RSS Feed
DVOA Analysis
Football Outsiders' revolutionary statistics that break down every single play of the NFL season
25 Dec 2007
Week 16 DVOA Ratings
by Aaron Schatz
OK, so the Patriots are the best team in the league again this week. Which team ranks second? For most of the season, the answer was either Indianapolis or Dallas. I think most of us would say Indianapolis right now. However, according to weighted DVOA -- the formula that gives less weight to games early in the season -- the second-best team in the NFL right now is Jacksonville.
Yes, the Jaguars are as hot as they look. They have a DVOA of 30% or higher in seven straight games. This week's victory over Oakland comes out with the second-highest single-game DVOA of the year, right behind Denver's blowout of Kansas City in Week 14 and just ahead of Minnesota's blowout of San Diego in Week 9. The Jaguars only have two games below 0% all year, and one of them -- their 13-7 win over Atlanta in Week 2 -- just dropped out of the weighted DVOA equation.
"Uh-oh," say Patriots fans. "Are we going to have to face this team? If the Chargers win this week, the Steelers and Jaguars have a rematch, and we probably have to face the winner of that game. Based on what we've seen in recent weeks, the Jaguars would have to be favored to beat Pittsburgh." That's okay, fellow Pats fans. The Colts don't get off easy either. The second-hottest team in the NFL is the team the Colts will probably host in their first playoff game: San Diego.
They aren't quite as hot as the Jaguars, but the Chargers have now moved up into third place in weighted DVOA, ahead of the Colts. The Chargers have a DVOA of 10% or higher in seven straight games. They have only three games below 0% all year, and one of them -- New England's emotional "Go suck on it, Spygate" game in Week 2 -- just dropped out of the weighted DVOA equation.
Home-field advantage and an extra week of rest still make New England and Indianapolis the clear favorites in the second-round AFC playoff games, but the Jaguars and Chargers are both very dangerous right now. (The Chargers have a subjective asterisk, of course, since many of us are expecting Norv Turner to do something stupid come playoff time. I don't think anyone expects that from Jack Del Rio.)
By the way, the Jaguars and Chargers will probably jump a bit in weighted DVOA again next week. Each team's worst loss of the year took place in Week 9, and next week Week 9 bumps down a significant step in the weighted DVOA equation (from 95 percent strength to 70 percent strength).
Remarkably, our playoff odds equation still gives the Patriots just a 70 percent chance of finishing undefeated, even though the Giants (like the Cowboys, Colts, and a few other teams) have been given a "sit starters" penalty for Week 17. New England's weighted DVOA is no longer so huge that it mucks up the equation, but I still think there's something missing from the system, because their chances of winning this week have to be higher than that. Perhaps the "sit starters" penalty is not high enough... we'll have to work on it in the off-season.
* * * * *
Here are the Football Outsiders team efficiency ratings through 16 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 |
W-L |
WEIGHTED DVOA |
RANK |
OFFENSE DVOA |
OFF. RANK |
DEFENSE DVOA |
DEF. RANK |
S.T. DVOA |
S.T. RANK |
|
| 1 | NE | 54.3% | 1 | 15-0 | 45.2% | 1 | 41.8% | 1 | -8.9% | 7 | 3.5% | 7 |
| 2 | IND | 36.8% | 2 | 13-2 | 28.0% | 4 | 29.2% | 2 | -12.4% | 2 | -4.9% | 30 |
| 3 | DAL | 29.3% | 3 | 13-2 | 25.3% | 5 | 22.9% | 3 | -6.4% | 8 | 0.0% | 15 |
| 4 | JAC | 29.2% | 5 | 11-4 | 37.1% | 2 | 20.2% | 4 | -5.4% | 11 | 3.6% | 5 |
| 5 | SD | 22.7% | 7 | 10-5 | 30.4% | 3 | 5.6% | 13 | -11.1% | 5 | 6.0% | 3 |
| 6 | TB | 20.2% | 6 | 9-6 | 17.2% | 6 | 8.3% | 9 | -12.4% | 3 | -0.5% | 16 |
| 7 | PIT | 19.2% | 8 | 10-5 | 12.9% | 9 | 6.5% | 12 | -14.5% | 1 | -1.8% | 19 |
| 8 | GB | 18.2% | 4 | 12-3 | 15.1% | 8 | 16.0% | 5 | 0.1% | 17 | 2.4% | 11 |
| 9 | SEA | 16.5% | 9 | 10-5 | 16.3% | 7 | 4.3% | 15 | -9.4% | 6 | 2.9% | 8 |
| 10 | PHI | 9.0% | 11 | 7-8 | 7.8% | 12 | 10.3% | 7 | -3.1% | 14 | -4.5% | 28 |
| 11 | MIN | 8.0% | 10 | 8-7 | 12.2% | 10 | 4.9% | 14 | -0.9% | 16 | 2.2% | 12 |
| 12 | CLE | 4.8% | 12 | 9-6 | 11.8% | 11 | 7.8% | 10 | 8.7% | 22 | 5.7% | 4 |
| 13 | TEN | 4.1% | 13 | 9-6 | -2.2% | 18 | -6.2% | 21 | -12.3% | 4 | -2.0% | 20 |
| 14 | WAS | 3.8% | 14 | 8-7 | 4.8% | 14 | 0.3% | 17 | -3.5% | 13 | 0.1% | 14 |
| 15 | CIN | 1.2% | 15 | 6-9 | 1.1% | 17 | 10.2% | 8 | 9.0% | 23 | 0.1% | 13 |
| 16 | NYG | -1.9% | 18 | 10-5 | -3.3% | 19 | -4.6% | 20 | -4.3% | 12 | -1.6% | 18 |
| TEAM |
TOTAL DVOA |
LAST WEEK |
W-L |
WEIGHTED DVOA |
RANK |
OFFENSE DVOA |
OFF. RANK |
DEFENSE DVOA |
DEF. RANK |
S.T. DVOA |
S.T. RANK |
|
| 17 | NO | -3.1% | 17 | 7-8 | 7.1% | 13 | 12.7% | 6 | 13.1% | 31 | -2.7% | 23 |
| 18 | DEN | -4.0% | 16 | 6-9 | -6.7% | 21 | 6.6% | 11 | 7.7% | 21 | -2.9% | 25 |
| 19 | BUF | -4.5% | 19 | 7-8 | 2.3% | 16 | -6.9% | 22 | 1.1% | 19 | 3.5% | 6 |
| 20 | CHI | -6.0% | 21 | 6-9 | 4.3% | 15 | -19.1% | 31 | -5.6% | 10 | 7.5% | 1 |
| 21 | HOU | -6.1% | 20 | 7-8 | -5.3% | 20 | 3.9% | 16 | 12.7% | 30 | 2.7% | 10 |
| 22 | BAL | -11.1% | 22 | 4-11 | -15.3% | 23 | -14.7% | 26 | -6.3% | 9 | -2.8% | 24 |
| 23 | ARI | -11.2% | 23 | 7-8 | -18.2% | 24 | -1.1% | 18 | 7.6% | 20 | -2.6% | 22 |
| 24 | DET | -18.5% | 24 | 7-8 | -23.5% | 25 | -1.2% | 19 | 12.5% | 29 | -4.8% | 29 |
| 25 | KC | -19.5% | 25 | 4-11 | -24.6% | 27 | -17.8% | 29 | -1.4% | 15 | -3.0% | 26 |
| 26 | NYJ | -20.4% | 26 | 3-12 | -13.0% | 22 | -11.6% | 24 | 11.6% | 27 | 2.8% | 9 |
| 27 | CAR | -24.0% | 28 | 6-9 | -24.3% | 26 | -17.8% | 30 | 0.9% | 18 | -5.2% | 31 |
| 28 | ATL | -26.9% | 29 | 3-12 | -29.6% | 30 | -14.2% | 25 | 11.3% | 26 | -1.3% | 17 |
| 29 | MIA | -28.8% | 30 | 1-14 | -31.2% | 32 | -10.0% | 23 | 16.4% | 32 | -2.5% | 21 |
| 30 | OAK | -30.1% | 27 | 4-11 | -29.5% | 29 | -16.5% | 27 | 9.3% | 24 | -4.3% | 27 |
| 31 | STL | -33.2% | 31 | 3-12 | -27.8% | 28 | -16.6% | 28 | 10.9% | 25 | -5.6% | 32 |
| 32 | SF | -35.8% | 32 | 5-10 | -31.1% | 31 | -29.8% | 32 | 12.1% | 28 | 6.1% | 2 |
- 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.
- 2007 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 and includes the final, as-yet-unplayed Week 17 opponent.
- 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 |
2007 SCHEDULE |
RANK | VAR. | RANK | |
| 1 | NE | 54.3% | 15-0 | 55.4% | 13.6 | 1 | 0.4% | 18 | 14.6% | 16 |
| 2 | IND | 36.8% | 13-2 | 35.7% | 12.2 | 2 | 2.1% | 12 | 15.6% | 14 |
| 3 | DAL | 29.3% | 13-2 | 33.5% | 10.8 | 4 | -2.1% | 22 | 17.2% | 11 |
| 4 | JAC | 29.2% | 11-4 | 26.9% | 11.3 | 3 | 1.2% | 17 | 11.6% | 25 |
| 5 | SD | 22.7% | 10-5 | 18.9% | 9.3 | 7 | 0.1% | 19 | 23.2% | 3 |
| 6 | TB | 20.2% | 9-6 | 24.7% | 9.7 | 6 | -7.6% | 30 | 21.2% | 6 |
| 7 | PIT | 19.2% | 10-5 | 20.7% | 8.8 | 10 | -3.0% | 23 | 24.1% | 2 |
| 8 | GB | 18.2% | 12-3 | 24.7% | 9.9 | 5 | -5.0% | 28 | 22.5% | 5 |
| 9 | SEA | 16.5% | 10-5 | 24.5% | 9.2 | 8 | -11.1% | 32 | 10.5% | 27 |
| 10 | PHI | 9.0% | 7-8 | 1.0% | 9.0 | 9 | 4.9% | 4 | 16.8% | 12 |
| 11 | MIN | 8.0% | 8-7 | 12.2% | 8.7 | 11 | -4.1% | 26 | 20.0% | 8 |
| 12 | CLE | 4.8% | 9-6 | 6.9% | 8.3 | 12 | -5.0% | 29 | 6.3% | 32 |
| 13 | TEN | 4.1% | 9-6 | 0.8% | 8.0 | 14 | 2.2% | 11 | 16.4% | 13 |
| 14 | WAS | 3.8% | 8-7 | -2.6% | 7.5 | 17 | 5.2% | 2 | 8.6% | 30 |
| 15 | CIN | 1.2% | 6-9 | 6.8% | 8.1 | 13 | -3.3% | 24 | 8.8% | 29 |
| 16 | NYG | -1.9% | 10-5 | -2.4% | 7.3 | 18 | 1.5% | 15 | 7.4% | 31 |
| TEAM |
TOTAL DVOA |
W-L |
NON-ADJ TOT VOA |
ESTIM. WINS |
RANK |
2007 SCHEDULE |
RANK | VAR. | RANK | |
| 17 | NO | -3.1% | 7-8 | -3.8% | 7.5 | 16 | -3.6% | 25 | 13.6% | 19 |
| 18 | DEN | -4.0% | 6-9 | -1.8% | 6.7 | 21 | 1.7% | 14 | 35.4% | 1 |
| 19 | BUF | -4.5% | 7-8 | -9.3% | 7.7 | 15 | 5.6% | 1 | 13.0% | 21 |
| 20 | CHI | -6.0% | 6-9 | -8.1% | 6.8 | 20 | 2.4% | 10 | 13.9% | 18 |
| 21 | HOU | -6.1% | 7-8 | -10.4% | 6.8 | 19 | 3.2% | 7 | 11.6% | 23 |
| 22 | BAL | -11.1% | 4-11 | -17.5% | 6.0 | 23 | 2.9% | 8 | 14.3% | 17 |
| 23 | ARI | -11.2% | 7-8 | -2.9% | 5.8 | 24 | -8.7% | 31 | 20.8% | 7 |
| 24 | DET | -18.5% | 7-8 | -15.5% | 6.1 | 22 | 3.7% | 6 | 18.3% | 10 |
| 25 | KC | -19.5% | 4-11 | -22.8% | 4.9 | 26 | 1.5% | 16 | 23.1% | 4 |
| 26 | NYJ | -20.4% | 3-12 | -23.9% | 4.8 | 27 | 5.1% | 3 | 10.6% | 26 |
| 27 | CAR | -24.0% | 6-9 | -24.7% | 5.1 | 25 | 1.8% | 13 | 15.0% | 15 |
| 28 | ATL | -26.9% | 3-12 | -25.3% | 4.7 | 28 | -0.5% | 20 | 11.6% | 24 |
| 29 | MIA | -28.8% | 1-14 | -35.9% | 3.8 | 30 | 4.8% | 5 | 13.4% | 20 |
| 30 | OAK | -30.1% | 4-11 | -29.2% | 3.7 | 31 | 2.5% | 9 | 18.6% | 9 |
| 31 | STL | -33.2% | 3-12 | -30.4% | 3.5 | 32 | -2.1% | 21 | 9.4% | 28 |
| 32 | SF | -35.8% | 5-10 | -31.1% | 3.9 | 29 | -4.3% | 27 | 11.8% | 22 |
Best and Worst DVOA Ever Watch
| BEST TOTAL DVOA AFTER WEEK 16 |
BEST OFFENSIVE DVOA AFTER WEEK 16 |
WORST TOTAL DVOA AFTER WEEK 16 |
WORST OFFENSIVE DVOA AFTER WEEK 16 |
|||||||||||
| 2007 | NE | 54.3% | 2004 | IND | 42.0% | 2005 | SF | -55.6% | 2005 | SF | -39.4% | |||
| 1999 | STL | 46.3% | 2007 | NE | 41.8% | 2004 | SF | -49.7% | 2002 | HOU | -38.6% | |||
| 2001 | STL | 38.5% | 2002 | KC | 35.9% | 2000 | CLE | -44.8% | 2004 | CHI | -36.4% | |||
| 1996 | GB | 38.3% | 2006 | IND | 33.0% | 2000 | ARI | -43.5% | 1997 | NO | -34.9% | |||
| 2004 | IND | 37.6% | 2000 | STL | 31.6% | 2000 | CIN | -42.6% | 2006 | OAK | -34.4% | |||
| 2004 | NE | 37.6% | 2000 | IND | 31.4% | 1999 | CLE | -42.3% | 1999 | ARI | -33.2% | |||
| 2004 | PIT | 37.3% | 2004 | KC | 30.0% | 2003 | ARI | -41.2% | 2000 | CLE | -32.7% | |||
| 2007 | IND | 36.8% | 2007 | IND | 29.2% | 2002 | ARI | -40.0% | 2007 | SF | -29.8% | |||
| 2005 | IND | 36.2% | 2005 | IND | 28.8% | 2002 | HOU | -39.6% | 1996 | NYG | -29.4% | |||
| 2006 | SD | 33.0% | 2001 | STL | 27.6% | 1998 | PHI | -36.4% | 1999 | PHI | -29.1% | |||
Notice anything about those lists above? Yes, there is no longer a team from 2007 on the "worst total DVOA" list. Two wins have taken the 2007 49ers far away from the historical suckitude of the 2005 49ers. Originally, I was going to remove the two "worst" lists altogether, but I figured that if we've run with them so far, we might as well see them through to the end.
The Patriots' DVOA peaked at 73.7% after Week 11 and has dropped every week since, but it still is far and away the best DVOA rating ever recorded. That's the way things will end up unless the Giants somehow pull out not just a win, but a blowout victory. Not bloody likely. Only two teams since 1996 ended the season with a DVOA rating above 40%: the Rams in 1999 and the Packers in 1996.
You'll notice that we haven't been running a list of where this year's teams stand among the best defensive DVOA ratings ever. We ran a list once at midseason, when the Tennessee Titans were at their peak, but the injury to Albert Haynesworth quickly brought the Titans back to the pack. The Steelers have now been in first place on defense for six weeks, even though they have progressively gotten worse since they peaked at -23.7% after Week 12. In fact, if Pittsburgh were to finish next week with the same DVOA they have now, they would be the worst defense to ever lead the league in DVOA -- and by a huge margin.
It looks like 2007 will be the first season where no defense finishes better than -20%, but it goes beyond that. At least three defenses were better than the 2007 Pittsburgh Steelers in every single season for which we have DVOA except for 2002, when the Carolina Panthers finished third at -13.8%. In four different seasons -- 1997, 1999, 2000, and 2001 -- the current Steelers would not even have ranked in the top five for defense! If the season ended today, Pittsburgh would rank as the 49th-best defense of the DVOA era.
The parity of defenses in 2007 works the other way too, although it isn't quite as strong. Miami would only have finished with the worst defensive DVOA in one other year, 1997. In that year, the last-place defense was Cincinnati at 15.1%. The standard deviation of defensive DVOA in 1997 was 8.9%. In 2007, the standard deviation of defensive DVOA is 9.5%. In every other season, it was 10.5% or higher. The season with the highest standard deviation on defense is, of course, 2000.
In case you are curious... the standard deviation of offense right now is 15.7%. The only seasons with higher standard deviations on offense were 2004 and 2000, with 2005 and this year tied for third. The season with the least amount of standard deviation on offense was 1996.
One last note: I know some people are wondering where this week's Green Bay punt-block-o-rama falls on the list of the worst special teams games ever. The answer is that it doesn't make the list. Mason Crosby's strong kickoffs balance out below-average kickoff returns, so the Packers were really only exceedingly bad in one area.
On to the housekeeping... All the team stats pages and individual stats pages are now updated, as are the playoff odds . Loser League results and the DVOA Premium database will be updated Wednesday due to the holiday. (PREMIUM AND LOSER LEAGUE 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.)
Final note for Boston/Providence-area readers or anyone who wants to listen online: I will be guest co-host on the "Dale and Holley Show" this Wednesday from 10am to 2pm EST. Unlike the last time I did four straight hours on the radio, I will not be backselling any Stone Temple Pilots records.
There's no way to avoid the conclusion that the AFC playoffs are going to be tremendous. And I don't think anybody can look for any easy games. But I still think we'll see Indy vs. NE in the AFC championship (aka 'the game to determine the Super Bowl winner'). The Jaguars have played well recently, but don't forget that one of these games where they've played well is a loss to Indy.
Sweet, third in weighted.
What's everyone going to do if the Chargers win the superbowl? Would Norv Turner gain an new respect? Or would everyone on the team have to automatically be inducted into the hall of fame immediately following the trophy presentation?
I've openly routing for the Chargers this entire year just so everyone will have to get off Norv's back. The guy took jobs that noone else wanted(head coaching wise) and is now being penalized for doing nothing with teams that never had a chance.
The Chargers had supposedly giving up on playing for him by week4(Simmons you idiot). And are now the third hottest team in the league. Hmmm. Could it be that Norv was never that bad in the first place.
I would love to see everyone take one foot and insert deep into their mouths at the end of january or whenever the superbowl is being played.
Can't wait.
I'm looking forward to the Colts facing one of the tamer division winners while the Pats get stuck facing the Jags.
Mr. Parker:
Norv still sucks, even if they win the Super Bowl. I don't think that general attitude will change... people will credit Marty more than Norv, just like no one respects Barry Switzer as a coach for winning a SB with Jimmy Johnson's team.
Fair or not, the reason Norv's been criticized is the sheer idiocy of firing Marty. Absolutely unforgivable hubris on the part of the GM. In fact, my buddies and I are actively rooting against the Chargers, because we don't want dumb luck to give the Chargers' front office even a shred of vindication for their stupidity. We feel Marty's been given the shaft after a 14-2 season, for losing a playoff game to a team that's beaten more than their share of great teams.
Merry Christmas!
3
No one wanted to coach the talented Chargers coming off a 14-2 season? Really?
Do you think it's some kind of personal vendetta? Or do you think maybe he's being harped on for having a .439 career winning percentage and for only having 1 career playoff win?
Yes, Norv has taken a 14-2 team and turned it into a 10-5 team. That's not easy! Surely nobody else could have done that.
Yeah, it's easy to pick on Norv. I will say, though, that for years Dungy had a reputation as an underachiever in the playoffs, and he's moved beyond that. And Belichick didn't exactly light things up in Cleveland. So if Norv succeeds and the Chargers win the Super Bowl, he will get credit and a lot of us will admit that we were wrong.
I have the same plan in mind in case Pauly Shore wins an Oscar.
(OK, that last bit wasn't exactly fair.)
Eagles, why do you torment me with your 9.0 estimated wins?!?
Lifelong Charger fan. I question Marty without Cameron and/or Phillips. Spanos, team president, was an ass to do nothing prior to the assistants leaving. Smith, ego-ist that he is, can assess player talent, if not coaching talent, and deserves respect for that (Gates, LT, Cromartie, Weddle, Merriman, etc). The defense seems to be playing much better after getting run over in Minnesota, but the offense is still not up to full potential. Norv is not that good, but, may not be so bad as to completely kill their chances. Aside from Tennessee, they have not beaten too many good teams, but, aside from NE and JAX, they had chances to win all of their other losses (KC, GB, MSP), so it will be interesting if he can be less risk averse (aka predictable) in the playoffs. If they beat Oakland, if they can a game at home (they will play tough, even if they lose) and then would go to Indy. They are 2-0 in their last two games vs. Indy. Not that it is much, but Peyton has not played well against SD. If the script keeps going, then they lose to NE, but Norv keeps his job. For the knowledgeable fan out there, who is arguable the best available coach out there in the Belichick mold?
5. You remind me of an old cereal commercial…oh never mind. Marty's impact on draft board was minimal if not squat. As a coach, you want great regular season, then heartache, Marty's your man. Most folks have Chargers coaching backwards, Marty was a players coach, and Norv is more demanding at Chargers Park. Fans who watch Bolts know the rest regurgitate ESPN.
3: Actually, I'm rooting for Green Bay to beat the Pats in the SB so that Peter King will have something else to write about every week next season after Favre retires and the meltdown that occurs from all the Pats fans will be rather funny.
In fact, if that happens, I'll then be pulling for the Celtics to win the NBA, just so that Bill Simmons can write about how the worst team in Boston is the Pats. No, the Bruins don't count because Simmons no longer acknowledges them.
I'm sick of people claiming that Schottenheimer was fired because of A.J. Smith's ego. He was fired because he decided to get himself fired by the team president (not A.J. Smith, but Dean Spanos) by trying to hire his brother because he didn't like working with Smith. They didn't fire him for losing in the playoffs or they would have fired him after the game not later after he intentionally got himself fired.
Giants and Eagles vs NFC North- both 2-2.
Giants and Eagles vs Redskins/Cowboys- both 1-3.
Giants and Eagles vs Jets/Dolphins- both 2-0.
And, assuming that the Giants lose to NE and the Eagles beat Buffalo, both will be 1-1 against Buf/NE.
In fact, against common opponents they have had the same wins and same losses, except flip-flopping Minnesota (Giants loss, Eagles win) and Chicago (Eagles loss, Giants win).
Giants/Eagles head to head- both won by Giants.
DVOA's numbers notwithstanding, I have to consider both teams to be comparable in quality but with the Giants slightly better.
As a Giants fan, of course I would say that, but I think I have a good case.
I'm a die-hard Charger fan, too. BUT PLEASE, we aren't in the playoffs yet. Just because you take an ugly girl (Norv) and put her in a pretty dress (the Chargers) doesn't make her beautiful. Norv is still a bad coach, wait until we face a great team and we'll see how preparation and play calling snatch defeat from the jaw of victory.
Did anyone watch the Chargers-Denver game? Did anyone notice that the power-run Chargers switched to a zone blocking scheme trying to get LT to the edge? Did people also notice that LT, Turner, and Sproles got STUFFED when running up the middle? Take away the bread and butter plays, Rivers needs to step up.
As for the QB, did anyone notice on plays designed for Gates and Chambers, Rivers turned into CPT Checkdown? He threw when he had to and against a suspect Denver Defense it worked. Against Jax, Indy, or NE it might not.
All is not well in SD, and talent alone won't fix it.
I know some people are wondering where this week’s Green Bay punt-block-o-rama falls on the list of the worst special teams games ever. The answer is that it doesn’t make the list.
Really? You can get two punts blocked and shank another one, score a total of one point via the kicking game, and that's balanced by good kickoff distance? If that game isn't among the worst special teams games of all times, maybe having two punts blocked in one game is more common than I thought.
You don't have to run the list, but how close do this year's Bears come to having the best special teams of the DVOA era?
I really hope in their pre-game prayers that the Seahawks thank God for moving into the NFCW.
#16: The funny thing is that when the move first happened, everyone was freaked out about how they would ever compete with the mighty 49ers and Rams. Oops.
OK, let me get this right. According to the playoff odds report, the Redskins are about 2/1 likely to beat the Cowboys, a team way ahead of them on DVOA. But the Titans are only given about a 25% chance to beat the Colts? The parallels between the two matchups are striking--the Redskins and Titans are back to back in DVOA, and face must-win games against division rivals (also back-to-back in DVOA) who are likely to be sitting starters for the finale. Does home field advantage really make up that much of a difference? What gives?
I have stated my concerns about GB for the past several weeks and now the numbers tell me I "ain't so crazy".
It can be hoped that the bye week allows the D-line to lick its wounds. But that rest will do nothing about an older qb fading in the stretch, a punter ill-equipped to cope with the elements and an O-line that still gets stoned on running plays half the time.
The Seahawks' -11.1% 2007 schedule is really astonishing. Talk about good luck, they've had a division winner's schedule for the last 3 years yet consistently have had easy schedules. Every other team in the NFCW should be embarrassed.
I'm not complaining, though, it's gotta balance out the drain from constantly traveling cross country.
Quickly, to answer the question about Chicago and the best special teams of all-time: Remember, I changed the formulas a bit a few weeks ago to account for teams avoiding Hester with squib kicks. I haven't gone back and re-done any prior years with this new formula. Therefore I can't really compare the Bears and past teams. Without this change, the Bears would be lower. Even with the change, they don't come close to the highest special teams ever, the 2002 New Orleans Saints (10.0%).
13- You are forgetting the fact that many of the FO guys picked the Eagles in the Super Bowl where as they picked the Giants to be drafting Jake Long with the #1 pick in Aprils draft.
If you think they don't hang onto their picks then look at last years write up on the Washington redskins in PFP and how they were "a Peyton Manning and Marvin Harrison" away from winning the super bowl and how if they didn't have any injuries they would have been better.
If my Aunt had a dick then she'd be my uncle.
I am excited to say that it appears as if every team in the playoffs will be in the top half of the final DVOA rankings. All except the giants should end up with a positive DVOA and Weighted DVOA.
While this is great for football, it is awful for gamblers. Usually you can count on a bad division winner to go against in Round 1 (SD in 04, TB in 05, Sea last year). No such luck this year. Also, almost every season you can make the statement, Team X is overvalued because it has a great offense and a shaky defense. Of the likely play-off teams only GB is outside the top half of Defensive DVOA.
And while DVOA doesnt rate worst drives of a season, it is safe to say that the Philly D allowing Brian Griese to go 92 yards in 2 minutes with no timeouts was the most crippling drive of the year for any unit.
I am also sick of the Norv Turner bashing. If the Chargers go 11-5 that is not a bad job considering he had to recreate the entire team with a brand new coaching staff. It's not like the 14-2 record from last year would have been easily replicated with new schemes/coaches. The Bears, Saints and Ravens fell off last year and didn't match their ( or the 07' Chargers win totals) with the same coaching staffs so Norv out performed Lovie, Payton and Billeck in that sense.
Do I think Norv Turner is a great coach? Of course not. Do I think he is a good coach? I wouldn't go nuts to hire the guy but he does know offense and he did a respectable job this year in a very difficult circumstance. The media goes after this guy like Volchers and I don't feel the whole " why the hell did they hire Norv" or " how did he turn a 14-2 team into an 11-5 team Feeling many people have.
#22 - and you are forgetting the fact that the article said that the difference between the redskins and colts at the start of the season was Peyton Manning and Marvin Harrison. They then suffered from a lot of injuries. Not to mention the fact that two teams that are "only" separated by a top 10 all time qb and top 10 current WR in the game are really not close at all. And the other fact that DVOA has no bias for different teams.
#13 - Think about how the games actually went down. The Packers blew out the Giants in New York and only beat the Eagles in Green Bay because of 2 fumbled punt returns, both recovered by the Packers. Also, the Eagles played a very close game against the Pats, with some luck, giving them a tougher strength of schedule. These are just 2 quick examples. The DVOA ratings look at each play of each game, not just the winner/loser, and try to predict how teams will fare in the future.
no way Raiders worse team than Dolphins or Falcons. Dolphins laughingstock of league for only having 1 win and Falcons other laughingdstock of league for losing coach and Michekl Vick and just being crap overall. FO computer clearly broken still. When will it get it right? probably not untill next year when raiders get to playoffs and computer have no chance to underrate Raiders.
Raiderjoe just isn't as much fun as he used to be. Reading that the Raiders aren't worse than Miami isn't nearly as entertaining as the preseason predictions of Russell's rapid ascent to Hall-of-Famedom.
I suppose the shock of watching his 10-6 prediction crumble to ashes has left him a little off his game.
re24
What is Volchers?
Also you are poster who makes fun of Russell. Just you wait and see what he does on Sunday against SD. Don't blink or you might miss one of his laser passes. This preview of 2008 season when Russell and Raiders take back AFC West
re27
When you make as many predictions as me, you are going to get some wrong.
Raiders record really only bad one I make though.
Team still on rise and will be great in 2008
#18,
Part of the difference is that the Titans have to win to make the playoffs, while the Redskins can still get in if they lose (with Minnesota and New Orleans losses).
So even if they lose, the Redskins has ~25% chance of making the playoffs, which means the playoffs odds is giving them a ~50% chance to beat the Cowboys.
That's still a lot higher than the Titans chances against Indy, but I can see how playing a weaker team and having HFA make that gap plausible.
Chris #24:
I am also sick of the Norv Turner bashing. If the Chargers go 11-5 that is not a bad job considering he had to recreate the entire team with a brand new coaching staff. It’s not like the 14-2 record from last year would have been easily replicated with new schemes/coaches.
I'm sorry, but you are getting tiresomely stupid on this site. Could you at least look a few things up before you run your mouth on the keyboard?
THE CHARGERS HAVE RUN NORV TURNER'S OFFENSE SINCE HE WAS THE OC THERE UNDER SCHOTTENHEIMER SEVERAL YEARS AGO. NORV TURNER'S DEFENSIVE COORDINATOR IS TED COTTRELL, WHO WAS DEFENSIVE COORDINATOR IN BUFFALO FOR WADE PHILLIPS, WHO OF COURSE WAS DEFENSIVE COORDINATOR FOR SCHOTTENHEIMER LAST YEAR. THEY HAVEN'T HAD TO RECREATE ANYTHING MAJOR AS FAR AS SCHEMES OR COACHING.
I think the Weighted DVOA formula needs a tune-up. Yes, there is something to trends over a season, but with precious few games in a season, they all mean something.
There's no way the Jaguars are the 2nd-best team in the league right now. The Colts and Cowboys are much better.
Everyone talks about how good the Jags are playing, like they do every year. But every year they lose the division to Indy. And when they make the playoffs, they have a history of flaming out early. And as for "The Chargers have a subjective asterisk, of course, since many of us are expecting Norv Turner to do something stupid come playoff time. I don’t think anyone expects that from Jack Del Rio.": Well, I do. Elevating Garrard was the only intelligent thing he's ever done.
Don't get me wrong; I'd love for the Jags to beat New England. Because as CERTAIN as I am that the Colts will win in Foxborough on Jan. 20, I'm even more certain that the Colts would beat Jacksonville at home on Jan. 20.
Gerry #13:
"DVOA’s numbers notwithstanding, I have to consider both teams to be comparable in quality but with the Giants slightly better."
NFC North
Eagles crush Detroit, Giants barely squeak by.
Eagles beat Minnesota, Giants are crushed by them.
Eagles lose at last second on flukely plays to Packers, Giants are crushed by them.
Eagles lose at last second to Bears, Giants barely squeak by.
Advantage - Eagles 3-1
AFC North
Eagles beat Dolphins handily, Giants barely squeak by.
Eagles and Giants both beat Jets.
Eagles barely lose to Patriots, Giants ???
Giants crush Bills, Eagles ???
Advantage, Eagles 1-0-1
Strength of Schedule
Giants crush the weakling Falcons and 49ers
Eagles lose at last second to the good Seahawks, crush the okay Saints.
Advantage Eagles 1-0-1 (close loss to a good team = crushing of weaker team)
"Giants and Eagles vs Redskins/Cowboys- both 1-3."
Umm ... no. The Eagles are 2-2 vs. Cowboys and Redskins. The Giants are 1-3.
NFC East
Eagles crushed by Dallas, then beat Dallas, Giants beaten by Dallas twice. Eagles net points vs. Cowboys -17 (or -10 if you will), Giants -21
Eagles and Giants both beaten by Redskins, then beat Redskins. Eagles net points vs. Redskins 0, Giants -5.
Eagles beaten by Giants, then lose closely to Giants.
Advantage, Giants 3-1-2
Net of all games by result, and not simple win-loss, Eagles 5-4-4.
The Giants are ahead in the standings by virtue of one strength of schedule game and the wins in the head-to-head games. The wins in the head-to-head games required fluke luck for the Giants that was out of their control. (1) Kawika Mitchell not ruled down by contact when Matt Schobel was clearly touching him while he had a knee on the ground, (2) McNabb running over the line of scrimmage while throwing an apparent touchdown to Reggie Brown, (3) Akers boinking the tying field goal off the upright in the second game and missing two field goals in the first game.
If you want to claim the Giants are better based on playing the 49ers instead of the Seahawks and winning two close games by fluke luck, go right ahead, but also forgive the rest of us for being skeptical when the actual play on the field as a whole does not agree with assessments made by this method.
31: Might want to get that caps lock key fixed. The Chargers aren't running the exact same schemes as last year. They're similar, no doubt, but they're not exactly the same. There was going to be an adjustment period. Also, last year's team was playing a softer schedule than this year's team. 11-5 is legitimately an accomplishment for a brand new coaching staff with a first place schedule.
Chad Gerson #32:
There’s no way the Jaguars are the 2nd-best team in the league right now. The Colts and Cowboys are much better.
In recent weeks, the Cowboys have:
1) barely beat the Packers with the Packers best corner and 2nd best pass rusher out, and their back-up QB in for 2/3 of the game.
2) barely beat the Lions based on a shanked field goal and last second TD drive
3) gotten spanked at home by the Eagles
4) barely beat the Panthers playing some 4th string scrub at QB.
What is impressive about anything they have done in the past month?
RE: Jacksonville
Get back to me when Jack Del Rio actually manages to win a big game. His team self-destructs against top competition like the Colts and Pats.
RE: Pats playoff opponents
This Pats fan wants another piece of the Chargers hide. That team ain't right in the head. It would be great to watch them cry like little babies yet again.
35
1. Barely beat the Pack??? If TO catches that easy pass they win by 17! Probably even more if Favre plays the whole game. How could you say that wasn't an impressive win?
2. I agree, but they also fumbled at the one so you can't nitpick every little part of the game.
3. They lost by four to the #10 team in DVOA. How is that spanked? Not mention Romo was hurt (plus just had a horrible game), Gurode hurt, and and bunch of other defensive players. Sure not impressive, but not terrible.
4 Again Romo, Gurode, TO, Newman, Williams, Ratliff, Watkins all hurt or not playing. I mean whatever, this game didn't really say anything either way.
Anyway if you're just saying the Jags have been beter lately, then yeah but thats obvious by Weighted DVOA. But you're kidding yourself if you think the Jags are better than the Cowboys.
Also 1,
"aka ‘the game to determine the Super Bowl winner’). "
Pretty much no need to comment. Go back to the FOX boards.
re: Norv Turner
Oakland and Washington franchises have been a wreck. He is maligned for coaching both of those teams.
I would like to see the guy get some credit for pulling together a crumbling ship, and getting a bunch of two way wins late in the season(two way win is when the defense allows less than 20 and offense scores more than 20...20 is about the league average for points per game).
I know that if Parcells were coaching this team under the exact same circumstances that he would somehow be getting more than his share of credit for making the Chargers "dominant". The Chargers have lost
@Green Bay
@New England
@Minnesota
@Jacksonville
median DVOA = 23.5
opp ppg approximately 35
So I'm wondering how the defense is Norv's fault?
Their other loss was what will probably be their only loss in their division. Is there anything wrong with going 5-1 in your own division?
Now have the Chargers been a dominating team? No. But they have the had a pretty good season by losing 1 home game all yea and most likely going .500 on the road where half of the road games were against top 10 teams.
People need to get off Norv's back for losing in situations where noone would have one. As far as I'm concerned this is his first fair shot as a head coach and he has passed with flying colors.
Again if Parcells did the same job he would be receiving praise.
"And while DVOA doesnt rate worst drives of a season, it is safe to say that the Philly D allowing Brian Griese to go 92 yards in 2 minutes with no timeouts was the most crippling drive of the year for any unit."
It was even worse than that since it actually was a 97 yard drive.
And is "Volchers" supposed to be "vultures"?
My main complaint with Norv as a Chargers fan is the offense. That's supposed to be his specialty, it seems like that's the area of the team where it's most fair to judge his impact. He has taken the Chargers from the 2nd best offensive team in the league to the 13th best, and Rivers has regressed quite a bit. Norval is also a terrible at making fourth down decisions, which is how I expect us to lose a close game that we should have won in the first round of the playoffs.
The problem of Norv Turn is his past. So, the only way to be fair with him is to wait until we can put this season into perspective. By now, the tiebrake goes AGAINST him...
The Jaguars are tailor made for the Patriots. Mostly because they're one of those teams that just lines up and "does what they do", and because Jack Del Rio is their coach. Anyone who thinks they have a better shot than Indy, or even San Diego, is fooling themselves.
36: "Get back to me when Jack Del Rio actually manages to win a big game. His team self-destructs against top competition like the Colts and Pats."
Although it'll only be relevant for less than a week, you still might want to invest in a calendar that says 2007 on it. The self-destructive Jaguars, despite having all the fumble luck go and other close calls go against them in Indy, outscored the Colts 18-7 in the second half and forced the Colts to make plays to win it. That's not melting down -- that's actually fighting back and competing. Losing 28-25 to the defending champions when everything went against them? I put more stock in that than in the ridiculous blowout Jaguars win in December 2006 (although, to be fair, the Colts *did* force one punt in that game, which is one more punt than they forced this time). ;)
The Jaguars don't have a "history" of flaming out in the playoffs. They made the playoffs two years ago and lost to a pretty good New England team IN New England with an 8:00 start time. It was the first playoff game for a lot of those guys and the first tough game they had played in weeks. They also got jobbed early by the officials and found themselves unable to dig out of a hole. Bottom lines it that they lost, by not playing well, to a good team. That does not make a "history" of flaming out. They lost their last 3 games last year, but that doesn't give them a "history" of losing the last 3 games.
Yes, Norv has taken a 14-2 team and turned it into a 10-5 team. That’s not easy! Surely nobody else could have done that.
stop calling me surely
we all know that a team that wins 14 games in one year is expected to win..
ummm..
since the NFL went to 16 games, there have been 14 teams that went 14-2
in year n+1, average number of wins?
9.75
median = 10
so if the San Diegos win next week, they will be doing BETTER than average
Can someone help me out with some data interpretation?
For the past 4 years Philly's Non-Adjusted VOA has been significantly better than their DVOA. They have the highest differential so far this year, they had the 5th highest last year, 2nd highest in 2005, and 11th highest in 2004. That gives them the highest 4-year average in the league.
What (if anything) could this mean? Is it saying that Philly is consistently shafted by luck moreso than any other team?
"He has taken the Chargers from the 2nd best offensive team in the league to the 13th best, and Rivers has regressed quite a bit."
yes, and all taht is against a MUCH TOUGHER SCHEDULE. Last year, they played the dregs of other divisions. This year, they got to play the best in the divisions. That 4 game "skid" they had came against the Packers, Patriots, and a Bears team that was still competitive.
"The wins in the head-to-head games required fluke luck for the Giants that was out of their control."
You mean like sacking Donovan McNabb TWELVE times?
"Final note for Boston/Providence-area readers or anyone who wants to listen online: I will be guest co-host on the “Dale and Holley Showâ€"
May God have mercy on your soul. At least it's not Dennis and Callahan's White Supremacist Hour, though.
46:
I would say it just shows how volatile their conference, and their division in particular, has been. The NFC East has been very very strong this year when you look at the Cowboys, Giants, Redskins and Eagles as a whole. In previous years however, it has fluctuated wildly. In '03 for instance, it was just the opposite, where all three of the Eagles divisional opponents, as well as the rest of the conference, were very weak. That seems to have caused some extreme peaks and valleys in their strength of schedule year to year, which would expectedly create some craziness in their VOA-vs-DVOA differentials.
Nick, I don't 100% agree with you on 42. Your argument works very well with a Pittsburgh, which is very tough but was stubborn enough to lose...but I don't see the same thing in Jacksonville. To me, Jacksonville is a tough, well rounded team. With a proper defensive game-plan, that type of team seems to give New England fits, keeping games closer than you would expect.
I would almost switch San Diego and Jacksonville...San Diego has a very talented team, and has some tough players, but I'm not sure I would give them the moniker of tough team. And exchange Del Rio with Norv.
I think I'd rather see Philip Rivers and LDT in New England than MJD/Taylor/Garrard
For the Giants resting starters, they have the same thing to play for that The Patriots do on Saturday, making history. Beating the 15-0 Pats would put them in the same category as the Miami team who were the 1 against the 15-1 Bears. And with an apparent 30% chance of victory on Saturday vs the very slim chance of a Super Bowl victory or even appearance, I think playing to win on Saturday is the right choice.
Re #33:
Its incredible how a couple Philadelphia Eagles fans on this site rely upon "fluke luck" to minimize their team's losses. Last year, this year, its the same tired story. The Eagles lost because of a perfect storm! They had no business losing! The other team is inferior despite the outcome!
In the first game, the Eagles fumbled 5 times, if memory serves me right. The Giants only recovered the one you mentioned; Kawika Mitchell returning it for a TD. Go ahead, take away the 7 and put a chip shot 3 in its place. 12-3 is still a two score game on a night where the Eagles offense was dreadful (by comparison, the Giants offense were merely awful).
But the Eagles getting 4 of 5 of their own fumbles back is not luck at all! That is SKILL! Nevermind what the official FO.com/DVOA stance is on the matter.
In the second game, there was no luck. The Giants and Eagles played an evenly matched game, with awful red zone offense from the Gmen turning what should have been a two-score victory into a last-second nail biter.
Decrying your team's bad luck, or the other team's good luck, as the reason for a loss truly is the equivalent of crying.
DVOA needs a weather adjustment really, really bad.
Re #54
No it doesn't, Brady was fine this week!
(I kid..I kid..)
Chris, enough with the claim that many FO writers picked the Giants to have the #1 pick in next year's draft. According to the FO preseason predictions (hopefully linked from my name), 3 out 17 picked the Giants to have the NFL's worst record. They were wrong, and have no problem admitting it.
The comparison between the Eagles and Giants interests me because I think it is a great example of how schedules can affect two seasons.
Last year, the NFC East played the NFC South. The Giants had to play a first-place schedule, so their other conference opponents were the Bears and Seahawks. The Eagles played the 49ers and Green Bay. Philly had a much easier pair of uncommon opponents.
This year, the East played the North. The uncommon opponents for the Giants were the 49ers and the Falcons, while the Eagles had to play the Seahawks and the Saints.
Is it a mystery why the Giants beat out the Eagles this year instead of last year?
56 - The Giants definitely had a lot easier schedule than the Eagles as it turned out, though I think it's fair to note that preseason DVOA ranked the Eagles vastly higher than Seattle and NO, and the Giants a bit behind Atlanta and SF.
That said, part 2 of the simple explanation for the standings is that the Giants beat the Eagles twice, in one close game and one not close at all game, and deserved to win both games. Hitting the upright from 27 yards might have been good luck for the Giants; doing so from 57 yards (to tie, not win the game) is not.
Watch out for San Diego. That's a team with elite talent starting to play extremely well. I'm a Broncos fan, and what I saw Monday night was silly. Denver didn't belong in the same league, and I think they were held to 56 yards of offense in the first half.
I'm curious to see what San Diego's weighted DVOA looks like when that Vikings game drops out of the equation. The Jags have gotten a lot of attention, but I think the Chargers may actually be playing better.
Hasn't FO determined that DVOA for the whole season has a higher correlation with playoff success than weighted DVOA? If so, why the claim that the Jaguars are the most dangerous team in the playoffs?
Re: 59
I could easily me mistaken, but I don't remember anyone claiming that whole-season DVOA is more predictive of postseason success than WDVOA.
"I could easily me mistaken, but I don’t remember anyone claiming that whole-season DVOA is more predictive of postseason success than WDVOA."
I don't remember, but I do remember getting called a all sorts of nasty names for saying 2 years (or so) ago that the Patriots would beat the Jaguars in the playoffs based entirely on the fact that their WDVOA was much higher than the Jags WDVOA. The Pats blew the Jags out.
Here's the quote from an FO article entitled "Why Doesn’t Bill Polian’s S–t Work in the Playoffs?":
"Overall, a team’s DVOA over the course of the entire season (.317) had a stronger correlation with playoff success than its weighted DVOA (.264)."
I've got another data interpretation question. Regarding "variance", can you look at it as a particular team's DVOA +/- their variance, or is it a particular team's DVOA +/- (DVOA * Variance)?
I'm fairly sure it's the second one, but I just wanted to double check.
This doesn't really mean much, but I just wanted to take a look at what could have been. According to "Estimated Wins" this would be the current playoff picture.
AFC
1. NE
2. IND
3. SD
4. PIT
5. JAC
6. CLE
CIN, TEN, & BUF are still in the hunt
NFC
1. DAL
2. GB
3. TB
4. SEA
5. PHI
6. MIN
NO, WAS, & NYG are still in the hunt
re: 33
You've convinced me that the Eagles are better than the Giants. Too bad that isn't reflected in the standings.
re: 34
Curiously, the first-place schedule hasn't been the problem for the Chargers. They went 2-1 against the other first-place teams, beating both Baltimore and Indy. (Yeah, remember when Baltimore was 13-3 and not mired in a 9-game losing streak? Seems like eons ago, but it was only last year.)
re: 45
Bully for Norv for potentially doing marginally better than the median performance! And here I implied anybody could do that! Silly me.
"Curiously, the first-place schedule hasn’t been the problem "
No, but the schedule in general has. They've played almost all of the best teams in football. NE, GB, Indy, etc.