the middle of game play. Evan had better luck getting the Detroit arena clue.

Yes, Kelly was featured nicely in the episode.

[legendneverdies]

Crackle skipped over, at least on my watching, the part between the beginning of the FJ! think music and about the middle of the end credits/post game recap.

[JFanForever]

I was able to get all three Daily Doubles, plus FJ almost immediately. Then again, I know I need to work on stuff outside of baseball, basketball, football and hockey.

[jeff6286]

Coaches
By winning Super Bowl XXXIV in 2000, he became the first head coach to win both a Rose Bowl & a Super Bowl.

Spoiler

Who is Dick Vermeil? Evan had no guess; Steve said Jon Gruden.

Dan Gartland: $7,000+$3,001=$10,001...wins $5,000
Steve Howell: $5,000-$5,000=$0
Evan Berman: $3,750-$3,000=$750

[jeff6286]

While the calendar year/Roman numeral issue does make NFL championship teams a bit harder to immediately identify than their counterparts in other sports, I thought there were a few that were still pretty well-known: 1972 Dolphins, 1985 Bears, 1999 Rams, 2000 Ravens. One historic perfect team, two historic defenses, and one historic offense. Kurt Warner's emergence, Marshall Faulk's incredible year, record-breaking offensive numbers, the Music City Miracle boosting the Titans to the Super Bowl, one of the greatest Super Bowls ever, (at the time, one of very few close games in recent memory), Dick Vermeil's tears. I was a bit stunned to see 2 of 3 players miss it, I guess the '99 Rams must not be as well known as I thought,

Contrary to some above posts, I thought this was a very poorly played game with some huge knowledge gaps between the 3 players. Lots of stuff that I didn't consider particularly difficult sports trivia had all 3 standing and staring.

[Golf]

Anybody who misses FJ here has zero business on Sports Jeopardy.

Super Bowls are incredibly basic, most know them with no memorization required. Using the rule of 66 helps, simply add the Super Bowl number to 66 to get the year it was played. Both were given in the clue but all top sports guys use 66 to help connect the dots. Personally, I learned them by year and just subtract 66 to pull the SB number.

Winners every year in the four major sports should be child's play, the best of the best also know golf and tennis majors in addition to Daytona and Indy winners. Grey Cups and Arena League winners are usually ignored.

[econgator]

Anybody who misses FJ here has zero business on Sports Jeopardy.

That'd be me.

As much as I love football, I don't care who won which SB. Actually, that pretty much works for any sport. I know a few World Series winners here and there, but if you asked me who won the 2002 WS? Don't know, don't care.

[Golf]

That'd be me.

As much as I love football, I don't care who won which SB. Actually, that pretty much works for any sport. I know a few World Series winners here and there, but if you asked me who won the 2002 WS? Don't know, don't care.

And that's just fine, everybody has different strengths and weaknesses. You freely admit Sports Jeopardy isn't your cup of tea. No biggie.

But for someone appearing on any sports trivia show, not knowing these basic tidbits is simply amazing. Note, I am assuming that if one knows the Rams won that SB that they also know the weepy coach. It is possible that if one memorizes the list by rote that they wouldn't know the coach.

[psgola]

On the FJ, I easily got Vermeil, because I remembered watching that 2000 Super Bowl, and Dick Vermeil coached at UCLA. Some might've gotten mixed up with the year, because it mentioned the year of the Super Bowl, but usually the memorable team is remembered by the year of that regular season, such as the 1999 Rams winning the Super Bowl in Jan. 2000.

Only hard part for me while watching this season, has been Final Jeopardy, as I'm only 2/5.

a game of horse 3/4; recrutnings speeches? 4/4; women's skating 4/4; when I hosted snl 3/4 (can't believe I missed Jeter); who's who 3/4; i own you 4/4;

a game of horse 3/4; conn smythe trophy winners 2/4' (I also blew it on Patrick Roy, thought Jacques Plante); you know the score 3/4 (I did say 4-3 for miracle on Ice) boys from brazil 2/4;
minor league baseball 1/4 (I don't know my minor leagues, hopefully I won't see those type of questions if called to be on the show).

Lach Trash: Steelers/Giants, Meryl Davis, Kwan,
Triple Crown, Senna, Tree Rollins

[legendneverdies]

Dick Vermeil as an Eagles coach lost Super Bowl 15 in January 1981 to the Oakland Raiders.

[jeff6286]

Here's an interesting (to me at least) bit of Dick Vermeil trivia. Since he retired right after the Rams' Super Bowl victory, his overall record with the team was just 22-26, for a regular season winning percentage of .458, the worst record of any Super Bowl winning head coach with the team they won the title with. Only one other Super Bowl champion coach has a record below .500 with that team, anyone have a guess? I can give some hints if necessary, but am curious to see what kind of guesses this might bring.

[BobF]

Here's an interesting (to me at least) bit of Dick Vermeil trivia. Since he retired right after the Rams' Super Bowl victory, his overall record with the team was just 22-26, for a regular season winning percentage of .458, the worst record of any Super Bowl winning head coach with the team they won the title with. Only one other Super Bowl champion coach has a record below .500 with that team, anyone have a guess? I can give some hints if necessary, but am curious to see what kind of guesses this might bring.

Weeb Ewbank?

[econgator]

Here's an interesting (to me at least) bit of Dick Vermeil trivia. Since he retired right after the Rams' Super Bowl victory, his overall record with the team was just 22-26, for a regular season winning percentage of .458, the worst record of any Super Bowl winning head coach with the team they won the title with. Only one other Super Bowl champion coach has a record below .500 with that team, anyone have a guess? I can give some hints if necessary, but am curious to see what kind of guesses this might bring.

I would have guessed John Gruden, who was close (.509), but not quite.

[jeff6286]

I had the same thought about Jon Gruden, as the Bucs had a lot of lean years after their Super Bowl title, but indeed he just barely stayed over .500 at 57-55, making him the 3rd-worst SB winning coach, by this standard. BobF got it right, it was Weeb Ewbank, with a record of just 71-77-6 (.480) with the Jets from 1963-73. His overall career record was .502, and Vermeil's is .524, so there is a not a single Super Bowl winning head coach with a career record below .500.

Hard to believe, but #4 on this list would be Jimmy Johnson, who had a .550 record with the Cowboys. He only coached the team for 5 years, and that 1-15 mark in his first season was a big hole to dig out of.

[BobF]

I had the same thought about Jon Gruden, as the Bucs had a lot of lean years after their Super Bowl title, but indeed he just barely stayed over .500 at 57-55, making him the 3rd-worst SB winning coach, by this standard. BobF got it right, it was Weeb Ewbank, with a record of just 71-77-6 (.480) with the Jets from 1963-73. His overall career record was .502, and Vermeil's is .524, so there is a not a single Super Bowl winning head coach with a career record below .500.

Hard to believe, but #4 on this list would be Jimmy Johnson, who had a .550 record with the Cowboys. He only coached the team for 5 years, and that 1-15 mark in his first season was a big hole to dig out of.

Easy one for me. I'm a Giants fan, but the Jets are my second team. And I know there's no Jets coach who has a career winning percentage of over .500 with the team. Somebody was right at .500, I think maybe Sammy Baugh because he only coached a year?

ETA: 2 years, 1960 and 1961, finished 7-7 each year.

Plus, he would have been a correct response to my "two-sport star" question in TD 192. http://www.baseball-reference.com/minor ... ugh-001sam

[TheyCallMeMrKid]

Anybody who misses FJ here has zero business on Sports Jeopardy.

Super Bowls are incredibly basic, most know them with no memorization required. Using the rule of 66 helps, simply add the Super Bowl number to 66 to get the year it was played. Both were given in the clue but all top sports guys use 66 to help connect the dots. Personally, I learned them by year and just subtract 66 to pull the SB number.

Winners every year in the four major sports should be child's play, the best of the best also know golf and tennis majors in addition to Daytona and Indy winners. Grey Cups and Arena League winners are usually ignored.

I live in St. Louis, so this was really easy for me, but I am pretty sure I couldn't rattle off all of the SB winners by SB #. I struggle more with the more recent ones than the older ones, though. Age kicking in, I think, plus a lot more cluttering my mind now than when I was 12 and spent more time reading those record books, etc.

The depth of knowledge that Jeopardy! seems to go for, though, doesn't seem to be as great as what a quiz bowl, for example, would require. Sports Jeopardy! seems to be tracking similar. I don't think that you need nearly as much knowledge to get on Sports Jeopardy! than you would've with Stump the Schwab, for example.

[jeff6286]

Anybody who misses FJ here has zero business on Sports Jeopardy.

Super Bowls are incredibly basic, most know them with no memorization required. Using the rule of 66 helps, simply add the Super Bowl number to 66 to get the year it was played. Both were given in the clue but all top sports guys use 66 to help connect the dots. Personally, I learned them by year and just subtract 66 to pull the SB number.

Winners every year in the four major sports should be child's play, the best of the best also know golf and tennis majors in addition to Daytona and Indy winners. Grey Cups and Arena League winners are usually ignored.

I live in St. Louis, so this was really easy for me, but I am pretty sure I couldn't rattle off all of the SB winners by SB #. I struggle more with the more recent ones than the older ones, though. Age kicking in, I think, plus a lot more cluttering my mind now than when I was 12 and spent more time reading those record books, etc.

The depth of knowledge that Jeopardy! seems to go for, though, doesn't seem to be as great as what a quiz bowl, for example, would require. Sports Jeopardy! seems to be tracking similar. I don't think that you need nearly as much knowledge to get on Sports Jeopardy! than you would've with Stump the Schwab, for example.

Agreed, they are definitely emphasizing breadth, not depth, though there have occasionally been what I consider clues requiring very deep knowledge in the bottom rows. From what I've seen, it seems like the best route to winning big would be to have a solid knowledge of all sports, as relatively niche categories such as hockey, auto racing, horse racing, boxing, gymnastics, figure skating, etc. have often seen lots of stand-and-stares. With 12 categories in each game, they can't all be about football, baseball, and basketball.