Hot Sauce Guy
Footballguy
With Ridley out, Mixon & CMC status up in the air & a few other issues, suddenly I have a slew of lineup decisions to make. While considering replacements, naturally I looked at strength of schedule. I'm not asking for any help here, as I have a good idea of who I'm going to play, but I thought it was interesting how much of an illusion these rankings can sometimes be.
Not sure how much this has been discussed here, but "rank against the pass/run" is kind of deceptive. Like, does anyone really believe the Raiders are 9th against the pass? Especially after the injuries they took this week? Or are the Raiders 9th against the pass because teams run on them so much? I certainly wouldn't bench any Chicago receivers this week based on that ranking.
I'm just sayin - there are good stats & bad stats to judge matchups by in the NFL.
The rank vs pass & rank vs run seem like two of the more deceptive ones. Sure, they can be accurate. I do mostly believe Pittsburgh & TB are both stout against the run & they'll probably earn their ranking week in & week out.
But then again, some of that may simply be that they haven't been tested much either. After week 1, TB was likely ranked #1 against the run, but is that because they're an impenetrable wall or because Dallas ran like, 5 times the whole game, and only once from something other than a shotgun?
Anyway, probably no great revelation to most of the sharks here, but it is something I've thought about over the years. Teams that give up a ton of rushing yards might give the false impression of being good against the pass, and vice verse.
Who might this year's pretenders and contenders be after 4 weeks?
Which teams do you believe are "ranked" too high against the run or pass based on the potential illusion?
Not sure how much this has been discussed here, but "rank against the pass/run" is kind of deceptive. Like, does anyone really believe the Raiders are 9th against the pass? Especially after the injuries they took this week? Or are the Raiders 9th against the pass because teams run on them so much? I certainly wouldn't bench any Chicago receivers this week based on that ranking.
I'm just sayin - there are good stats & bad stats to judge matchups by in the NFL.
The rank vs pass & rank vs run seem like two of the more deceptive ones. Sure, they can be accurate. I do mostly believe Pittsburgh & TB are both stout against the run & they'll probably earn their ranking week in & week out.
But then again, some of that may simply be that they haven't been tested much either. After week 1, TB was likely ranked #1 against the run, but is that because they're an impenetrable wall or because Dallas ran like, 5 times the whole game, and only once from something other than a shotgun?
Anyway, probably no great revelation to most of the sharks here, but it is something I've thought about over the years. Teams that give up a ton of rushing yards might give the false impression of being good against the pass, and vice verse.
Who might this year's pretenders and contenders be after 4 weeks?
Which teams do you believe are "ranked" too high against the run or pass based on the potential illusion?
