Something to Believe In?

I've been using ANYA for this as well, and do have the numbers for the last 10 years, BTW. The numbers are rounded up, because that's how PFR handles them and I haven't wanted to use more detail 6.73 and 6.71 are about the same

1 Denver Broncos P That Manning guy is pretty good
2 Houston Texans P seems right
3 Pittsburgh Steelers - wow
4 San Francisco 49ers P- having the 3rd best ANYA rank on defense helps a mediocre Offense
5 Chicago Bears P- The best passs defense by ANYA against avery bad offense by ANYA
6 Dallas Cowboys
7 Detroit Lions
8 Green Bay Packers
9 Seattle Seahawks
10 Minnesota Vikings P - Its about Jared Allen, niot Ponder
11 Cincinnati Bengals
12 Philadelphia Eagles
13 Carolina Panthers
14 St. Louis Rams
15 Miami Dolphins P average on both sides of the ball by this metric.
16 Atlanta Falcons P middling on both sides
17 New York Giants P best passing offense helps, there pass defense has been atrocious
18 Washington Redskins
19 New York Jets
20 Oakland Raiders
21 Arizona Cardinals P .. we all know were this ship is sailing.
22 Baltimore Ravens P .. see Arizona
23 Cleveland Browns
24 Indianapolis Colts
25 San Diego Chargers P- not for long now their OL is gone.
26 Tampa Bay Buccaneers
27 Buffalo Bills
28 New England Patriots P This ranking better represents how bad their defense has been.
29 New Orleans Saints
30 Tennessee Titans
31 Kansas City Chiefs
32 Jacksonville Jaguars


The rankings are slightly different. Maybe gross YPA would work better, but I like ANYA because it takes into acount sacks, which Passer Rating doesn't

I hate the QBR as a measure of a player, but I think it is okay to use it for a team.

I like how these rankings do not believe in the Chargers and may be sensing doom for Baltimore.

Originally Posted by Rich Gapinski

I hate the QBR as a measure of a player, but I think it is okay to use it for a team.

Like you I don't believe in one stat. I like how this passer differential, depending on the stat used, shows different rankings for teams.

BTW, I also use TO differential, per game (I hate volume stats), which also describes the reason why teams are were they are in the standings.

1 Chicago Bears P
2 Atlanta Falcons P
3 New England Patriots P
4 New York Giants P
5 Houston Texans P
6 Washington Redskins
7 Baltimore Ravens P
8 Tampa Bay Buccaneers
9 Arizona Cardinals P
10 Green Bay Packers
11 Cleveland Browns
11 San Francisco 49ers P
13 Pittsburgh Steelers
14 Jacksonville Jaguars
14 New Orleans Saints
14 New York Jets
14 St. Louis Rams
18 Minnesota Vikings P
18 Seattle Seahawks
20 San Diego Chargers P
21 Oakland Raiders
22 Denver Broncos P
23 Miami Dolphins P
24 Tennessee Titans
25 Detroit Lions
26 Buffalo Bills
26 Cincinnati Bengals
28 Carolina Panthers
29 Dallas Cowboys
30 Indianapolis Colts
31 Philadelphia Eagles
32 Kansas City Chiefs

Looking at were teams rank by passer differential, and then were they rank because of TO differential, gives you a sense of why a good team (like Denver), is .500. The offense is coughing the ball up.

Also, the demise of the Steelers has been greatly exagerated. They've lost close games, but they've had a lot of injuries. They remind me of the 2010 Packers in that sense. I Wouldn't want to face them in the playoffs. They still aren't forcing enough turnovers on defense, but that can change if they start giving some of their younger guys more playing time. It'll hurt at first, but there older players aren't dynamic enough.

I use QBR as well, but just for D's, just how good is <name the team> D?
I also use the differential between QBR O vs QBR D to rank teams within each division as this seems to hold up over the season (after about 3-5 weeks). I then have a pretty good picture of who will make playoffs.
TO's are a bit iffy and really rank only the best D's and the weakest D's the others in between seems to be a big hodge podge each year.

Originally Posted by xmenehune

I use QBR as well, but just for D's, just how good is <name the team> D?
I also use the differential between QBR O vs QBR D to rank teams within each division as this seems to hold up over the season (after about 3-5 weeks). I then have a pretty good picture of who will make playoffs.
TO's are a bit iffy and really rank only the best D's and the weakest D's the others in between seems to be a big hodge podge each year.

agreed. Year to year correlations for TOs vary alot, but they do tend to explain why a team with good Passing differntials isn't as succesful as expected. It's a second order stat, if you will. I also have some efficiency stats, and look at efficiency differentials (I use points per 100 yards as a method), but you could use the inverse and obtain CHHF's bendability and scoreability.

1 Chicago Bears
2 Atlanta Falcons
3 New York Giants
4 Houston Texans
5 Tampa Bay Buccaneers
6 Minnesota Vikings
7 Baltimore Ravens
8 San Francisco 49ers
9 New England Patriots
10 Green Bay Packers
11 San Diego Chargers
12 Arizona Cardinals
13 New Orleans Saints
14 New York Jets
15 Seattle Seahawks
16 Miami Dolphins
17 Denver Broncos
18 Cleveland Browns
19 Washington Redskins
20 St. Louis Rams
21 Jacksonville Jaguars
22 Buffalo Bills
23 Cincinnati Bengals
24 Carolina Panthers
25 Tennessee Titans
26 Pittsburgh Steelers
27 Philadelphia Eagles
28 Indianapolis Colts
29 Detroit Lions
30 Dallas Cowboys
31 Oakland Raiders
32 Kansas City Chiefs


I've flireted with the idea of using only offensive scores in this measure, because for example CHicago appears extra efficient on offense (#2), but that's due to the defensive scoring. I've kept it based on total scoring to represent teams as a whole.

I've been using a new metric that seems obvious for the modern NFL, but I do not see many others using it. I like to use QB rating differential to decide if I believe in a team. It simply is the difference between the team's offensive passer rating versus passer rating allowed. I tried it out last year and it had 10 of 12 playoff teams in the top 12 with 50+% of the league's wins coming from those top 12 teams.

You're very smart to use this metric...

Many fans and analysts say that the passing game has grown in importance in recent years. But that's not true. Teams certainly pass more often today than they did in the past. But passing is not more important and the success of the Saints, Packers and Rodgers are not recent phenomena.

The NFL has ALWAYS been dominated by teams that dominate the skies, as measured by passer rating.

• an incredible 40 of 69* NFL champions (58 percent) since 1940 finished the year No. 1 or No. 2 in Passer Rating Differential

• 67 of 69* champions (97 percent) since 1940 finished the year ranked in the top 10 in Passer Rating Differential.

For a little perspective, consider that 68 of 69 champions finished in the top 10 in scoring differential. That's right. Passer rating is nearly as effective at identifying winners as points.

The average NFL champion, for example, ranked No. 2.7 in scoring differential. They ranked 3.4 in Passer Rating Differential.

And it's always been this way: the Bears dominated the 1940s with four NFL titles. They led the NFL in Passer Rating Differential in 1941, 1943 and 1946 and won championships each season.

Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/201...#ixzz2ALHjOAcG

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/201...ing/index.html

Wow, thanks for that info, packa. So, I think I'm going to keep using this.

BIG Thanks to eDave, but here are the corresponding sheets:

Yeah, I actually coincidentally found this just this morning while discussing Tony Romo with a friend. I was blown away by this. It makes sense when you think about it. Your QB is efficient and the other guy's QB isn't efficient.

Next:

It makes it more interesting when you look at a game like the Giants-Redskins...The giants were -30 in QB rating, yet won the game and kept things close all game. I wonder where turnovers fit in to this. You can have a QB with a 100+ QB rating and a WR or RB can fumble and thats it.

Originally Posted by packa7x

It makes it more interesting when you look at a game like the Giants-Redskins...The giants were -30 in QB rating, yet won the game and kept things close all game. I wonder where turnovers fit in to this. You can have a QB with a 100+ QB rating and a WR or RB can fumble and thats it.

The Skins have been very lucky with the fumble recoveries. Denver has been very unlucky in the same. That is something hard to keep up. In that game, the skins fumbled 5 times, and recovered only 2 of them. 3 fumbles and 1 pick, versus 2 picks by Eli.

I like QBR differential, but it does hide the fumbleitis. ANYA isn't better either in this regard. That -30 is a red flag though, that something else happened.