|
AVAILABLE JULY 9! 
Click here for more info.
 COME VISIT 
|
» Printable version
Week 5 DVOA Ratingsby Aaron Schatz Here are the Football Outsiders team efficiency ratings through five weeks of 2007, 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 for opponent and consider all fumbles, kept or lost, as equal value. SPECIAL TEAMS DVOA is adjusted for type of stadium (warm, cold, dome, Denver) and week of season. Opponent adjustments are currently set at 50% and will increase each week until they are full strength after Week 10. DAVE is an early-season formula that combines early-season performance with our preseason projection to get a more accurate picture of how well teams will play over the course of the entire season. (DAVE stands for “DVOA Adjusted for Variation Early.”) In this week’s DAVE ratings, for teams with five games, the preseason projection counts for 27 percent, and the current DVOA counts for 73 percent. For teams with four games, the split is 40/60. In addition, the weight of Weeks 1 and 2 has been lowered slightly. To save people some time, we request that you please use the following format 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> Commentary follows the numbers.
Today’s DVOA commentary was going to talk in depth about the historic seasons that we are seeing in New England, Indianapolis, and Dallas. Then Tony Romo went out and threw 463 interceptions in just the first eight seconds of Monday Night Football. OK, I may be exaggerating, but the Cowboys were outplayed by one of the worst teams in the NFL last night. That onside kick recovery may have given Dallas the chance to stay undefeated, but in the DVOA ratings, they are no longer the same team. The ratings for last night:
Take out opponent adjustments and special teams, and the teams were basically even: Buffalo offense/Dallas defense at -37.5%, and Dallas offense/Buffalo defense at -32.5%. Shockingly, Romo didn’t have the worst game of any quarterback this week. Monday Night Football doesn’t end up in Quick Reads, but for those curious, Romo was worth -7.9 DPAR passing and -2.2 DPAR rushing. That’s not as bad as Jon Kitna was against Washington. Five interceptions with 309 net passing yards is a better game than two interceptions with just 74 net passing yards. One more note: Remember my post from last week about Dallas on third down? Romo threw two interceptions on third down last night, but the Cowboys still converted 10 of 15 third-down opportunities. So now our discussion of historic greatness comes down to New England and Indianapolis. Last week, I talked about where these teams stand compared to all teams through four weeks since DVOA starts in 1996. After Indy’s dominating victory over Tampa Bay, these teams look even better. Once again, we’ve gone back and done DVOA if we were replaying the season a week at a time. We’re going to look at teams after five games, rather than five weeks, so opponent adjustments are 50% strength for teams without bye weeks and 60% strength for teams with bye weeks, based only on the season to date. Here are the best teams ever through five games: 1999 Rams: 68.7% Taking the 2007 teams out of it, seven of the top ten teams were conference champions and four of the top ten teams eventually won the Super Bowl. Three other Super Bowl champions are also in the top 20: the 2005 Steelers, 2004 Patriots, and 1997 Broncos. Of course, both the Patriots and Colts can’t win the Super Bowl, and both the Patriots and Colts can’t even win the AFC championship. The Pats and Colts are building these great seasons with offense, but you already knew that. Only seven teams since 1996 have an offensive DVOA over 35% in their first five games. Amazingly, the 2001 Rams, 2004 Colts, and 1998 Vikings are not on the list, but two teams this year rank second and third: 2000 Rams: 50.9% The 1999 Rams are only seventh, by the way, because Kurt Warner didn’t really become “Kurt Warner” until the second game of the season. Are the 2007 Patriots and Colts having such great seasons because the overall offensive environment is stronger this year? Not really. Actually, it is probably working the other way around. As many people know, the baselines for DVOA are based on multiple years, which means the league rating for a specific season can be above or below 0%. For the last five years, the ratings go like this: 2002: 1.3% Yes, last year was exactly average compared to the whole five-year period. Anyway, this year through five weeks, the league rating is 1.2%, roughly the same as 2002 and 2004. However, remove the Patriots and Colts, and the league rating drops to -2.2%. By comparison, if you remove the top two offenses of 2004 (Colts and Chiefs) the rest of the league drops from 1.1% to -1.0%. Remove the top two offenses of 2002 (Chiefs and Raiders) and the rest of the league drops from 1.3% to -0.5%. By the way, you might be wondering how this is a big year for offense when it seems like every big name running back is averaging three yards per carry. Right now, the league DVOA is 5.5% for passing and -3.7% for rushing. So it’s only a big year for one part of the offense. One last thing, since I know somebody is going to ask. Here are the best defenses ever through five games: 1996 Packers: -45.2% Individual stats pages, offensive line, and defensive front seven are all updated. Each of these other pages will be updated through Week 5 later today or tonight, and we’ll let you know when the updates are finished:
For comments on every team, look for DVOA on AOL, every Wednesday. (This will be linked on the FO Goes Mainstream page.) 195 Comments » |
I’m actually shocked that the Broncos still have a top half of the league offense. A whole lot of not scoring points makes them look worse than they actually are, I suppose.
:: david — 10/9/2007 @ 3:06 pm
God dammed Romo, yeah he plays like Farve alright…
:: Cosmos — 10/9/2007 @ 3:08 pm
“Three other Super Bowl champions are also in the top 20: the 2005 Steelers, 2004 Patriots, and 2007 Broncos.”
This may surprise Denver fans. I assume you mean 1997?
:: Catfish — 10/9/2007 @ 3:09 pm
“Three other Super Bowl champions are also in the top 20: the 2005 Steelers, 2004 Patriots, and 2007 Broncos.”
Meaning the 1997 Broncos?
But the main reason I am here is not to nitpick Aaron but instead Sportsguy, for the genius of this little hindsight-is-20-20 gem in last week’s NFL column.
“But you can’t tell me Pittsburgh is better than Seattle, or vice-versa. So why would Pittsburgh be favored by six this week? How does that make sense?”
:: Matt — 10/9/2007 @ 3:09 pm
Three other Super Bowl champions are also in the top 20: the 2005 Steelers, 2004 Patriots, and 2007 Broncos.
I think you mean the 1997 Broncos…
:: JJ — 10/9/2007 @ 3:11 pm
Heh. Three people fix the same typo in a matter of seconds. I love the Internet.
:: Aaron Schatz — 10/9/2007 @ 3:17 pm
Tennessee is 1st in Defensive DVOA?
FIRST?
:: Sidewards — 10/9/2007 @ 3:17 pm
7.
Vince Young just wins games.
:: Rich Conley — 10/9/2007 @ 3:19 pm
Nah, I think he means the 2007 Broncos. Believe! ;)
Seriously, the AFC West looks bad in this. SD has the highest DVOA at #17, and Denver, KC, and Oakland are #24, 25, and 27 respectively. Ugh.
:: hooper — 10/9/2007 @ 3:19 pm
For those who still believe in the Lions:
DVOA: negative.
DAVE: negative.
VOA: negative.
Offense: negative.
Defense: positive.
Special teams: negative.
Past schedule: negative.
Future schedule: positive.
Sadly, there’s also this from the Playoff Odds Report:
Chance of getting #1 pick: 0.0%.
Bandwagon: Found On Road Dead.
(This comment sponsored by the American Colon Society. Punctuation: use it as you wish.)
:: zlionsfan — 10/9/2007 @ 3:22 pm
Unsurprisingly, DVOA also says the Packers played better than the Bears on Sunday.
:: Will Allen — 10/9/2007 @ 3:23 pm
9:
Oakland is clearly ranked too low because 1st Place in the AFC West, baby! Standings are way better than this. Daunte Culpepper is back, biatches!
:: Matt — 10/9/2007 @ 3:25 pm
“SD has the highest DVOA at #17,”
Thats not going to stay that way. San Diego will stomp oakland (who can’t stop the run) and move up into the top half. They’ll go into their bye at 3-3 with two consecutive stomps, and get to come out against Houston.
:: Rich Conley — 10/9/2007 @ 3:25 pm
“But you can’t tell me Pittsburgh is better than Seattle, or vice-versa. So why would Pittsburgh be favored by six this week? How does that make sense?�
Why would Chewbacca live on Endor? He’s a wookie! It doesn’t fit!
Ahem. It just makes me sad to see two historically great teams in the AFC. Being third isn’t really very helpful when you’re convinced your team couldn’t beat #1 or #2. Although I suppose that have the best shot.
:: Fnor — 10/9/2007 @ 3:25 pm
Any chance we can move the Colts back to the NFC so we can have a really competitive super-bowl this year? And this will have the added benefit of keeping Dallas out. It’s win-win. Well, except for the endless you know who/you know who debate.
:: B — 10/9/2007 @ 3:25 pm
7: Read the back cover of PFP 07. :)
Also, have the Niners really been that bad?
:: throughthelookingglass — 10/9/2007 @ 3:27 pm
Re: 12 (but not aimed at you, just a post of opportunity)
Right now, crowing about first place in the AFC West is like virginity among prostitutes; it sounds special, but means nothing.
:: hooper — 10/9/2007 @ 3:28 pm
In response to the question from Quick Reads about David Garrard… he’s 5th in DVOA. I think he’s playing pretty well.
I don’t understand how the Jacksonville defense can be ranked 16th overall in DVOA and best in Variance. They were atrocious against Tennessee in Week 1 I thought. They’ve improved each week since. How can they be the least varying?
:: sam — 10/9/2007 @ 3:34 pm
*back* to the NFC? Maybe you mean back to the AFC East?
Man, those were two bad teams in the early 90’s.
:: shannon — 10/9/2007 @ 3:34 pm
Re: 19
The Colts were an NFL team before the merger. They were one of the teams that shifted to the AFC when the merger went through; I think that’s the reference. “Back to the NFL” wouldn’t have made much sense.
:: hooper — 10/9/2007 @ 3:37 pm
19: The Colts (Baltimore version) were members of the NFL until the 1970 merger. Hence how they played the Jets in Super Bowl III.
:: Eddo — 10/9/2007 @ 3:38 pm
How does Pittsburgh have 3.2 estimated wins when a) they’re 3rd in team efficieny, and b) they’ve beat the living crap out of 4 teams this year? Is that a typo/should be 4.2 wins, perchance?
:: Thoreau — 10/9/2007 @ 3:40 pm
Re: 4
Actually, last week the Steelers were #5 in DVOA and the Seahawks were #6 so just based on overall DVOA for the year, Simmons wasn’t far off. Not that I don’t think Simmons says ridiculous things, but that was one of the least ridiculous things he has said.
:: gobigred — 10/9/2007 @ 3:40 pm
14 - Historically great teams in the AFC? At this point, sure. I’ll wait till the end of the season to write the history, however. I don’t expect the Steelers to beat the Patriots or the Colts either, but nothing will “convince” me of that until they play them and don’t beat them. Just looking at these three teams over the course of the past decade, everybody knew that the Steelers couldn’t beat the Colts in 2005, that Manning couldn’t overcome his big game curse against Brady in 2006, that the 2001 no-name Patriots couldn’t run with the big-name Steelers, etc.
17 - No offense taken, esp. as I was not serious in the least with my post at 12. I wonder if I violated the complaint rules, however, as standings don’t really count as a “subjective ranking system.”
:: Matt — 10/9/2007 @ 3:44 pm
#7, You’re six posts too late.
#19, The AFC (with the exception of the Jaguars and the Browns or Ravens, depending on how you see the franchise move) is essentially the expansion part of the NFL, created with the NFL/AFL merger. The three exceptions were Baltimore, Pittsburgh, and Cleveland, who were in the NFL, but switched conferences in the name of competitive balance.
:: dryheat — 10/9/2007 @ 3:46 pm
7, Tennessee being first in Defensive DVOA is not a surprise at all IMO. After all they did keep the #1 Offense in the league (DVOA-wise) to only 22 points. Peyton Manning had his worse game of the season so far against the Titans.
The Titans D-Line (Actually, lets be honest here, Kyle Vanden Bosch and Albert Haynesworth with a sprinkle of Tony Brown) have been mauling offensive lines and getting into and disrupting the backfield. Albert Haynesworth is playing like a man posessed and would probably be talked about even more if it wasn’t for his stomping spree (okay… it was only a single one, so that doesn’t justify calling it a spree) and the fact that he plays for Tennessee.
Vs. the Run Titans have been fantastic, with Haynesworth and Tony Brown sealing off all gaps between the Tackles, and Thornton and Bulluck’s speediness effectively shutting down the outside runs.
Vs. the Pass Titans have been decent, and it’s all thanks to Cortland Finnegan and Nick Harper. Especially with Finnegan looking like Pacman with his physical play on the WRs.
:: John Kim — 10/9/2007 @ 3:52 pm
Manning and Brady are basically tied for first in DPAR with 57.8. That puts them on pace for 185 DPAR this year, which would be the best of the DVOA era (beating Manning in 06 @ 175 and Manning in 04 @ 170).
Also, raise your hands if you thought Sammy Morris would be the 2nd RB in DPAR at any point this season.
:: Catfish — 10/9/2007 @ 3:53 pm
22: Their variance hurts them a lot. I’m not sure how their splits work out, but they might also be getting hurt in the formula by poor situational performance.
:: Optimistic Packer Fan — 10/9/2007 @ 3:53 pm
RE:Tenessee
One of the interesting things about them, is there are only two teams in the top 10 (defenses) that are being adjusted upward. Washington and Tenessee. Tenessee is receiving a big adjustment up (+4%) while Pittsburgh is being greatly adjusted downward (-7%) New England is being adjusted down 1.5%.
Pittsburgh’s VOA is over 10% higher than Tennesee’s, so SoS is playing a huge part here.
:: Rich Conley — 10/9/2007 @ 3:58 pm
23 -
That’s why I said my criticism of the estimable Mr. Simmons was hindsight-based. Perhaps I should have been clearer. I too expected a better game and two more evenly matched teams.
That said, Sunday was a beatdown — so whatever DVOA said before or after, I’m willing to say that the Steelers are a better team at the moment.
Moreover, I guess I’m willing to go out on a statistical limb and go in way over my head (just to mix metaphors as thoroughly as possible) and suggest that the Steelers #2 ranking in Weeks 2 and 3, when compared to the Seahawks #14 ranking in both of those weeks, was an indicator to consider along with the Week 4 rankings that came in after the Steelers worst game of the year and the Seahawks most dominant game. Now weeks 2 and 3 were still plain old VOA, without any opponent adjustments, etc., but thus far it looks like the Week 4 timeframe when these two teams were next to each other in the rankings was a bit of an anomaly.
I am sure others will disabuse me of that notion, however, if my lack of statistics knowledge is on full display here when I try to talk about trends and anomalies and all that good stuff.
:: Matt — 10/9/2007 @ 3:58 pm
I know no one cares except Giants fans, but to be ranked 13th on defense after being 25% WORSE than the 31st ranked defense after week one is quite a feat.
It’s also nice to see them top 6 running the ball and against the run. The only team better in both categories is the Pats.
Derrick Ward is the 5th rated DVOA RB? I don’t want to say RBs are “fungible”, but….
:: kevinNYC — 10/9/2007 @ 3:58 pm
touche’
Still, feels good having lived through the Rod Rust era.
:: shannon — 10/9/2007 @ 3:59 pm
“Vs. the Run Titans have been fantastic, with Haynesworth and Tony Brown sealing off all gaps between the Tackles, and Thornton and Bulluck’s speediness effectively shutting down the outside runs.
Vs. the Pass Titans have been decent, and it’s all thanks to Cortland Finnegan and Nick Harper. Especially with Finnegan looking like Pacman with his physical play on the WRs. ”
you’ve got that backwards. They’re -40% DVOA agaisnt the pass, and -5% against the rush. Surprisingly, their Pass Defense is better without Pacman.
:: Rich Conley — 10/9/2007 @ 4:00 pm
15,
Can we at least let the games be played before we crown the AFC? How can you say that the superbowl won’t be competitive? Anything can happen in just one game. I mean, the Texans almost beat the Colts without Andre Johnson. Its silly to think Indy is some kind of unstoppable force. Indy started out 9-0 last year before the got beat by the ‘Boys. Then they finished the season flat but still won the SB. The SB isn’t decided by DVOA after week 5. Lets not crown the Colts and Pats just yet.
:: thestar5 — 10/9/2007 @ 4:06 pm
Individual pages now updated, so are playoff odds. We’ve made a couple of adjustments on playoff odds this week, which regresses teams to the mean slightly as the year goes along.
:: Aaron Schatz — 10/9/2007 @ 4:06 pm
30.
What I’d take from the steelers bouncing around is that Arizona’s DVOA is probably much closer to the truth than its DAVE.
:: Rich Conley — 10/9/2007 @ 4:13 pm
“you’ve got that backwards. They’re -40% DVOA agaisnt the pass, and -5% against the rush. Surprisingly, their Pass Defense is better without Pacman. ”
Really? I hadn’t checked out the actual numbers for the defense yet. That is surprising. From what I’ve seen (which is 3 games on a tiny 320×320 part of the screen on sopcast and 2 games on TV) the Tennessee D-Line has been doing a great job of stuffing the runs and not giving up long-runs either, especially up the middle. And that our pass defense was less-than-reliable at certain points but overall, above-average to good.
And as for our Pass D, IMO A lot of it has to do with Cortland Finnegan stepping up big time. Nick Harper was thought to be the only above-average player among our CBs, but Finnegan has been playing great, FWIS.
I think we should make Cortland Finnegan the next cult-hit player, a la Pacman
=D
:: John Kim — 10/9/2007 @ 4:13 pm
Whoops… thought those Garrard stats looked familiar…
He’s actually 4th in DPAR and 3rd in DVOA. People keep calling him a game manager in the line of superbowl-winning Trent Dilfer but I don’t think that’s an accurate reflection of what he’s accomplished this year (especially with a very mediocre group of receivers).
For those who laughed at JAX signing Dennis Northcutt… well, he’s 16th in DPAR and 8th in DVOA, so I suppose that he’s working out so far.
:: sam — 10/9/2007 @ 4:13 pm
so if you know what the baseline DVOA ‘could’ have been if not for two teams, at what point does it skew the whole ‘average performance’ thing. how much of a difference to the average do two outliers have to make for there to be a problem? or is this never a problem?
:: inkakola — 10/9/2007 @ 4:19 pm
SD has the highest DVOA at #17,�
Thats not going to stay that way. San Diego will stomp oakland (who can’t stop the run) and move up into the top half.
I don’t think that SD mauling the 32nd-ranked rushing defense is going to make their DVOA improve that much. And that assumes that Turner actually capitalizes on that weakness of Oakland; he might instead try and pass a lot and get SD killed.
I mean, we did think SD was going to handily crush KC, right?
:: Kal — 10/9/2007 @ 4:23 pm
sorry if this has been discussed to death elsewhere, but Dick Jauron absolutely blew that game last night!
Gave the ‘boys 3 points before halftime with that stupid FG attempt/clock mgt. Then foregoes the run followed by FG attempt with 5 minutes to go that would have ended the game, allowing Trent to throw the pick.
That’s just terrible, terrible decision making, w/o even getting in to how do you allow a sideline out pattern with 7 seconds and no timeouts left — why bother putting defenders in the middle of the field!
:: Carlos — 10/9/2007 @ 4:27 pm
40.
Kal, when you can run at will on a team, the team brings safties and LB’ers forward, and then you can pass at will.
Opponent adjustments aren’t perfect, and offense moves the ratings more than defense (theres more range in offense, its easier to put up a +50% offense than a -50% defense).
:: Rich Conley — 10/9/2007 @ 4:31 pm
“hen foregoes the run followed by FG attempt with 5 minutes to go that would have ended the game, allowing Trent to throw the pick.”
Forgoes the run?
Last Drive: Run for 2, Run for 1, Incomplete pass
2nd to Last Drive: P4, R2, P8, R14, Incomplete, R2, Pick
“Abandoning the run” wasn’t the problem. They were getting 2 yards a carry. They probably would have won that game if they’d stopped running so much on 1st and 2nd.
:: Rich Conley — 10/9/2007 @ 4:35 pm
43 - I think his point was about the specific playcalling on that Edwards’ pick. Whatever they were getting on the run and whatever they could have done differently during the rest of the game, a Buffalo FG there makes it an 11-point spread with about 4 minutes left and (maybe?) puts the game out of reach.
:: Matt — 10/9/2007 @ 4:40 pm
w/o even getting in to how do you allow a sideline out pattern with 7 seconds and no timeouts left — why bother putting defenders in the middle of the field! That was the thing that got me, and I haven’t heard it even get mentioned anywhere. That was inexcusable - let them catch a pass anywhere, but don’t let any Cowboy get closer to the sideline than a Bill, and they win that game. That was unbelievable, and the broadcasters (and all of the commentary this morning) didn’t seem to notice it…
:: Lyford — 10/9/2007 @ 4:43 pm
Kal, when you can run at will on a team, the team brings safties and LB’ers forward, and then you can pass at will.
except apparently for the raiders, who have the 11th best pass d and the 32nd best run D. In that case it appears that you can’t pass at will on them but running at will is fine. Or they stubbornly don’t do what you say they do, and just keep getting crushed against the run but stay fine against the pass.
Or maybe they man up well and don’t play a lot of zones. That’s my suspicion given their personnel and the games I’ve watched.
Really, the next worst team at rush D is NYJ, and they’re 9 points better. But the pass D is pretty hot. If Turner goes out there and decided that Rivers should win the game on his own, well, they might lose. SD should win handily, but they’ll only do so if they actually go after the Oakland weakness.
:: Kal — 10/9/2007 @ 4:48 pm
46
One thing to note is that the Chargers Rushing DVOA is -10%. I think thats more of an artifact of playing the Patriots, Packers, and Bears (all better than -10% Rush Defense) than it is a statement about their own team.
They’ve played two teams with Bad run Ds’ so far. The Broncos (41-3) and the Chiefs. They dominated that chiefs game until they stopped running the ball.
Now, barring a Chiefs-style Norv-Meltdown, I think the -10% rushing Chargers run all over the -25% rush D Raiders. I think they run the ball well enough that their run offense approaches positive dvoa for the year.
:: Rich Conley — 10/9/2007 @ 4:55 pm
“Abandoning the run� wasn’t the problem
Fake quotes = strawman.
Or maybe you’re not talking to me?
I’m talking very specifically about:
1-10 at Dal 27: 14 yard run by Lynch.
Now there’s 7:09 and you’re up by 8. FG makes it 11, and basically means game over. (would really mean game over if they’d not given up the 3 points at the half).
Instead of three straight runs followed by a FG (assuming no first down or touchdown), leaving Dallas down 11 with 4:45 to play, the play calling is
1-10 at Dal 13: Pass (incomplete)
2-10: Run (2yd)
3-8 at Dal 11: Pass (INT)
Just idiotic. I hate it when coaches get really conservative with a lead 5 minutes into the 3Qtr, but this was
:: Carlos — 10/9/2007 @ 5:03 pm
TEN’s visibly stout yet statistically mediocre run defense becomes more explicable if you look at the Defensive Line stats. The Titans rank 3rd in ALY and 2nd in stop rate, but are 30th in 10+ rate. The Titans are also 24th in Power, which surprises me. At least they’re not Green Bay, which hasn’t stopped anybody this year in a Power situation.
:: NewsToTom — 10/9/2007 @ 5:06 pm
Yeah, once the ball was in chip shot field goal range, with only that much time remaining, it makes no sense to have an inexperienced qb throwing the ball in a red zone crowded with defenders.
:: Will Allen — 10/9/2007 @ 5:18 pm
50.
I agree, but the run wasn’t working. The issue is that the pass got picked off… not that the playcall was a pass. If the play wasn’t there Edwards should have thrown it away or eaten the ball.
:: Rich Conley — 10/9/2007 @ 5:21 pm
Looking at the individual DPAR pages, and my own subjective observations from watching Dolphins games, is it too early to “crown” Ronnie Brown as an elite back?
:: throughthelookingglass — 10/9/2007 @ 5:21 pm
52.
Looking at the RB page, I for one, hope that Dallas continues to insist on giving Julius Jones the ball.
:: Rich Conley — 10/9/2007 @ 5:28 pm
52: I’d say it’s about a year to late. Probably to early to crown him as an elite fantasy back, though.
:: B — 10/9/2007 @ 5:30 pm
I handle the regressing towards the mean problem in my playoff odds forecasts by increasing the variance of single game outcomes. That tends to help the weak teams and hurt the strong teams, which has the same effect as regressing towards the mean. I’ve been doing that for years, because without it, it makes the odds for the front runners unrealistically high. Now if a teams W-L record would just perfectly reflect their DVOA, I think Mike Harris’ playoff odds report and mine would converge.
:: cdcox — 10/9/2007 @ 5:34 pm
Re 47:
I’m pretty sure that “approaching positive DVOA” is horribly dissapointing. They had a 22% rushing DVOA last year, and their unadjusted was higher so they faced above average defenses.
:: tom — 10/9/2007 @ 5:34 pm
but the run wasn’t working.
wasn’t working at what? All the run had to “work at” was keeping the clock running and keeping possession with the Bills for 3 more plays until the FG.
Of course, Lynch had just ripped off a 14 yard run, so 3 straight runs might have even resulted in more than 3 points.
:: Carlos — 10/9/2007 @ 5:35 pm
Re #25:
The AFC (with the exception of the Jaguars and the Browns or Ravens, depending on how you see the franchise move) is essentially the expansion part of the NFL, created with the NFL/AFL merger. The three exceptions were Baltimore, Pittsburgh, and Cleveland, who were in the NFL, but switched conferences in the name of competitive balance.
Actually, there were 16 AFL teams and 10 NFL teams when the leagues merged. After a lot of discussion, the Steelers, Browns, and Colts agreed to move, accepting money from the league for moving to the “inferior” conference. There was a lot of comment at that point about how putting the Jets and Colts in the same division would create a tremendous rivalry in the wake of Super Bowl III; of course, that rivalry never developed.
:: Jerry — 10/9/2007 @ 5:39 pm
54: as a top 3 back, MVP candidate in a normal season type player? (that’s what I mean by elite, I should have defined that better)
:: throughthelookingglass — 10/9/2007 @ 5:40 pm
Re #58:
there were 16 AFL teams and 10 NFL teams
Make that 16 NFL and 10 AFL. Sorry.
:: Jerry — 10/9/2007 @ 5:43 pm
51 - No, the play call was the problem. In theory, yes, Edwards should have thrown the ball away or eaten it. But theory doesn’t always work - here you have an inexperienced QB playing under the bright lights of MNF against one of the best teams in the league. Stuff happens. Just run the ball, grind off another 40 seconds, and kick the FG to go up 11.
:: Hector — 10/9/2007 @ 5:47 pm
56.
“I’m pretty sure that “approaching positive DVOAâ€? is horribly dissapointing. They had a 22% rushing DVOA last year, and their unadjusted was higher so they faced above average defenses.”
I’m not saying its not dissapointing so far, but they’ve played 3 VERY GOOD run defenses so far, and not done much. They’ve shredded two bad run defenses. If they shred a third one this weak, and it puts them back around zero, then theres reason to believe they end up well into the positive at the end of the season.
When I said “for the season” I mean “for the season up to and including the game next week”
:: Rich Conley — 10/9/2007 @ 5:52 pm
Rich, the Bills didn’t need anything more to “work” than a field goal at that point to win the game, and they were close enough to make the field goal highly probable. Hell, they could’ve done a kneel-down, run another thirty five seconds off the clock, and it would have been more intelligent than allowing the inexpereinced qb to make another decision. When a 28 yard field goal wins the game, then you run time off the clock, and kick the field goal. Period. You don’t throw the ball.
:: Will Allen — 10/9/2007 @ 5:53 pm
“51 - No, the play call was the problem. In theory, yes, Edwards should have thrown the ball away or eaten it. But theory doesn’t always work - here you have an inexperienced QB playing under the bright lights of MNF against one of the best teams in the league.”
And lynch could have fumbled the ball. You have an inexperienced running back playing under the bright lights of MNF against one of the best teams in the league.
Edwards had thrown what, 35 passes at that point with no picks?
Bad things DO happen. Defenses FORCE turnovers.
We’re harping over this stuff because they lost. If edwards completes that pass for a first down, the bills win that game 31-16, and everyone is saying Jauron pulled a masterful upset.
:: Rich Conley — 10/9/2007 @ 5:57 pm
Houston is #1! #1, baby!
#1 in SPECIAL TEAMS. Read and WEEP Patriots and Colts.
228 yards of FGs! Yeah!
Seriously though, just happy to be in the top half with our injury situation. Also, Kris Brown is a kicking god. And his name? Very easy to spell. That’s important.
:: Admore — 10/9/2007 @ 6:00 pm
“If the play wasn’t there Edwards should have thrown it away or eaten the ball.”
True. But NFL head coaches are supposed to be aware of the fact that NFL rookie quarterbacks are not known for making good decisions in this manner, not having fully adjusted to the fact that they can’t get away with what they used to be able to get away with in college and not fully adjusted to the speed of the pro game.
Then again, it is not like the Bills were going anywhere this year. Might as well let the kid learn from experience.
:: Gerry — 10/9/2007 @ 6:04 pm
Well, Rich, if Lynch is too inexperienced in terms of ball security, then you do a kneel down and kick the field goal. Really, though, we see this situation in overtime with frequency. Once the ball gets to about the 10 yard line, teams stop throwing, even with experienced qbs, because it doesn’t make any sense.
:: Will Allen — 10/9/2007 @ 6:09 pm
The team I’m having trouble understanding in both DVOA and the playoff odds report is TB.
The Bucs were stomped in both of their losses, and while it’s not embarrassing to be stomped by the Colts, it’s strange that they are ahead of a Seattle team who has only been stomped once and has a stomp victory over the Bucs.
The Bucs on the other hand have three stomps, which is vital to DVOA success, but all came over terrible opponents. The Bucs have defeated the 26th, 29th, and 31st ranked teams.
The playoff odds report claims to assign wins “based on a formula that considers the current DAVE ratings”. Does this formula take into consideration the propensity of certain teams to play close games? FO has pointed out at length the fallacy in the idea that a team’s quality is shown in the ability to win close games (oh, to be a Detroit fan like myself). Close games are pretty close to being random.
When the playoff formula assigns wins and losses, it would need to deviate from DAVE in a certain way in order to accurately predict that good teams like Baltimore and Jacksonville are likely to lose more games than DVOA projects and lousy teams like K.C. and S.F. are likely to win more games than DVOA projects simply because of the way they manage games.
(Good teams should want to maximize the pace of games during the first half while they build their leads, then minimize the pace during the second to reduce player wear-and-tear. Bad teams like K.C. and S.F. want to slow the pace as much as possible all game in order to secure a few fluke victories.)
When you consider the ability of T.B. to build up early leads would seem permanently compromised - if it actually existed to begin with - by the rash of offensive injuries, the close game phenomenon will rob T.B. of a number of wins going forward as they become a defensively-oriented, ball control team.
Even playing in a historically bad division, it’s hard to see T.B. as a 90% playoff team. Their most likely record over the next 6 games is no better than 2-4. They have 4 home games against top 13 DVOA teams, and considering their injuries and previous performance against top 10 DVOA teams, it’s hard to like them in any of those games. Even if they win one of them, there’s a strong likelihood that they lose either at Detroit (which has a very good DVOA at home on the carpet) or at Atlanta.
Following that stretch, they’ll be 5-6 and possibly still in first place in the AFC South, but the 10 win estimation would seem out of reach.
Great info by the outsiders as always.
:: Temporarily#24inNBC100KChallenge — 10/9/2007 @ 6:11 pm
Rich - your analysis is hopeless.
Could lynch have fumbled? Sure. But what is the ratio of fumbles lost:carries vs. INT:Attempts. It guess the difference is just barely within an order of magnitude.
Plus, with the run, you guarantee to keep the clock running.
Plus, you overlook Jauron’s terrible play calling at the end of the first half. You can call it hindsight if you want, but I was there at the time telling my TV what stupid decisions those were.
As a fellow Eli, I wanted to see Jauron succeed, but you’re probably a an all-time terrible coach if you get 6 turnovers from the opposing QB plus three return TDs and still lose, and, you know what, Jauron, at least yesterday, was an all time bad coach.
:: Carlos — 10/9/2007 @ 6:12 pm
I think you guys are talking about kneel to win… the Bills should’ve played kneel to win.
Rich, thanks for turning the FOMB into your own personal version of Crossfire, every assertion must be challenged by Rich, the brave contrarian, speaker of truth… maybe you can somehow turn discussion of the MNF game into a Colts-Patriots argument…
Denny Green mode
Dick Jauron is who we thought he was, he might’ve had one good season, but Dick Jauron is who we thought he was. He was sub-500 in Chicago, even with a 13-3 season, got fired from there, Dick Jaruon is who we thought he was. He coached the Lions defense, who thinks coaching the Lions defense isn’t an indication of skill? It’s BS… their defense didn’t even improve when he was their coordinator… DICK JAURON IS WHO WE THOUGHT HE WAS!… what fan gets excited because Dick Jauron is their head coach?! Dick Jauron is who we thought he was.
:: Fergasun — 10/9/2007 @ 6:14 pm
a lot of people like to question objective rankings, but i just wanted to say that your top 10 ranked teams (NE-JAX) are the exact same teams I’d have in my top 10, althouhg maybe in a slightly different order.
Says a fair bit for the validity of your statistics, IMO, as all your fancy formulas have somehwo come up with a graet rankings.
:: Dave — 10/9/2007 @ 6:15 pm
14 and 24: Let’s not forget the 2004 regular season when the Steelers and their rookie QB couldn’t possibly beat either the undeated Pats or the undefeated Eagles and certainly not in back to back weeks.
Just because the Pats and Colts haven’t yet laid an egg does not mean that they won’t lay an egg. Of course they will.
:: countertorque — 10/9/2007 @ 6:21 pm
Dick Jauron. Yalie. Say no more.
And I point this out having grown up watching him dominate as the high school phenom he was.
:: mm — 10/9/2007 @ 6:38 pm
#72: And, if you recall, the Steelers with their rookie QB got plastered in the postseason, while the other two looked like who (sorry) we thought they were in the regular season.
:: Fnor — 10/9/2007 @ 6:43 pm
Who would have thought after 5 weeks that the six of the bottom 7 RBs out of 46 (min. 30 carries) would include:
R.Bush
M.Jones-Drew
S.Jackson
R.Johnson
F.Gore
C.Benson
That’s five elite fantasy RBs and a #2 (C.Benson.)
:: chip — 10/9/2007 @ 6:43 pm
Re: 16
Yes, the 49ers offense really has been that bad.
I think the Defense is better than #22, but they’re just on the field 40 minutes per game, which will knock them down a bit–they just get tired out eventually.
:: Felden — 10/9/2007 @ 6:51 pm
Re #68
I think the Bucs’ 86% division probability has a lot to do with their high playoff probability. The NFC South this year looks like it could challenge the NFC West of recent vintage as being among the worst divisions in NFL history. They’re also routing their pathetic foes and only have been really blown out against the Colts-the Seahawks won by 14, but it was a 1-score game until less than 8 minutes left. Meanwhile, the Saints game was even less close than a 31-14 score indicates, as the Bucs were up 28-0, the Rams were just destroyed, and Carolina scored a meaningless TD in the last minute to make it only 20-7. Yes, they’ll almost certainly be worse with the offensive injuries. But, right now, we can’t be sure just how much worse. Subjectively, I think 9-7 is more likely than 10 wins, and an 85% chance to win the division is about right. And it wouldn’t surprise me if 9-7 is enough to get a wildcard berth, even if someone beats them out for the division.
:: NewsToTom — 10/9/2007 @ 7:04 pm
“Could lynch have fumbled? Sure. But what is the ratio of fumbles lost:carries vs. INT:Attempts. It guess the difference is just barely within an order of magnitude.”
IIRC, Modern running backs fumble about once in every 40-50 carries. QBs throw a pick about 30-40 attempts. Its pretty close.
The patriots were in the same situation sunday. Up 10, about 8 minutes left, and they threw. They scored a touchdown and put the game away. The only reason it was the wrong call for Buffalo was that it didn’t work.
:: Rich Conley — 10/9/2007 @ 7:07 pm
#74 I think comment #24 already addressed the post season. The Steelers can decisively beat either of those 2 teams. I’m not saying they definitely will. But, it’s silly to be down on the #3 team because they aren’t ranked #1.
:: countertorque — 10/9/2007 @ 7:13 pm
In 2006
per team there were on average
398.7 rb carries
6.2 fumbles
3.8 fumbles lost
:: coldbikemessenger — 10/9/2007 @ 7:17 pm
First, Rich, given a 50/50 fumble recovery rate, the odds of LOSING a fumble drop well below the odds of an int. Second, eight minutes isn’t five and half minutes, which is what would have been left after a run and a kick, so one doesn’t adopt the same strategy at eight minutes as one does at five and a half minutes. Third, Tom Brady doesn’t play for the Bills, and one would not expect to adopt the the same strategy with Brady behind center as one would with a very inexperienced qb. Yes, it was a wrong call because it didin’t work, but also because it had a much better chance of turning sour due to who was playing qb, and because a field goal makes it highly unlikely the Cowboys can come back, and the chance of a successful field goal is extremely high.
:: Will Allen — 10/9/2007 @ 7:19 pm
IIRC, Modern running backs fumble about once in every 40-50 carries. QBs throw a pick about 30-40 attempts. Its pretty close.
No, that’s about the worst running back that you can have. That’s Tiki Barber fumblitis. Most RBs fumble about once in 70 attempts. Here’s some example stats of touches per fumble for RBs:
Priest Holmes– 155.7
Curtis Martin— 133.8
Corey Dillon—- 102.9
Marshall Faulk– 101.5
LT Tomlinson— 97.1
Fred Taylor—– 92.1
S. Alexander—- 88.0
Stephen Davis– 84.6
Duce Staley—- 81.9
Clinton Portis— 79.25
D. McAllister—- 74.8
Ahman Green— 60.6
Ricky Williams*– 53.5
Jamal Lewis—– 50.2
Travis Henry—- 41.8
Tiki Barber—— 37.1
RBs tend to be a far better proposition than QBs on turning the ball over per attempt - and they’re especially better than a rookie QB.
:: Kal — 10/9/2007 @ 7:19 pm
It was clearly the wrong call because I predicted it in the FO IRC chatroom before it happened. As to mistakenly calling for a pick-6, well, I did that just to show I was human. Or I was wrong, take your pick.
:: NewsToTom — 10/9/2007 @ 7:27 pm
So here’s something interesting… the AFC South and NFC East both have their entire divisions inside the top-16.
:: sam — 10/9/2007 @ 7:30 pm
72: Just because they haven’t laid an egg doesn’t mean they will, either.
:: B — 10/9/2007 @ 7:30 pm
Don’t like piling on, but the call for Edwards to throw the ball twice inside the 15 with 6 minutes left up 8 was horrible.
Whenever I see a coach like Jauron with a lifetime record well below .500 I always suspect that he has no handle on the statistical strategies of the game.
:: jimm — 10/9/2007 @ 7:44 pm
Yeah, I forgot he passes on first down as well. If they run on first and third down, there’s actually only about 4:45 left, which seals the game to an even greater degree.
:: Will Allen — 10/9/2007 @ 7:58 pm
#30
That ain’t mixing metaphors! This is mixing metaphors… (courtasy of Zapp Brannigan)
When we hit this bulls-eye the rest of the dominos will fall like a house of cards. Checkmate.
:: jebmak — 10/9/2007 @ 8:06 pm
I can’t wait to see one of those last second time out calls by the coaches backfire when some kicker misses the first attempt that doesn’t count, and makes the second one.
:: jimm — 10/9/2007 @ 8:23 pm
78 - Will beat me to it, but I can’t let it go. Next, Rich will tell us that (as the MNF guys said) Trent Edwards is just like Brady. Same diff. If you can trust Brady to throw to seal the game, then Jauron should trust his rookie. 79 - Right, I specifically didn’t mention regular season “upsets” in my list, but those just add to the theory in my opinion. The Steelers beat down the Pats in 2004 reg season but got it handed back to them in the playoffs. Same deal in 2005, but this time it was the Colts in the regular season triumph and the Steelers in the playoffs. (Just to keep piling on with Steelers misery, one can go back to 1997 as well, where the Steelers beat the Broncos pretty handily in Week 15 only to lose the AFCC to them six weeks later.) In the end, I think it just proves that (no matter how good a predictor DVOA may be) you just don’t know, and even mid- to late-season regular season results are not necessarily indicators of playoff results between the same teams.
:: Matt — 10/9/2007 @ 8:24 pm
86. Will - of course we do realize there are teams capable of blowing an 11 pt lead with just 6 minutes or so left in the game.
As soon as Dallas missed the 2 pointer I thought of the Ariz/Minn in 2003.
:: jimm — 10/9/2007 @ 8:33 pm
Today’s DVOA commentary was going to talk in depth about the historic seasons that we are seeing in New England, Indianapolis, and Dallas.
Ok, in all due respect to this statement above. New England has absolutely not been tested. Their opponents are giving up an average of 6.1 yards per play. I know New England has put up 30+ points in most of their games. But all of the teams they have played have given up a large amount of points to other opponents as well. Its not like New England has put up 38 against Pittsburgh , when all other teams are averaging less than ten points against them. Lets not start making these kinds of statements just yet footballoutsiders.
:: Dutch — 10/9/2007 @ 8:54 pm
MNF - Somehow, I had the feeling that the Bills had managed to dodge the bullet when they got the goalline interception, but no…
How on the series before, Jauron didn’t have his offense run the ball twice and then on third down have the sneak to the center of the field for the field goal is bey