David Yudkin
Footballguy
I have been researching all things Patriots recently and came up with the following to report. For starters, let me say that if the Patriots win the turnover battler against the Giants, it's game over right there. I don't mean this matter-of-factly, I mean this LITERALLY.
Here is the breakdown in all the Pats games since Tom Brady became the starting QB in NE. In games where the Patriots had fewer turnovers than their opposition they have gone . . . (DRUMROLL PLEASE) . . . 66-1 (.985).
And don't think that when the Pats are even or -1 in the turnover category they are a lot worse. When they went EVEN in turnovers they went 15-5 (.750). Perhaps even more impressive, in games where they had a -1 turnover differential they went 16-4 (.800).
Add that all together and that gives us a combined record of 97-10 (.907) in games when they had a turnover differential of -1 or better. That, my friends, is why this team is staring down the barrell of their 4th SB title in 7 seasons.
Here is the breakdown:
+6: 1-0
+5: 2-0
+4: 8-0
+3: 14-0
+2: 18-1 (the only loss was to Denver early in Brady's career)
+1: 23-0
0: 15-5
-1: 16-4
OK . . . so what about when they cough the ball up more than their opponents did to the tune of -2 turnovers or worse.
-2: 2-6
-3: 0-5
-4: 1-4
When the Pats have had a -2 turnover differential or worse, they have gone 3-15 (.167).
I can't say that I am surprised at the outcomes (I really don't have any other data to compare it to), but I suspect that the Pats are probably more lethal than other teams if they win the turnover battle.
If you are a Giants fan, you better hope that the Pats are -2 or worse if you want your team to win.
Here is the breakdown in all the Pats games since Tom Brady became the starting QB in NE. In games where the Patriots had fewer turnovers than their opposition they have gone . . . (DRUMROLL PLEASE) . . . 66-1 (.985).
And don't think that when the Pats are even or -1 in the turnover category they are a lot worse. When they went EVEN in turnovers they went 15-5 (.750). Perhaps even more impressive, in games where they had a -1 turnover differential they went 16-4 (.800).
Add that all together and that gives us a combined record of 97-10 (.907) in games when they had a turnover differential of -1 or better. That, my friends, is why this team is staring down the barrell of their 4th SB title in 7 seasons.
Here is the breakdown:
+6: 1-0
+5: 2-0
+4: 8-0
+3: 14-0
+2: 18-1 (the only loss was to Denver early in Brady's career)
+1: 23-0
0: 15-5
-1: 16-4
OK . . . so what about when they cough the ball up more than their opponents did to the tune of -2 turnovers or worse.
-2: 2-6
-3: 0-5
-4: 1-4
When the Pats have had a -2 turnover differential or worse, they have gone 3-15 (.167).
I can't say that I am surprised at the outcomes (I really don't have any other data to compare it to), but I suspect that the Pats are probably more lethal than other teams if they win the turnover battle.
If you are a Giants fan, you better hope that the Pats are -2 or worse if you want your team to win.
Last edited by a moderator:
