Word of Muth breaks down film of Alex Gibbs coaching and speaking over a cut-up tape. Find out the secrets of the man who's built big seasons for everyone from Terrell Davis to Warrick Dunn.
12 Sep 2007
by Bill Barnwell
| SCRAMBLE FOR THE BALL SPONSOR |
| Attention Football Outsiders Readers: Get a free week of winning NFL picks from Doc’s Sports Handicapping Service. You will receive the same picks Doc’s paying members receive from all 5 handicappers on their “Advisory Board”; and there is absolutely NO OBLIGATION what so ever for this offer. Call 1-866-238-6696 or email service@docsports.com with “Free Football Outsider” in the subject line. |
Chris Brown's 175-yard day in Week 1 against the previously-stifling Jacksonville run defense represents the latest in a history of great Week 1 performances leading to breakout years. Storied in the halls of ESPN's Fantasy Football Hall of Fame are the great beginnings experienced by guys like Kevin Dyson in 1999, Cade McNown in 2000 and Quincy Morgan in 2002, the first evidences of breakout years by the stars of the early 21st cent...
Wait. You mean those guys didn't have breakout years? And ESPN stole that idea from ... Hey, one thing at a time here, buddy. You're blowing my mind.
OK, so maybe Week 1 isn't always an indicator of a breakout year. Declaring that great first weeks are overrated is low-hanging fruit, but if you'll just join me in reaching slightly higher up, we can find some more interesting things as a team. Namely, does a great Week 1 mean anything for the rest of the season?
I took the 65 best performances in Week 1, as judged by fantasy points in a standard league, from 1995-2006. The cutoff that made 65 was to include everyone who'd scored 30 or more fantasy points. Anquan Boldin was thrown out for being a rookie and having no history, as were Daunte Culpepper and Rob Johnson (who were basically rookies). The test: To see what, exactly, a big Week 1 means for the rest of the season.
The short answer? Not that much. The players' huge Week 1's, on average, netted them 33.8 fantasy points -- that's the equivalent of a 150-yard, three-touchdown game for a running back. In other words, unless your quarterback was Drew Brees, having a guy with that sort of numbers is going to win you the week in most fantasy leagues. Chris Brown actually only pulled out a 17, but that was because he didn't score any touchdowns.
The 65 players averaged 11.8 fantasy points per week the year before -- that includes guys like 2002 Priest Holmes, who averaged 26.6 points per game, and guys like 1998 Richard Huntley, who averaged two. Not including their Week 1 heroics, those 65 players averaged 12.8 fantasy points over Weeks 2-17. In other words, the differences in performance are negligible and Week 1 isn't a predictor of much of anything for the rest of the season.
On the other hand, there are some great Week 1's in history we can look back at together. The best of and a forgotten star for each year:
![]() |
| Check out the Football Outsiders comics archive and Jason’s wacky Gil Thorp blog. |
Ah, the smell of a fresh season of Losers. Since I knew you'd ask, the worst Week 1 in the last twelve years? Jon Kitna's 2000: 6-of-13 for 54 yards and four interceptions. That's good for -4.8 fantasy points; the worst game altogether was, actually, by our patron saint, Rex Grossman, against the Vikings last year. He had -5.2 points; his Week 17 performance against the Vikings was a relatively strong -4.5.
Quarterbacks: Welcome back, Charlie Frye! By the time this column had been written, you and your -1 were dealt elsewhere, so any teams that benefited from this performance will be suffering penalties from you for the rest of your short career. Steve McNair's injury-aided disaster of a performance against the Bengals earned him a 2. I think he overthrew Derrick Mason by about two person-lengths at one point.
Running Backs: Steven Jackson got off to a slow start last year, but he got off to an even slower one this year. He had a 1, and with Orlando Pace gone for the year, his viability as an elite running back has to come into question. Jamal Lewis, whose viability as an elite running back is certainly not in question, only mustered a 2 against a good Steelers rush defense that had 28 points or so on the Browns. A bunch of players all had threes, most notably both Reggie Bush and Deuce McAllister.
Wide Receiver: Sometimes, I wonder whether the 0.0 is even more impressive than negative numbers. There's something so stark about just being absolutely useless for a week. Lee Evans, if he's a Scramble reader, is also contemplating this at the moment. Lee, if you are reading, you're better than that. Peerless Price, maybe not so much. Eight players had a lone point. Two of them, Troy Williamson and Sidney Rice, were Vikings. I suspect we'll be seeing them more in this spot as the year goes along.
Kicker: Oh, it's a great way to start the season when you've got Sebastian Janikowski in your sights. Seabass wins the Losingest Loser of the Week this week with a -3. Don't miss three field goals. Nate Kaeding put up the ol' goose-egg.
2-1 last week
Ah, a solid start to the campaign. Of course, I bet on Jacksonville, which was foolish, and even picked them in a survival pool, which was even more foolish. My own fault, really. No video games this week, unfortunately.
Kansas City's down to bare bones at this point, and I'm not really sure Vegas has caught up to how bad they are yet.
A couple of sites have actually taken this line off the board with the injury issues in New York. I know the Giants are at home, but they're decimated by injury and up against a Packers team the projection system believes is underrated and breaking out upon the league, particularly defensively.
Boy, Indianapolis looked good last week. They've also been gotten off to a great start each of the last two years, and I have no qualms about betting against Tennessee.
44 comments, Last at 18 Sep 2007, 3:48am by Sid
Comments
Jamal Lewis, who’s viability as an elite running back is certainly not in question
Except by practically every other writer on this site!
The Chiefs are really bad, but laying 13 points with the Bears O is definately a gutsy pick.
If that line for the Packers/Giants game can still be found anywhere, I have to imagine everyone should jump at that chance.
1: I believe that what he means is that an answer has been returned. It was no.
2: The Bears D can score 13 points on their own.
Of course, I bet on Jacksonville, which was foolish, and even picked them in a survival pool, which was even more foolish.
I feel your pain.
I think you mean 1995, not 2005 for Herman Moore's prime.
I remember 1997 fondly. I traded Tim Brown away for Natrone Means and Keyshawn Johnson. Just after I picked up a relative unknown Rod Smith off the waiver wire. Of course, today, a player like Rod Smith '97 wouldn't even be a free agent to begin with.
#3 that was my take as well.
What's with Goodell as a drag queen? Not that there's anything wrong with that....
One other complaint - McAllister, McAllister, McAllister! Not McCallister. Granted, I used to complain to my fantasy commish about his spelling of Deuce's last name as well.
Doh. Fixed. And #3/#7 are right.
Is that Chiefs - Browns game with the ridiculous numbers for Priest and Morgan also the infamous Dwayne Rudd helmet throwing game?
No mention of one and done Medlock? And to think, I even considered naming my loser league team The Medlock Expressway. Now a lot of owners are holding out hope that the Chiefs will be bad enough to not attempt an XP or FG.
Agree with your picks this week. Green Bay and Chicago I like a lot ATS.
Except by practically every other writer on this site!
this is clearly a riff on the DJ Gallo ESPN "conversation" board... and a finely played one as well.
or at least that's what his defense should be!
Ladbrokes are currently paying 1.83 times your money for GB +1.5...
Also, while offtopic, bet hard on the US vs Sweden in the Ladies' Soccer World Cup! 1.57 is a gift...
Frisman Jackson, anyone?
I'm a Texans fan. I watched KC@HOU in its entirety, and believe me when I tell you that that scoreline was not the result of the Texans having suddenly become a good team. The Chiefs have a reasonable pass rush, but other than that they do no in any way resemble an NFL team. There are few teams in the league that I would not believe merit a 13 point handicap against the Chiefs and the Bears certainly aren't one of them. The '07 Chiefs are worse than the '06 Raiders. If it would ever be possible to say the DVOA projection system whiffed because it said a team would merely be the worst in football, the Chiefs are that team. They suck.
Rex's -4.5 must have been against the Packers, not the Vikes, if it was on Week 17. Remember, the game he didn't fancy preparing for?
And I think the Giants can beat Green Bay. The way the Packers' offensive line played Sunday, Michael Strahan ought to get a real sack on Favre, crocked or no.
You're absolutely crazy giving any team playing the Bears 13 points. That'd be like taking the Jaguars in a suicide pool AND giving the opponent 13 points.
The only way the Bears create a 13 point gap over a team as ludicrously boring as the Chiefs is if they start assigning negative point values for ridiculously bad drives (although that will leave both teams solidly below 0).
By the way, the Bears are now on a pretty extended string of unimpressive performances. In their last 7 games, they go 34-31 over Tampa (#31 DVOA), 26-21 over Detroit (#27 DVOA), lose 26-7 to G.B. (#15 DVOA), OT victory over Seattle (#25 DVOA), impressive victory over Saints, humiliating Super Bowl loss to Colts, humiliating season debut against S.D.
F.O. is quick to point out that stomps tend to tell you more than guts, and the Bears have currently been gutting out games against bottom feeders and getting stomped by quality opponents.
I swear this has nothing to do with the disagreements that Bill and I have had in the past, but I liked the back and forth that Scramble had in prior years more than one voice.
Is there a search for another partner going on right now?
16 --
If you are right about the Chiefs (and I have little reason to think that you are not), just imagine the special fondness that we may well develop for the HBO series in reruns for years to come.
18: There's a common thread in all of those except the SD game (where they pretty well held one of the better offenses in check) -- Tommie Harris didn't play in any of those other games. And he is the single most important player on the Bears, even more than Urlacher I believe. The Bears allowed far more points per game after his injury.
The Bears with Harris regularly blew out bad teams last year, unless the bad team had a good defense, or at least a good pass rush. The Chiefs don't.
My first top 20 finish in three years and the Browns have to screw up the rest of the season for me. Crap, crap and double crap.
I'm a Seahawks fan so I'll concede that I'm biased, but right now I'm eying the (-3) line against Arizona like a juicy steak.
So Bill, are you going to own up to "you should start Alex Smith over Carson Palmer in Week 1", or should we pretend that never happened?
#24 - I'll cover it in my Rotoworld column this week.
I do believe my KC Under 7.5 wins bet in Vegas will actually be redeemable after last week. If that bet was still up, would it be like -400?
I'm a Colts fan, but I don't like that -7.5 versus the Titans. The Titans held the Colts to 14 and 17 points last year...
#10 - Yes, the Chiefs - Browns game with the ridiculous numbers for Priest and Morgan was also the infamous Dwayne Rudd helmet throwing game.
If only the Browns could be mediocre like that again someday...
And the Titans last year had Pacman Jones, where the Titans this year have Nick "Not-Quite-As-Bad-As-Jason-David" Harper. Ask the Saints how that whole CB-who-knows-the-Colts-offense-inside-out thing worked for them last week. Ugoh will undoubtedly struggle with Vanden Bosch, but the Titans have no passing game, the Colts run defense looks much improved, and Peyton remains Peyton. And I'm a Texans fan, so I hate both teams.
#29 is in response to #27, obviously.
#27 and #29
I'm with Ben on this one (being a self-avowed Titans fan). The Titans held Indy to 14 and 17 not by the virtue of Pacman alone ... Indy has way too many weapons for 1 cornerback to handle. Even with an improved run defense Indy's DL is no match for Titans OL.
That said Peyton is Peyton and will keep Indy ahead. I anticipate TN to cover the spread.
But losing Pacman doesn't just affect the coverage of the man that would have been his. The Titans won't be able to give as much safety help to the guy on the other side, because they'll have to give more to Harper. The safeties will have to play deep coverage more often, harming the run defense (though I imagine they generally play pretty deep against the Colts anyway, for obvious reasons). They won't be able to leave Harper on an island when they blitz, which reduces the range of playcalling options. There's a reason why losing a top corner is more damaging than losing a top player at almost any other position, and why elite corners are paid an absolute fortune. And they'll also miss his punt returns against the heinous Colts coverage units.
Last year the Titans didn't call many blitzes anyways. I would still look for Schwartz to play his safeties deep as a carryover from last year's schemes. It may not be Reggie or Marvin hurting the Titans most tomorrow; nor do I anticipate Addai to run miracles against the Titans revamped DL. My money is on Dallas Clark being a disruptive force with his seam routes.
Punt returns is an altogether different chapter - Pacman is being missed already.
*shakes head*
Isn't this conventional knowledge yet? Don't bet against Vince Young.
I seem to remember Kevin Walter having a monster week one for Cincy about two years ago.
dryheat, in the context of Kevin Walter, you are correct: four catches, 47 yards, one TD (his only career TD), Week one 2005 vs. Cleveland.
Re: myself in #14
Hope you followed my advice above, that was money in the bank ;)
A little help with My QB decision:
I have D McNabb against Washington,
M Hasselback at Arizona,
or Favre against the non existent Giants secondary
re 38: I would start Favre without hesitation.
Re: 38
Only problem with that is you also get the GB offensive line and WRs with Favre.... I'd go Hasselback.
I need a flex out of the following (PPR league, otherwise standard points):
Branch @ Ari; Fred Taylor vs. Atl; Norwood at Jax; Betts @ Phi; Curtis @ Was
I was thinking Branch - he can't have two crap games in a row, right?
Thoughts?
Re: Week 1 performances
Anquan Boldin (2003) - 10 receptions, 217 yards, 2 TD's. Greatest debut by a WR ever?
That is all.
St. Louis plays without offensive linemen Orlando Pace and Richie Incognito. Signed the woeful Brandon Gorin (cut by AZ at beginning of last season despite AZ being desperate for linemen) to fill in for Pace. Take SF and the 3 points in St. Louis. Big day for the SF 3-4 vs shakey STL offensive line.
RE: 23
I’m a Seahawks fan so I’ll concede that I’m biased, but right now I’m eying the (-3) line against Arizona like a juicy steak.
Silly man. NFC West = always bet the home team.
That's my policy. Occasionally I'll get one wrong (Rams = fail), but it works very well for me, especially in games like this one.