DVOA Analysis
Football Outsiders' revolutionary metrics that break down every single play of the NFL season

Week 16 DVOA Ratings

Week 16 DVOA Ratings
Photo: USA Today Sports Images

by Aaron Schatz

Despite a loss to the Seattle Seahawks on Sunday night, the Kansas City Chiefs remain on top of the Football Outsiders DVOA ratings. And for a day there, it looked like we were going to have a new team on top of the weighted DVOA ratings. New Orleans moved slightly past Kansas City after Sunday night's game. But when Monday night's game between Oakland and Denver changed various opponent adjustments, that moved the Chiefs slightly ahead of the Saints yet again, 30.1% to 29.9%.

The top four teams in full-season DVOA remain the same as last week. Baltimore moves up a spot to No. 5, passing Chicago. Denver is the big loser this week, dropping from No. 7 to No. 12. Remember back after Week 10, Denver was sitting at 3-6 but ranked ninth in DVOA because of a very difficult schedule. Then the Broncos had three wins including over the top ten Chargers and Steelers, where they played fantastic. And now they've lost three straight, and they've been horrible.

Weeks OFF  Rk DEF Rk
Weeks 1-10 3.2% 12 -8.4% 5
Weeks 11-13 27.9% 4 -21.4% 6
Weeks 14-16 -24.1% 29 1.0% 20

Denver is certainly one team where DVOA still differs from conventional wisdom, and recent performance has a lot to do with it. In fact, recent performance has a lot to do with a lot of the differences between DVOA and conventional wisdom. Remember, full-season DVOA is looking at the entire season, going all the way back to Week 1. As we add more games on to the season, each individual game becomes less important, so the week-to-week changes become smaller.

I ran a table of team performance only since Week 11, the last six weeks, for this week's Any Given Sunday column. The Baltimore Ravens, now known as "the team nobody wants to play in the playoffs," were No. 2 over that period. And the New Orleans Saints, the current Super Bowl favorite -- they're our Super Bowl favorite as well because of how the seeding fell -- are the No. 1 team over the last six weeks.

With a look at only the last six weeks, you also see how hot Indianapolis and Cleveland are, not to mention the New York Giants. Wait, the Giants? Yes, DVOA loves the Giants since Week 11 even though they are just 3-3 in that time. This table also shows each team's DVOA from Week 1-10 for comparison purposes, which helps you see the late-season collapses from Pittsburgh and Carolina.

TEAM
WK 11-16
OFFENSE
DVOA
Rk DEFENSE
DVOA
Rk S.T.
DVOA
Rk TOTAL
DVOA
Rk TOTAL
DVOA
WK 1-10
Rk
NO 4.1% 11 -23.2% 3 1.8% 16 29.1% 1 19.2% 6
BAL -5.3% 22 -26.1% 2 8.0% 4 28.9% 2 11.9% 7
IND 11.7% 6 -14.8% 5 1.5% 18 28.0% 3 -1.4% 16
CLE 25.0% 2 -2.3% 14 -1.2% 24 26.1% 4 -16.3% 25
LAC 16.9% 5 -2.2% 15 2.7% 12 21.8% 5 24.4% 3
KC 27.7% 1 10.0% 28 3.2% 9 20.9% 6 39.0% 1
MIN 0.4% 14 -15.9% 4 1.7% 17 17.9% 7 1.3% 14
NYG 3.6% 12 -4.2% 11 9.7% 2 17.5% 8 -12.9% 24
NE 18.2% 4 5.3% 22 1.9% 15 14.7% 9 8.9% 10
CHI -19.8% 29 -30.4% 1 2.4% 13 13.0% 10 20.6% 5
LAR 6.6% 9 -3.0% 13 -0.2% 22 9.5% 11 29.7% 2
SEA 11.1% 7 4.1% 20 -0.8% 23 6.2% 12 9.8% 8
TB 10.2% 8 0.6% 16 -3.5% 28 6.1% 13 -25.8% 28
DEN -1.8% 16 -11.0% 8 -3.5% 27 5.7% 14 7.1% 13
ATL -3.4% 20 -6.0% 10 2.9% 11 5.6% 15 -9.3% 22
DAL -10.8% 27 -13.5% 7 1.2% 19 3.9% 16 -12.3% 23
NYJ -2.5% 19 11.2% 29 15.9% 1 2.2% 17 -18.0% 26
HOU -1.3% 15 3.9% 18 5.6% 7 0.3% 18 8.0% 12
OAK 1.1% 13 4.0% 19 2.1% 14 -0.8% 19 -29.3% 31
GB 18.6% 3 19.2% 32 -3.5% 29 -4.1% 20 8.0% 11
PHI -2.3% 18 5.5% 23 3.5% 8 -4.4% 21 -2.4% 17
JAX -27.9% 30 -13.8% 6 9.1% 3 -5.0% 22 -4.3% 18
PIT 6.6% 10 4.9% 21 -7.3% 30 -5.6% 23 21.5% 4
TEN -2.2% 17 2.2% 17 -2.0% 25 -6.5% 24 -1.4% 15
BUF -9.0% 25 -7.5% 9 -10.5% 32 -11.9% 25 -27.7% 30
DET -8.9% 24 6.3% 25 0.7% 21 -14.5% 26 -27.2% 29
CIN -7.8% 23 14.4% 31 7.4% 5 -14.8% 27 -6.5% 20
SF -14.3% 28 8.0% 27 6.3% 6 -16.0% 28 -21.3% 27
CAR -10.1% 26 6.2% 24 -2.8% 26 -19.0% 29 9.6% 9
MIA -3.7% 21 7.5% 26 -10.1% 31 -21.3% 30 -7.8% 21
WAS -37.6% 31 -4.0% 12 3.0% 10 -30.6% 31 -4.9% 19
ARI -48.6% 32 12.9% 30 0.9% 20 -60.6% 32 -32.4% 32

Did you notice how bad Arizona has been the last six weeks? Nearly twice as bad as any other team. The Cardinals are down this week to the third worst offense in DVOA history, and the Chiefs are up to the fourth best offense:

BEST OFFENSIVE DVOA
THROUGH 15 GAMES, 1986-2018
  WORST OFFENSIVE DVOA
THROUGH 15 GAMES, 1986-2018
Year Team DVOA x Year Team DVOA
2007 NE 42.7% x 2002 HOU -44.6%
2010 NE 41.3% x 1992 SEA -44.1%
2002 KC 37.5% x 2018 ARI -41.6%
2018 KC 35.0% x 2005 SF -41.5%
2004 IND 33.6% x 2010 CAR -36.8%
2011 NE 32.4% x 2004 CHI -36.6%
2004 KC 32.3% x 1997 NO -36.1%
2003 KC 32.1% x 2006 OAK -35.6%
2011 GB 31.9% x 2016 LAR -34.2%
1998 DEN 31.9% x 2010 ARI -33.5%
2011 NO 31.8% x 2008 STL -32.0%
2013 DEN 31.7% x 1991 IND -31.8%

If you've been tracking these tables each week over the course of the season, you'll notice that a lot of the best offenses in DVOA history had bad games in Week 16. (For the 1988 Bengals, that's Week 15, when they lost to Houston 41-6.) Last week, we showed a dozen offenses with offensive DVOA over 33% through 14 games. This week, you'll notice there are only five such offenses through 15 games. And the Kansas City Chiefs are one of them, with their rating only dropping slightly after putting up 21.5% offensive DVOA against the Seahawks this week. The Chiefs have yet to put up a single game this year with a below-average offensive DVOA.

And, on the flip side, the Arizona Cardinals have put up only one game all season with an above-average offensive DVOA. And it's not above average by very much. After changing opponent adjustments this week, Arizona's offensive DVOA for Week 5's 28-18 win over San Francisco is 0.0016%.

* * * * *

Playoff odds are currently updated through Week 16, as well as the FO Premium DVOA database. Snap counts should be updated later this evening.

* * * * *

These are the Football Outsiders team efficiency ratings through 16 weeks of 2018, 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 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. As always, positive numbers represent more points so DEFENSE is better when it is NEGATIVE.

WEIGHTED DVOA represents an attempt to figure out how a team is playing right now, as opposed to over the season as a whole, by making recent games more important than earlier games.

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>

RK TEAM TOTAL
DVOA
LAST
WEEK
WEI.
DVOA
RANK W-L OFFENSE
DVOA
OFF.
RANK
DEFENSE
DVOA
DEF.
RANK
S.T.
DVOA
S.T.
RANK
1 KC 32.2% 1 30.1% 1 11-4 35.0% 1 9.2% 27 6.4% 2
2 LAC 23.7% 2 26.2% 3 11-4 22.1% 3 -5.3% 8 -3.7% 26
3 NO 23.6% 3 29.9% 2 13-2 17.2% 4 -4.6% 10 1.8% 9
4 LAR 22.8% 4 16.1% 7 12-3 23.5% 2 0.7% 14 0.0% 15
5 BAL 18.1% 6 18.8% 4 9-6 -0.2% 15 -15.3% 2 3.0% 6
6 CHI 17.5% 5 16.3% 6 11-4 -5.1% 22 -25.4% 1 -2.8% 25
7 NE 11.1% 9 15.4% 8 10-5 13.3% 7 2.3% 19 0.1% 14
8 PIT 10.6% 8 13.8% 10 8-6-1 15.7% 5 1.0% 17 -4.1% 30
9 IND 10.2% 10 17.6% 5 9-6 5.8% 10 -3.5% 12 0.9% 11
10 SEA 8.4% 11 10.3% 11 9-6 9.5% 8 1.0% 16 -0.1% 16
11 MIN 8.2% 12 14.3% 9 8-6-1 -1.8% 18 -11.4% 4 -1.4% 22
12 DEN 6.9% 7 6.6% 12 6-9 1.3% 13 -9.4% 6 -3.8% 28
13 HOU 4.7% 14 3.2% 15 10-5 -4.2% 21 -5.3% 7 3.6% 5
14 GB 3.4% 13 1.3% 18 6-8-1 15.6% 6 8.5% 26 -3.7% 27
15 NYG -0.5% 16 6.2% 14 5-10 -0.2% 14 4.0% 22 3.6% 4
16 CAR -2.5% 15 -7.5% 21 6-9 4.0% 11 6.3% 25 -0.2% 17
17 ATL -2.6% 21 1.7% 17 6-9 7.9% 9 11.5% 29 1.1% 10
18 PHI -3.3% 17 -1.2% 19 8-7 -0.8% 16 2.8% 21 0.4% 12
19 CLE -3.4% 22 6.5% 13 7-7-1 -3.4% 20 -4.5% 11 -4.5% 32
20 TEN -3.6% 19 3.1% 16 9-6 -5.2% 23 -1.2% 13 0.4% 12
21 JAX -4.4% 18 -9.7% 22 5-10 -19.7% 30 -10.5% 5 4.8% 3
22 DAL -6.0% 20 -4.5% 20 9-6 -9.6% 26 -4.7% 9 -1.0% 21
23 CIN -9.7% 23 -18.6% 28 6-9 -1.5% 17 10.7% 28 2.4% 8
24 NYJ -11.2% 26 -11.4% 23 4-11 -17.4% 29 2.5% 20 8.6% 1
25 MIA -12.4% 24 -21.2% 31 7-8 -6.8% 24 4.6% 24 -1.0% 20
26 TB -13.5% 25 -12.1% 24 5-10 4.0% 12 13.4% 31 -4.1% 31
27 WAS -14.6% 27 -20.8% 30 7-8 -16.5% 28 0.7% 15 2.6% 7
28 OAK -17.8% 30 -18.9% 29 4-11 -3.3% 19 12.5% 30 -2.0% 24
29 SF -19.4% 28 -17.6% 27 4-11 -14.3% 27 4.4% 23 -0.8% 19
30 DET -22.1% 29 -17.1% 26 5-10 -6.9% 25 13.5% 32 -1.6% 23
31 BUF -22.4% 31 -13.1% 25 5-10 -30.7% 31 -12.4% 3 -4.1% 29
32 ARI -43.6% 32 -46.7% 32 3-12 -41.6% 32 1.8% 18 -0.2% 18
  • 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).
RK TEAM TOTAL
DVOA
W-L NON-ADJ
TOT VOA
ESTIM.
WINS
RANK PAST
SCHED
RANK FUTURE
SCHED
RANK VAR. RANK
1 KC 32.2% 11-4 29.7% 12.1 1 2.3% 7 -17.8% 28 10.5% 9
2 LAC 23.7% 11-4 24.6% 10.2 5 -0.4% 14 6.9% 12 7.7% 3
3 NO 23.6% 13-2 25.5% 10.8 3 -0.8% 17 -2.5% 16 9.7% 7
4 LAR 22.8% 12-3 26.1% 11.6 2 -1.2% 18 -19.4% 29 7.6% 2
5 BAL 18.1% 9-6 15.4% 10.4 4 1.5% 10 -3.4% 19 15.0% 19
6 CHI 17.5% 11-4 21.6% 9.7 6 -7.3% 32 8.2% 11 12.2% 12
7 NE 11.1% 10-5 11.0% 9.1 7 -1.6% 21 -11.2% 24 14.2% 18
8 PIT 10.6% 8-6-1 5.5% 8.4 12 5.1% 2 -9.7% 23 13.0% 16
9 IND 10.2% 9-6 17.5% 9.0 8 -6.0% 31 -3.6% 20 13.5% 17
10 SEA 8.4% 9-6 10.1% 8.6 9 0.4% 12 -43.6% 32 9.5% 6
11 MIN 8.2% 8-6-1 7.1% 8.5 10 -4.4% 30 17.5% 6 9.8% 8
12 DEN 6.9% 6-9 10.3% 8.5 11 2.0% 8 23.7% 2 20.2% 31
13 HOU 4.7% 10-5 10.0% 8.3 13 -3.1% 28 -4.4% 21 5.4% 1
14 GB 3.4% 6-8-1 1.1% 8.3 14 -3.6% 29 -22.1% 30 12.4% 14
15 NYG -0.5% 5-10 -1.1% 7.4 16 -2.1% 23 -6.0% 22 16.1% 23
16 CAR -2.5% 6-9 3.2% 7.0 21 -2.1% 22 23.6% 3 16.7% 25
17 ATL -2.6% 6-9 -1.3% 7.0 20 -1.3% 19 -13.5% 26 9.1% 5
18 PHI -3.3% 8-7 -4.7% 7.2 17 1.0% 11 -14.6% 27 11.5% 11
19 CLE -3.4% 7-7-1 -0.9% 7.0 19 4.2% 4 18.1% 5 12.4% 15
20 TEN -3.6% 9-6 -1.4% 7.5 15 -0.4% 15 10.2% 9 19.8% 29
21 JAX -4.4% 5-10 -5.2% 6.1 23 0.1% 13 4.7% 13 7.8% 4
22 DAL -6.0% 9-6 -1.6% 6.5 22 -2.5% 25 -0.5% 15 10.7% 10
23 CIN -9.7% 6-9 -13.9% 7.0 18 5.8% 1 10.6% 8 18.2% 26
24 NYJ -11.2% 4-11 -12.6% 5.9 25 -2.7% 26 11.1% 7 20.2% 30
25 MIA -12.4% 7-8 -14.1% 5.3 27 -2.4% 24 -22.4% 31 19.6% 27
26 TB -13.5% 5-10 -17.6% 5.2 28 1.9% 9 -2.6% 17 12.4% 13
27 WAS -14.6% 7-8 -10.5% 6.0 24 -3.0% 27 -3.3% 18 15.9% 22
28 OAK -17.8% 4-11 -23.1% 4.6 31 5.0% 3 32.2% 1 19.7% 28
29 SF -19.4% 4-11 -20.9% 4.7 30 -0.6% 16 22.8% 4 16.1% 24
30 DET -22.1% 5-10 -21.7% 4.8 29 -1.4% 20 3.4% 14 15.5% 21
31 BUF -22.4% 5-10 -26.4% 5.4 26 2.9% 6 -12.4% 25 22.5% 32
32 ARI -43.6% 3-12 -43.1% 2.1 32 3.3% 5 8.4% 10 15.0% 20

Comments

35 comments, Last at 30 Dec 2018, 11:14am

1 Re: Week 16 DVOA Ratings

As a long time, die hard Seahawks fan, I finally have to be heard. This thought occurs to me every time I see those historic lists. I can't hold it back any more. I'm too mad to even use the proper zlionsfan commenting format. I'll just come right out and say it:

I just can't believe that there was an offense that was worse than the 1992 Seahawks.

3 Re: Week 16 DVOA Ratings

The '76 Bucs are a worthy competitor, but the Seahawks had more interceptions, more fumbles, more sub 200 yard games, and more sub 100 yard games. Their greatest monument to offensive futility is also head and shoulders "above" the Bucs' efforts: against Dallas the Seahawks were shut out while putting up 62 total yards and three turnovers.

The longer season did give the Seahawks 2 extra games to stink up the league, but I think they were still solidly worse by most rate stats. Opponent adjustments the Bucs might have a shot at the garbage throne.

8 Re: Week 16 DVOA Ratings

Era adjustments will likely keep the Seahawks number 1 in being bad. It was just so much harder to gain yards and score points in that pre 78 rules environment, although change was already afoot, with the head slap by pass rushers outlawed. I think if Reggie White had been given the head slap, he would have recorded 300 sacks.

13 Re: Week 16 DVOA Ratings

In his seasons 2,3,4 he had 18, 21 , and 18 sacks. in a league that didn't throw as much, in a run oriented, for the time, division. With the head slap? Who knows? 80? 90? What would a grizzly bear do?

18 Re: Week 16 DVOA Ratings

As I recall, Reggie played a 20-game season in the USFL in spring 85 before joining the Eagles for his NFL rookie season. He was obviously gamefit but also probably a bit battered from it.

And his 21 sacks in '87 came in just 12 games due to the strike.

4 Re: Week 16 DVOA Ratings

The 1977 Bucs (who won their last two games after losing their first 12 (26 overall) were worse than the 76 bucs.

The scored 104 points in a 14 game season, good for less than 7½ (7.43) points per game. The 2002 Seahawks scored 140 in 16 game season, which is 8.75 pts per game. In 7 home games... home, mind you... the 77 Bucs scored 20 pts. They were shut out 6 times (in 14 games). and all that is with them scoring 50 pts in the last two games where they finally won (33 and 17 pts). For the rest of the season, they scored 23 in a loss at Seattle (the other expansion team from 76) where they turned the ball over six times, and 10 in a loss at San Fransisco. That left 10 games in which 4 of them they scored once... and the other six where they did not score. That 33 point game (a 33-14 win over New Orleans) was aided by 3 defensive TDs. One of the other games where they weren't shut out was also because of a defensive score. That's 27 of their 104 points from the defense (they did not make an extra point after one of them).

They started Gary Huff 6 games, he thew 3 tds and 13 picks, completed 48.6% of his passes and had a rating of 37.4 They started Jeb Blount 4 games, he threw 0 tds and 7 picks, completed 41.6% of his passes and had a quarterback rating of 28.4 And in the other 4 games they started Randy Hedberg, who threw 0 tds and 10 picks, completing 27.8% of his passes (25 of 90) for 244 yards and a rating of 0.00. That is also his career rating, which makes him the lowest rated passer in NFL history.

Ricky Bell lead all rushers with 436 yards at 2.9 yards per carry.

The team reached 300 yards once (in that 6 turnover loss to Seattle). 4 other games they were in the 200s, 8 games they were in the 100s. And in a 17-0 shutout to the Falcons, they managed 78 yards.

6 Re: Week 16 DVOA Ratings

Woof. I remember the 77 Bucs, and they were awful, but laying out the stats.... just amazing. You look at 20 points in 7 home games, and you think that must be a typo. How they kept playing is a mystery.

14 Re: Week 16 DVOA Ratings

there are just so many staggering angles to that. Because they did score 17 in their last home game vs the cards. Taat means a 1 yard rush by Louis Carter in the first quarter of that season finale was the first touchdown they scored at home. It also means they scored a total of 3 points in all their other home games combined. In the 2nd quarter of the season opener, they kicked an 18 yard field goal which gave them a 3-2 lead over the Vikings (who would win the game 9-3).

From then, they were shut out at home 5 games in a row, and for a total of 22 quarters.

10-0 to washington
13-0 to green bay
10-0 to the giants
17-0 to the falcons
10-0 to the bears

5 Re: Week 16 DVOA Ratings

Remember that DVOA numbers are year adjusted; the 2002 NFL is significantly more offensively friendly than the 1992 NFL. Also, Chris Warren was a significantly better running back than anybody on the 2002 Texans.

12 Re: Week 16 DVOA Ratings

I'm astounded that the 2006 Raiders B&B Offense is only the 8th worst ever. It was putrid. Never felt like any hope they were going to score.

As a team they scored 168 pts of which Rob Ryan's defense managed to score four TDs.

Of the offense's 12 TDs ... the QBs (Walter, Brooks and Tuiasosopo) combined for 7 passing TDs of which 3 were caught by Randy Moss in 13 games. Remember this is the Randy Moss who just got inducted into the Hall of Fame and a year later after being traded for a 4th or 5th round pick set the record for receiving TDs.

That Shane Lechler only punted 77 times also amazes me but then his QBs threw 24 ints among 38 turnovers lost. How little the offense moved the ball is demonstrated by his 47.5 gross average. And not many teams (apart from the 2002 Texans) have conceded 72 sacks.

It really was an attempt by Shell and Walsh to reinstall the 70s Raiders long bomb offense with spectacular ineffectiveness.

31 Re: Week 16 DVOA Ratings

I feel the same way about the 2004 Bears except I don’t think they even had a plan. Grossman was the best of 4 starters and played the least of them (due to his early career injury woes), and none of the other 3 QBs ever played a meaningful down in the NFL again.

That offense was lead by Terry Shea, a one and done OC who came to prominence as the QB coach of the Vermiel/Saunders Chiefs, and whose only other two positions after that were for the abysmal Cam Cameron Dolphins and Linehan/Haslett Rams. That team also ended the career of former 1st round pick and Michigan WR David Terrell. An absolute miasma of suck.

Thomas Jones and a decent offensive line singlehandedly saved this team from being even worse than they were.

32 Re: Week 16 DVOA Ratings

I'm pretty sure Terrell was going to be bad regardless. But who can forget the #1 target Bobby "Bobbles" Wade.

I also remember the line being pretty bad at pass pro, and bringing Miller at RT and moving Tait to LT made a night and day difference when 2005 came around.

10 Re: Week 16 DVOA Ratings

Wow, was the Bears offense really that bad in the second half of the season (11-16)? -20% (29th)?

I guess that would include 2 games of Chase Daniels and a clunker by MT against the Rams. But still, this team will really struggle in the post season if that OFF continues on this path.

11 Re: Week 16 DVOA Ratings

The defense will make them formidable at home, as long as the offense doesn't turn the ball over. I would make them substantial underdogs in New Orleans. I like their chances much better in L.A.. Goff just isn't ready to handle pressure. Seattle at Chicago would be intriguing. Wilson could hold up, if Seattle's defense is ready to play well on the road. If the Vikings win in Minneapolis Sunday, and get the Bears in Chicago the next week, that'll be a very tough draw for the Vikings, unless they just stomp the feces out of Trubisky at home, and even then, I don't know if the Vikings offense can score 10 points in Chicago

17 Re: Week 16 DVOA Ratings

That sounds like a pretty good summary. I said last week that I thought Seattle were best placed of the 'outsiders' to spring a surprise or two. Even if their offense is generally overmatched playing in Dallas, Chicago, or New Orleans you could see them scoring some points, simply because of Wilson's play-making ability. OTOH, I would fear for Cousins playing in Chicago, or Trubisky/Prescott in New Orleans. Chicago's defense is evidently good enough that they could win any one-off game without help from their offense. But they are, as you say, substantial underdogs in New Orleans.

16 Re: Week 16 DVOA Ratings

yeah, the main issues is that Chicago's run defense is just too good.

So Zimmer wanted more running and canned DeFlippo because of it. Now, mind you there were many things going wrong with flip's offense, but the sudden running renaissance had more to do with the opposition, Miami, than it did with Stefanski. Detroit is mediocre vs the run, and held up pretty well until the defense was broken (by a pass). Trying the run first, run often approach vs Chicago is going to result in a lot of 3 and outs. Especially when they team basically knows that is their mandate.

I know Chicago is currently #2 vs the run (by dvoa) and #1 vs the pass, but I feel that starts with the run defense.

Looking for weaknesses, chicago is #1 vs #1 receivers, #4 vs #2 receivers, #6 vs other receivers, #3 vs tight ends and i guess the weak spot is #11 vs running backs catching passes, so Cook would be key.

At this point my main hope is that Chicago will mentally prefer to face us again than Philadelphia. And I could see that logic, too, though I doubt any football person would ever say it.

19 Re: Week 16 DVOA Ratings

Oh, the Vikings have a good chance in Minneapolis, because the Vikings defense could really get after the Bears offense, and the Vikings kicking game could avoid complete awfulness in the dome. In Chicago, I'd be shocked if the Vikings won.

22 Re: Week 16 DVOA Ratings

Is Goff less ready to handle pressure than Trubisky?

In the fourth quarter and overtime of one-score games this year, Goff is 41 of 67 for 522 yards, 4 TD's and no interceptions with a passer rating of 105.

Trubisky is 41 of 62 for 470 yards, 3 TD's and 2 interceptions with a rating of 91.

25 Re: Week 16 DVOA Ratings

According to quick reads, only the Patriots and Dolphins have beaten the Bears when he produced above replacement level. Now the Bears only have 4 losses and he didn't play for 1 so this is tiny sample sizes. However, if I did my research correctly, only 2 other games finished closer than 2 scores (Packers and 49ers). The Bears really do not need a whole heck of a lot from him, and he's mostly been playing well enough. It's a good thing he doesn't have to play across from Mack, Hicks et all.

On a final note, now that I've typed this, he's going to play like an in-his-prime McNabb and the Bears will lose their final game because some opposing player does a Steve Smith or Marshawn Lynch impersonation.

26 Re: Week 16 DVOA Ratings

Oh, I read it that you liked the Bears chances better at LA (than at Chicago), but now see that you mean better in LA than at New Orleans. That makes sense.

Trubisky and Goff both played pretty poorly in that matchup a couple weeks ago. That was the only game in the NFL this year where both teams had a passer rating under 50.

I really hope for a rematch in the playoffs. And I fully expect it to be a shootout, because that seems to be the way these things go.

27 Re: Week 16 DVOA Ratings

I'm not too surprised by that number given the games you already mentioned, but I am concerned that overall they will finish as a below-average offense for the season. I know Nagy has stated that it will take multiple years to fully install the offense, and I like the potential I am seeing from Trubisky way more than anything I've ever seen from a Bears draft pick at QB in my life, but this team was not supposed to have to rely so heavily on the defense. I guess the silver lining is that I believe the offense and Trubisky are more than capable of putting together a positive-DVOA performance in any one game, so maybe they get hot in the playoffs.

I'm so conflicted as a Bears fan right now, because 11-12 wins was so far ahead of what I reasonably expected of them going into the season, and I think it's reasonable to be optimistic about Nagy and Trubisky (and maybe even Ryan Pace now) and think that the best could be yet to come. On the other hand, this isn't basketball or even baseball; it's really, really hard in football to build teams that dominate for multiple seasons and even if the team does everything right it can still be undone by a couple of key injuries (or even just 1 if it's the QB). So I still feel a bit of urgency for them to put together a Super Bowl run this season, because even if they are a good team for the next few years as I now expect them to be, this may be their best shot.

29 Re: Week 16 DVOA Ratings

I am not a Bears fan, but I would hope that they have a better shot in the next few years than they have this year. A bye increases SB chances significantly, and Soldier Field in January provides good HFA. [If they are able to jump up to the #2 seed ahead of LA, that obviously helps their SB chances tremendously.] Having said that, I fully expect them to be the #3 seed, and beat whoever visits them on wild-card weekend. But winning in LA and NO is going to be very difficult, not to mention the rest that both those teams will get. (If they were in the AFC, their SB chances would be much better, IMO.)

30 Re: Week 16 DVOA Ratings

Oh sure, I agree with you from the seeding standpoint. My argument is that they've been fortunate in a number of ways this season that may not repeat in future seasons. They've been pretty healthy...assuming that Eddie Jackson recovers for the playoffs, the biggest injury loss will be Bryce Callahan. They will have had Trubisky for 14 games. They also benefited from a surprisingly weak NFC North this year and will finish at least 4-2 in the division (and if this was a must-win game for the Bears, I'd like their chances to go 5-1).

The Bears could be a better team in paper in 2019, 2020, or 2021 and still finish as the #3 seed or even worse. Or manage a bye but lose one of their top 5 players for the playoffs. It's just so hard to have a dynasty in the NFL unless you have a HOF QB and/or coach for a long period of time. Maybe Trubisky and/or Nagy will be that good, but it's too early to tell.

15 Re: Week 16 DVOA Ratings

I'm curious about the Dallas numbers. I hear talk about the Cooper trade sending Dallas in the right direction but the table seems to indicate their defense is likely the cause of their improvement.

20 Re: Week 16 DVOA Ratings

That is what's happened. The offense is still poor. What's funny to me about this second half resurgence from the Cowboys is how bad it might prove to be for the franchise in the end. That's because making the playoffs this year will likely lead Jerry Jones to make two bad decisions. First, to retain Jason Garrett. At mid-season it seemed like Garrett might finally be gone. Now, that certainly won't happen. Secondly, to sign a QB who ranks 29th in DVOA to a long-term deal.

21 Re: Week 16 DVOA Ratings

I wonder if anyone in GB survives the smoldering ruins that is special teams. Certainly Zook is gone. Crosby is alleged to be on thin ice. Maybe the rookie punter because he was a draft pick??

24 Re: Week 16 DVOA Ratings

As bad as they have been - and they've been bad on special teams all year - the extra pain of the last few weeks is probably made worse by all of the defensive players who have piled up on IR giving way to street free agents and UDFAs who have only been on the roster for a couple of weeks. Definitely looking forward to moving on from Zook but hopefully nothing is beyond fixing by a competent coach.

Interestingly it looks like FO has the Packers rated about average in terms of FG/XP value. Crosby might be overpaid but it may not be the area where the easiest or most obvious upgrade might come.

28 This is what parity looks like

Parity.

It’s evident in DVOA. There is just one team above 25%, and just one below -25%. When is the last time that happened?

You can see it in the non-divisional records, too. There are the fewest teams outside the 3-7 to 7-3 non-divisional record range in at least 10 years. And the shortage of outliers is at both ends of the spectrum.

33 Re: This is what parity looks like

That's a really good catch. That has only happened once before, in 2003. And this is creepy: the best team that year was Kansas City. The worst team was Arizona.

1988 and 2001 were close, with one over 25% and two under -25%.

35 Re: Week 16 DVOA Ratings

Why not run six week stats every week. They seem so much more relevant and useful. I would pay a hefty premium for last six week stats every week.