Writers of Pro Football Prospectus 2008

Most Recent FO Features

RiversPhi04.jpg

» 2014 KUBIAK vs. ADP: The Underrated

Going too low in your fantasy draft: veteran quarterbacks, running backs who do more with their hands than their feet, and Houston's (only) two good receivers.

22 Oct 2013

Week 7 DVOA Ratings

by Aaron Schatz

Indianapolis knocked Denver out of the ranks of the unbeaten on Sunday night, but not out of the top spot in the Football Outsiders DVOA ratings. The Colts' big win did move them up from fifth to third, where they now trail only the Broncos and Seahawks and have passed the NFL's last remaining unbeaten team, the Kansas City Chiefs.

A narrow victory over Houston (currently ranked a miserable 30th in DVOA) drops Kansas City's DVOA rating from 25.6% to 23.2%. Beware of power rankings which simply regurgitate a list in order of wins and losses: Kansas City has not been the best team in the NFL in 2013. The most important issue is that the Chiefs have played the league's easiest schedule, even if we remove all games that any teams have played against Jacksonville. It doesn't get much harder the next two weeks, with games against Cleveland (25th) and Buffalo (17th), both of which are now playing with backup quarterbacks. However, most of Kansas City's division schedule is set up after their bye in Week 10, which means both games against the Broncos and both games against the Chargers (13th in DVOA). They also have a game with Indianapolis in Week 16 which could be hugely important for playoff seeding.

However, while the Chiefs may not be the best team in the league, they may be the most consistent. They rank first in variance, including third on offense and seventh on defense.

Kansas City's ranking is one of the few places where the current DVOA ratings deviate significantly from win-loss records. Another team that stands out is Carolina, which has climbed to sixth overall at 3-3. However, with the exception of the Panthers, every team with a winning record is better than every team at .500 or worse except for two teams right in the middle of the ratings: Atlanta 15th at 2-4 and the Jets 16th at 4-3.

BEST AND WORST DVOA EVER WATCH

Denver's loss knocks them out of the top ten teams in DVOA history. Jacksonville is still plumbing the depths of the historical DVOA ratings, but the Jaguars no longer rank as the worst team ever because the 2005 San Francisco 49ers had one of the worst games of all-time in Week 7, losing to Washington 52-17. Yes, the quarterback of that worst team ever was in fact the same man who currently quarterbacks the last undefeated team of 2013.

Meanwhile, the current Washington team had another lousy week on special teams. Washington had 26.6 net yards per punt, with one of those returned for a touchdown by Devin Hester, and just one touchback on eight kickoffs, which just won't cut it with the kickoff line at the 35.

BEST TOTAL DVOA
THROUGH WEEK 7
x BEST OFFENSIVE DVOA
THROUGH WEEK 7
x WORST TOTAL DVOA
THROUGH WEEK 7
x WORST OFFENSIVE DVOA
THROUGH WEEK 7
x WORST SPECIAL TEAMS DVOA
THROUGH WEEK 7
Year Team DVOA x Year Team DVOA x Year Team DVOA x Year Team DVOA x Year Team DVOA
2007 NE 69.1% x 2007 NE 48.0% x 2005 SF -75.5% x 2005 SF -49.7% x 2010 SD -21.1%
1991 WAS 61.8% x 1999 WAS 45.2% x 2013 JAC -63.4% x 1992 SEA -47.7% x 2013 WAS -18.3%
1996 GB 54.0% x 2000 STL 44.0% x 2008 KC -60.4% x 2013 JAC -44.9% x 2008 MIN -17.6%
1994 DAL 51.8% x 2013 DEN 41.9% x 2000 CIN -58.4% x 2004 MIA -43.5% x 1997 STL -16.2%
1999 STL 50.7% x 1998 DEN 41.2% x 1993 TB -58.0% x 2002 HOU -42.6% x 1999 CIN -15.1%
2007 IND 47.6% x 2002 KC 39.2% x 2009 DET -57.4% x 2010 CAR -42.0% x 1996 ARI -14.7%
1990 CHI 46.8% x 2007 IND 36.9% x 2002 CIN -56.1% x 1996 STL -42.0% x 2000 CIN -14.5%
1998 DEN 45.0% x 1992 SF 35.3% x 1991 IND -54.5% x 1991 NE -40.4% x 1995 PHI -14.0%
1997 DEN 43.8% x 1995 DAL 34.5% x 2005 HOU -52.5% x 1993 TB -40.3% x 2006 ARI -12.9%
1991 NO 42.0% x 1997 DEN 33.7% x 1996 STL -52.5% x 2009 OAK -40.1% x 1994 HOIL -12.8%
2013 DEN 40.9% x 2004 IND 32.7% x 2009 OAK -51.9% x 1991 PHI -39.5% x 2005 PHI -12.8%
1992 PHI 40.8% x 2011 NE 32.6% x 1999 CLE -51.4% x 2007 SF -39.1% x 1990 DEN -12.5%

Apologies for the shortened commentary this week; my hard drive died on Thursday and I've been limping along on my wife's computer with limited access to files until I can get everything fixed/replaced and then restore my backup.

* * * * *

During the 2013 season, we'll be partnering with EA Sports to bring special Football Outsiders-branded items to Madden 25 Ultimate Team. Each week, we'll be picking out a handful of players who starred in that week's games. Some of them will be well-known players who stood out in standard stats. Others will be under-the-radar players who only stood out with advanced stats, including DYAR, Defeats, and our game charting coverage stats for cornerbacks. We'll announce the players each Tuesday in the DVOA commentary article, and the players will be available in Madden Ultimate Team packs the following weekend, beginning Friday night.

The Football Outsiders stars for Week 7 are:

  • FB Stanley Havili, IND: TD reception and forced fumble on special teams.
  • WR Jeremy Kerley, NYJ: 97 yards and a touchdown with six third-down conversions.
  • LT Trent Williams, WAS: Washington had 5.5 yards on left-side runs (not including scrambles) and allowed only one sack.
  • LB Lavonte David, TB: Six defeats including three TFL.
  • LB Lawrence Timmons, PIT: 13 tackles for an average gain of just 3.2 yards.

Other players we considered this week who didn't make the cut: Aaron Rodgers, Mike Brown, Clint Boling, Robert Mathis, Sean Lee, Vontae Davis, Earl Thomas, and Mike Mitchell.

* * * * *

All 2013 stat pages are now updated or will be updated in the next few minutes, including snap counts, playoff odds, and the FO Premium database.

* * * * *

These are the Football Outsiders team efficiency ratings through seven weeks of 2013, 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 strength of schedule and to 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.

Because it is early in the season, opponent adjustments are only at 70 percent strength; they will increase 10 percent every week through Week 10. As always, positive numbers represent more points so DEFENSE is better when it is NEGATIVE.

DAVE is a formula which combines our preseason projection with current DVOA to get a more accurate forecast of how a team will play the rest of the season. Right now, the preseason projection makes up nine percent of DAVE (19 percent for teams with only six games played).

To save people some time, 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
TOTAL
DAVE
RANK W-L OFFENSE
DVOA
OFF.
RANK
DEFENSE
DVOA
DEF.
RANK
S.T.
DVOA
S.T.
RANK
1 DEN 40.9% 1 38.7% 1 6-1 41.9% 1 7.9% 26 6.8% 3
2 SEA 34.4% 2 32.7% 2 6-1 8.3% 12 -22.3% 1 3.8% 10
3 IND 26.2% 5 23.3% 3 5-2 17.0% 5 -4.6% 11 4.6% 8
4 KC 23.2% 3 19.6% 6 7-0 -3.3% 18 -19.3% 2 7.3% 2
5 GB 22.5% 7 22.9% 4 4-2 26.2% 2 1.6% 18 -2.1% 26
6 CAR 20.4% 8 19.6% 5 3-3 6.3% 14 -14.3% 3 -0.2% 20
7 NO 19.0% 4 16.9% 7 5-1 15.5% 6 -1.9% 16 1.7% 14
8 CHI 17.7% 6 16.1% 9 4-3 14.5% 7 1.0% 17 4.2% 9
9 DAL 16.2% 11 14.4% 10 4-3 7.1% 13 -2.8% 14 6.3% 4
10 SF 16.1% 10 16.6% 8 5-2 10.1% 9 -4.5% 12 1.5% 15
11 CIN 13.2% 9 12.5% 11 5-2 2.6% 15 -7.6% 7 3.0% 12
12 NE 9.7% 13 10.8% 12 5-2 -4.7% 19 -7.1% 8 7.3% 1
13 SD 3.2% 16 2.5% 13 4-3 25.8% 3 21.6% 32 -1.0% 24
14 DET 2.6% 12 2.2% 14 4-3 9.8% 10 6.3% 24 -0.9% 23
15 ATL 0.1% 19 0.4% 15 2-4 17.3% 4 16.2% 30 -0.9% 22
16 NYJ -0.6% 18 -1.3% 16 4-3 -18.4% 30 -12.8% 4 5.1% 7
TEAM TOTAL
DVOA
LAST
WEEK
TOTAL
DAVE
RANK W-L OFFENSE
DVOA
OFF.
RANK
DEFENSE
DVOA
DEF.
RANK
S.T.
DVOA
S.T.
RANK
17 BUF -1.0% 14 -2.3% 17 3-4 -7.4% 21 -9.4% 6 -3.0% 27
18 PIT -3.7% 21 -2.9% 18 2-4 -0.3% 16 4.5% 22 1.2% 16
19 ARI -4.2% 17 -4.3% 19 3-4 -15.1% 23 -10.0% 5 0.9% 19
20 PHI -4.6% 15 -4.4% 20 3-4 14.2% 8 12.1% 29 -6.7% 28
21 TEN -7.7% 20 -8.5% 22 3-4 -2.2% 17 -2.4% 15 -7.9% 29
22 MIA -8.8% 25 -9.2% 23 3-3 -6.0% 20 4.0% 20 1.1% 17
23 BAL -9.1% 23 -7.1% 21 3-4 -15.5% 25 -4.6% 10 1.7% 13
24 TB -12.9% 22 -11.6% 24 0-6 -19.6% 31 -5.7% 9 1.1% 18
25 CLE -14.8% 24 -13.9% 25 3-4 -16.5% 27 3.6% 19 5.4% 6
26 STL -17.2% 26 -17.2% 27 3-4 -11.8% 22 8.7% 27 3.4% 11
27 MIN -17.6% 27 -16.9% 26 1-5 -16.0% 26 7.0% 25 5.4% 5
28 OAK -21.5% 28 -20.2% 29 2-4 -15.2% 24 4.2% 21 -2.1% 25
29 WAS -21.6% 30 -18.0% 28 2-4 8.8% 11 12.0% 28 -18.3% 32
30 HOU -23.7% 29 -21.3% 30 2-5 -17.2% 28 -3.1% 13 -9.7% 30
31 NYG -34.9% 31 -31.3% 31 1-6 -18.2% 29 5.2% 23 -11.4% 31
32 JAC -63.4% 32 -59.2% 32 0-7 -44.9% 32 17.9% 31 -0.6% 21
  • NON-ADJUSTED TOTAL DVOA does not include the adjustments for opponent strength or the adjustments for weather and altitude in special teams, and only penalizes offenses for lost fumbles rather than all fumbles.
  • ESTIMATED WINS uses a statistic known as "Forest Index" that emphasizes consistency as well as DVOA in the most important specific situations: red zone defense, first quarter offense, and performance in the second half when the score is close. It then projects a number of wins adjusted to a league-average schedule and a league-average rate of recovering fumbles. Teams that have had their bye week are projected as if they had played one game per week.
  • PAST SCHEDULE lists average DVOA of opponents played this season, ranked from hardest schedule (#1, most positive) to easiest schedule (#32, most negative). It is not adjusted for which games are home or road.
  • FUTURE SCHEDULE lists average DVOA of opponents still left to play this season, ranked from hardest schedule (#1, most positive) to easiest schedule (#32, most negative). It is not adjusted for which games are home or road.
  • VARIANCE measures the statistical variance of the team's weekly DVOA performance. Teams are ranked from most consistent (#1, lowest variance) to least consistent (#32, highest variance).



TEAM TOTAL
DVOA
W-L NON-ADJ
TOT VOA
ESTIM.
WINS
RANK PAST
SCHED
RANK FUTURE
SCHED
RANK VAR. RANK
1 DEN 40.9% 6-1 48.6% 7.0 1 -13.0% 31 -1.3% 17 7.0% 11
2 SEA 34.4% 6-1 36.6% 5.5 3 -5.2% 26 -7.6% 30 12.6% 24
3 IND 26.2% 5-2 26.5% 5.3 5 0.1% 18 -12.4% 32 7.0% 13
4 KC 23.2% 7-0 32.6% 5.7 2 -19.9% 32 6.2% 6 1.7% 1
5 GB 22.5% 4-2 26.0% 5.4 4 -2.3% 25 -2.4% 20 2.4% 2
6 CAR 20.4% 3-3 26.7% 4.0 11 -6.7% 29 2.9% 9 14.6% 25
7 NO 19.0% 5-1 23.8% 4.7 7 0.3% 16 7.6% 5 8.8% 16
8 CHI 17.7% 4-3 18.5% 4.9 6 -6.1% 28 0.1% 14 6.9% 10
9 DAL 16.2% 4-3 18.7% 4.6 8 -1.6% 22 -4.3% 24 7.0% 12
10 SF 16.1% 5-2 12.5% 4.0 12 4.3% 8 -5.0% 28 22.6% 31
11 CIN 13.2% 5-2 13.2% 4.5 9 4.7% 7 -3.8% 22 8.0% 15
12 NE 9.7% 5-2 7.7% 4.4 10 2.5% 11 -1.0% 15 2.6% 3
13 SD 3.2% 4-3 4.6% 3.8 14 -11.2% 30 6.1% 7 5.5% 8
14 DET 2.6% 4-3 5.6% 3.8 13 -0.7% 19 -2.9% 21 5.5% 7
15 ATL 0.1% 2-4 6.3% 3.7 16 -1.8% 23 9.3% 3 3.3% 4
16 NYJ -0.6% 4-3 -0.3% 3.6 18 -0.8% 21 -1.3% 16 14.7% 26
TEAM TOTAL
DVOA
W-L NON-ADJ
TOT VOA
ESTIM.
WINS
RANK PAST
SCHED
RANK FUTURE
SCHED
RANK VAR. RANK
17 BUF -1.0% 3-4 3.4% 3.6 19 1.4% 15 -4.1% 23 12.0% 22
18 PIT -3.7% 2-4 -8.9% 2.8 22 -0.7% 20 -2.2% 19 5.6% 9
19 ARI -4.2% 3-4 -5.6% 3.6 17 8.9% 3 -4.4% 25 10.3% 19
20 PHI -4.6% 3-4 -7.1% 3.7 15 2.0% 12 -4.5% 27 20.6% 30
21 TEN -7.7% 3-4 -3.0% 2.7 23 7.0% 4 -11.1% 31 12.2% 23
22 MIA -8.8% 3-3 -7.0% 2.9 21 3.4% 9 3.8% 8 15.4% 28
23 BAL -9.1% 3-4 -8.0% 2.9 20 1.6% 13 2.2% 10 11.4% 21
24 TB -12.9% 0-6 -12.6% 1.9 29 3.2% 10 8.6% 4 3.6% 5
25 CLE -14.8% 3-4 -6.6% 2.1 26 0.3% 17 -1.8% 18 9.4% 17
26 STL -17.2% 3-4 -17.7% 1.9 28 -5.5% 27 13.7% 1 18.7% 29
27 MIN -17.6% 1-5 -13.1% 2.7 24 -2.1% 24 9.4% 2 15.2% 27
28 OAK -21.5% 2-4 -17.3% 2.0 27 1.4% 14 0.8% 12 7.3% 14
29 WAS -21.6% 2-4 -23.4% 1.6 30 5.5% 6 0.8% 13 4.8% 6
30 HOU -23.7% 2-5 -23.9% 2.6 25 6.1% 5 -6.4% 29 23.5% 32
31 NYG -34.9% 1-6 -44.3% 0.7 31 13.7% 1 1.1% 11 11.0% 20
32 JAC -63.4% 0-7 -65.5% 0.0 32 12.7% 2 -4.5% 26 10.0% 18

Posted by: Aaron Schatz on 22 Oct 2013

115 comments, Last at 15 Jan 2014, 1:32am by louis vuitton v

Comments

1
by Mike B. In Va :: Tue, 10/22/2013 - 7:38pm

I know defense varies more than offense, but if you had told me that after last year's debacle that Buffalo would have the number 6 defense in the league despite only two weeks of Byrd and playing 3rd-string corners, I'd have laughed at you.

Mike Pettine apparently really does know his stuff. Well, and some of the opponents have sucked, but, still...

46
by Neffarias_Bredd :: Wed, 10/23/2013 - 9:59am

Doug Marrone and his staff have done an outstanding job in Buffalo this year. Really getting the most out of the talent on that roster. If he gets the opportunity to build the program over a couple years Buffalo will be a contender.

2
by Will Allen :: Tue, 10/22/2013 - 7:51pm

The Vikings have the 2nd hardest schedule from here on out. They ain't gettin' to the 5 projected wins the almanac had them at, and which I agreed with. I knew they'd be bad, but I didn't anticipate they would manage to make the Joe Webb Fan Club look rational. The coach is in his last year, and they will get no production from the qb position. This has Les Steckel written all over it, except Frazier is an easier guy to feel bad for.

Can we make Andrew Luck available again in the draft?

4
by Brad M (not verified) :: Tue, 10/22/2013 - 7:56pm

Don't send Luck to the Jags, no one deserves that!

I have no idea how to find SF's variance by week 7 from last year, but I know they led the league or were top 3 in variance last year overall. Why are they so damn variant when I hoped that they'd theoretically be less variant after switching to a QB that didn't have to depend on a running game.

41
by hrudey (not verified) :: Wed, 10/23/2013 - 9:36am

Hey, now, the Jaguars have been in existence nearly 20 years and their best two drafted QBs are David Garrard and Rob Johnson, and he only because he showed just enough to get traded for a pick that became Fred Taylor. A great QB would be absolutely idolized in Jacksonville - heck, a great man who's a god-awful QB is still idolized here.

15
by Bobman :: Tue, 10/22/2013 - 9:02pm

Will.
We'll let you have the neckbeard for a 2014 6th rounder and a ham sandwich.

3
by Will Allen :: Tue, 10/22/2013 - 7:54pm

With their defense poised on the ledge, and their qb hurt, no matter his issues, the Bears are in deep, deep, trouble. Shame Lovie didn't get Trestman hired as an OC several years ago.

19
by Braddw54 (not verified) :: Tue, 10/22/2013 - 10:51pm

i am afraid your right looks like it is Green bays div.to loose

71
by Jon Goldman (not verified) :: Wed, 10/23/2013 - 1:19pm

Any real hope of the Bears being legitimate superbowl contenders died when Nate Collins' ACL was torn. This just makes them a fringe playoff team instead of a fringe contender.

75
by tuluse :: Wed, 10/23/2013 - 1:30pm

It's this Bears team makes the playoffs, I'll be shocked.

80
by Jon Goldman (not verified) :: Wed, 10/23/2013 - 1:59pm

They could, presuming Green Bay finally gets Rodgers injured.

82
by tuluse :: Wed, 10/23/2013 - 2:02pm

I think both the Lions and Packers are significantly better than the Bears team at this time.

95
by Steve in WI :: Thu, 10/24/2013 - 12:43am

Don't worry, they'll find a way to finish 8-8 or 9-7 (assuming that 9-7 won't get them into the playoffs) and secure the worst possible draft pick for a non-playoff team, as usual.

After the past three seasons, I'm starting to get jealous of fans of teams that eliminate themselves from playoff contention by just being bad. I'm tired of getting my hopes up every year only to have them dashed by injuries without really seeing what kind of a team the Bears were.

5
by MilkmanDanimal :: Tue, 10/22/2013 - 7:56pm

So, I assume Tampa is now the best 0-6 team ever, instead of the best 0-5 team ever. Progress!

I thought Lavonte David had four TFL, but, then again, it's hard for my eyes to focus properly at this point after all the bashing of my head I've been doing.

6
by herewegobrowniesherewego (not verified) :: Tue, 10/22/2013 - 8:08pm

Surprised that opponent adjustments didn't keep GB and CLE more stable after this week; Brownies defense is now below replacement (3 weeks after being ranked 8th,) and GB is now +10.2 on DAVE from last week.

I'm guessing the relatively quick 14-0 GB lead had something to do with it, and Lacy looking like a Pro Bowler against them.

7
by JoeyHarringtonsPiano :: Tue, 10/22/2013 - 8:19pm

Well Nick Fole's reign as #1 QB by DVOA didn't last long. Frankly I'm shocked that he's still 6th after last Sunday.

8
by BroncFan07 :: Tue, 10/22/2013 - 8:28pm

After the bye the following weekend, Denver's next 4 go: at SD, KC, at NE, at KC. Whole lotta fluctuation in the AFC might be coming.

31
by panthersnbraves :: Wed, 10/23/2013 - 3:49am

I know the NFL wanted to keep things interesting by pushing the Divisional games to the end, but this year is maddening. At almost the mid-point of the season, a few teams have definitely settled out to the bottom, and that is about it. Since November and December have so many Divisional games (which also count as Conference games), we as fans are in a situation where we know the final tie-breakers and seedings are being set right now, but can't really be sure who the teams will be.

I guess it is particularly hard for us Panthers fans, since we're not sure of the identity - tough-luck loser, middle-of-the-road team who wins the easy ones but can't win the hard ones, spoiler who will dash some team's hopes, or plucky upstart hiding in media obscurity until the breakout run.

Football Outsiders has had faith in the Panthers thus far, but it will be another month or more before the truth is finally known if the Panthers are really a top team (and better than New Orleans).

78
by Vince Verhei :: Wed, 10/23/2013 - 1:41pm

If it were up to me, the six divisional games would be the last six games each team played. That would give everyone a legit chance to play catchup and keep every team alive in the playoff race longer.

86
by Gaucho (not verified) :: Wed, 10/23/2013 - 2:44pm

My name is Gaucho, and I approve this message.

81
by Bay Area Bengal (not verified) :: Wed, 10/23/2013 - 2:00pm

I agree ... the scheduling IS maddening, with teams like Carolina and KC essentially remaining unproven until deep into the second half of the season.

My guess is that although Carolina is a good team, they'll miss out on the playoffs. They're 3-3 after playing an extremely easy (by DVOA's measurements) schedule. They are a high variance team with the 9th toughest schedule in the league from here on out. That looks like a hard-luck 9-7 or 8-8 to me.

Instead, I think Detroit nabs the 6th playoff spot, assuming Megatron gets back to 100% and stays healthy. The Lions have a very easy schedule remaining ... the injury-decimated Bears, the hapless Bucs, the Giants, the Vikings.

Still, I think finishing at .500 or above should be enough to get some pressure off of Cam Newton and some (dare I say?) momentum towards a better 2014.

99
by ericogg :: Thu, 10/24/2013 - 12:51pm

I think it's only maddening because other teams turned out worse than they thought.

If you looked at KC's schedule based off of last year's records it would have been:

Week 1 (2-14) Jags (easy win regardless)
Week 2 (8-8) Cowboys (everyone has high expectations, 9-7, 10-6 seasons)
Week 3 (4-12) Eagles (Chip Kelly was the talk of the NFL, even in week 1!)
Week 4 (9-7) Giants (Another contender at the start of the year)
Week 5 (6-10) Titans (Another team some had progressing to 2nd in the division)
Week 6 (4-12) Raiders (Well, they're the Raiders...)
Week 7 (12-4) Texans (We all expect the Texans to collapse by now, but after last year most had them still near a 10-6, 11-5 team)

So lets say Jags and Raiders are "guaranteed wins" the other 5 games the teams records were 7.8-8.2. I'd say a schedule that averages to be just under 8-8 is good scheduling. Keep in mind that the Chiefs were 2-14...even if the NFL gave them some slack in scheduling (I personally think the NFL doesn't care, and it just works out by standings anyway), I don't think anyone thought they'd go 7-0. Also, I don't think anyone expected the Chiefs' opponents to be at an average of 2.1-3.7 (without Chiefs' wins).

9
by Cythammer (not verified) :: Tue, 10/22/2013 - 8:30pm

Did not expect the Patriots to rise and the Bills to fall this week.

I would say Indy is going to feast on their easy schedule going forward, but based on their results so far they would be better off playing the best teams in the league.

23
by RickD :: Wed, 10/23/2013 - 12:03am

Pats beat the Saints and went down. Then they lost to the Jets and went up.

No criticism implied, it's just interesting.

10
by Raiderjoe :: Tue, 10/22/2013 - 8:32pm

No way Bikings better than Raiders. Minnesota truly crap twam. Raiders would annihilate Vikivs head to head.

16
by Paul R :: Tue, 10/22/2013 - 9:12pm

Raiders have a pretty good run defense. They would get their exercise that day. 55 straight handoffs to Peterson. Maybe the occasional sack-fumble/screen pass into the bleachers whenever he needs a breather.

Annihilate? I don't know... Probably more like 9-3.

29
by commissionerleaf :: Wed, 10/23/2013 - 2:36am

Yeah, but you mean 9-3 Raiders...

37
by Paul R :: Wed, 10/23/2013 - 9:10am

Right.

87
by Gaucho (not verified) :: Wed, 10/23/2013 - 2:46pm

Well, at least, this would be the best chance for OAK to be 9-3...

33
by Eggwasp (not verified) :: Wed, 10/23/2013 - 4:19am

Not sure how the raiders current starting O-line (or third stringers as they were known in preseason) stands up to Jarrod Allen....

11
by Bobman :: Tue, 10/22/2013 - 8:47pm

Aaron, sorry to hear about your dead hard drive. My condolences to its motherboard, keyboard, and the little flash drives who no doubt wonder what happened. You'll have to be strong for all of them. (sniff)

Is there an appropriate charity I can send, I don't know, a few lines of code to, to show my respect?

Thanks for busting your hump and getting this out almost on time.

35
by Ryan D. :: Wed, 10/23/2013 - 8:40am

Just go ahead and close the thread. The competition for funniest post has officially ended.

44
by specq (not verified) :: Wed, 10/23/2013 - 9:43am

cool, who won?

12
by DA (not verified) :: Tue, 10/22/2013 - 8:51pm

It is still mindboggling to me that CHI's Pass Defense ranks ahead of GB's. I assume having Eli throw passes straight to your defenders is helping, whereas GB has not had many INTs but has been pretty solid outside of Week 1 (and late in Games when up by multi score)

56
by Jimmy :: Wed, 10/23/2013 - 11:49am

This Bears fan is fairly amazed too. The Bears defense is now on life support. They haven't looked good all year and now with two DTs, the starting MLBer and Lance Briggs all out for a while (or the season) it isn't going to get any better.

The only reason for thinking anything positive about the Bears' pass defense is that Tillman and Jennings remain turnover machines - of course the negative being that they are both free agents in three months time.

13
by Bobman :: Tue, 10/22/2013 - 8:51pm

Colts Special teams, #8! I'm sorry, maybe you did not hear:

COLTS SPECIAL TEAMS #8!!!

I've got smelling salts for all of you with the vapors now.

Pat McAfee seems to start each game with a 32 yard punt, yet somehow ends up with a 50 yard gross average by game's end, four kicks inside the 20, and a few KR-shaped indentations in his helmet. Ooh-rah!

20
by turbohappy :: Tue, 10/22/2013 - 11:11pm

Haha. This Colts fan loves it! Totally different team than I'm used to watching. So well-rounded. They've really done a great job putting the defense together also. None of the players are really impressive on their own, but much more than a sum of their parts. Just hope they can still move the ball on offense without 87 :o(

38
by Revenge of the NURBS (not verified) :: Wed, 10/23/2013 - 9:21am

Not just the #8 special teams, but the team as a whole is very well rounded. Looking at the DVOA table, the Colts are as well-rounded as anybody in the league. It's interesting to see a team with a plan other than "have Peyton go dominate". Whether that translates into success in January remains to be seen, but it's definitely different.

14
by Bobman :: Tue, 10/22/2013 - 9:01pm

Okay, preliminary AFC playoff view... Denver is one game behind KC with two H2H games. Denver has the 17th ranked future sked, KC the 6th... Gonna be interesting. I say Denver takes the division. But if they have the same record as Indy (with its 32nd ranked sked), Indy gets the HFA nod. Cincy and NE, both 5-2 but ranked 11 and 12 respectively in DVOA have final schedules ranked 22 and 15, respectively. SO I think CIN will finish ahead of NE. SD is right behind them in DVOA and the eyeball test as well--maybe ahead of NE using the eyeball test, actually.

Safe to say the two Den/KC games and the Indy/Cin and Indy/KC games will have a big impact on the playoff picture. The biggest remaining Pats game is probably Denver, maybe Balt.

18
by dmstorm22 :: Tue, 10/22/2013 - 10:39pm

It could get really messy if 3-4 teams end at 12-4, because then h2h will probably be irrelevant. Cincinnati has an advantage for now having 1 of their 2 losses be to an NFC team. I also think Denver ends up with the division, but KC schedule is just so easy. Obviously, if Denver sweeps they have a clear shot, but anything less and it could be tough.

24
by LionInAZ :: Wed, 10/23/2013 - 12:31am

I'm having trouble understanding why everyone points out KC's easy schedule without noticing that Denver's schedule has been the second-easiest. This should not have been difficult since they play virtually identical schedules.

25
by Perfundle :: Wed, 10/23/2013 - 1:06am

Virtually identical, but not exactly, and that makes a big difference. Denver already lost at Indianapolis, while Kansas City gets them at home. They also play at Buffalo before Manuel returns, while Denver has to go to New England.

27
by Rick S (not verified) :: Wed, 10/23/2013 - 1:28am

I honestly think Denver is going to have to sweep KC to win the division, because the remaining schedule for KC is significantly easier.

42
by BJR :: Wed, 10/23/2013 - 9:38am

Through weeks 1-9 QBs Kansas City have faced/will face are: Gabbert, Romo, Vick, E.Manning, Fitzpatrick, Pryor, Keenum, Weedon, Thad Lewis.

Week 10 is their bye, then they face: P.Manning, Rivers, P.Manning, RG3, Pryor, Luck, Rivers.

Looks to me like it gets a heck of a lot tougher for their defence after week 10.

88
by panthersnbraves :: Wed, 10/23/2013 - 4:51pm

hey! those NFC East QB's are, er, used to be, oh never mind...

28
by td (not verified) :: Wed, 10/23/2013 - 2:23am

Is it really? I think Denver twice, San Diego twice, and Indianapolis is five games against playoff-caliber opponents, and even the games against Washington or Buffalo could be tricky. Not many layups, as I see it

30
by commissionerleaf :: Wed, 10/23/2013 - 2:39am

Kansas City is going to get swept by Denver. They can't score 35 points, which is pretty much the price of admission. SD has a better chance to win a shoot out.

34
by Eggwasp (not verified) :: Wed, 10/23/2013 - 4:22am

Kansas barely beat the Raiders (till Pryor got all rookie-on them in Q4 - with a third string O-line) whereas Denver barely broke-stride. Denver are a significantly better team than Kansas

49
by nathan of brainfertilizer fame (not verified) :: Wed, 10/23/2013 - 10:37am

Get back to me when someone figures out how to beat KC's defense like they have already figured out how to stop Denver's offense.

Also, as the weather gets colder and less pleasant, defenses get stronger whereas high-octane passing offenses sputter and slow down. That includes Denver and Indy.

Not to mention, KC has the pass rush to get anyone (especially Denver's depleted line) and the secondary to play man on even WR corps as deep as Denver's.

Then mix in the Arrowhead advantage, which seems to be back. Pryor's loss of composure didn't happen in a vacuum.

My conclusion is: a home/home split with Denver and a victory over Indy is looking like a good bet.

52
by Aaron Brooks Go... :: Wed, 10/23/2013 - 10:50am

"Get back to me when someone figures out how to beat KC's defense like they have already figured out how to stop Denver's offense."

Wait, what?

They held the Broncos to 33. That would still be the #1 scoring offense and #32 scoring defense. What they did was hold them within 1 SD of league average instead of 2 SDs...

53
by commissionerleaf :: Wed, 10/23/2013 - 10:58am

/agree.

Denver is going to crush Kansas City. A hella good offensive day for KC is 24. A bad offensive day, against a really good defense for Denver is 30. Honestly I am not sure KC doesn't lose to Cleveland this week if there is a squirrelly special teams play or two.

89
by herewegobrowniesherewego (not verified) :: Wed, 10/23/2013 - 6:26pm

Agree on this weekend; it's the trap game/surprise upset of the week if I say so myself; and at least I think the spread (which started at 9 and has converged to 7.5 in places) is too large given the defensive lean of both teams, and given KC's weak schedule so far. Special teams are the wildcard, agreed.

I also think that Campbell may not necessarily be better than Weeden but teams may have forgotten how to defend him/don't have recent film on him, so there will be at least temporary improvement.

100
by ericogg :: Thu, 10/24/2013 - 12:57pm

We should all stop and realize one thing as well: The Chiefs' still have Alex Smith and Andy Reid. Pretty much the butt of all QB and time management jokes since 2005. That has to lose 1 or 2 games this year alone, independent of who they're facing.

97
by 3Monkies (not verified) :: Thu, 10/24/2013 - 12:27pm

That's 33 points scored while comitting 4 turnovers, 3 fumbles (Hillman, Holiday, Manning) and one INT on the road against one of the best teams in the NFL. All of those turnovers resulted in either points for Indy or took points away from Denver.

How many teams could overcome those circumstances and make it close at the end? The biggest concern for Denver going forward isn't their defense, but the injuries on the offensive line. Losing Clady was huge and might have been the difference in the game, as his absence resulted in the biggest play of the game (Mathis strip-sack). Orlando Franklin can't come back soon enough.

54
by Eggwasp (not verified) :: Wed, 10/23/2013 - 11:11am

No Pryors loss of poise didn't happen in a vacuum - it happened in the context of every single expected OL starter (which lets face it, was hardly expected to be the Hogs!) was injured - including the 2nd string C and the third string replacement RT)

73
by Zach (not verified) :: Wed, 10/23/2013 - 1:27pm

In response to commissionerleaf the Chiefs are averaging 24 points a game thats actually an average game for them...... I am in no way saying that the Chiefs offense is stellar or even good but the fact is there is only two AFC teams that are outscoring them right now per game and that is Indianapolis and Denver. I think Denver takes both games personally but lets not completely throw out stats and say 24 is a "hella" good game its actually there seasonal average on the dot. 169/7=24.14

76
by Perfundle :: Wed, 10/23/2013 - 1:33pm

Nope, commissionerleaf is right. The Chiefs as a whole are averaging 24 points a game; their offense is averaging 19 points a game. I don't expect them to maintain a 5/7 non-offensive TD per game average.

58
by Nathan :: Wed, 10/23/2013 - 12:03pm

As a Pats fan, I would love someone to figure out how to stop us to the tune of 33 points.

68
by Bobman :: Wed, 10/23/2013 - 12:51pm

Nathan, Not to sound snarky, but I think you are living in the past when you refer to Indy as having a high-flying passing offense. They run as much as they pass, Luck is middle of the pack for yardage, and Reggie Wayne and last year's top TE are on IR. They are now calling up practice squad WRs.

After watching KC limp by the Texans (led by a rookie QB in his first start) and the Colts handle the Broncos this week, I am quite sure the Broncos will beat KC in Denver, and pretty sure in KC as well. If the Broncos gave the ball away three times in Indy, and Indy gave Manning half his season sacks in ONE GAME and hit him another ten times, and if they got lucky with a handful of his passes fluttering... and he still put up 33 on the road, you have to figure that no matter how good KC's D is, the Broncos are good for 25-30 pts on the road and 35+ at home. Can KC score that much? I an skeptical.

The Indy game is a big one--if Colts still had Wayne, I'd give them a 1 pt edge in KC, 3-4 at home. Without Wayne... I'll have to see how they adapt in a couple weeks. But for the time being, and based on what I saw last Sunday from both teams, I'd call it a toss-up.

74
by Perfundle :: Wed, 10/23/2013 - 1:28pm

I don't see how Kansas City's defense is only 3-8 points better than the Colts. Is pointing out that Indy gave Manning half his season sacks supposed to indicate that it was a fluke occurrence? But Kansas City has the most sacks in the league by far. Also, I don't know about getting lucky with fluttering passes. It seems like Indy's defense forced his passes to be like that, and it's certainly reasonable to expect Kansas City to do the same.

83
by Bobman :: Wed, 10/23/2013 - 2:26pm

KC's D is clearly better than Indy's. But their O is not as good.

Yes, 4 sacks a game is a fluke occurrence for Manning (last happened in 2007 IIRC from the TV graphics) and for the Broncos this year, who averaged less than one sack per game in the first six games. Now the average is 1.3.

Okay, give KC six sacks (4.7 times the average so far seems a bit rich), more or less unheard of for Manning, but who knows? And the same fluttery passes as a result. They hold Den to 25 in KC and 33 in Den.

Will KC score that much? I just don't know.

Two more points: Indy forced 3 fumbles and recovered 2.5 (safety OB is not a recovery, but still points, so I gave them half of a recovery). That is not sustainable for either team (to lose or recover all the fumbles). Will KC recover all the fumbles they force? Will Den's luck regress to the expected center and will THEY recover all the fumbles? Or even just one or two?

The points swing on those fumbles for Indy was 2 for the safety, 7 for the kickoff return (scored on next play from the 11), and 3-7 for the fumble they recovered on their own 3 yard line, or 13-17 pts benefit off those turnovers, for a pretty good offense. If KC doesn't get all those turnovers, and has a less explosive offense, where do their points come from to top the 25+ Den will likely score?

My point was that the Colts got a lot of breaks, held Denver to season lows, and STILL Denver scored 33. If KC plays their usual game on D (holding a record-breaking offense to, say, 20 pts below their season average) but gets ONE LESS break than the Colts (resulting in an additional TD for Den or one less score for KC), Den probably scores 25+ in KC and 30 +/- in Den.

Will KC keep up offensively? They may need a ST TD to win, which can happen.

Denver can also come back to earth offensively with a cluster of 28 pt games, which is still good, but not otherworldly. But as things stand today, I think it's pretty likely that Den scores 25+ in KC and 30+ in Den, and I have not seen that kind of potential from KC's offense. Den's D, which I thought was only giving up garbage time points earlier this year, started to unravel in Dallas, a tiny bit against Jax, and continued against the Colts. So maybe that points to KC scoring 30 on them. Not sure. They should be great games; I hope the Seattle TV stations carry them both somehow, or I'll be stuck watching the Jags play the '82 Colts, or some similar game.

92
by Cythammer (not verified) :: Wed, 10/23/2013 - 7:47pm

The Broncos haven't been all that great the past three weeks. They almost lost to the Cowboys and let the Jaguars hang around. The Chiefs definitely have a shot.

93
by JIPanick :: Wed, 10/23/2013 - 11:07pm

I'm surprised to be saying this, but beating the Cowboys in Dallas is a very solid result.

98
by 3Monkies (not verified) :: Thu, 10/24/2013 - 12:33pm

Dont forget that against Dallas, Denver was missing five defensive starters; including their two best CBs (Bailey, Harris),defensive captain (Woodyard). and best pass rusher (Miller)... and that Dallas has an explosive offense when Romo is hot.

66
by Rick S (not verified) :: Wed, 10/23/2013 - 12:51pm

Big difference between @ Indy and getting them at home. Also a lot easier to go to Buffalo against Thad Lewis, than to go to New England in late November.

To me this feels eerily similar to 1997 if Denver splits with KC
--Denver choked away number 1 seed in big upset the prior year.
--With a KC split and loss to NE, I think Denver chokes away division (just like '97) bc KC good team with easier schedule
--KC is defensive based team that lives off of turnover ratio (both years) that could easily be #1 seed
--37 year old QB maligned for not winning "big one" or enough of them

67
by Rick S (not verified) :: Wed, 10/23/2013 - 12:51pm

Big difference between @ Indy and getting them at home. Also a lot easier to go to Buffalo against Thad Lewis, than to go to New England in late November.

To me this feels eerily similar to 1997 if Denver splits with KC
--Denver choked away number 1 seed in big upset the prior year.
--With a KC split and loss to NE, I think Denver chokes away division (just like '97) bc KC good team with easier schedule
--KC is defensive based team that lives off of turnover ratio (both years) that could easily be #1 seed
--37 year old QB maligned for not winning "big one" or enough of them

69
by Bobman :: Wed, 10/23/2013 - 12:53pm

Not sure those parallels mean much. Moreno sure as hell is not Davis, but the '13 passing attack is much more productive than in '97.

17
by ATL refugee (not verified) :: Tue, 10/22/2013 - 9:32pm

The Falcons are clearly ranked too low because they just won a game with only two good players and a WR who can't walk down an aisle in a supermarket without falling over. An entire offense of nothing but Snovel passes is way better than this. They have a higher DVOA than two teams that they lost to, which converts those losses to wins. Uh, right?

Seriously, the one high note of this season so far has been watching Matt Ryan singlehandedly move an offense with missing or limited receivers, a shockingly inept OL, and constantly bad field position from the sieve-like defense. The only problems are that I don't think the Harry Douglas Show can possibly happen more than once, Jacquizz Rodgers will start getting the Tony Gonzalez treatment where three guys whale on him with lead pipes every time he tries to cross the line of scrimmage, and their red zone offense still looks terrible and mystifying.

21
by Peregrine :: Tue, 10/22/2013 - 11:21pm

After several years of reading FO articles noting how the Falcons have been lucky, I'm waiting for a morsel of a writeup that points out that this year they've been somewhat unlucky. Of course, having watched the defense melt in the last minute of the two awful losses to the Dolphins and Jets, I know there was no unlucky about it.

OL has gotten better, but we are going to miss Julio like crazy.

22
by N8- (not verified) :: Tue, 10/22/2013 - 11:25pm

GB special teams back in familiar territory. GB defense improves(!?!) without Clay Matthews.

39
by Sakic (not verified) :: Wed, 10/23/2013 - 9:29am

And with no Nick Perry or Mike Neal either...only 2 healthy outside linebackers on the entire roster and somehow they are making it work. Hawk has really stepped up his game but a lot of it has to do with the improved defensive line play...the effective return of Johnny Jolley has really allowed the linebacker corps to make some plays.

47
by DisplacedPackerFan :: Wed, 10/23/2013 - 10:12am

No Mike Neal? So who was that guy in the 96 Neal jersey who played 35 defensive snaps (data available here on FO even)? OK that was overly snarky, but Neal played, he had a couple hurries and QB hits. He was still clearly not fully healthy but he played decently.

As to the D in general, you are spot on, the line has been a huge factor. The rotation has worked so well, I don't anyone has played more than 36 snaps on that line since the first (maybe 2nd) week. Against the Browns in was Raji 33, Daniels 31, Pickett 27, Jones 23, Jolly 20, Wilson 9, Boyd 7. The team had 70 defensive snaps. That line stays fresh and they all seem to have pretty well defined packages too, so they can really focus on what they need to do for the situations they are in the game for. Sure they will get "stuck" on the field at times against a hurry up offense, but they are generally well rested.

The secondary is getting better with coverage jobs too. House is finally fully healthy and while Williams will never be the 2010 version of himself he is serviceable. Shields is not being asked to play zone much and his technique is better so he isn't just reliant on his athleticism. Getting Burnett back has helped immensely with cutting down on blown assignments. There is enough depth that the coaches have some additional leverage when a player does poorly too. McMillian got benched for bad play, House has been benched for bad play, Hyde has been benched for bad play and they had to earn their spots back on the field. Hayward is going to come back too.

The first two games of the season (SF and WAS) dug a huge hole for the defense in terms of stats. I don't want to post too much of the premium DB stats, but pass D was 94.1% vs SF and in the 40's vs Was. The only other times they have had positive (bad) defensive DVOA's for either run or pass D was the passing D against Bal was at 19.4% and the run D vs WAS at 2.4%. Otherwise they have had negative defensive DVOA on both phases, and overall negative defensive DVOA in every game except the first 2.

Now they did that vs Dalton (who is erratic at times), Stafford without Calvin Johnson, Baltimore who are decent passing (outside of the Buf game) but can't run the ball at all, and then a Weeden Browns team. So while I'm optimistic it's cautious. I still see the defensive weakness as the linebackers, and the secondary is decent but doesn't seem to have the ball hawking skills the players have shown in the past. They do tackle better this year though. I've seen a lot more wrap up and while they may side down the legs wrapping means they still tend to be able to hold the legs and bring the player down. It might allow a yard or two more, but it has seemed to prevent a lot of the broken tackle 20 - 40 yard plays that were becoming very common.

As long as health holds out on the D line, which seems to be stocked with quite a few above average though not spectacular players, I think the D will continue to improve, in part by getting some players back from injury at other positions, and could very well settle in around a -15 to -20% DVOA. Yes, I do think they have a shot at being a top 5 defense by the end of the season.

51
by Sakic (not verified) :: Wed, 10/23/2013 - 10:42am

My apologies, you were right about Mike Neal playing.

I had heard he hadn't practiced earlier in the week and given his injury history plus the fact that I don't remember hearing his name called I assumed he didn't play. Also, I realized he's still being classified as a defensive lineman (for snap count purposes) and I now think of him more as a hybrid linebacker than a down lineman.

102
by ericogg :: Thu, 10/24/2013 - 1:10pm

My only challenge to the top 5 defense issue is related to Dom Capers' complacency with playing full zone defenses without gaining much pass rush. They're being challenged getting any sort of pressure with 4 guys (where zone is primarily effective).

The good things I've seen is tackling ability and coverage from Lattimore and others. They've done a great job on run defense, but the lack of turnovers is probably due mostly to lack of pressure and excess zone with the QB's having ample time.

They haven't done much in my opinion to change the scheme enough to generate the pass rush. In addition, Capers' has basically been ok with playing zone because no team has been able to really sustain long drives back to back to keep up with the offense. These cover-2 or cover-3 zones are keeping the big plays to a minimum which makes it challenging for teams that are down by 14 or so (which seems to be where most of the games have been with exception of SF and CIN of course).

106
by DisplacedPackerFan :: Fri, 10/25/2013 - 5:01pm

I'm not so sure about that. I think Capers has been better and disguising where the 4 rushers are coming from. They have sent 5 or more rushers less frequently since Matthews got injured based on PFF numbers; 32% of the time after the injury vs 39% before Matthews broke his thumb.

This D is a lot more like what he did in 09 and 10, and got away from in 11 and 12. Since a lot of the pass rush is coming out of the the 2 lineman formations, you often have the 2 linemen, one outside backer and then a middle backer or corner coming. That was Jenkins and Raji usually as the two linemen, when they failed to replace Jenkins Capers couldn't get that to work anymore. While Jones hasn't been getting the sacks like Jenkins did, he pretty much only plays in that spot, and he has been facilitating some of the blitzes working. He sucked up two blockers on one of Hawks untouched sacks.

So with that you have just 4 rushers, the other OLB and MLB are in coverage. If you don't watch the all-22 film you don't notice and it looks like that MLB or CB was a 5th or even a 6th blitzer.

I also don't see a lot of zone after the first two games where they played it nearly exclusively. Shields and the other OCB (House or Williams) are almost always in man. They sometimes have a safety over top and will be playing trail where the TV angles make it look like they were coming over in zone and are handing the receiver off to the safety, but they generally were playing press.

The slot guys and the backers are often in zone but that is one of the base concepts of the defense, regardless of personnel grouping. Outside man with a safety over the top (Collins was great at this and Burnett has been getting better) and then zone in the middle, with the other safety sometimes in man, sometimes over the top, and sometimes just covering a zone, that may or may not overlap with the man coverage the corners have.

As you mentioned Lattimore appears to be able to cover. Jones is OK at too. It's refreshing considering Hawk really isn't good, and neither was Bishop.

Now the pressure isn't great, and the base 3-4 D doesn't seem to generate much, especially without Matthews, while they do get it with just four rushers, it does rely on what feels like trickery at times. But if the D line rotation holds up, both health and player skill wise, things should just keep getting better as the year rolls on.

As to lack of turnovers I think they've dropped as many ints this year as they did all last season. But that is just a feeling I haven't dug for data on it. I hope that Hayward helps with that.

I also hope Williams steps things up a bit more, even if this is his last season (they aren't paying him $10 million next year, they'll pay Shields $6 - 7, and go with Hayward, House, Hyde, and someone from the draft).

26
by PeterJMoss :: Wed, 10/23/2013 - 1:08am

Only defense of the comment regarding the Washington special teams is the lack of touchbacks was due to them doing everything possible to avoid Hester returning anything. Which based on their return coverage is probably smart (they should literally never kick it to anyone under 300lbs)

32
by Scott Crowder (not verified) :: Wed, 10/23/2013 - 4:08am

I find it fascinating that the #2 ranked Wide Receiver per DVOA - Doug Baldwin - is not even an option to vote for in Pro Bowl voting. Seahawk fans know Baldwin is Mr. Clutch and the most valuable receiver on that team. yet, while Denvers three WR's are all on the ballot, only Rice and Tate make the ballot for the Hawks and neither are remotely having as good a season as Baldwin.

36
by Aze (not verified) :: Wed, 10/23/2013 - 8:50am

Interesting goings-ons in the AFC East. New England went up with a loss, Miami went up with a loss. The Jets went up with a win. Buffalo went down with a win.

40
by Mike B. In Va :: Wed, 10/23/2013 - 9:31am

Buffalo went down with a "our offense was terrible but the 'Fins kept handing us the ball" win. Feels like a legit drop to me.

43
by Anonymous7676767 (not verified) :: Wed, 10/23/2013 - 9:38am

Imagine what the Patriot's special teams would be if they didn't have LeGarrette Blount taking the ball to Le16yard line on every Lekickoff. You would think they could just get some one else to cacth and kneel 7 times a game. He lesucks.

57
by EricL :: Wed, 10/23/2013 - 11:54am

This raises a question that's been going through my head for a little while now, and this seems as good as any place to raise it.

Why do returners get _credited_ for yards when the return the ball out of the end zone and don't make it back to the 20? Also, why catching the ball 2 yards deep in the end zone and making it to the 18 and catching it 9 yards deep and making it to the 18 result in different amounts of return yardage doesn't really make sense, either. I can see the logic in calling it an 18-yard return, but the guy should be credited -2 yards.

Calling the last example a 27-yard return is just stupid.

59
by Nathan :: Wed, 10/23/2013 - 12:05pm

This is a great point.

64
by Revenge of the NURBS (not verified) :: Wed, 10/23/2013 - 12:47pm

Quite so, and I've always thought the same thing. Returning a kick out of the endzone and coming up short of the 20 is a failure, plain and simple. Considering that the 20 is being offered FOR FREE, bringing it back to the 21 is a gain of 1 yard, not 21, and certainly not 29 or 30 depending on how deep in the endzone you caught it. I'd argue that you need to get to maybe the 25 just to justify the additional risk of penalties and injuries being incurred by bringing it out.

91
by MJK :: Wed, 10/23/2013 - 7:40pm

Alternately, you could just credit any returner that chooses a touchback with a 20 yard return...

I sometimes wonder of the CFL rule would make things more interesting... kneeling to take the touchback gives the opposing team 1 point... You'd have to move kickoffs back, though. There are too many kickers these days that can boom the kickoff out of the back of the endzone.

Also, the NFL would never do it, since it would encourage more returns, which they're trying to discourage.

60
by Nathan :: Wed, 10/23/2013 - 12:06pm

I offered my circle of Pats fans friends $100 to anyone who could explain Blount returning kickoffs. Nobody has stepped up to claim the prize.

61
by Anonymouse (not verified) :: Wed, 10/23/2013 - 12:33pm

BB doesn't want to injure any actually valuable players returning kicks?

62
by MilkmanDanimal :: Wed, 10/23/2013 - 12:34pm

Bucs fans couldn't understand why anyone, particularly a pass-heavy team like the Patriots, would trade for the guy in the first place; he was patently awful as a runner last year, and he's abysmal in pass protection. Then they started using him as a kick returner, and I started wondering if it was all some bizarre performance-art piece by Belichik about the futility of man's existence or something.

Don't get it at all.

65
by quy (not verified) :: Wed, 10/23/2013 - 12:49pm

I really like what you guys are up too. Such clever work and coverage! Keep up the superb works guys I've you guys to blogroll. buying instagram followers provides quality social services. it is possible to buy followers on instagram. Insta Portfolio Pro | Instant Site Wizard | Spin Rewriter 4.0 | FB Objective | FB Objective | FB Cash Study | Webinar Alchemy | Covert Store Builder | Insta Portfolio Pro

70
by Bobman :: Wed, 10/23/2013 - 12:56pm

Excellent point! Do you have a brochure or something you can send us?

104
by Bay Area Bengal (not verified) :: Fri, 10/25/2013 - 2:35pm

Just click on the links to learn more, Bobman! It's easy.

Now if only I could figure out how to make $10,000 A MONTH as a stay-at-home mom ...

105
by Insancipitory :: Fri, 10/25/2013 - 2:41pm

I heard there's a Breaking Bad spinoff on the DIY network that covers this.

77
by Shattenjager :: Wed, 10/23/2013 - 1:34pm

"[I]t was all some bizarre performance-art piece by Belichik about the futility of man's existence[.]"

Sounds to me like you do get it . . .

45
by hrudey (not verified) :: Wed, 10/23/2013 - 9:44am

Jacksonville is clearly ranked too high because they got pushed up one spot by Grambling State refusing to play. Ranking the teams by their coach's performance at the Carson Palmer Cornhole Classic is way better than this. Adam Vinatieri has scored more points in Jacksonville in one game than the Jaguars as a team have in three home games.

48
by BJR :: Wed, 10/23/2013 - 10:26am

Nice effort, but the final sentence is far too relevant and coherent.

72
by bravehoptoad :: Wed, 10/23/2013 - 1:19pm

I like the way these have become their own form of poetry. FO's version of haiku.

79
by Vince Verhei :: Wed, 10/23/2013 - 1:44pm

The Grambling line was an excellent touch.

50
by usernaim250 :: Wed, 10/23/2013 - 10:41am

As a Redskins fan I'm encouraged. Hadn't thought about how tough their schedule was -- especially for them with their incredibly challenged pass defense. Now, they are still pretty bad, but after Denver this week likely drops them to 2-5, their past sched will stand around 11.5 and their future at .5. You can imagine them sweeping the four games in their division schedule, beating MIN, and winning two of San Diego at home at 1:00, @Atl, home against KC and, SF. It's more likely that they split their remaining games to end 7-9, but 9-7 wouldn't be absurd, and winning the division there wouldn't be impossible. So the season isn't QUITE over yet.

Special teams are likely to improve. Griffin seems to be getting a bit better (not as much as others have claimed, but better) and it is possible he will improve further. Haslett did switch gears a bit last year and the defense improved substantially during their win streak, so that's possible too.

Or Griffin could go down (or just continue to function as a pro-level passer only off play action), special teams could cost games, another injury or two could deplete the OL, etc. Solace is that the Giants have a far bigger problem--they can't block anyone.

63
by Revenge of the NURBS (not verified) :: Wed, 10/23/2013 - 12:35pm

I'm not sure about encouraged. Their SOS is about to get easier, but their DVOA says they've been playing bad even after accounting for the opposition.

Still, it's true that no one seems willing/able to seize control of that division. That fact alone will probably keep WAS in the playoff hunt into December.

55
by Gaucho (not verified) :: Wed, 10/23/2013 - 11:26am

The NY Giants is clearly ranked too low because we just DESTROYED THE ALL-MIGHTY VIKINGS! My own point-of-view as a passionate and blind fan is way better than this. NO ONE CAN SOTP US! WE ARE GNOIG TO WIN THE NFC ESAT! WCATH OUT, BHOYZ, BYRDZ AND PYGHZ!!

84
by Other Dean (not verified) :: Wed, 10/23/2013 - 2:33pm

Well done, except too many words are spelled correctly.

85
by Bobman :: Wed, 10/23/2013 - 2:41pm

I have a question about the Playoff Odds page.

The mean wins records indicate that in the AFC Den is likely to get the #1 seed with 12.5 wins, and the Colts with 11 wins SHOULD have the #2 (since KC cannot despite 12.3 projected wins), but Cin (at 10.8 wins) have a higher probability of securing #2. Does that mean that in the 50k simulations, Cin beat Ind more often? So that even with essentially the same record, Cin gets the nod for #2 by a 32.5 : 29.5 ratio? That's how I read it. Or maybe it's a better conf record, since Indy's two toughest games are Cin and KC, plus maybe a loss to Ten or Hou.... and Cin already has a leg up on them with conf record. But of course, the H2H tiebreaker comes before conf record.

Hmmm, things to wonder about while not working in the office during a bye week. Oh, hey, it's almost lunch time!

In NFC, NO really only projects out to 10.6 wins despite currently being 5-1? Wow, I can't quite picture them finishing out 5-5 or 6-4; they look pretty complete, play in a dome, and have the Bucs and injury-riddled Falcons in their division. I guess that future sked is pretty challenging.

90
by JIPanick :: Wed, 10/23/2013 - 6:44pm

I'd hazard a guess that the apparent discrepancy is caused by the Bengals being favored for the H2H tiebreaker, based on the Colts/Bengals game being in Cincy.

94
by commissionerleaf :: Thu, 10/24/2013 - 12:08am

The Bengals are clearly ranked too high because Andy Dalton's arm is Al Dente about is time in the season, and will soon get wiggly. Ranking teams based on total weight is way better than this. U can stop the Bengals just by dabble covering their one trick pony and showing their cornerbakcs old Cowboys games.

96
by Jerry :: Thu, 10/24/2013 - 3:20am

Not arguing with Aaron, but this column sings Lawrence Timmons' praises, noting that of the 17 tackles he was officially credited with (20 according to the coaches' film breakdown), 6 came after he broke his hand in the fourth quarter.

101
by Dawn (not verified) :: Thu, 10/24/2013 - 1:09pm

Thanks for your work... I just want to be sure I understand what each of the column heading abbreviations are for in the first DVOA table you have on this page.

S.T. DVOA | S.T. RANK

Can you please explain what those columns are?

103
by Vince Verhei :: Thu, 10/24/2013 - 1:21pm

Special Teams DVOA, and rank in Special Teams DVOA. New England has the best special teams in the league (1), Washington the worst (32).

107
by Mike B. In Va :: Fri, 10/25/2013 - 11:36pm

Which,of course, brings with it the question of exactly how the heck New England is #1 with the aforementioned Mr. Blount "returning" kicks?

108
by tuluse :: Sat, 10/26/2013 - 12:03am

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/teamst

Their return teams kind of suck, but their coverage and kicking makes them the best.

109
by Kizi 4 (not verified) :: Mon, 10/28/2013 - 9:17am

useful information and complete, thank you for sharing your

110
by Yepi 3 (not verified) :: Mon, 10/28/2013 - 9:20am

I am always satisfied with the information that you provide, thanks

111
by Gazo 3 (not verified) :: Mon, 10/28/2013 - 9:21am

good luck, thanks for share

112
by v (not verified) :: Mon, 01/13/2014 - 11:30am

3. dollar, heavy QE in Japan, and the (since February) depreciating Euro, international exposure, despite larger markets, will hurt revenues. Michael Kors, in 2013, only generated 6.1% of its sales from Europe and 1.3% in Japan. Ralph Lauren generates 37% of its revenues outside of North America, which makes it much more susceptible to currency shocks. Specifically, 21% of sales are from Europe, and 12% from Asia. Coach is even more susceptible to currency shocks, with 48% of sales coming from international regions, particularly China and Japan. Coach's first quarter 2013 earnings showed a 40% increase in sales in China. However, currency exposures may give Coach a boost as the Yuan appreciates against the USD. Finally, Estee Lauder generates 37% of its sales from Europe, the Middle East, and Africa, and 21% from Asia. Similar to RL, EL may be hit hard with the depreciating Euro and appreciating USD. Thus, KORS, which has the least international exposure, will likely be less affected by currency shocks. RL and EL will suffer from the depreciating Euro, while COH may gain due to the appreciating Yuan.
v

113
by louis vuitton solglas (not verified) :: Mon, 01/13/2014 - 11:46am

and the indulgence to allow the bible in private houses in 1539. With regard to the first, by adopting the three creeds and the first four general councils, they admitted the doctrines of the Catholic church, for Catholics believe novmore now than the fathers of the councils believed then. Of baptism there is no difference in the belief, and with regard to penance we have the Catholic doctrine at once confirmed. We have confession to the priest taught as neDiscount Oakley Sunglassescessary to salvation, then we have contrition, and satisfaction by the external works of charity; all which are considered as essentially necessary acts of the sacraments of penance. As to the eucharist, or sacrament of the altar, the real presence is most distinctly admitted, and, observe reader, Tom Cranmer, though, he rejected this doctrine in his heart, yet he nevertheless sub an injunction is attached that the people ought to be taught to avoid superstition.and Chairman CEO of Donna Karan International NEW YORK New York, state, United States New York, Middle Atlantic state of the United States.
louis vuitton solglas

114
by louis vuitton resv (not verified) :: Mon, 01/13/2014 - 1:18pm

In this article, we evaluate the opportunities in the Chinese luxury market, current trends driving demand and potential risks that could impact the retailer's growth rate in the region. We all must set our own target beyond reach so that individuals will try harder. Furthermore, the accent color to wear for summer is a purple shade, whether plum or fuchsia. Never let greasy fingers, a perfect manicure, or warm woolly gloves get between you and your iPad again. It should not be used as a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. If a bad group of smells come off your skin layer it could turn out really bad and you wont smell what sort of perfume does when considering out the bottle. By shopping around it is entirely possible you can get a very inexpensive price and maybe a great offer on delivery. Nevertheless, there are a host of courses available in the galore of learning centres. When it comes to auto detailing and car washing industry, pressure washing machines for use commercially are a good pick and its possible to find a wide range of different technologies and configurations.
louis vuitton resv

115
by louis vuitton v (not verified) :: Wed, 01/15/2014 - 1:32am

The SFC was concerned that ArcelorMittal had been acting in concert with Mr Han for months and was, therefore, obliged to make a general offer for minorities' 27 per cent interest in China Oriental. It referred the matter to the territory's seldomconvened Takeovers Panel, which could not care less about ArcelorMittal's delicate regulatory dance north of the border, and duly forced the company to make an unconditional general offer to China Oriental's Hong Kong minorities. So while awaiting Chinese government approval to take a controlling 73 per cent interest in China Oriental, ArcelorMittal is also proceeding with another deal that would give it an equally controlling 55 per cent of the company. No word back yet from China's regulators, who have a month to rule. Leslie Van sometimes takes with him on his travels a James Bondstyle attach case with a foam interior, moulded to accommodate his weapons. In place of 007's Walther PPK and accessories, the chief executive of Rexam packs an array of the company's products hightech perfume, cosmetic and beverage dispensers that Q himself would be happy to have designed.
louis vuitton v