Football Outsiders is pretty widely accepted amongst stat geeks. Just because it doesn't fit your idea of how things should be ranked doesn't mean its wrong. Historically their DVOA ratings have been VERY accurate judge of things.So after looking at it, a commenter had it right.Nick Bradley "If your model has Denver, New England, Seahawks as the best teams in NFL history your model is broken"If anything having these 3 teams ranked in the top 10 tells me the way this is calculated is off...
Never even heard of these guys until now. Are you sure you didn't make a mistake and they are just widely accepted amongst Seahawks fans instead?I'm thinking if they have the Seahawks #1 then they are not just outside looking in, they are in outer space.Football Outsiders is pretty widely accepted amongst stat geeks. Just because it doesn't fit your idea of how things should be ranked doesn't mean its wrong. Historically their DVOA ratings have been VERY accurate judge of things.So after looking at it, a commenter had it right.
Nick Bradley "If your model has Denver, New England, Seahawks as the best teams in NFL history your model is broken"
If anything having these 3 teams ranked in the top 10 tells me the way this is calculated is off...
they are pretty popular and have been cited around here a bit. that said, is there a cliff's notes version on how their analysis works?Never even heard of these guys until now. Are you sure you didn't make a mistake and they are just widely accepted amongst Seahawks fans instead?
DET HC Jim Schwartz used to collaborate with FO's Aaron Schatz years ago. For advanced stats, it's a pretty well respected site. One 49er stat guy in their front office checks it out often.ETA: Danny Tuccito is a guy I know who is one of their assistant editors. He puts out some real solid analysis as well.Never even heard of these guys until now. Are you sure you didn't make a mistake and they are just widely accepted amongst Seahawks fans instead?I'm thinking if they have the Seahawks #1 then they are not just outside looking in, they are in outer space.Football Outsiders is pretty widely accepted amongst stat geeks. Just because it doesn't fit your idea of how things should be ranked doesn't mean its wrong. Historically their DVOA ratings have been VERY accurate judge of things.So after looking at it, a commenter had it right.
Nick Bradley "If your model has Denver, New England, Seahawks as the best teams in NFL history your model is broken"
If anything having these 3 teams ranked in the top 10 tells me the way this is calculated is off...
Not exactly a glowing endorsement for them.DET HC Jim Schwartz used to collaborate with FO's Aaron Schatz years ago. For advanced stats, it's a pretty well respected site. One 49er stat guy in their front office checks it out often.Never even heard of these guys until now. Are you sure you didn't make a mistake and they are just widely accepted amongst Seahawks fans instead?I'm thinking if they have the Seahawks #1 then they are not just outside looking in, they are in outer space.Football Outsiders is pretty widely accepted amongst stat geeks. Just because it doesn't fit your idea of how things should be ranked doesn't mean its wrong. Historically their DVOA ratings have been VERY accurate judge of things.So after looking at it, a commenter had it right.
Nick Bradley "If your model has Denver, New England, Seahawks as the best teams in NFL history your model is broken"
If anything having these 3 teams ranked in the top 10 tells me the way this is calculated is off...
Yeah, but we're talking stats, not coaching. I think Schwartz was doing that FO stuff before he was HC of DET obviously. Parag Marathe of the 49ers is also into that kind of stuff, and if Mike Nolan hadn't had a PowerPoint presentation that knocked 49er owner John York's socks off, Schwartz might have been the 49er HC hired instead, with Marathe as GM.Not exactly a glowing endorsement for them.DET HC Jim Schwartz used to collaborate with FO's Aaron Schatz years ago. For advanced stats, it's a pretty well respected site. One 49er stat guy in their front office checks it out often.Never even heard of these guys until now. Are you sure you didn't make a mistake and they are just widely accepted amongst Seahawks fans instead?I'm thinking if they have the Seahawks #1 then they are not just outside looking in, they are in outer space.Football Outsiders is pretty widely accepted amongst stat geeks. Just because it doesn't fit your idea of how things should be ranked doesn't mean its wrong. Historically their DVOA ratings have been VERY accurate judge of things.So after looking at it, a commenter had it right.
Nick Bradley "If your model has Denver, New England, Seahawks as the best teams in NFL history your model is broken"
If anything having these 3 teams ranked in the top 10 tells me the way this is calculated is off...
The FootballOutsiders model doesn't have DEN, NE, and SEA as the best teams in NFL history, it has them as 3 of the 11 best teams of the past 21 years.So after looking at it, a commenter had it right.Nick Bradley "If your model has Denver, New England, Seahawks as the best teams in NFL history your model is broken"If anything having these 3 teams ranked in the top 10 tells me the way this is calculated is off...
Colts are 25th due to how they lose and who they beat and how they beat those teams. They won a bunch of close games with a lot of the wins not being against very impressive teams and in their losses they were blown out.Looking at this year's ratings the Bears are 6th, the Giants are 7th, the Panthers are 13th, the Rams are 15th, the Lions are 17th, and the Colts are 25th.
I looked at a few different power ratings sites this morning to fill out a playoff bracket thingy. Of the ones I looked at (including these, these, these (both ELO score and Pure Points), and these), I averaged them together and the top five teams were:1. New EnglandSo after looking at it, a commenter had it right.
Nick Bradley "If your model has Denver, New England, Seahawks as the best teams in NFL history your model is broken"
If anything having these 3 teams ranked in the top 10 tells me the way this is calculated is off...
You should check out their site. They do some good work over there. (Which doesn't mean that you should agree with all of it, of course.)Never even heard of these guys until now.
Ya I like their rankings normally to give you an idea of where teams are but something is off when your talking about these teams as tops, even in the last 21 years.You should check out their site. They do some good work over there. (Which doesn't mean that you should agree with all of it, of course.)Never even heard of these guys until now.
If you are a blackjack card counter and the deck is extremely favorable you bet the max. There is no guarantee you are going to win that hand, but over time you'll come out ahead.Having a team appropriately rated as #1 is not a guarantee, just a more than likely chance they will win. That's why they play the games.If I recall correctly last year they had GB as no. 1. We know how that turned out.
FWIW (on average) each of the links MT lists has about a 7 point differential between SEA and WAS and none of them list WAS ahead of SEA.'Maurile Tremblay said:I looked at a few different power ratings sites this morning to fill out a playoff bracket thingy. Of the ones I looked at (including these, these, these (both ELO score and Pure Points), and these), I averaged them together and the top five teams were:1. New England'packseasontix said:So after looking at it, a commenter had it right.
Nick Bradley "If your model has Denver, New England, Seahawks as the best teams in NFL history your model is broken"
If anything having these 3 teams ranked in the top 10 tells me the way this is calculated is off...
2. Seattle
3. Denver
4. San Francisco
5. Green Bay
So it doesn't seem all that unusual to have those as the top three teams.
Edit: I didn't catch the "in NFL history" part of your post. I thought you were just talking about this year. Never mind.
Umm, basically everyone had Green Bay as the #1 team in the regular season last year.If I recall correctly last year they had GB as no. 1. We know how that turned out.
I looked at a few different power ratings sites this morning to fill out a playoff bracket thingy. Of the ones I looked at (including these, these, these (both ELO score and Pure Points), and these), I averaged them together and the top five teams were:1. New EnglandSo after looking at it, a commenter had it right.
Nick Bradley "If your model has Denver, New England, Seahawks as the best teams in NFL history your model is broken"
If anything having these 3 teams ranked in the top 10 tells me the way this is calculated is off...
2. Seattle
3. Denver
4. San Francisco
5. Green Bay
So it doesn't seem all that unusual to have those as the top three teams.
Edit: I didn't catch the "in NFL history" part of your post. I thought you were just talking about this year. Never mind.
Those numbers are not a predictor of who will win the Superbowl. They do have odds though: http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/playoffoddsThe last five years, the Superbowl champ finished 12th, 4th, 6th, 4th, and 14th in final DVOA. I don't see how this is any more a predictor of playoff success as any other power ranking.
You don't know how they calculate this, but you know why they're calculated wrong? Maybe you should read about how it's constructed. It doesn't take blowout scores into account at all.'Portis 26 said:I don't know how their model has been constructed but it is overvaluing blowouts, it is Seattle's blowouts that has them so highly ranked.
It's not a predictor of playoff success, nor does it purport to be.'butcher boy said:The last five years, the Superbowl champ finished 12th, 4th, 6th, 4th, and 14th in final DVOA. I don't see how this is any more a predictor of playoff success as any other power ranking.
Maybe learn about something before you criticize it.What does it purport to be?I always thought any type of power ranking was a tool to predict future success.
he's right.Maybe learn about something before you criticize it.What does it purport to be?I always thought any type of power ranking was a tool to predict future success.
They do...but in the 1st quarter tonight they were getting pushed around. Washington was the much more physical team to that point.That changed a lot over the rest of the game though.'BusterTBronco said:Is it just me, or do the Seahawks look like they are bigger and stronger than the opposing teams at just about every position on the field? These guys are monsters.
Crack analysis here. Do you have a newsletter?They do...but in the 1st quarter tonight they were getting pushed around. Washington was the much more physical team to that point.That changed a lot over the rest of the game though.'BusterTBronco said:Is it just me, or do the Seahawks look like they are bigger and stronger than the opposing teams at just about every position on the field? These guys are monsters.
Dynamite drop in Monty...that broadcast school has really paid off.Crack analysis here. Do you have a newsletter?They do...but in the 1st quarter tonight they were getting pushed around. Washington was the much more physical team to that point.That changed a lot over the rest of the game though.'BusterTBronco said:Is it just me, or do the Seahawks look like they are bigger and stronger than the opposing teams at just about every position on the field? These guys are monsters.
Beats working in a Junior High cafeteria, Cletis.Dynamite drop in Monty...that broadcast school has really paid off.Crack analysis here. Do you have a newsletter?They do...but in the 1st quarter tonight they were getting pushed around. Washington was the much more physical team to that point.That changed a lot over the rest of the game though.'BusterTBronco said:Is it just me, or do the Seahawks look like they are bigger and stronger than the opposing teams at just about every position on the field? These guys are monsters.
You guys are getting real close to needing a room. Props to whoever wins this war or bigger props to whoever walks away.'Doctor Detroit said:Beats working in a Junior High cafeteria, Cletis.'sho nuff said:Dynamite drop in Monty...that broadcast school has really paid off.'Doctor Detroit said:Crack analysis here. Do you have a newsletter?'sho nuff said:They do...but in the 1st quarter tonight they were getting pushed around. Washington was the much more physical team to that point.That changed a lot over the rest of the game though.'BusterTBronco said:Is it just me, or do the Seahawks look like they are bigger and stronger than the opposing teams at just about every position on the field? These guys are monsters.
At least I threw in a quote from Major League...You guys are getting real close to needing a room. Props to whoever wins this war or bigger props to whoever walks away.'Doctor Detroit said:Beats working in a Junior High cafeteria, Cletis.'sho nuff said:Dynamite drop in Monty...that broadcast school has really paid off.'Doctor Detroit said:Crack analysis here. Do you have a newsletter?'sho nuff said:They do...but in the 1st quarter tonight they were getting pushed around. Washington was the much more physical team to that point.That changed a lot over the rest of the game though.'BusterTBronco said:Is it just me, or do the Seahawks look like they are bigger and stronger than the opposing teams at just about every position on the field? These guys are monsters.
As a niner fan I think I'd rather have had the home game vs the Hawks.'BusterTBronco said:Well, Seattle impressed me today with the way they came back in the 4th quarter. I think the better team lost. San Francisco is probably feeling pretty fortunate that they play Atlanta next week instead of these guys.BTW, when was the last time the #1 DVOA (regular season) team actually ended up winning the superbowl? Seems like it might be a bit of a curse.
Fixed.Plenty of great regular season teams flop in the postseason.'BusterTBronco said:According to DVOA, the Seahawks, Broncos, and Patriots were supposed to be three of the greatest regular season teams of the last 22 years.
And they were a horrible replacement ref call away from losing the Green Bay game and not making the playoffs. There went your point.the seahawks were a play away from winning the atl game and we all know the sea/sf match up would have been a coin flip.
For the life of me I still can't figure out why people keep calling that a horrible call when I've looked at replays and close up's and still can't figure out who should have been awarded the catch but actually lean towards it being he correct call. I've mean we've had no doubt about it bad calls in throughout the history of the game, that was not one of them. That was the media who had been just bursting at the seams waiting to pounce on the first controversial call and so they could make the replacement refs a story but now everyone just parrots it like fact. Carry on.For what it's worth I'm a Steeler fan so no personal bias or love for the Seahawks but I thought they entered the playoffs as the best team in the NFL. I had them just slightly ahead of the 49'ers due mainly to Justin Smith's impact on the defense and had seen more of Wilson than Kapernick to trust him a little more. In my playoff scenario I did have them losing to SF but that was due to homefield. Fact is they did not make it but just because they lost a game I don't think it necessarily makes anyone who considered them the best team or one of the best teams in the league wrong. I thought they outplayed Atlanta but they lost, anyone can lose any week but I don't think it proves anything about the kind of team anyone was over the regular season.And they were a horrible replacement ref call away from losing the Green Bay game and not making the playoffs. There went your point.the seahawks were a play away from winning the atl game and we all know the sea/sf match up would have been a coin flip.
Nope, they made the playoffs with or without the Green Bay game.And they were a horrible replacement ref call away from losing the Green Bay game and not making the playoffs. There went your point.the seahawks were a play away from winning the atl game and we all know the sea/sf match up would have been a coin flip.
Hard to say the Seahawks flopped in the postseason. They won their first game, but lost their top pass rusher to injury in the process. They weren't the same defense in the Falcons game, and it showed as they couldn't generate pressure on Ryan without blitzing. Seahawks had a critical injury at the worst time. I think the worst injury a team could suffer outside of losing your QB is losing your top pass rusher. Quarterbacking and getting pressure on the QB are probably the two most important aspects of a football team.Fixed.Plenty of great regular season teams flop in the postseason.'BusterTBronco said:According to DVOA, the Seahawks, Broncos, and Patriots were supposed to be three of the greatest regular season teams of the last 22 years.
FootballOutsiders loves inventing statistics but they don't really understand them. Playoff seed has been a better predictor of Super Bowl pairings than DVOA since 2005. DVOA performed better than seeding for 2005 Pittsburgh, 2008 Pittsburgh, 2010 Green Bay. That's it. Playoff seeding performed better for 2006 Indy, 2006 Chicago, 2007 NYG, 2008 Arizona, 2009 Indy, 2009 New Orleans, 2011 NYG, so more than twice as many times. (The rest were pushes).why are you so afraid of math?the seahawks were a play away from winning the atl game and we all know the sea/sf match up would have been a coin flip.name a better predictor than DVOA. let me guess, your "gut"?
Ironically, a big part of the reason that the Seahawks won their first game was that the QB of the opposing team was injured. RG3 played, but he shouldn't have been in the game after the first quarter.Not saying that the Seahawks didn't win legit -- they did. But you can't just say they won the first game pure but lost the second game only due to injury. Injuries helped them one game and hurt them the next...that's how the ball bounces in the NFL and it happens to everyone.Hard to say the Seahawks flopped in the postseason. They won their first game, but lost their top pass rusher to injury in the process. They weren't the same defense in the Falcons game, and it showed as they couldn't generate pressure on Ryan without blitzing. Seahawks had a critical injury at the worst time. I think the worst injury a team could suffer outside of losing your QB is losing your top pass rusher. Quarterbacking and getting pressure on the QB are probably the two most important aspects of a football team.Fixed.Plenty of great regular season teams flop in the postseason.'BusterTBronco said:According to DVOA, the Seahawks, Broncos, and Patriots were supposed to be three of the greatest regular season teams of the last 22 years.