It's still a simple game... (1 Viewer)

[P Boy]

Team	RuO	RuD	TOM	TOTALDenver	2	3	2	7Seattle	3	6	7	16Pittsburgh	6	2	9	17Kansas City	4	9	9	22New York (N)	7	15	4	26Cincinnati	10	17	1	28Chicago	9	8	11	28Jacksonville	11	12	6	29Carolina	21	5	3	29San Diego	8	1	23	32Washington	5	11	19	35Indianapolis	15	16	4	35Tampa Bay	16	7	13	36Atlanta	1	23	13	37Dallas	12	14	17	43New England	20	4	21	45Miami	13	19	16	48Baltimore	19	10	26	55Minnesota	29	18	12	59Buffalo	23	32	8	63Philadelphia	28	20	18	66Detroit	26	25	15	66Tennessee	25	22	21	68San Francisco	18	21	29	68Houston	14	31	24	69Oakland	27	24	19	70Arizona	32	13	26	71New Orleans	17	27	31	75Cleveland	22	29	24	75St. Louis	24	30	30	84New York (A)	31	28	26	85Green Bay	30	26	32	88

Current NFL rankings in rushing offense (RuO), rushing defense (RuD), and Turnover margin (TOM)

 

[simsarge]

Am I missing something, or is there nobody on the minus side for turnover margin?

 

[P Boy]

Am I missing something, or is there nobody on the minus side for turnover margin?

Those are NFL rankings, 1-32. Not actual numbers, like +/- TO margins (or rushing average, or rush D average).

 

[simsarge]

Current NFL rankings in rushing offense (RuO), rushing defense (RuD), and Turnover margin (TOM)

Duuuuuh! I can almost read.

 

[simsarge]

Interesting to see the Biils, Vikes and Eaglets all ranked ahead of the Pats. I'da thought otherwise with the Pats reputation as a team for not turning over the ball. Plus with them going to the playoffs and the former watching on TV.

 

[P Boy]

Interesting to see the Biils, Vikes and Eaglets all ranked ahead of the Pats. I'da thought otherwise with the Pats reputation as a team for not turning over the ball. Plus with them going to the playoffs and the former watching on TV.

I think that has a lot to do with the fact that the NE D doesn't generate many turnovers - they are the second worst team in the NFL in takeaways. NE is #10 in the NFL in giveaways (they don't turn the ball over very much in comparison to other teams).

 

[BGP]

Now go back and look at the rankings for the last 15 years. How strongly do these stats correlate to postseason success?Also, what are you using to define rushing? Yards? Yards per carry? Something else?

 

[P Boy]

Now go back and look at the rankings for the last 15 years. How strongly do these stats correlate to postseason success?

No thanks. I'll leave that for you, since you're so interested in history & correlation.

Also, what are you using to define rushing? Yards? Yards per carry? Something else?

Rushing yds per game.

 

[TommyGilmore]

Teams don't necessarily win because they do these things; they do these things because they're winning.

 

[DerangedGridironGeek]

Like the list, but I want something a little more recent. What does this list look like for the last 6-8 weeks? Team play can change from week 1 to week 10 (just ask Phi). I'm not saying that we cant use this data, but that the ability to see both might tell us a little more.

 

[P Boy]

Teams don't necessarily win because they do these things; they do these things because they're winning.

Okay.........

 

[TommyGilmore]

Teams don't necessarily win because they do these things; they do these things because they're winning.

A team that already has a big lead (whether that lead is thanks to rushing, passing, defense, special teams, whatever) is:- more likely to run the ball at the end of the game (therefore skewing its rushing stats)

- less likely to be run on (therefore skewing its defensive rushing stats)

- more likely to get turnovers as the opposition gets desperate (therefore skewing its turnover margin)

San Diego, Pittsburgh and KC are all in the top-10 of your list, yet 2 of them won't be making the playoffs. Meanwhile, the best team in the league (Indy) is not in the top 10.

It's all about cause and effect. You can't simply dedicate yourself to rushing stats and expect to be a winner -- just ask Army.

These teams aren't good simply because they focus on the run; they're good because they have solid players from top to bottom.