RSS Feed
DVOA Analysis
Football Outsiders' revolutionary statistics that break down every single play of the NFL season
21 Nov 2006
Week 12 DVOA Ratings
by Aaron Schatz
Here's a look at this week's DVOA ratings. Extended commentary is finally posted (as of 1am EST, Wednesday) at FOXSports.com. This week is the first annual DVOA Commentary All-Optimism Special.
I assume that FO regulars do not need a reminder that the DVOA ratings are not adjusted for injuries, either past or future. But I'll give one anyway. DVOA ratings are not adjusted for injuries, either past or future.
Once again, Mike Harris has put together a Football Outsiders Playoff Odds Report based on DVOA and the remaining schedule. The Playoff Odds Report now uses a new algorithm based on analysis of the actual results of the last few weeks of each season since 1997. This algorithm also includes a variable to account for the generally lower performance of warm-weather and dome teams when playing cold weather cities after November 1. (As I've written many times in the past, this is one piece of conventional wisdom that is absolutely true.) It also drops the chances of a team winning its final game if it has clinched a playoff spot and cannot change its seeding with a final win.
You'll notice there are actually two reports. One uses current WEIGHTED DVOA numbers. The other one sets the Philadelphia Eagles to 0%, based on how well they played last year after losing Donovan McNabb for the season. If you think it is wrong to consider McNabb's injury and not other injuries, then my suggestion is that you don't look at that report.
One last big piece of news: The long-awaited Football Outsiders T-shirts are finally available! Yes, we opened a CafePress store like all the other sites out there. The FO shirts come in all kinds of shapes and sizes, and with two different taglines to go with the logo:
- Tackling football from outside the hashmarks.
- Stats are for losers. Better stats are for winners.
Some shirts have one line, some the other -- since we haven't opened a premium shop yet, we can only sell one of each type of shirt rather than offering a choice of taglines for each possible product. If the shirts prove to be super popular, we can take that next step. We're also trying to figure out how to do a shirt with some of Jason Beattie's cartoons, but we can't use Gil Thorp, lest we get sued. We'll keep working on that one.
(One of the first comments in today's thread suggested a ROBO-PUNTER jersey. Great idea, we'll hopefully have one ready after Thanksgiving.)
You know how I always say that a question asked through e-mail is much more likely to be answered than a question asked in a discussion thread? That goes triple for any questions or suggestions you have regarding the FO shirts and other swag.
Offense, defense, special teams are updated; individual pages and adjusted line yards will be updated later tonight.
* * * * *
These are the Football Outsiders team efficiency ratings through Week 11 of 2006, measured by our proprietary Defense-adjusted Value Over Average (DVOA) system that breaks down every single play and compares a team's performance to the league average based on situation in order to determine value over average. (Explained further here.)
OFFENSE and DEFENSE DVOA are adjusted based on strength of opponent as well as to consider all fumbles, kept or lost, as equal value. SPECIAL TEAMS DVOA is adjusted for type of stadium (warm, cold, dome, Denver/Mexico City) and week of season.
WEIGHTED DVOA is based on a formula which discounts games more than eight weeks ago in order to get a more accurate picture of how teams are playing now. This is the formula used for the rankings at FOXSports.com.
Remember that you can always use the keyword "DVOA" to access the latest DVOA commentary at FOXSports.com.
To save people some time, please use the zlionsfan template for all complaints:
<team> is clearly ranked <too high/too low> because <reason unrelated to DVOA>. <subjective ranking system> is way better than this. <unrelated team-supporting or -denigrating comment, preferably with poor spelling and/or chat-acceptable spelling>
| TEAM | TOTAL DVOA |
LAST WEEK |
W-L |
WEIGHTED DVOA |
RANK |
OFFENSE DVOA |
OFF. RANK |
DEFENSE DVOA |
DEF. RANK |
SPECIAL DVOA |
S.T. RANK |
|
| 1 | CHI | 34.3% | 2 | 9-1 | 34.1% | 1 | -3.4% | 19 | -28.8% | 1 | 8.9% | 1 |
| 2 | SD | 33.9% | 4 | 8-2 | 32.8% | 2 | 27.1% | 2 | -1.9% | 16 | 4.9% | 5 |
| 3 | PHI | 28.2% | 1 | 5-5 | 25.2% | 4 | 14.4% | 4 | -15.4% | 5 | -1.7% | 25 |
| 4 | JAC | 24.9% | 7 | 6-4 | 24.1% | 5 | -3.0% | 18 | -26.2% | 2 | 1.7% | 11 |
| 5 | BAL | 24.5% | 8 | 8-2 | 23.1% | 7 | -3.9% | 20 | -22.8% | 3 | 5.6% | 3 |
| 6 | DAL | 24.5% | 6 | 6-4 | 25.7% | 3 | 9.9% | 7 | -15.8% | 4 | -1.3% | 22 |
| 7 | NYG | 23.1% | 3 | 6-4 | 23.8% | 6 | 13.6% | 5 | -9.2% | 8 | 0.3% | 16 |
| 8 | NE | 18.8% | 9 | 7-3 | 21.6% | 8 | 8.6% | 8 | -8.2% | 10 | 2.0% | 8 |
| 9 | IND | 16.8% | 5 | 9-1 | 15.9% | 9 | 28.4% | 1 | 8.5% | 25 | -3.0% | 28 |
| 10 | DEN | 7.8% | 10 | 7-3 | 9.2% | 10 | 3.0% | 12 | -4.6% | 14 | 0.2% | 17 |
| 11 | KC | 6.7% | 11 | 6-4 | 7.4% | 11 | 2.4% | 13 | -2.8% | 15 | 1.5% | 13 |
| 12 | CIN | 6.6% | 14 | 5-5 | 4.3% | 14 | 15.3% | 3 | 10.4% | 27 | 1.8% | 10 |
| 13 | CAR | 4.7% | 16 | 6-4 | 7.0% | 12 | 0.3% | 16 | -7.7% | 12 | -3.3% | 29 |
| 14 | PIT | 4.7% | 12 | 4-6 | 4.9% | 13 | 1.4% | 14 | -10.4% | 7 | -7.1% | 31 |
| 15 | NO | 4.2% | 13 | 6-4 | 2.0% | 15 | 12.1% | 6 | 9.4% | 26 | 1.5% | 12 |
| 16 | STL | -3.4% | 15 | 4-6 | -4.7% | 16 | 3.1% | 11 | 5.5% | 21 | -1.1% | 20 |
| TEAM | TOTAL DVOA |
LAST WEEK |
W-L |
WEIGHTED DVOA |
RANK |
OFFENSE DVOA |
OFF. RANK |
DEFENSE DVOA |
DEF. RANK |
SPECIAL DVOA |
S.T. RANK |
|
| 17 | MIN | -5.4% | 18 | 4-6 | -6.3% | 18 | -17.1% | 28 | -11.5% | 6 | 0.2% | 18 |
| 18 | WAS | -6.5% | 19 | 3-7 | -7.7% | 20 | 8.2% | 9 | 15.9% | 29 | 1.2% | 14 |
| 19 | CLE | -7.5% | 24 | 3-7 | -5.8% | 17 | -19.4% | 29 | -5.8% | 13 | 6.2% | 2 |
| 20 | MIA | -9.0% | 20 | 4-6 | -7.0% | 19 | -15.9% | 27 | -9.2% | 9 | -2.3% | 27 |
| 21 | GB | -9.9% | 17 | 4-6 | -8.6% | 21 | -2.3% | 17 | 5.4% | 20 | -2.3% | 26 |
| 22 | ATL | -10.5% | 21 | 5-5 | -10.4% | 22 | -5.1% | 21 | 1.7% | 19 | -3.7% | 30 |
| 23 | NYJ | -12.4% | 23 | 5-5 | -13.6% | 24 | 0.4% | 15 | 16.2% | 30 | 3.4% | 6 |
| 24 | BUF | -15.0% | 25 | 4-6 | -17.2% | 26 | -13.2% | 25 | 6.9% | 23 | 5.1% | 4 |
| 25 | SEA | -15.7% | 22 | 6-4 | -17.4% | 27 | -9.3% | 24 | 8.4% | 24 | 2.1% | 7 |
| 26 | HOU | -15.8% | 26 | 3-7 | -13.0% | 23 | 5.1% | 10 | 19.6% | 32 | -1.3% | 23 |
| 27 | TEN | -19.5% | 30 | 3-7 | -15.8% | 25 | -14.8% | 26 | 6.7% | 22 | 2.0% | 9 |
| 28 | TB | -21.6% | 28 | 3-7 | -21.0% | 28 | -21.1% | 31 | -0.7% | 17 | -1.2% | 21 |
| 29 | SF | -25.0% | 31 | 5-5 | -27.2% | 31 | -7.8% | 23 | 15.8% | 28 | -1.5% | 24 |
| 30 | DET | -25.4% | 27 | 2-8 | -25.9% | 30 | -7.0% | 22 | 19.0% | 31 | 0.6% | 15 |
| 31 | OAK | -25.7% | 29 | 2-8 | -23.9% | 29 | -33.0% | 32 | -7.9% | 11 | -0.6% | 19 |
| 32 | ARI | -30.3% | 32 | 2-8 | -29.6% | 32 | -20.7% | 30 | 1.1% | 18 | -8.5% | 32 |
- NON-ADJ VOA shows what the rating looks like without adjustments for strength of schedule, luck recovering fumbles, or weather and altitude on special teams.
- ESTIMATED WINS uses a statistic known as "Forest Index" that emphasizes consistency as well as DVOA in the most important specific situations: red zone defense, first quarter offense, and performance in the second half when the score is close. It then projects a number of wins adjusted to a league-average schedule and a league-average rate of recovering fumbles. Teams that have had their bye week are projected as if they had played one game per week.
- PAST SCHEDULE lists average DVOA of opponents played this season, ranked from hardest schedule (#1, most positive) to easiest schedule (#32, most negative). It is not adjusted for which games are home or road.
- FUTURE SCHEDULE lists average DVOA of opponents still left to play this season, ranked from hardest schedule (#1, most positive) to easiest schedule (#32, most negative). It is not adjusted for which games are home or road.
- VARIANCE measures the statistical variance of the team's weekly DVOA performance. Teams are ranked from least consistent (#1, highest variance) to most consistent (#32, smallest variance).
| TEAM |
TOTAL DVOA |
W-L |
NON-ADJ TOT VOA |
ESTIM. WINS |
RANK |
PAST SCHED |
RANK |
FUTURE SCHED |
RANK | VAR. | RANK | |
| 1 | CHI | 34.3% | 9-1 | 47.0% | 7.6 | 3 | -12.5% | 32 | -7.8% | 26 | 27.3% | 3 |
| 2 | SD | 33.9% | 8-2 | 38.1% | 7.9 | 1 | -3.1% | 24 | -12.0% | 31 | 6.3% | 31 |
| 3 | PHI | 28.2% | 5-5 | 22.8% | 7.7 | 2 | -2.2% | 22 | 8.7% | 4 | 9.8% | 23 |
| 4 | JAC | 24.9% | 6-4 | 26.0% | 6.4 | 8 | 5.1% | 7 | -0.2% | 19 | 37.4% | 1 |
| 5 | BAL | 24.5% | 8-2 | 32.3% | 7.1 | 4 | -2.8% | 23 | 0.0% | 18 | 10.2% | 21 |
| 6 | DAL | 24.5% | 6-4 | 25.1% | 6.4 | 7 | 1.9% | 13 | -0.3% | 20 | 14.2% | 14 |
| 7 | NYG | 23.1% | 6-4 | 17.7% | 6.6 | 5 | 5.9% | 5 | 5.9% | 8 | 11.1% | 18 |
| 8 | NE | 18.8% | 7-3 | 26.1% | 6.3 | 9 | -4.8% | 25 | -1.7% | 22 | 16.5% | 9 |
| 9 | IND | 16.8% | 9-1 | 16.1% | 6.6 | 6 | 3.0% | 12 | 2.6% | 14 | 8.4% | 27 |
| 10 | DEN | 7.8% | 7-3 | 6.9% | 5.3 | 12 | 4.3% | 8 | -4.0% | 23 | 15.3% | 11 |
| 11 | KC | 6.7% | 6-4 | 9.9% | 5.7 | 10 | -5.6% | 29 | 9.7% | 1 | 28.5% | 2 |
| 12 | CIN | 6.6% | 5-5 | 1.2% | 5.4 | 11 | 5.8% | 6 | 3.4% | 12 | 6.3% | 30 |
| 13 | CAR | 4.7% | 6-4 | 5.8% | 5.0 | 16 | -1.0% | 19 | 7.2% | 6 | 10.2% | 20 |
| 14 | PIT | 4.7% | 4-6 | 1.0% | 5.1 | 15 | 3.1% | 11 | 5.2% | 10 | 14.9% | 12 |
| 15 | NO | 4.2% | 6-4 | 4.6% | 5.3 | 13 | -0.2% | 16 | 1.7% | 15 | 9.6% | 24 |
| 16 | STL | -3.4% | 4-6 | 5.9% | 5.0 | 17 | -6.9% | 30 | -9.8% | 30 | 10.3% | 19 |
| TEAM |
TOTAL DVOA |
W-L |
NON-ADJ TOT VOA |
ESTIM. WINS |
RANK |
PAST SCHED |
RANK |
FUTURE SCHED |
RANK | VAR. | RANK | |
| 17 | MIN | -5.4% | 4-6 | -1.6% | 5.2 | 14 | -4.9% | 26 | -7.8% | 27 | 8.7% | 25 |
| 18 | WAS | -6.5% | 3-7 | -13.3% | 4.6 | 18 | 8.0% | 3 | 7.7% | 5 | 10.1% | 22 |
| 19 | CLE | -7.5% | 3-7 | -14.6% | 3.8 | 26 | 3.8% | 9 | 0.8% | 17 | 3.9% | 32 |
| 20 | MIA | -9.0% | 4-6 | -2.9% | 4.0 | 24 | -1.4% | 20 | 1.3% | 16 | 8.7% | 26 |
| 21 | GB | -9.9% | 4-6 | -13.1% | 4.2 | 19 | -0.3% | 18 | -8.3% | 29 | 17.5% | 8 |
| 22 | ATL | -10.5% | 5-5 | -0.9% | 4.2 | 20 | -1.7% | 21 | 5.6% | 9 | 26.3% | 4 |
| 23 | NYJ | -12.4% | 5-5 | -12.5% | 4.1 | 22 | 3.7% | 10 | -13.5% | 32 | 14.5% | 13 |
| 24 | BUF | -15.0% | 4-6 | -13.5% | 4.1 | 21 | 1.1% | 14 | 7.1% | 7 | 15.9% | 10 |
| 25 | SEA | -15.7% | 6-4 | -11.7% | 3.8 | 25 | -5.5% | 28 | -7.5% | 25 | 12.1% | 16 |
| 26 | HOU | -15.8% | 3-7 | -22.4% | 4.1 | 23 | 9.2% | 2 | -4.9% | 24 | 12.9% | 15 |
| 27 | TEN | -19.5% | 3-7 | -22.6% | 3.7 | 27 | 10.9% | 1 | 8.8% | 3 | 20.5% | 7 |
| 28 | TB | -21.6% | 3-7 | -30.2% | 3.2 | 30 | 6.4% | 4 | 5.0% | 11 | 7.9% | 28 |
| 29 | SF | -25.0% | 5-5 | -24.7% | 3.6 | 28 | -0.3% | 17 | -7.9% | 28 | 24.6% | 5 |
| 30 | DET | -25.4% | 2-8 | -17.1% | 2.8 | 32 | -9.3% | 31 | 8.9% | 2 | 6.7% | 29 |
| 31 | OAK | -25.7% | 2-8 | -32.7% | 2.9 | 31 | 0.7% | 15 | 2.6% | 13 | 11.9% | 17 |
| 32 | ARI | -30.3% | 2-8 | -24.0% | 3.5 | 29 | -5.0% | 27 | -1.3% | 21 | 23.5% | 6 |
First! Yeah, my Broncos are just slightly above average. Another 1st round playoff loss... yeah.
Clickable chart updated with the latest data. Click my name for it.
Its actually pretty amazing how completely non-descript the Broncos are... 12th, 14th and 17th, with 10th overall... no wonder they're kinda painful to watch.
I love the football outsiders t-shirts.
But there is one missing.
It is a jersey, with the #1.
And Robo-punter on the back.
Those are some nice-lookin' shirts. I especially like the hoodie.
Re: #4 I'd so buy one of those....
And Andrew's a genius.
OK, totally ignoring what I wrote about sending suggestions by e-mail -- and I still mean it, really -- comment #4 is a great idea and we will absolutely put that together. Should be available next week.
love the football outsiders t-shirts.
But there is one missing.
It is a jersey, with the #1.
And Robo-punter on the back.
if you added the Catholic Match Girl on the sleeve, I'd buy 2 dozen
#2
Gotta love the chart
A la the Onion, how about the FO logo on the front and "Your favorite team's DVOA sucks" on the back.
Sorry, Aaron.
Wow! Dallas is 3rd in weighted DVOA. Can't wait to see what happens as we move farther and farther away from the Bledsoe era. (Although I don't know how much better it can get.)
I'm not a huge fan of any of the current shirts, but I like the robopunter and I'd be even more up for a zlionsfan template shirt.
And Pittsburgh has narrowed the gap with Arizona for worst special teams! But with only 6 games left, will they be able to, er, win?
I've just finally crawled out of my Giants induced hole. It makes me feel somewhat better that the only teams that have played tougher schedules than the Giants are a combined 12-28. Does that mean they will beat Tennessee? Who knows.
Dammit, something needs to be done about NFL scheduling! The Giants need to play Western Carolina this week.
12: Trust me, the farther away you can get, the better you'll feel. Meanwhile I'm basking in the knowledge that the Patriots are the only team left with a top 10 ranking in Offense, Defense and ST. I just don't know what it means, exactly. Oh wait, I know what it means. They really benefited from Favre's Eli impression on Sunday.
Wow, Oakland's offensive DVOA is way off the chart. How does that rank historically in terms of offensive ineptitude?
#10: Thanks. Lots of horrible javascript behind it. :)
One of the fun things in the chart is seeing, say, how important off/def/ST is. 3 of the top 5 DVOA teams have negative offense. the first negative defensive team is the colts at #9 on dvoa, and the only one that comes close is the chargers (who had a top 10 def dvoa until week 9).
Is the 5.2 estimated wins for the Vikings a result of bad fumble and turnover return luck?
I am mildly surprised that their special teams rankings remains below average, given the number of good punt returns Mewelde Moore has had.
I can't believe the Eagles dropped so little. Admittedly, the defense at least only allowed two big plays - Henry's 42 and 70 yard runs, but without McNabb, that pretty much decided the game.
The Browns moving up.. small consolation after losing to Pittsburgh.
Unfortunately, I'm sure Catholic Match Girl would have the same licensing / royalties issues that the creators of Gil Thorp would raise. Hard to believe, but that is a real person out there.
Too bad -- a pink fitted "CMG" T would go nicely with a lot of team store items these days.
The G-men are in a rapid decline and the Titans are having a strong upswing. Should be an interesting game, with recent momentum pitted against yearlong above average play.
Oh, and what's up with the Ravens? Still stuck at 7, behind the Giants and Dallas? I thought they would go up after DAVE dropped out; maybe the Buc and Raider wins are declining?
Eagles dropped from 38.5% to 28.2%. I do believe that qualifies as "a lot."
#29 (5-5) SF vs. #3 (5-5) PHI. One is CLEARLY ranked TOO HIGH and the other TOO LOW. Actually, I am surprised that SF has a lower weighted DVOA than the 'regular' given that they have won the last 3.
I wonder given the strength of future schedule and the quarterback situation if the two teams' paths will ever cross (in the rankings that is, Philly convincingly beat the Niners on the field that helps me understand the rankings gap).
#12, I really like the Cowboys chances against the Bears in January, thus I really like their chances of being the NFC team in the Super Bowl. It all comes down to which Grossman shows up, and I'd say in the playoffs there is approximately a 33% chance that Very Bad Grossman steps onto the field at least once.
I'm down with #4 - I'll buy that.
dbt #18:
One of the fun things in the chart is seeing, say, how important off/def/ST is
Defense, especially scoring defense, wins championships. Almost invariably, the Super Bowl winner is one of the teams with the fewest points allowed. The lower points allowed as well, the better the team does in Pythagorean Wins (since it is part of the denominator), and the Super Bowl winner is almost always the team with the most Pythagorean Wins.
There is no consistency to high-powered offenses absent the best defense winning. Some years they do (1997 Broncos), some years they don't (1998 Vikings).
Well I'll hold off to see if something more official comes along, but click on my name for something that can be done (minimum a dozen) with www.customjerseybuilder.com...
To answer my own post... the Niners are now in possession of a wide receiver that does stupid things. Which bring down the DVOA, no doubt.
Quote:
San Francisco 49ers wide receiver Antonio Bryant was arrested on reckless and drunken driving charges after his Lamborghini was seen speeding faster than 100 mph on a freeway.
An officer entering U.S. Highway 101 saw Bryant speed past and tried unsuccessfully to catch him...
Bryant ... was uncooperative, combative and verbally abusive. He refused to step out of the car...
The officers were forced to use leather restraints ...
16.
Either that B, or they were previously getting killed by opponent adjustments that are going away. IE the Jets/Miami arent playing as poorly anymore.
And like I was saying before...the Defence is much better than people thought. And you all thought I was crazy when I was bitching about them being 27th.
Aaron:
But everyone else dropped too, so the Eagles only went from #1 to #3. That is surprising.
Wow, New England is one of only 4 teams that has a top 10 offense and defense, and the only team that's top 10 in all three categories. So why don't I feel better about their chances in the playoffs? Maybe it's because they've lost to almost every winning team they've played in the last year and a half...
Hey Aaron, would it be possible to get the Raven's offensive DVOA% pre-bye and post-bye (or Fassel era and post-Fassel era). Watching the Raven's passing attack these past few weeks, it looks like a totally different team out there (with the exception of Jamal Lewis still stinking). I'm not sure if its McNair's increased familiarity with the offense or Billick's genius (cue laughter), or improved line play, but its definetely something.
Nice CafePress store. No FO thong???
RE: 29
Not for nothing, but the Vikings allowed the 6th fewest points in the league in 1998 at 296.
The Rams, in 2001, allowed the 7th fewest.
Re: 35
I second taking a look at the Baltimore Offense pre-/post-Fassel. That sounds like an excellent idea for either an EPC or maybe a blog post.
Given how much I respect and, frankly, love the FO analyses of football, it makes me really happy to see the Cowboys are finally doing well in the DVOA rankings.
It's not "gratifying because they were so obviously good, and now you've finally seen it" it's the other way around:
Seeing Dallas doing well in the FO stats makes me much more comfortable believing that they may actually be going somewhere.
Not *that* comfortable. I have been through the last decade-ish of uninspiring/crap play, after all.
RE: 37
Forget I wrote that. That is all.
39. Keep in mind how high the Eagles have been ranked all year. :) Still feel good?
MJK, one wierd thing I've noticed is, very often teams with winning records before playing the patriots (that the pats beat), no longer have winning records 4 or 5 games later.
See Cincy and Min this year.
I'm not exactly sure what that means.
41: Heh, well, that's true. But then, the Eagles *were* really good at the start of the year. Insanely good on offense, especially, and I guess that's maybe been carrying them a bit in their decline lately. Whereas the Cowboys were rather average at the start and seem to be picking it up now. I'd rather have the Cowboys' current tendency than the Eagles' :)
The Romo factor is a big one, though. More and more tape each week. At some point, some team is going to cause him some big problems, I imagine. Unless he's the next coming of Brady.
Poor Bledsoe. That has to suck.
An interesting note:
PHI and NYG are the only two teams in the top 10 who aren't recieving a NEGATIVE adjustment. IE theyre the only ones who are being pushed up by theyre hard schedule. The rest are recieving significant penalties.
They also, IMO, seem like the two teams of the top 10 most likely to have a bad 2nd half...again, not sure what that means.
re: 1/3
Looking at the nice charts (#2) cbt does, you can see that there is a big drop off just before DEN. Not only are the Broncos #10 in the ranking, but they are the best "mediocre" team, not the worst "excellent" team. The GREAT graphic charts make that just jump out at me.
On the upside, they've beat 2 high-probability playoff contenders NE & BAL and lost 2 to IND & SD (and were "in" both games they lost). They beat KC also, but I don't know where to put them. Maybe they can get to a 2nd round of the playoffs before getting tossed.
RE #31...
Leather Restraints? Antonio Bryant shall henceforth be known as "The Gimp".
Wasn't RoboPunter issued #10? Either way, I can't wait to see it.
Re #44:
I'd say that means they are significantly affected by injuries.
The Cowboys are a prime example of how difficult it is to seperate offensive line performance from qb performance, and vice versa. Not that they look like the '72 Dolphins' offensive line now, but once they were protecting a qb who couldn't get a job as an exhibit in an art gallery, pass blocking suddenly became an achievable goal, especially with above-average receivers.
Offensive line stats, along with individual DVOA and DPAR rankings, should always be seen through a thick lens of interdependence.
Re 45:
Definitely there is a huge dropoff between #9 Indy and #10 Denver.
Looks like there are three mini-tiers or clusters, with Chicago and SD somewhat ahead of the pack and possibly favorites to go to the Super Bowl at this point (though each team has significant questions, CHI with offense, SD with defnese), then #3-#7 in a pack, and #8 NE with #9 IND at the edge of contention.
#48
That just makes me more want to see how Tavarius would play behind the Viking line.
49: San Diego's defense is really only a question due to injuries. If they get healthy, the D is a top-10 unit again.
#51 ... and PED suspensions...
Mike Harris playoff odds report now finished. See notes above, or click my name for link.
Chicago vs. San Diego Super Bowl with San Diego losing? I predicted years ago that San Diego would be the next team to go 0-4 in Super Bowls. The year after the Vikings lost their 4th, the Broncos lost their 1st. The year after the Broncos lost thieir 4th, the Bills lost their 1st. And the year after the Bills lost their 4th, San Diego lost their 1st. With Rivers and Tomlinson, it seems like SD should be at least good enough to get there for a few years.
#27 Evil Rex scares the crap out of me.
Oooh I will absolutely buy a Robo-Punter jersey. And I'll second the need for a zlionsfan template shirt. It would be cool if you could do one for every team, but would probably infringe on nfl liscences.
49: If Thomas Jones continues to run for 100 yards a game, the Bears offense will be less of a question. That running game can take much of the pressure off of Grossman.
re 49:
Interesting, depending on whether you use weighted or unweighted DVOA, NE is closer to 7 or mid-way to 9 IND. So, the 1st 2 tiers hold in both, and IND is not quite in the 2nd tier, and DEN is definitely not in the 2nd tier, and NE may or may not be in the 2nd tier depending on how one squints.
The other one sets the Philadelphia Eagles to 0%, based on how well they played last year after losing Donovan McNabb for the season.
Just keep rubbing salt in the wound. Bastards.
Sigh... Sad Giants fan here... Still 6th but reality says otherwise. Between the injuries, Eli's shaky performances, and an apparent Tiki breakdown they look like toast right now.
Hey Mike Harris, if you have more time than you know what to do with, I'd love to see what the probability of the Steelers making the playoffs in the simulations is: a) if they run the table to go 10-6; and b) if they almost run the table, going 9-7.
That's the most depressing thing about being a hopeless Steelers optimist right now; either Baltimore has to go 2-2 in non-Steelers games, or one of Jacksonville, Denver, or San Diego has to significantly underperform, or the Steelers likely won't make the playoffs even at 10-6. (Sure, Indianapolis could lose out, or the Steelers could get lucky in how the tiebreakers fall out, but losing head-to-head versus Jacksonville, Denver, and San Diego was
costly.)
Re: 60
Usually that would make me feel better. But since the alternative is Bill Parcells and Terrell Owens making it to the playoffs, I think I'm just going to stop watching football all together until next season.
#50, Yeah, Moridin, I have no doubt that the Vikings offensive line, which has not been horrible, would look much better than it has, if it had a reasonably competent qb who could just move a little. It would certainly expand their playbook, especially since the classic West Coast offense usually employs plays that move the pocket. RT Marques Johnson in particular has his weaknesses exposed by having a statue at qb.
Of course, the Vikings, unlike the Cowboys, have huge steaming piles of crap for receivers, so even if Jackson was even close to being mentally prepared to start in the NFL (and I have no idea of whether he is), the difference wouldn't be as pronounced as it has been for the Cowboys.
I'll say this however; substitute the Vikings' offensive line for the Cowboys', and the Cowboys would become a very good bet to win the Super Bowl. Of course, that would require salary cap adjustements as well, so it all becomes kind of pointless to really hypothesize, although it is not as wildly counterfactual to think the Cowboys with Keyshawn instead of T.O., and with Hutchinson (current contract) and Mckinnie (old contract) would be a much better team.
Roster construction is one of the most interesting things about the salary-capped NFL.
Yeah, the gulf between Indy and Denver is huge. Interesting.
Also interesting to see how much SD and Chi are over the others.
On the playoffs - I hadn't realized that it's impossible for the Bears to lose their division now. Wow. I don't see how that's quite true, but I guess that Minn and GB both play each other at least once, so they can't both win or something. Dunno.
Mathematically, the Bears could still finish in 2nd place (or tied for 2nd). If they lose all of their remaining games, they would be 9-7. If either the Vikings or Packers (not both, as they will play each other once more) win all of their remaining games, they would be 10-6. In reality, it's not likely, but it is possible.
I wonder if Mike Harris has current odds of an 8-8 team getting a wild card slot in the NFC.
In fact, the Bears could still finish in third place. Here's the scenario: Chicago loses all its remaing games (including one each to Minnesota and Gree Bay) to finish 9-7. Minnesota and Green Bay have identical 5-0-1 records (the tie being when they play each other) to finish 9-6-1.
Ach,I should refresh before posting anything else. Disregard my #30, and I'm waiting with baited breath at the RP jersey (wondering what color it would be, assuming green since the site has kind of a green logo).
New blog post on Rex Grossman for those interested:
http://community.foxsports.com/blogs/footballoutsiders
About the Grossman blog post. One thing that should probably be addressed is the fact that whether the Bears are way ahead, way behind, or playing close heavly depends on how Grossman is playing. The strength of Chicago's defense and speacial teams means that they are almost always going to have the advantage in terms of field position unless Grossman starts turning the ball over. So while it is accurate to say that Grossman plays worse when the Bears are behind or the game is close, it is also accurate to say that the Bears are more likely to be behind or playing a close game when Evil Rex is behind center. And that is why I still think the Bears need to give Griese a shot at starting.
Very interesting post, Aaron. Who knows? maybe Grossman will put together three good games, or just three non-hideous games, consecutively in the playoffs, but I wouldn't bet the house payment on it. I definitely don't think they'll beat the AFC champs in the big game on a neutral field, and I'd only give them a slight edge in a Soldiers Field NFC Championship game. Rexus Horribillus is going to make an appearance at some point, I think.
I want a ruling. Is it Bad Rex, Evil Rex, or Dislexy Rexy?
I just want to point out the trio of Chi, Jax and Bal: 1,2,3 on defense - 18,19,20 on offense. I could definitely see a 6-3 Super Bowl if some combination of these three make it to the big game.
73: Bal/Chi superbowl will have 49 points scored on defense/ST and 6 points scored on offense.
Re: 42
Yeah, sometimes Belichick figures out a way to beat a team, and then the way is copied for the following month.
Still, I'd feel a lot better about the Pats if they could beat the Bears. I figure it's a good matchup: BB feasts on young, insecure QBs. Also, the new turf couldn't hurt.
Re: 70
Bring on Griese! Please!
74: Funny and true, but is 31-24 with 49 on Def/ST better or worse than 6-3? And in the event of Chi/Bal should we just let Hester and Sams have a Return-off to see who the NFL champ is?
Well, now that I see that my Bengals and the Browns are two of the three teams with the least variance, and the Bengals are about 14% ahead on DVOA (10% weighted) I am more convinced than ever that the Bengals will win this weekend on the way to 8 and 5.
#61 and #66
These are the questions that fans have at this time of year. I wrote my software (click my name) in order that you can answer them yourself.
Mike Harris will get a little different answers due to the differences in projected game odds.
If Pittsburgh wins out they have about an 80% chance of making the playoffs. 9-7 depends on which team they lose to, a loss to Baltimore and its about 10%. A loss to Carolina and its about 35%. Of course these odds will change with the outcome of every AFC game from here on out.
Whether an 8-8 NFC team can make the playoffs depends on the team, due to tiebreakers. Here are the conditional playoff chances of some of the NFC teams, if they finish 8-8:
Carolina 15%
Giants 30%
NO 17%
Seattle 40%
Dallas 5%
Philadelphia 20%
Atlanta 7%
SF 25%
StLouis 7%
Minnesota 30%
Green Bay 5%
I plan to post another comparison of Mike Harris' playoff projections and mine later tonight.
Re: #2 - DBT, take a bow. Very nice work.
#75: BB obviously realized that Rex was coming to town and decided to install a faster field to get more hits on him. Go Pats! (and I hope the Packers actually get to the field this week)
When do we get the shirts with the slogan "We’re angry. We won’t stand for any more. We made tee shirts."?
I would say that the best teams are the teams that have a high ranking in all 3 phases of the game (O, D, ST) or at least high in D and ST. That would make Chicago, Bal and NE the best, with NE having the best balance since they rank 8th on offense, 10th on D and 8th on ST. All the other teams have numbers all over the map. I would guess of the teams with good records that SD is going to have a tough time in the playoffs (16th in D).
After reading the blog post, I'd like to see something like that for other QBs with the "gunslinger" reputation. (like Favre, perhaps?) It seems likely that this stat has alot to do with forcing deep throws against a defense playing the pass, and that performance while behind would improve drastically with time in the league.
I was just checking the site before I go to bed and caught the "FO Apparel stuff".
Re #4
Andrew, you are a genius and I'll buy one.
If Baltimore and Chicago end up in the superbowl, I will shoot myself.
Perhaps wearing a ROBO-PUNTER jersey.
#86: Wait, good teams have good ST or D? ST is important, but more important than O? Wha?
Personally, at the moment, I like SD and DAL, especially later when SD's front 7 comes back.
Re: 70 & 75.
Yes, Rex scares the crap out of me come playoff time as well, but do you really think going to Griese would be better? Most likely, Griese will make fewer mistakes while at the same time not producing quite as much as Grossman. Isn't this just a variation of the Kyle Orton offense? Does Brian Griese "just win games"?
Along those lines, what gives me reason to hope is that Grossman didn't play well against the Jets, but also didn't play terribly. In fact, I thouhgt he did a nice job not forcing many throws. With the quality of the Bears defense and a running game that seems to be finally getting its act together, if Rex simply realizes that he doesn't need to always make something happen downfield, the Bears can have playoff success even if he is not playing particularly well.
And yes, a strong pass rush in the playoffs can rattle Grossman, but how is that different from the majority of quarterbacks in the league? Look at the other possible quarterbacks of NFC playoff teams when they face a pass rush: Hasselbeck is the one that inspires the most confidence, although can be rattled (see the Bears game this year); Eli Manning may be getting worse by the week; Romo, as good as he has looked, is no sure thing (and Grossman started off the season even better than Romo); Delhomme has a tendency to force throws under pressure; Brees is having a great year, but he has played in exactly as many playoff games as Grossman (one). Aside from maybe P. Manning, Brady, McNabb, and Palmer, no quarterback has really proven they can consistently succeed against a heavy rush.
Grossman didn't thrill me in last year's playoff game against Carolina, but he didn't disappoint me, either. If I had told you beforehand that Grossman would lead the Bears to three offensive touchdowns, you probably would have assumed they would have won the game.
Incidentally, the ROBO-PUNTER jersey is awesome, and the #1 number is appropriate given the initial discussion (would he be the top draft pick).
Of course, give my opinion on the subject, I would make it a Detroit Lions jersey. That'd be completely appropriate.
#88
But Millen would never take ROBOPUNTER over another receiver.
On behalf of myself, and perhaps Will Allen and Pacifist Viking, we would like to apologize for sticking up for the Vikings, they clearly did not deserve our advocacy :)
I would imagine that every QB would have a lower rating when behind (especially given sample size); the question isn't whether they have a lower rating, it's by how much.
Rivers?
What can be suprising to most people:
People claim the Bears need to establish a running game, yet Thomas Jones has the 4th most rushing yards in the NFC, ahead of many notables like Warrick Dunn, Steven Jackson, Ahman Green, and Brian Westbrook. He has more yards than Rudi Jahnson from Cincy. Thomas Jones and Cedric Benson combine for more yards than other two-headed tandems that are overrated in the NFL: Ace-Deuce-And-Plenty-of-Use-McAllister and Reggie Bush and more yard than the Corey Dillon/Laurence Maroney due.
I'm sure the Bears have established thier "running team" mantra, don't you think?
Hey, Becephalus, I already ate my DVOAcrow, although my preseason win projection for Minny may still end up being closer than Aaron's , and it is very likely my midseason projection will be better. No doubt, though, I overrated them and I think it is mostly due to my underestimating the effect of Koren Robinson's near-inevitable fall off the wagon. Without a number-one caliber wideout, and the other guys really not even being mediocre number-two caliber, Brad Johnson's deficiencies just became impossible to work with. Outside the Raiders, they have to be close to the easiest offense to game plan for in the league, and certainly the easiest with a decent offensive line.
I think they've established "we play crappy defences" more.
Re #51, #82:
SD's defense isn't as bad as #16. Weighted DVOA actually underestimates the Chargers D, since the most recent games have been injury plagued.
On the other hand, their pass D is still probably going to be bad even with Merriman and Castillo back...better, b/c of the pass rush, and not likely to give up as many big plays, but still questionable.
96: Yea, it's really too bad your best defensive player got busted for steroids. I'm sure that would negatively affect their defensive ratings.
Will Allen,
totally agree on the Cowboys and Vikings o-lines. I would take Hutchinson over owens in a heartbeat.
All this Cowboy love is scaring the crap out of me. They are a good team, they ain't that good.
Re 97:
But the Roid Warriors will be back, and that will improve the D enough, I think, to make SD balanced enough in all three phases to be legit contenders.
87
There is this common misconception that Orton was an "effecient game manager". He wasn't. He was a turnover machine and a disaster waiting to happen. Griese is different. He has played in conservative ball control offeses his entire carrer and was relatively successful in them. True, he will never put up the monster numbers that Grossman does when Rex is on, but he also will not take the stupid risks that Grossman is prone to. The Bears defense and special teams are good enough to ensure that the offense is almost always working on a short field which means Chicago does not need a high powered passing attack to generate points. The offense just needs to move the chains and not turn the ball over.
That's weird... I went back home for thanksgiving and found out one of my classmates was on the Cleveland Browns for a little while.
Nuts. Checking up if I can find out more, but that's weird.
99: The question is how will they perform now that they can't take the roids anymor