http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/teameff Football Outsiders for those who are unaware use Defense-adjusted Value-Over-Average which is very briefly, a highly complicated mathematical formula that looks at every single play, and rates it in the context of the scenario and opponent. Further explanation on the methodology here: http://www.footballoutsiders.com/info/methods#dvoa It goes much further then simple stats; Lets assume Player A throws for 10 yards on a 3rd and 15 (insert Schotty joke) and Player B throws for 7 yards on a 3rd and 5. On a stat sheet Player A has more yards but Player B actually made a much more important play. Hence player B, despite lacking in stats made a larger difference to the game. Examples like this (both on defense and offense) are the backbone of their statistics. Their rankings have historically been a very accurate predictor of team success. Now I am not claiming that I would rank the Jets #2 in all of the land right now, this is just to provide some perspective. Despite somewhat sloppy halves to games and not the gaudiest of wins the Jets have played better football then what most people are crediting them for. When people say "the offense/defensive didn't show up for that half" they often neglect to mention the very good playing that the other side of the ball (and our special teams) are doing. The take home for Jets fans can be that we have the talent and ability to be an elite team, we just simply need to execute consistently.
So the Bengals in your mind are the second best team in the AFC? I understand your point after 16 games but after 7 you have to look a little harder to really see where your team is which was the only purpose of my post.
No, I understand. It's a good look at bucking the weird trends that start in the NFL. Although I didn't like seeing the Bills high up on that list (haven't watched them play yet this year... aside from the 4th qtr of the PATS game) Hopefully as the season progresses this analysis will prove the cream rises to the top, but fluke plays, weird shit and whatever can be the difference in wins and loses..... and in the end, who goes to the dance and who stays home. :jets:
There's a bias built in to the DVOA rankings that is insidious and hard to define. The reason I think this is the case is that the same teams dominate the DVOA rankings from season to season. The Patriots and Steelers are obvious, because they have been among the most successful teams in the NFL this decade. The Ravens and Jets however have been good but not on the same level. Nonetheless the Ravens were #1 in DVOA in 2009 despite having a 9-7 record. The Jets were #9 that season despite having a totally dysfunctional offense for much of the season and finishing 9-7 also. The Falcons on the other hand have been #18 (9-7), #8 (13-3!) and are #14 (4-3, the same as the #2 Jets and #8 Texans.) For some reason DVOA does not like the Falcons very much but it loves the Ravens and Jets. The Colts also have been very unloved by DVOA despite having excellent records. I can't figure out what the bias is but I'm pretty sure it's there.
But if this was the case the system would love Atlanta and Indianapolis and it doesn't. It would love San Diego and it mostly hasn't. It would have hated the Jets in 2009 when Mark Sanchez regular season was looking like rookie rags right up to the playoffs.
In your examples of the Falcons and Jets you prove yourself wrong with their playoff performance. The #8 DVOA Falcons did lose to DVOA #3 GB (who won the SB despite being 10-6) which sorta proves in your instance that they ARE in fact good indicators of team quality. This is not about record; it is about teams that can make positive plays when they need them most, hence why the Jets may be rated so highly the last few years. Which by the way, we have gone to back-to-back AFC championship games again showing why a high DVOA would be warranted the last two years.
Jets had by far and away the best passing defense in 09'. I am at work and didn't research it. I can't say the reason for the other teams.......
It just doesn't work though. The two best records in football in 2009 were the two teams that played in the Super Bowl, 14-2 Colts vs 13-3 Saints. They were ranked #6 and #8 respectively in DVOA that season. The two teams that lost the conference championship games were ranked 7 and 9, that being the Vikings and the Jets. The top 5 were completely missing from the championship round. What are the odds that DVOA is a real statistic when everybody who is ranked in the top 5 is gone before the conference championships and the two teams widely viewed as the best in the NFL that season play in the Super Bowl? It just doesn't fit. There's a bias in the ranking somehow although I can't find it.
Read the methodology of their calculations if you want a picture of how it is exactly calculated. If not you have to sorta shift your mindset to understand it. How it is calculated is not by stats in the way we consider them. 200 yards passing is not always as good of a day as 125 yards passing. It is about the impact of plays that are made.
The Cowboys played us and the Pats extremely well. The Bills have beaten some good teams, albeit after they blew huge leads.
do they weigh offense, defense and special teams equally? if so, then this number makes some more sense but as important as special teams are, they shouldnt hold as much weight as either offense or defense
Jets(#9) beat Bengals(#19) and then Chargers (#11) then lost to IND (#6) Ravens(#1) beat NE (#3) then Lost to IND (#6) Vikings(#7) beat Dallas (#5) then lost to (#8) Saints Arizona(#13) beat GB (#3) then lost to (#8) Saints Dallas (#5) beat Philadelphia (#4) Heads up DVOA went 7-3 and only once in the four incorrect games did a game occur (AZ-GB) where the underdog was more then 5 places away from the favorite and won. Upsets still happen. ESPN "Accuscore" (which has the highest percentage of any analyst for ESPN at picking games straight up) went 6-4. DVOA gets more robust throughout the season which means as more games are played the ratings become more accurate so I would not buy the superbowl tickets just yet, this is just stating in statistical terms that the Jets are a better football team then they have been playing like and MAY even be in the discussion of the elite teams by the end of the season.
No they are weighted by the amount of plays that occur (i.e. much less then offense or defense). Notice how the percentages don't get above about 12% for special teams but can get as high as near 40% for offense and defense.
YES.. Look at this... They are including pre-season data which declines over time. I guess they have to start with something early in the season but I think that's pretty stupid overall. Pre-season data is utter crapola GIGO...
As an addition the heads up DVOA went 10-3 in heads up match ups this week. This ties ESPN's Accuscore. The games it missed on were Steelers-Patriots, New Orleans-Saint Louis and Philadelphia-Dallas.
