AMERICA'S BEST-SELLING
PRO FOOTBALL BOOK!

PFP 2008

Click here for more info.

KUBIAK UPDATE
8/27: ADDS KICK AND PUNT RETURN YARDAGE!
8/26: Changes PHI WR, NYG DT, SD DT
8/25: Changes ARI QB, ATL QB/WR/TE, HOU RB, MIA RB, NYG DL
Download here.


Most Recent Ramblings

ROTOWORLD.COM
DRAFT GUIDE 2008

Rotoworld Draft Guide 2008

The perfect complement
to PFP 2008

Get notified when new Outsider Ramblings are posted:


||

Top 5 Total DVOA

2007 FINAL

  1. NE (52.0%)
  2. IND (33.1%)
  3. DAL (24.3%)
  4. JAC (23.7%)
  5. GB (21.2%)

Top 5 Offense

2007 FINAL

  1. NE (42.6%)
  2. IND (28.3%)
  3. JAC (20.7%)
  4. DAL (19.0%)
  5. GB (17.3%)

Top 5 Defense

2007 FINAL

  1. TEN (-13.4%)
  2. PIT (-12.3%)
  3. IND (-10.7%)
  4. TB (-10.2%)
  5. SD (-9.8%)

Top 5 Special Teams

2007 FINAL

  1. CHI (9.3%)
  2. CLE (6.9%)
  3. HOU (5.7%)
  4. SF (4.5%)
  5. SD (4.5%)
Play texas holdem poker on Launchpoker.com
Help with KUBIAK and Premium

Wish to Play & Win big time at the best Online Casino sites?
CasinosVIPLounge is your comprehensive guide to the world of Online Casinos. From Casino Games to online Sports Betting. Gambling tips, casino reviews, freebies, Bonuses, breaking news
and much more...

Baseball Prospectus Basketball Prospectus


ArmchairGM -- All Sports, All You


2007 CFBA Nominee: Best Audio
» Printable version

Week 11 DVOA Ratings

11/20/2007

by Aaron Schatz

By now we’re used to DVOA giving an account of a game that’s very different from conventional wisdom, and even at times very different from the final score. That was definitely the truth with two games in Week 11.

The Cleveland Browns had what seems like huge emotional win, beating the evil ex-Browns (a.k.a. the Ravens) in overtime. Despite this, the Browns actually drop a spot in the DVOA rankings. To the DVOA formula, this was effectively a tie against a bad team. We’re all so used to thinking of Baltimore as good and Cleveland as bad that it is hard to see it this way, but how would you feel if the Giants had to scratch their way through overtime to beat the Texans? The difference in DVOA is roughly the same; only the perception is different.

On the other hand, you have the Broncos’ 34-20 win over the Titans. That looks like a solid victory, not an overwhelming one — but Denver gets a 96.0% DVOA, making this one of the top games of the season. Denver outscored the Titans despite running 23 fewer plays. All three Denver touchdown drives went 80 yards, and the Titans fumbled four times and only lost one. After two weeks without Albert Haynesworth, the Titans have gone from ranking as one of the top 10 defenses of the DVOA Era to not even ranking as the top defense of 2007. Even stranger, the number one pass defense is now Indianapolis. Raise your hand if you thought that the Colts defense would carry Peyton Manning through the regular season… yes, that’s none of you.

Overall, the Broncos climb three spots this week, and the Titans drop five.

Of course, let’s be honest — all of this movement is dwarfed by the story of the season, which is New England’s quest for the perfect season. By now everyone is probably sick and tired about talking about how dominant the Patriots are, but every week it gets more and more impressive.

* * * * *

Here are the Football Outsiders team efficiency ratings through 11 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.

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>


TEAM TOTAL
DVOA 		LAST
WEEK 		WEI.
DVOA 		RANK W-L OFFENSE
DVOA 		OFF.
RANK 		DEFENSE
DVOA 		DEF.
RANK 		S.T.
DVOA 		S.T.
RANK
1 NE 73.7% 1 74.2% 1 10-0 51.3% 1 -16.9% 3 5.5% 7
2 DAL 39.0% 3 38.4% 2 9-1 30.3% 2 -9.2% 7 -0.5% 16
3 IND 34.9% 2 32.5% 3 8-2 25.7% 3 -15.7% 4 -6.5% 30
4 GB 28.4% 5 28.9% 4 9-1 18.7% 4 -7.1% 9 2.5% 10
5 PIT 25.4% 4 21.3% 5 7-3 7.4% 11 -21.1% 1 -3.1% 23
6 TB 20.6% 6 20.3% 6 6-4 15.4% 5 -7.2% 8 -2.0% 18
7 SD 14.4% 7 16.3% 7 5-5 2.7% 15 -4.0% 12 7.8% 2
8 JAC 13.5% 8 14.5% 8 7-3 12.1% 9 2.7% 17 4.1% 9
9 NYG 9.9% 11 11.9% 9 7-3 7.0% 12 -5.8% 10 -2.8% 22
10 SEA 9.4% 9 8.1% 11 6-4 1.8% 16 -1.8% 14 5.8% 6
11 WAS 7.5% 14 7.8% 12 5-5 0.9% 17 -5.0% 11 1.6% 13
12 PHI 5.9% 13 2.5% 14 5-5 13.9% 6 3.6% 19 -4.4% 29
13 CLE 5.4% 12 8.3% 10 6-4 12.6% 7 15.9% 29 8.7% 1
14 MIN 4.0% 15 3.8% 13 4-6 3.8% 13 1.8% 16 2.0% 11
15 TEN 2.7% 10 0.7% 16 6-4 -11.5% 25 -18.5% 2 -4.3% 28
16 DEN 1.8% 19 1.0% 15 5-5 11.5% 10 10.9% 24 1.3% 14
TEAM
TOTAL
DVOA 		LAST
WEEK 		WEI.
DVOA 		RANK W-L OFFENSE
DVOA 		OFF.
RANK 		DEFENSE
DVOA 		DEF.
RANK 		S.T.
DVOA 		S.T.
RANK
17 ARI -1.1% 18 -0.4% 17 5-5 -2.2% 20 -2.6% 13 -1.5% 17
18 CIN -2.3% 16 -3.1% 19 3-7 12.3% 8 14.7% 27 0.1% 15
19 BUF -5.3% 17 -2.2% 18 5-5 -8.2% 23 3.4% 18 6.2% 4
20 KC -9.1% 24 -7.5% 20 4-6 -19.7% 29 -14.0% 5 -3.3% 25
21 HOU -9.4% 23 -12.3% 22 5-5 -0.8% 19 10.6% 23 2.0% 12
22 DET -12.2% 22 -11.2% 21 6-4 -4.1% 22 1.5% 15 -6.5% 31
23 BAL -12.6% 20 -14.4% 23 4-6 -22.4% 31 -13.8% 6 -3.9% 27
24 NO -17.8% 21 -14.5% 24 4-6 3.7% 14 17.6% 31 -3.9% 26
25 MIA -18.3% 26 -18.8% 27 0-10 -0.6% 18 15.4% 28 -2.2% 19
26 CHI -18.5% 28 -17.5% 25 4-6 -20.9% 30 3.7% 20 6.2% 5
27 NYJ -20.1% 29 -17.8% 26 2-8 -3.4% 21 23.1% 32 6.4% 3
28 ATL -23.0% 25 -22.3% 28 3-7 -14.6% 26 6.0% 22 -2.4% 20
29 CAR -24.5% 27 -24.3% 29 4-6 -11.5% 24 5.5% 21 -7.5% 32
30 STL -34.2% 30 -32.0% 30 2-8 -19.0% 28 12.0% 25 -3.2% 24
31 OAK -34.3% 31 -34.0% 31 2-8 -18.6% 27 13.2% 26 -2.5% 21
32 SF -51.6% 32 -54.0% 32 2-8 -39.9% 32 16.3% 30 4.6% 8

  • 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.
  • 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 NE 73.7% 10-0 71.6% 10.0 1 4.5% 9 -2.0% 18 2.8% 32
2 DAL 39.0% 9-1 36.3% 8.1 3 3.1% 10 -3.0% 20 8.5% 22
3 IND 34.9% 8-2 29.2% 8.4 2 6.0% 6 -12.6% 25 16.0% 9
4 GB 28.4% 9-1 32.4% 7.4 4 -0.4% 17 -14.5% 28 8.2% 23
5 PIT 25.4% 7-3 34.0% 6.3 7 -6.5% 27 4.0% 13 30.3% 1
6 TB 20.6% 6-4 18.9% 6.5 6 -4.7% 23 -23.7% 32 20.5% 6
7 SD 14.4% 5-5 6.2% 5.6 13 7.7% 3 -12.7% 26 27.9% 4
8 JAC 13.5% 7-3 12.1% 6.7 5 1.6% 16 -2.6% 19 7.2% 26
9 NYG 9.9% 7-3 11.1% 5.8 9 -0.5% 18 13.4% 7 5.8% 28
10 SEA 9.4% 6-4 21.0% 5.6 12 -11.4% 32 -17.9% 29 13.8% 12
11 WAS 7.5% 5-5 -5.5% 5.3 15 10.1% 2 9.9% 9 8.9% 20
12 PHI 5.9% 5-5 3.8% 5.8 8 2.5% 13 21.8% 2 15.9% 10
13 CLE 5.4% 6-4 3.2% 5.7 10 1.8% 14 -18.0% 30 8.7% 21
14 MIN 4.0% 4-6 4.0% 5.6 11 1.7% 15 -12.6% 24 20.1% 7
15 TEN 2.7% 6-4 4.6% 5.1 17 -2.2% 21 1.7% 16 16.0% 8
16 DEN 1.8% 5-5 0.4% 5.3 16 5.3% 7 -10.6% 23 28.4% 2
TEAM TOTAL
DVOA 		W-L NON-ADJ
TOT VOA 		ESTIM.
WINS 		RANK PAST
SCHED 		RANK FUTURE
SCHED 		RANK VAR. RANK
17 ARI -1.1% 5-5 5.2% 4.5 20 -6.8% 28 -22.3% 31 28.1% 3
18 CIN -2.3% 3-7 -0.5% 5.4 14 4.8% 8 -14.1% 27 3.0% 31
19 BUF -5.3% 5-5 -16.2% 5.0 18 12.7% 1 4.8% 12 10.2% 17
20 KC -9.1% 4-6 -10.2% 4.4 21 3.0% 12 -9.5% 22 11.2% 15
21 HOU -9.4% 5-5 -6.4% 4.2 22 -5.6% 24 15.8% 6 13.6% 13
22 DET -12.2% 6-4 -5.2% 4.9 19 -2.1% 20 21.0% 3 21.4% 5
23 BAL -12.6% 4-6 -8.8% 3.7 25 -7.3% 30 27.9% 1 8.1% 24
24 NO -17.8% 4-6 -14.8% 4.1 23 -5.6% 25 -8.1% 21 11.1% 16
25 MIA -18.3% 0-10 -27.6% 3.3 29 6.6% 5 11.7% 8 5.0% 29
26 CHI -18.5% 4-6 -17.2% 3.8 24 3.0% 11 6.7% 11 4.9% 30
27 NYJ -20.1% 2-8 -24.3% 3.4 27 7.1% 4 18.7% 4 9.0% 19
28 ATL -23.0% 3-7 -13.8% 3.3 28 -7.0% 29 2.4% 15 7.7% 25
29 CAR -24.5% 4-6 -20.9% 3.4 26 -2.0% 19 2.6% 14 14.3% 11
30 STL -34.2% 2-8 -30.0% 2.2 30 -7.7% 31 7.4% 10 12.9% 14
31 OAK -34.3% 2-8 -27.2% 1.8 31 -3.6% 22 16.8% 5 9.9% 18
32 SF -51.6% 2-8 -42.7% 1.3 32 -6.2% 26 0.4% 17 6.9% 27

Best and Worst DVOA Ever Watch

BEST TOTAL DVOA
AFTER WEEK 11		   BEST OFFENSIVE DVOA
AFTER WEEK 11		   WORST TOTAL DVOA
AFTER WEEK 11		   WORST OFFENSIVE DVOA
AFTER WEEK 11
2007 NE 73.7%   2007 NE 51.3%   2005 SF -55.9%   2005 SF -41.3%
1999 STL 46.4%   2004 IND 45.0%   2000 CIN -55.0%   2007 SF -39.9%
1998 DEN 43.5%   2000 STL 38.7%   2007 SF -51.6%   2002 HOU -36.8%
2002 TB 42.1%   2000 IND 36.3%   2005 HOU -49.5%   2004 MIA -36.0%
1996 GB 40.5%   1998 DEN 34.3%   1999 CLE -48.5%   1999 ARI -35.9%
2000 TEN 40.0%   2005 SD 32.2%   2004 SF -46.4%   1997 NO -35.1%
2004 NE 40.0%   2005 IND 31.6%   1998 PHI -44.3%   2000 CIN -33.4%
2001 STL 39.4%   2004 KC 30.6%   2000 ARI -44.0%   2006 OAK -33.0%
2007 DAL 39.0%   2002 KC 30.4%   2002 HOU -42.3%   1998 PHI -32.6%
2004 PIT 38.7%   2007 DAL 30.3%   2000 CLE -39.8%   2001 CAR -31.4%

In Audibles, Ned Macey asked about the Pats and the biggest-ever gap between the top two teams in DVOA. Here is a table of the top two teams in DVOA after Week 11 each of the past dozen years. This year is the biggest gap by far, of course. And just in case you think this is a case of reduced parity in recent years, notice that the smallest gap between the top two teams after Week 11 was… last year.


YEAR #1 TEAM #1 DVOA #2 TEAM #2 DVOA DIF
2007 NE 73.7% DAL 39.0% 34.7%
1998 DEN 43.5% DAL 24.9% 18.6%
2002 TB 42.1% OAK 26.6% 15.5%
2003 KC 38.3% TEN 24.0% 14.3%
1996 GB 40.5% DEN 29.9% 10.6%
1999 STL 46.4% JAC 38.6% 7.8%
2000 TEN 40.0% MIA 34.1% 6.0%
2005 IND 36.8% DEN 33.3% 3.5%
1997 SF 34.9% DEN 32.1% 2.8%
2001 STL 39.4% PHI 37.6% 1.8%
2004 NE 40.0% PIT 38.7% 1.3%
2006 CHI 34.3% SD 33.9% 0.4%

How dominant are the Patriots compared to every other team of the DVOA Era? Only six other teams ever had a DVOA of 40% or higher after ten games. Five of those teams won the Super Bowl, with the 2000 Titans as the only exception. No team had ever been at 50% DVOA after ten games. The Patriots aren’t just over 50% — the Patriots have not had a single game with DVOA below 50%.

Remember, the Patriots are not the first team in recent memory to spur talk of a perfect season. The 1998 Broncos and 2005 Colts both started 13-0 before losing. The Pats’ DVOA is almost twice as high as the DVOA ratings of those two teams after 10 games. Here’s our first week-to-week chart of the 2007 season, but this time we’re comparing the three teams that have gone 10-0 during the DVOA Era. These are the DVOA ratings for each individual game during those two 13-0 starts, plus the ratings for each Patriots game. I’ve noted the scores of some of the best and worst games. The Broncos actually won two games during their streak despite a DVOA under 0%. I didn’t have space to add the scores of the worst Pats games — their lowest ratings of the season were Week 1 against the Jets and Week 5 against the Browns.

The Patriots have played ten straight games with a DVOA rating above 55%. The 1998 Broncos and 2005 Colts, also undefeated after ten games, had only seven games over 55% combined. Wow.

As for the 49ers, well, what can you say? They make me sad. My acquaintance with people in the front office outweighs my Patriots rooting interests.

Housekeeping: Everything should be updated, including individual and team stats pages, the premium database, the playoff odds, and the Loser League.

(Playoff odds are now updated.)

For (short) comments on every team, remember to look for DVOA on AOL, every Wednesday. (This will be linked on the FO Goes Mainstream page.)

posted 11-20-2007 at 4:26 PM by Aaron Schatz || DVOA Ratings ||

207 Comments »

  1. Amazing. The Patriots offense is so good, that if you gave them the worst defense in the NFL (the Jets’), and the worst special teams in the NFL (Carolina), it looks like they would still be about the sixth-best team in the league (tied with Tampa Bay).

    :: Scott de B. — 11/20/2007 @ 4:55 pm



  2. Wow. If it was any other year, people might be talking about how well the Cowboys are playing. Instead, they are absolutely dwarfed by the dominance of the Pats.

    :: Todd M. — 11/20/2007 @ 4:56 pm



  3. I’m not getting an updated playoff odds page yet.

    :: Yosi Scharf — 11/20/2007 @ 5:01 pm



  4. As a Steelers fan, I’m curious: what’s the record for variance over the course of a season?

    Also, it looks like the playoff odds are still on Week 10.

    :: Yaxley — 11/20/2007 @ 5:02 pm



  5. #1

    How about if you gave the Pats a league average Defense and Special Teams, they would still be the best team in the history of DVOA.

    :: jebmak — 11/20/2007 @ 5:05 pm



  6. The Giants jumped 7 spots in special teams?

    Geez… the Lions’ ST really is horrendous. The Giants got their longest punt and kick return of the season in that game.

    :: kevinNYC — 11/20/2007 @ 5:05 pm



  7. Just out of curiousity, why was the Pats game against Buffalo so much lower (well, relatively :) than the Washington game?

    :: PatsFan — 11/20/2007 @ 5:06 pm



  8. Amazingly enough, it looks as if New Englands worst performance of the year came against the Cleveland Browns. When’s the last time anyone would have wrote that down?

    :: SGT Ben — 11/20/2007 @ 5:07 pm



  9. It looks like the Saints little run of 4 wins in a row is a distant memory now. They’re now back to their bumbling sub-mediocrity that they’ve had for the last 6 years, excluding the fluke that was last year, and their sub-par (even for them) performance during the post Katrina days.

    And, with that little winning streak, they’ve managed to shoot themselves in the foot for a shot at a top 5 draft pick. Oh well, leave it up to the Saints to screw up even being bad.

    :: Bayou_Fan — 11/20/2007 @ 5:08 pm



  10. 2,

    Yes I cry about it every night. Only kidding! Maybe… ;)

    :: thestar5 — 11/20/2007 @ 5:08 pm



  11. 7.

    Putting up 50+ on the 11th ranked defense is more impressive than doing the same to the 18th ranked defense.

    :: MMM — 11/20/2007 @ 5:10 pm



  12. 2:
    Indeed, and it makes me sad on so many levels. If this were any other year, I’d be beaming brighter than the sun.

    As it stands, every happy feeling I get from this fantastic team is dwarfed by the fact that it won’t be enough in the end. *sniff*

    :: Costa — 11/20/2007 @ 5:12 pm



  13. Another interesting tidbit: the Steelers’ DVOA went down 7.4% after losing to the bottom-dwelling Jets, but their variance actually decreased 1.3%. That ought to be a bad sign for Pittsburgh, suggesting it was their excellent games which were driving their obvious inconsistency, more than their poor ones.

    :: slo-mo-joe — 11/20/2007 @ 5:13 pm



  14. My Cowboys were the 2nd best team in the league after 11 weeks in 1998? I must’ve slept through that season or something. I remember something about a guy named Moss dressed in purple being pretty good.

    :: Tony C — 11/20/2007 @ 5:15 pm



  15. #14 - Not unless the cowboys played in Denver.

    :: bsr — 11/20/2007 @ 5:22 pm



  16. By Division, the NFC East is pretty impressive. The whole group is in the top 12. Only the AFC South has more than one team ranked so high.

    :: Lance — 11/20/2007 @ 5:25 pm



  17. Actually I read the chart wrong. Tony was right.

    :: bsr — 11/20/2007 @ 5:26 pm



  18. Too bad KC and BAL aren’t playing each other. Regardless of where Vegas set the Over/Under line, you’d just take the under, no matter what. A mortal lock if ever there was one.

    :: beedubyuh — 11/20/2007 @ 5:27 pm



  19. By the way, why did the Pats special teams drop so much this week. I thought they did pretty well against Parish.

    :: bsr — 11/20/2007 @ 5:27 pm



  20. #19:
    I guess they had a -4 yards punting total. Next time, they should go for it. ;-)

    :: slo-mo-joe — 11/20/2007 @ 5:29 pm



  21. 14 - That was also the year of John Elway and some HB who’s initials were TD. Denver and Dallas were pretty solid (all around) teams, whereas Minnesota had a fantastic statistical offense. But we know that DVOA doesn’t care if you get 400 passing yards in a game if you fall behind 30-7 and make up the difference. I know Minnesota never fell behind like that, but they were a boom and bust offense, with a little more boom than bust (if I remember it correctly.)

    :: SGT Ben — 11/20/2007 @ 5:29 pm



  22. #1 & #5 - scarier still is that the Patriots have the best combined DVOA of defense and special teams; most of the other top defenses have poor special teams play. If they had an “average” offense, they would still be the fifth best team in DVOA; as it is the offensive DVOA dwarfs the contribution of defense and special teams. I think this is the first time ever that the point differential of the top pro football team might surpass the point differential of the top college team (exception might be the 1942 Bears - whose +292 differential may be broken next week).

    :: M — 11/20/2007 @ 5:34 pm



  23. And the gap between the conferences gets a little smaller.

    Teams 2-8 in each conference are practically a draw. So basically all the good teams in the AFC have a comparable counterpart in the NFC with the one exception of New England of course.

    I’ll have a bunch more charts tomorrow.

    :: Wanker79 — 11/20/2007 @ 5:37 pm



  24. #20 - Law of unintended consequences I guess.

    :: Jake — 11/20/2007 @ 5:38 pm



  25. How ’bout this one: If the Patriots and the Cowboys were to play in the Super Bowl today, a Cowboys’ victory would be a bigger upset by DVOA than the Patriots’ victory over the Rams after the 2001 season, despite the fact that the Cowboys are the ninth best team of the DVOA era.

    :: CA — 11/20/2007 @ 5:39 pm



  26. Whoops. My bad. Playoff odds are not up yet. Soon.

    :: Aaron Schatz — 11/20/2007 @ 5:39 pm



  27. It’s interesting to see the Packers up in the #4 slot, with OFF, DEF & ST all in the top 10. NE is the only other team with that distinction.

    Naturally the ST DVOA is aided when your opponent only puts 10 men on the field for a fake-FG pooch kick and you get a 94-yard return out of it. :-,

    :: ebongreen — 11/20/2007 @ 5:42 pm



  28. Re: gap between the conferences

    Through week 11, the NFC is 23-21 against the AFC, and that includes 2 losses to the Pats.

    :: Jim — 11/20/2007 @ 5:45 pm



  29. The 2nd best DVOA for QB’s (Garrard) doesn’t have a single WR or TE in the top 20 DVOA, but a RB who has the 3rd best DVOA for receiving (which is still 30% points below Garrard’s).

    When does FO start the Garrard for pro-bowl talk?

    :: bowman — 11/20/2007 @ 5:50 pm



  30. NE wins 56-10 and only goes up .5% in DVOA?

    Amazing.

    :: JJcruiser — 11/20/2007 @ 5:52 pm



  31. Wanker: Like your charts. Removing NE looks like the sides are pretty balanced except that the bottom third favors the AFC slightly.

    :: Thinker — 11/20/2007 @ 6:06 pm



  32. It is funny. Before the season GB was expected to have a good season by riding the force of its defense. And now offensive DVOA is #4, ST #10 while defense is “only” #9.

    :: Levente from Hungary — 11/20/2007 @ 6:07 pm



  33. All the buzz THIS week is focused justifiably on the Colts, whose top-secret “punting out of bounds” technique helps their ST ranking skyrocket from a lowly 32 to a lofty 30, in just one week! According to my own personally-developed advanced metrics (yes, NASA helped me with some of the grunt work on this), at this rate, if they punt out of bounds EVERY DOWN for the next 12 games, they’ll be #1 in ST by Week 7 next year.

    Then you will all feel their wrath…..

    :: Bobman — 11/20/2007 @ 6:09 pm



  34. As mentioned in the audibles thread, the way for a team with a good offense to maximize the chances of upsetting the Patriots is by radically abandoning the punt. It’ll be interesting to see if someone has the guts to try it.

    The gap between the Cowboys and Packers narrows. Barring significant injury before their meeting, I’ll predict a Packers upset win right now. I really think the Packers corners will be the difference.

    The Packers, led by The Timeless One, upsetting the 18-0 Patriots in the Super Bowl, would be one of the greatest storylines in NFL history. Given I won’t be sending out the bottles of superior whisky that I promised in another thread a few weeks ago, this is what I may as well root for. Even though it would make Peter King unreadable for the rest of King’s career.

    O.K., making King unreadable isn’t much of a leap, nor is it something to be regretted, but never mind……

    :: Will Allen — 11/20/2007 @ 6:11 pm



  35. Re: 21 That was also the year of John Elway and some HB who’s initials were TD. Denver and Dallas were pretty solid (all around) teams, whereas Minnesota had a fantastic statistical offense. But we know that DVOA doesn’t care if you get 400 passing yards in a game if you fall behind 30-7 and make up the difference. I know Minnesota never fell behind like that, but they were a boom and bust offense, with a little more boom than bust (if I remember it correctly.)

    I’d call them a “boom and boom” offense. The fewest number of points that the Vikings scored in any game in 1998 was 24. They often were too explosive to produce the multiple-first-down drives that push up DVOA. The Vikings didn’t need to get four first downs on six plays to score a TD from the 50 yard line when all they had to do was have Cunningham chuck the ball to Moss in the end zone. DVOA is based in part on the general rule that big plays are largely a consequence of circumstance and luck, and hence a sustained scoring drive is more impressive than a scoring drive that features just one or two big gains. The 1998 Vikings were one of the few teams to violate this rule, as they were able to achieve relatively consistent explosiveness. Hence DVOA underrates their offense. I’m not criticizing DVOA; I’m simply saying that it wasn’t built to measure a uniquely awesome offense like the 1998 Vikings’. Aaron, please jump in if you believe that I’ve misrepresented anything here.

    :: CA — 11/20/2007 @ 6:18 pm



  36. Will,
    I love your idea, but… what’s the payoff for that big risk? Aside from bragging rights? I could see if Pitt had 1 loss and NE had none, then the huge risk gets them the #1 seed if they win, and a loss still keeps them in the hunt for #2. The way things are now, their payoff would be “we broke their streak” versus “eh, we were 3rd seeded anyway…”

    I don’t see coaches taking risks like that for no clear reward. Now in the playoffs… the risk/reward is more stark: either win or pack your bags.

    Still though, I see this as a very conservative bunch and it would take a burning bush type moment to make a coach move himself that far away fromt he philosophical herd. Have I just mashed together every metaphor known to man? So be it; that’s the kind of zany risk-taker I am.

    :: Bobman — 11/20/2007 @ 6:19 pm



  37. what’s WEI dvoa?

    :: akachazz — 11/20/2007 @ 6:19 pm



  38. NE kickoffs were shorter on average than they have been and two runbacks were allowed out over the 35 (net).

    The eyes were deceived, though because the coverage team stopped Buffalo inside the 20 three times, and the Patriots held the Bills’ return yard average to about 18 per kickoff.

    The return game appeared fine if unspectacular.

    The only other play was that punt. I guess slo-mo has correctly identified the culprit play.

    We know that DVOA excludes some plays as “garbage time”. I am sure that the 2007 NE juggernaught is making for some challenges there. That punt Sunday night is an example. BB would almost never punt from there even on 4th and 10 for the exact reasons demonstrated. There are just too many possible outcomes worse than trusting their offense with another play - even if it fails.

    :: Thinker — 11/20/2007 @ 6:20 pm



  39. 37: Weighted. It gives recent games more weight than earlier games.

    :: B — 11/20/2007 @ 6:26 pm



  40. Re: 34 The gap between the Cowboys and Packers narrows. Barring significant injury before their meeting, I’ll predict a Packers upset win right now. I really think the Packers corners will be the difference.

    I would take the Cowboys’ superb receivers in a match-up against the Packers’ corners any day. Al Harris remains good, but he’s not the dominant force that he was two years ago, and I continue to be flummoxed by the hype surrounding Charles Woodson, who really looks no better to me in pass coverage than he did with the Raiders. The Packers have some of the best pass rushers in the game; yet their pass defense is only average. Their secondary simply isn’t as good as advertised. The match-up that I believe favors the Packers is the Packers’ defensive line against the Cowboys’ offensive line. If the Packers were to pull the upset in Dallas next week and/or in the playoffs (and make no mistake; it would be an upset), that’s the defensive unit that is more likely to deserve the credit.

    :: CA — 11/20/2007 @ 6:45 pm



  41. I was looking at just how bad the Jets run defense was

    32nd in run stuffing (15%)
    31st in run success (81%)

    2nd in 10+ yards gained!! 8%! How does a team that can’t stop the run at the line rarely give up a big run? Does that imply that the Jets have good tackling secondaries/ slow linebackers.

    This just seems interesting, does anyone have any insight on how this would happen?

    :: Biebs — 11/20/2007 @ 6:46 pm



  42. #27 - I’ve seen three fake-play/pooch punts attempted in pro & college in the last two weeks and the results were a pair of 9 yard punts and a return for a TD. It has to be one of the worst risk/reward decisions in sports. If you’re gonna punt, just put the punt unit that practices every day out there already!

    :: Tony C — 11/20/2007 @ 6:53 pm



  43. 40:
    I believe the charting data from last season showed very good results for Woodson. Haven’t seen what it says about him this year, or watched him play, so it’s possible he’s reverting back to Raider-levels this year but at the very least, last year he was among the top corners in coverage, as far as the game charting data is concerned.

    41:
    I would venture a guess that perhaps their scheme is so geared towards preventing the big run that it suffers otherwise. Mind you this is just speculation from someone who has not watched them more than 6 or 7 quarters.

    :: Costa — 11/20/2007 @ 6:58 pm



  44. 41: Read the discussion of the Steelers and Jets in Any Given Sunday.

    20: In the aforementioned article, someone suggested that the Steelers high variance may come from poor 1st and 2nd down performance and a, prior to week 11 at least, league best 3rd down performance. If so, their variance should drop somewhat after a game where they did not perform well on 3rd down.

    :: Michael — 11/20/2007 @ 7:01 pm



  45. #44:
    20: In the aforementioned article, someone suggested that the Steelers high variance may come from poor 1st and 2nd down performance and a, prior to week 11 at least, league best 3rd down performance. If so, their variance should drop somewhat after a game where they did not perform well on 3rd down.

    I thought the “variance” score reflected week-by-week total game DVOA, not play-by-play variation. If that is the case, per-down performance would not influence the final score (IOW, a team with high per down variation would have the same total variance as a team with identical, average per-down DVOA).

    On the other hand, if Pittsburgh’s variance was high because the outstanding games were the outliers, as opposed to the poor ones (contrary to the general perception), then another poor game will lower the variance more than another outstanding game. Or am I missing something?

    :: slo-mo-joe — 11/20/2007 @ 7:16 pm



  46. Albert Haynesworth 2007 Defensive POY. I kept thinking that the entire game Monday Night, but if he doesn’t get back soon the Titans may not win another game.

    John Lynch is another guy that makes a big difference when he is playing. I always assumed that SD would win the West no matter how bad they played, but that may not be the case. Denver is a top 10 offense and moving up and their D may be good enough to 5 out of 6 remaining games.

    :: Otis Taylor 89 — 11/20/2007 @ 7:33 pm



  47. Regarding a strategy to beat the Patriots I think Will is on to something; why kick the ball to a team that is going to score anyway? Regarding a defensive strategy I would think a Buddy Ryan approach along the lines of you might get your 40 points but your QB isn’t going to make it out of the game. I’m not talking illegal dirty football, just bring the house every play and hope the pressure brings about some mistakes and a gun shy QB.

    NE does seem unbeatable, but just three weeks ago Indy almost beat them minus a bunch of key injured players. I wouldn’t write off Indy yet if guys like Harrison get healthy.

    :: jimm — 11/20/2007 @ 7:36 pm



  48. Vikings 13th in offence, 16 in defence. Who would of believed that.

    Given the state of the QB and Receiver position it seems likely to me that the Vikings in 08 will be a top offence. Maybe Childress isn’t quite the idiot he’s mostly believed to be.

    :: jimm — 11/20/2007 @ 7:38 pm



  49. Yeah. Belichick would never have punted from the 30 yard line in a normal situation. The score was 56-10. He was trying to show a little mercy…and give his punter a little game experience.

    BTW, the punter sailed the ball through the end zone. I believe he was told to do that rather than pooch punt, pin the Bills on their goal line, and risk running up the score by two more points.

    :: hwc — 11/20/2007 @ 7:39 pm



  50. To clarify my point re: Viking offence. If you’re 13th with such obvious weakness at certain spots then it suggests the other areas of the offence must be very strong.

    By the way - when are we going to start the TJack just wins argument - the Vikes are 4-2 when he starts.

    :: jimm — 11/20/2007 @ 7:43 pm



  51. What amazes me is not only are the Patriots this ridiculously good, but their variance is also the best in the league…so they’re the most consistent team in the NFL as well as being by far the best.

    :: Jesse — 11/20/2007 @ 7:51 pm



  52. I haven’t even read any comments yet, but I already know what they say. One of my favorite parts of coming to this site is seeing a bunch of non-athletic, non-competitive, pasty whiny children bitch about the Patriots. Talking about “class” and “respect for the game” and “cheating,” just revealing that they probably haven’t been in a competitive situation in their lives, and if they have they didn’t try hard enough.

    Outside of that I come for the advanced statistics. The commentary is obnoxious, pedantic, and mostly incomplete.

    :: Hemlock — 11/20/2007 @ 7:52 pm



  53. Just wondering; how does running up the score influence DVOA?

    :: Goran — 11/20/2007 @ 7:55 pm



  54. Re: #52

    Try reading the comments.

    They are actually highly complimentary of the Pats DVOA.

    You would have been better keeping your mouth shut and thought of as a fool versus opening it and removing all doubt.

    :: Papa Narb — 11/20/2007 @ 7:58 pm



  55. And that, my friends, is why you should read the comments even if you decide to rhetorically say you haven’t read the comments. Excuse me while I eat foot.

    :: Hemlock — 11/20/2007 @ 7:59 pm



  56. Is there a correction factor you can use to account for the blowout games NE is having with regards to 4th & x? The idea that they have repeatedly gone for it in a blowout when just about every other team in history would have punted or kicked a FG must come into play somehow. Any stats on this?

    I may just be another fan complaining of a loss to NE, but I would like to know if there is something to this “running up the score”…thoughts?

    :: Ryan — 11/20/2007 @ 8:00 pm



  57. To beat the Pats (or at least keep it competitive), why not go for the offensive version of the NHL trap? Assume NE is going to score a TD or at least a FG every drive. Play keep away as much as possible. No punting - play for all 4 downs. Keep the ball on the ground as much as possible. Run the clock down every snap. All you need is 2.5 yards a play to keep the drives alive. And if the run is working, some short passing routes will open up.

    Phi has the #1 rushing O against NE’s #11 rushing D. NE’s going to eat their #21 passing D alive, so this seems like the only way to have a fighting chance.

    :: ak — 11/20/2007 @ 8:03 pm



  58. I just want to say that if I knew beforehand that a team would be going for it on 4th down all game against the Pats, that would make me about 300% more likely to watch the game.

    :: DavidH — 11/20/2007 @ 8:07 pm



  59. #45: I’m fairly new here, so you’re probably right. I was just mentioning a comment from the other article.

    I guess we won’t know for sure which games are the outliers until the season is over, maybe?

    :: Michael — 11/20/2007 @ 8:08 pm



  60. #52 + #55 = Comedy Gold

    :: zip — 11/20/2007 @ 8:09 pm



  61. Re: #45

    You’re missing something. Assuming that what FO calls “variance” is at least similar to what statisticians call “variance”, then what will decrease it is a DVOA close to their average DVOA. Being 10 over your average will have the same effect as being 10 under your average.

    :: PatsFan — 11/20/2007 @ 8:12 pm



  62. Re: #57

    Heck — why don’t teams that are out of contention do that sort of thing as a matter of course? If you’re the Dolphins, why the heck not pull out all the stops to try to win. It’s not like a loss is going to keep you out of the playoffs at this point.

    :: PatsFan — 11/20/2007 @ 8:14 pm



  63. Re: #56

    Amazingly, Peter King actually has something sensible to say about RunningUpTheScoreGate in today’s MMQBTE.

    :: PatsFan — 11/20/2007 @ 8:16 pm



  64. Boy when your the 25/32 team in the league it’s hard to press hard for a return of the coaching staff. Most likely the Raven and Jets game will decide their fate. It’s interesting most of the top teams have past the hardest part of their schedule while most of the chasing teams appear to be entering harder parts of their schedule. Not a good sign if you’re trying to improve your playoff position.

    :: johonny — 11/20/2007 @ 8:22 pm



  65. I find the top of the past schedule rankings fascinating. It seems that NE is so good that it skews things a bit. The top 7 (and the best teams they played):
    1. Buffalo (played NE twice, Dallas once)
    2. Washington (played NE, GB, Dallas)
    3. San Diego (played NE, GB, Indy)
    4. NY Jets (played NE, Pitt)
    5. Miami (played NE, Dallas)
    6. Indy (played NE)
    7. Denver (did not play NE)

    of NE’s first 10 opponents, 6 are the top 6 in past schedule difficulty. The others are 7 (CIN), 10 (DAL), and 14 (CLE).

    Certainly in the case of Buffalo, being the only team to have played NE twice has given them the dubious distinction of the hardest strength of schedule so far.

    :: Yosi Scharf — 11/20/2007 @ 8:46 pm



  66. #46: Denver is a top 10 offense and moving up and their D may be good enough to 5 out of 6 remaining games.

    Top 10 offense moving up, sure enough. Javon Walker will hopefully be back next week. And the newbies on the O-line, Chris Myers and Chris Kuper, are improving every week.

    Whether the defense will be good enough is what I’m dubious about. The run defense is much better, even allowing them to do without the 8th man in the box at times. (It was almost funny, hearing the ESPN commentators parrot the line about the Broncos improving against the run by putting 8 men in the box, exactly when they stopped White on a 2 yard gain with 7 men in the box.)

    It is the pass defense that worries me. The linebackers seem to have forgotten how to cover… Denver is last in the league defending passes to the TE and almost as bad against the slot receiver. The defensive DVOA page says that we’re 3rd in the league against passes to the RB which made me rub my eyes a bit, because I clearly remember Tomlinson shredding us on screens even though we kept him under control on the ground. Even Chris Brown had 4 receptions for 61 yards last night. Something fishy there.

    Special teams has improved tremendously… cheers for Scott O’Brien. And the D’s improvement means that Bates is no dummy and there is hope. Let’s see what we do against the Bears next week.

    :: Kaveman — 11/20/2007 @ 8:48 pm



  67. #57 ak, you sound dangerously like TMQ with the 2.5 yard average stuff. Yes, that’s true, but what if you get 5,3,1,0 and give them the ball at your own 30, then 6,1,1,1 and give them the ball on your 35. even if your next offensive play nets 15 yards (bringing your 9 play above 2.5 on average), you are 14 pts in a hole 3 minutes into it. That’s scary. And the coach would be looking for a job soon (unless his GM and owner seriously hate Pioli and Kraft).

    Rather than looking at it as just 2.5 yards average, it’s a matchups and situational game. You need to succeed in getting 1st downs rather than dialing up a 2.5 yard play every time. And 4th downs would probably need to be played like any other down–no 1 yard plunge conservatism. Assuming you have a 50/50 shot of that succeeding on 4th and 1, might as well go for another 50/50 play, like a quick hitch to the WR, which might end up getting 8 or more, and would loosen up the DL next 4th and one if they think you’re “crazy.”

    I agree that a team with “nothing to play for but pride” should try this, and frankly, anybody who thinks they are seriously overmatched should at least give it a whirl. Tenn tried it against Indy a few years ago with 3 onside KOs in the first half and for 30 minutes, it looks like it had potential. Then the wheels fell off.

    It takes a real firm committment to the new paradigm and, of course, execution. A seriously overmatched team rarely has great execution in the first place.

    While I like going for it on 4th, I also like what Indy did the past two weeks at 4th and 1 inside the 5 YL. Once they tried and failed to draw SD offside (undermined by a Vinatieri SNAFU–otherwise, that’s a brilliant play) and the next time, they ran the QB plunge. Now any opponents who find themselves in this situation can’t just sit on their asses to prevent an offsides penalty and they can’t twitch at the slightest hint of a play–they have to play it totally honest, and that gives the offense a slender advantage. On 4th and 1, that slender advantage is pretty big. Keep them questioning, and you have an edge.

    Dial up a whole game plan of 2.5 yard plays and you lead your men to slaughter. And a boring one at that.

    :: Bobman — 11/20/2007 @ 8:52 pm



  68. So what went wrong with the Niners this year? Smith wasn’t that great last year, so I can’t believe his suckitude/injury could be responsible. The offensive line appears to have gotten much worse, as it looks (subjectively) like Gore is running well when he gets breathing room.

    Could Norv have made THAT big of a difference?

    And how did the defense add a good linebacker, a good corner, and a competent safety and get worse?

    At least they’ll have a top 5 draft pick to fix things… d’oh.

    :: mmm... sacrilicious — 11/20/2007 @ 8:56 pm



  69. #68

    I haven’t seen a lot of the 49ers this year (they are the tree than falls in the woods that nobody hears), but what I have seen of them it seems the D isn’t bad - it just wears down because the O is historically bad. Smith should not play the rest of this year and Dilfer is no longer a NFL QB. That leaves….oh boy. I think I rather have the 1977 Rams Namath or the 1973 Chargers Unitas over those two.

    :: Otis Taylor 89 — 11/20/2007 @ 9:38 pm



  70. To beat the Patriots, the best strategy would be to figure out what the Colts did and copy that. They at least made the Patriots offense look mortal.

    :: B — 11/20/2007 @ 9:43 pm



  71. 70

    Play at home, have a great offense, one of the best QBs in NFL history, and a top 3 D?

    :: Crushinator — 11/20/2007 @ 9:46 pm



  72. I think the /real/ key to beating the Patriots is to spike the ball after every first down. You are penalized 10 yards for the delay of game, but it is still 1st and 10! So, you get the ball first, take 30 minutes driving down the field, and get 7 points. Onside kick to start the 2nd half. If they get the ball, they get 7. You spend the remainder of the half moving 11 yards forward, 10 yards back until you score again! Final Score - 14-7

    :-)

    :: Oh, Mathematics — 11/20/2007 @ 9:52 pm



  73. re: 70 The key is consistent pressure with the front 4. I don’t know who else can get that (and I’m not sure the Colts minus Freeney can anymore either). The Titans with Haynesworth, perhaps?

    :: Ben — 11/20/2007 @ 9:55 pm



  74. I love the spike plan. To repeat the Colts strategy, you need to also take out coach to QB radios (Brady couldn’t hear the sideline all game), and ensure that the bad reffing impacts the Pats more than you.

    :: AndyE — 11/20/2007 @ 10:01 pm



  75. 73: The Giants would be a good choice for that strategy.

    :: B — 11/20/2007 @ 10:09 pm



  76. Speaking of (lack of) punting, the Pats’ Chris Hanson doesn’t even qualify to be listed in the “league leaders” for punting because he doesn’t have enough punts.

    :: PatsFan — 11/20/2007 @ 10:09 pm



  77. #61: You’re missing something. Assuming that what FO calls “variance� is at least similar to what statisticians call “variance�, then what will decrease it is a DVOA close to their average DVOA. Being 10 over your average will have the same effect as being 10 under your average.

    Mmmm… hat was precisely my point. If a team’s game that is supposedly, by general judgment, their worst performance so far reduces their variance, it means that that game is closer to the mean of the team’s games than their best games. In other words, one or more of the best games were more fluky that the worst.

    Either that, or the general judgment was wrong and the supposedly worst game was not the worst game after all (possible, but then they must really have stunk against ARI or DEN, since those are decent teams, unlike the Jets). Game-by-game DVOA analysis of the Steelers’ season so far should answer that.

    :: slo-mo-joe — 11/20/2007 @ 10:10 pm



  78. Courtesy of Bob McGinn of the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel and his assessment of the Packer secondary in the most recent game:

    “Testaverde completed just three of 10 passes for 14 yards to receivers covered by Charles Woodson, who instinctively undercut a crossing route to Keary Colbert for his fourth interception. Unlike some others in the secondary, Woodson is all business all the time. With Steve Smith sidelined with a shin injury, Harris tried to intimidate towering Drew Carter. However, Carter took the ball away from Harris on a 26-yard fade, then took advantage of shoddy zone coverage and tackling by Harris for a 49-yard gain.”

    This is not the first time that McGinn has alluded to Harris taking a casual approach to an opposing receiver. While the coaching staff gave Al a “pass” for the beginning of the season due to the injuries he was suffering Harris is now believed to be healthy but has taken more than a relaxed approach to his job. He is more than willing to mix it up at the line of scrimmage but when he allows a free release he seems to wander around at times as opposed to honoring his assignments.

    Woodson has not been perfect by any stretch but he is making far more positive plays than negative.

    But both guys are blatant in their use of hands. They challenge refs to throw the flag multiple times a game. And both guys also know that a good many receivers will back down after getting roughed up early. So far it has worked more often than not.

    :: BadgerT1000 — 11/20/2007 @ 10:11 pm



  79. #62 - honestly, I don’t know why coaches of miserable teams (I’m looking at you, Miami) don’t do crazier things - you might as well have some fun out there

    #67 - i’m not saying play for 2.5yds/play, only that you need to average that - sure sometimes you’ll get burned deep in your own end, but against a team like NE, that saves you what, 3 minutes, before they move the ball the distance anyways?

    if you’re already outmatched, where’s the loss in taking big risks - if you hope bb will show mercy by pulling brady at +40, who cares if that point comes in the 2nd Q or the 4th Q?

    :: ak — 11/20/2007 @ 10:14 pm



  80. #72 That’s awesome! You just need an offense that’ll be able to convert 30 first downs in a row. But then it’d be as good as the New England offense.

    :-)

    :: TanGeng — 11/20/2007 @ 10:17 pm



  81. 80: Maybe the Pats should try that strategy. Bonus is no more accusations of running up the score.

    :: B — 11/20/2007 @ 10:34 pm



  82. I may just be another fan complaining of a loss to NE, but I would like to know if there is something to this “running up the score�…thoughts?

    Tom Brady gave his thoughts on that yesterday on the radio. He said that he has only played 10 games with Moss, Welker, and Stallworth, that they aren’t on the same page yet, and that they need the reps to continue developing the chemistry that a QB and receivers have after playing together for a while.

    So according to Brady, the Pats still have a lot of room for improvement if they want to be ready for the playoffs.

    :: hwc — 11/20/2007 @ 10:49 pm



  83. Does anyone know if you can work out what the Pats’ first half DVOA is vs historical teams? I ask because they are so far ahead that there is probably some bonus to their DVOA as a result of their running up the score/ legitimate professionalism.

    :: Karl Cuba — 11/20/2007 @ 10:52 pm



  84. Re: #82

    If anyone wants to hear that part of the interview, go here:
    http://media.weei.podzinger.com/archive/DennisAndCallahan/2007-11-20_Tom_Brady.mp3
    and skip ahead to the 11 minute mark.

    :: PatsFan — 11/20/2007 @ 10:56 pm



  85. I’d like to nominate Kyle Eckel for MVP. Every time he carries the ball, the Patriots win. He is so feared that fans consider it unsportsmanlike for him to run the ball. His mere presence on the field skews DVOA to historic levels.

    He’s better for winning than the awesome “kneel to win” play. He’s godlike.

    And served his country, too.

    God bless Kyle Eckel. And God bless America.

    :: nat — 11/20/2007 @ 11:05 pm



  86. 78. I’d like to see them get handsy with TO. Ok, that came out wrong, but you get what I mean.

    :: Temo — 11/20/2007 @ 11:09 pm



  87. RE: 74

    It’s good to know that no matter how good an NFL team gets, fans can still whine about how tough they have it.

    Actually, I’m not sure it is good to know that.

    :: countertorque — 11/20/2007 @ 11:14 pm



  88. Re:57

    You know, if the Eagles ran every down they had the ball and blitzed every down when the Pats had the ball, I wouldn’t be upset when they lost by 60 points. At least they would have tried something different.

    Also, I’d probably try an on-side kick for every kickoff I had. Who cares if you give them the short field, they’re going to score anyway. So might as well try to keep them from getting the ball.

    So, all runs, all blitzes, and all on-side kicks.

    :: Jason H — 11/20/2007 @ 11:15 pm



  89. 82: “So according to Brady, the Pats still have a lot of room for improvement if they want to be ready for the playoffs.”

    Very scary. And probably true.

    Remember that the Cowboys and the Colts both gave the Patriots a run for their money, so it’s safe to assume that Brady is serious about making the Pats offense even better.

    shudder

    :: nat — 11/20/2007 @ 11:20 pm



  90. #83: If anything, I think any effect on the Pats’ DVOA because of out-of-reach games would be negative, in the aggregate. Apart from the ga