In-depth divisional playoff previews - The Orange Mane

Lidderer · 01-13-2006, 09:14 AM

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/200...previews/3521/

quite the tease only giving the nfc one just now, but the other will be up shortly, and i'll post it too.

best previews out there.

Lidderer · 01-13-2006, 02:48 PM

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/200...previews/3523/

afc preview

Lidderer · 01-13-2006, 02:49 PM

New England at Denver

No long preview here. Picking the Patriots to lose a playoff game at this point is silly, not to mention disrespectful. The numbers say that New England has a 126% chance of winning this game. Frankly, Denver fans might want to consider doing something else Saturday night. Needlepoint, perhaps.

(hums quietly)

(still humming)

(taps foot)

Are they gone? Did we get rid of the people who don’t want to read anything negative about the Patriots? OK, good, now we can get around to discussing these two teams like normal adults.

This is where I usually put in the disclaimer about the fact that I’m a Patriots fan and at Football Outsiders we want to put our biases out in the open. The last two years, I was accused of being a Patriots homer because our numbers said the Patriots were the best team in football. This year, Patriots fans hate me. I’m here to do objective analysis and not let me personal rooting interests decide what I write, but it puts me in the very strange position where rooting for my team — and they are still my team, nothing will change that — also means that I’m rooting for another week of nonstop e-mails from Patriots yahoos, only some of which will get intercepted by the intern.

What the Patriots are attempting to do this year would be historic, and I’m not talking about becoming the first team to ever win three straight Super Bowls, as I detail in an excerpt from an article I wrote for Wednesday’s New York Sun.
THE PATRIOTS AIM TO MAKE HISTORY, TWICE

If the Patriots win this year’s Super Bowl, they will not only be the first team to ever win three in a row. They will also be the worst regular-season team to ever win the Super Bowl, period. Only one team has ever won the Super Bowl with the same 10-6 record as this year’s Patriots: the 1988 San Francisco 49ers.

Patriots fans might object that New England wasn’t really trying to win its final game and should have finished 11-5. Still, only two teams have won the Super Bowl with an 11-5 record, the 1980 Oakland Raiders and the Patriots themselves in 2001.

Most readers know of the Pythaogrean projection, which estimates how many games a team will win based simply on points scored and allowed (explained here). In a 16-game season, only one team has won the Super Bowl despite less than 10 projected wins: the 1980 Oakland Raiders, with 9.5 projected wins. This year’s Patriots had just 9.1 projected wins. (The leaders were Indianapolis with 12.7 and Seattle with 12.3.)

To win their third straight Super Bowl, New England would face the most difficult playoff path in NFL history. Last year’s Patriots defeated three teams with a combined 40 wins to set a record for the strongest opposition in a three-game Super Bowl run. The Baltimore Ravens, however, faced four teams with a combined 48 wins when they won the Super Bowl as a wild card in 2000.

If the Patriots were to win their third straight Super Bowl, they would have to go through Jacksonville (12-4), Denver (13-3), probably Indianapolis (14-2), and either Seattle (13-3) or another NFC team (11-5). That opposition represents 50 or 52 wins depending on the NFC champion.

New England quarterback Tom Brady is often compared to Joe Montana, and the Patriots will try to follow the path of Montana’s 1988 49ers, the only team to win the Super Bowl after a 10-6 season.

Though the 49ers were not defending champions, they had a five-year playoff streak and were coming off a 13-2 season. The 49ers struggled their way to a 6-5 record before reeling off four straight wins to claim yet another NFC West championship. (Like the Patriots, the 1988 49ers lost their final game after clinching a playoff spot.) The 49ers got past Minnesota and then won the NFC Championship by beating the league’s top team, Chicago, thus avenging an earlier Monday night loss. A 20-16 comeback win over Cincinnati in the Super Bowl completed the unlikely title run.

But while the 49ers may have accomplished a feat that the Patriots are trying to duplicate, they were not the only team to try. The 1984 Washington Redskins were coming off back-to-back Super Bowl appearances. At midseason, after getting creamed by the archrival New York Giants, they were just 5-4. But they finished with six wins in seven games to enter the playoffs as one of the league’s hottest teams — only to lose their first playoff game to Chicago.

The 1974 Dolphins had won the previous two Super Bowls but started the season just 3-2. They won eight of nine to finish the season, but lost in the playoffs to the team with the most wins that year, Oakland. The 1998 Packers and 1979 Cowboys also followed back-to-back Super Bowls with playoff seasons but found that championship experience could not make up for weaknesses that opened up that season, and each failed in the postseason.

Obviously, not all of these teams are alike, and Patriots fans will object, saying that the Patriots now are not the same as the team that was 4-4 at midseason. And that’s where our usual preview begins…

How do we identify a great football team? Do we look at the past few weeks, or the entire season, or should we go back to last season too? Perhaps we should toss out numbers and judge based on playoff experience, home field advantage, or unquantifiable qualities like "swagger." No game this year poses this question like the rematch of Denver and New England.

The Broncos are 13-2 since an opening day upset by Miami. The two losses came on the road by a combined five points. The wins included a 28-20 victory over the defending champions, but the game wasn’t really that close: Denver was winning 28-3 in the third quarter before New England came back against a prevent defense.

But the Patriots now are very different from the Patriots then. In that loss, the Patriots played without All-Pro defensive tackle Richard Seymour, inside linebacker Tedy Bruschi, third receiver/nickel back Troy Brown, and their top two running backs, Corey Dillon and Kevin Faulk. Patriots cornerback Duane Starks was repeatedly beaten by Denver wide receivers that day, and rookie safety James Sanders was making his first career start. Both have now been replaced by players who, while not as good as the players from the 2004 Patriots, are at least league average. The Patriots are red hot now, with five wins in their last six games, including last week’s 28-3 demolition of 12-4 Jacksonville.

What few people realize is that the Broncos today aren’t the Broncos of that game either. Early in the season, Denver was eeking out close wins despite terrible play in some very important situations. Through six weeks, the Denver offense ranked 28th in third-down conversion rate, and the Broncos were one of the league’s worst red zone teams on both offense and defense.

Since playing New England, the Denver offense is seventh in third-down conversion rate. Red zone DVOA on offense has gone from 23rd in the NFL to ninth, and red zone DVOA on defense has gone from 28th to sixth.
WHEN THE PATRIOTS HAVE THE BALL

The NFL says that Denver has the fourth-worst pass defense in the league. Football Outsiders says that Denver has the fourth-best pass defense in the league. What’s going on here?

The Broncos’ defense is a prime example of why the official NFL team rankings by total yardage are ridiculous. The NFL says the Broncos are 29th in pass defense, allowing 228 yards per game. Of course, the Broncos also face 38.3 passes per game, two more than any other team and six more than the NFL average. All three of their division rivals rank in the top 12 in passing yards. Only four defenses had more interceptions and only two caused more fumbles on passing plays.

This wacky NFL ranking is one reason why people don’t realize just how good Denver was this season. In reality, Denver’s pass defense provides a good match for the Patriots, who have the best air attack outside of Indianapolis. Denver’s run defense is mediocre, and so is New England’s running game. Actually, the Denver defense is much like the Jacksonville defense that the Patriots faced last week, except healthy. The one big difference is that Denver’s pass rush never gets to the quarterback, and the Broncos were last in the league in adjusted sack rate, which measures sacks per pass play adjusted for situation and opponent.

The Broncos are the best defense against tight ends and second-best against slot receivers, but middle of the road against starting wideouts. So expect more of Deion Branch and David Givens, and less of Ben Watson and Troy Brown. And while Denver’s defense has improved in the red zone, New England has one of the best red zone offenses in football.
WHEN THE BRONCOS HAVE THE BALL

Denver built that victory over New England on big plays: a 72-yard pass to Rod Smith, a 55-yard pass to Ashley Lelie, and a 68-yard run by Tatum Bell. But both pass plays came against cornerback Duane Starks, who was burned so often early in the season that the Patriots finally had to stick him on injured reserve, unable to pay the fire insurance. Starks is recovering, but if he comes back next year, he’ll have to wear a mask like Dr. Doom.

Meanwhile, as I’ve noted numerous times, the Patriots defense has led the league for three straight years when it comes to allowing the fewest rushing yards on long runs more than 10 yards from the line of scrimmage. That run by Bell happens to be the only carry over 20 yards allowed by New England all year. Bell also carried the ball on the second-highest run against New England, the only one of 20 yards. The Patriots played LaDainian Tomlinson, Larry Johnson, Warrick Dunn, Cadillac Williams — and none of these guys could break one for 20 yards.

Of course, after those two runs, Bell showed why he may never be an every-down back: He tires out too quickly. After gaining 109 yards on his first seven carries, he gained only five yards on his final six carries (and had a fumble). The Patriots should be more worried about the consistent pounding of Mike Anderson than they should be about the potential for Bell to make a big play. But they’ve allowed just 3.2 yards per carry to running backs since Seymour returned in Week 10, so they match up well with Denver’s league-best running game.

More likely, Denver will gain yardage with a succession of medium-length passes. New England’s secondary has improved without Starks, but it is still the team weakness. In particular, the Patriots keep getting burned by second and third receivers, while keeping number one receivers in check. They gave up big games to guys like Samie Parker and Donte Stallworth. Last week, Matt Jones, Ernest Wilford, and even Reggie "The Canty Dance" Williams gained more yardage than Jimmy Smith. For Denver, that means Ashley Lelie, who has had a strong second half. Third receiver Charlie Adams can be found way, way down here on our secondary table of wide receivers near guys like Tyrone Calico, Taylor Jacobs, and Bobby Wade.

Patriots fans expect Denver quarterback Jake Plummer to make a mistake like the Plummer of the past, but Plummer has only thrown four interceptions in his last 14 games, while the Patriots were near the bottom of the league with just 10 picks — half of which came from quarterbacks named "Losman" or "Bollinger." And as good as the New England offense is in the red zone, the New England defense is just as bad.
SPECIAL TEAMS

Broncos kicker Jason Elam actually had a subpar year, once numbers are adjusted for the altitude in Denver. But with longer kickoffs at home, he doesn’t need to worry so much about New England’s strong kick returns (ranked eighth in the league). The thin air is also supposed to allow longer field goals, but Elam missed his three longest kicks at home, a 52-yarder and two 53-yarders. Adam Vinatieri also missed a 53-yarder here in the first matchup, but he’s still the greatest clutch kicker in NFL history.
OUTLOOK

And now, I would like to share a secret with the class. As most of you know, the formula used for weighted DVOA is based on an attempt to be as accurate as possible for every single NFL team over the last few years. Obviously, some teams can’t be painted with the same broad brush, and this is what New England fans (with the exception of the one living at my house) claim about the current Patriots.

DVOA Since Week 12
(Meaningless Games Excluded)
TEAM OFF DEF ST TOTAL
NE 12.1% -18.6% 0.7% 31.4%
DEN 19.0% -6.1% 0.0% 25.1%

So, out of curiosity, I decided to figure out the DVOA rating for New England and Denver, but only since the Patriots got all their players back. That would go back to Week 12, the loss to Kansas City. Patriots fans may object that the current streak of strong play began the next week, but that’s not fair to Denver, which lost to the Chiefs on the road in Week 13 just like New England did in Week 12. So we go Week 12-16, plus the first half of Week 17 for Denver, and the wild card game for New England.

Surprise! Even if we include both Kansas City losses — and Denver’s loss was closer than New England’s loss — New England actually comes out ahead since Week 12.

So the Patriots have a much better chance to win this game than the full-season numbers might indicate, but the Broncos are a much better team than people are giving them credit for. On a neutral field, with equal rest, the Patriots would probably be a slight favorite. But they play the regular season for a reason, and the home field and extra week of preparation give the Broncos a slight advantage in a game that could easily go the other way.

Merlin · 01-13-2006, 03:18 PM

Obviously his weights for rushing D still have some problems when analyzing Denver. There is now way they should be rated ~17. We have seen them time and time again stop great rushing teams in the first half when it mattered, and allow meaningless rushes when Denver had big leads. Although FO accounts for these factors, the weightings must be off as Denver's D would indicate. Ironically, this is not the first time this season his weighting system has been fairly biased against Denver. Statistical anomalies exist, but it is very strange that his system hit Denver twice in one season. There must be something about Denver's style of play that must confound his data gathering/analysis. That being said, I like his stuff, and for the moment it is by far the best out there.

epicSocialism4tw · 01-13-2006, 03:29 PM

Obviously, my bone of contention with this guy's analysis is that he eventually decides to use his statistical ranking of the Pats after week 12. He is blatantly taking his sample from the Patriots' most productive stretch and subjecting the Broncos' analysis to the same stretch of games. During that stretch Denver played Dallas, KC, Baltimore, Buffalo, Oakland and SD. The Pats played KC, the Jets twice, Buffalo, Miami, and Tampa Bay. There are some obvious similarites in the schedule, but a sample size that small will likely produce more pronounced differences than a larger one would, like say, the whole season. Outliers affect the whole more dramatically. A schedule that includes the Jets twice would pad anybody's statistics. I believe that Denver gave up an entire 12 yards rushing to NY and shut them out 27-0.

Kaylore · 01-13-2006, 04:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by angryllama

Obviously, my bone of contention with this guy's analysis is that he eventually decides to use his statistical ranking of the Pats after week 12. He is blatantly taking his sample from the Patriots' most productive stretch and subjecting the Broncos' analysis to the same stretch of games. During that stretch Denver played Dallas, KC, Baltimore, Buffalo, Oakland and SD. The Pats played KC, the Jets twice, Buffalo, Miami, and Tampa Bay. There are some obvious similarites in the schedule, but a sample size that small will likely produce more pronounced differences than a larger one would, like say, the whole season. Outliers affect the whole more dramatically. A schedule that includes the Jets twice would pad anybody's statistics. I believe that Denver gave up an entire 12 yards rushing to NY and shut them out 27-0.

Can you blame him? He admits he's a Pats homer in his article.

Dagmar · 01-13-2006, 04:56 PM

Another

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3690072/..._spt_novacek05

Jay Novcek...

Patriots (11-6) at Broncos (13-3)

Time: 8 p.m. ET, CBS

This could be a real good game. Home-field advantage will play a huge role for the Broncos, who play so well at home. The way Denver can do things offensively, mixing a strong running game with bootlegs by Jake Plummer and deep passes, New England will have a hard time tuning into the Denver attack.
To beat the Patriots, a team has to do everything well: Run, use play action and pass. This will be a tough team for New England to defend.
For the Broncos defense, they need to be patient. Tom Brady is such a calm quarterback, and he tricks defenses into trying too hard to stop him. He doesn’t make mistakes, and he will jump on any errors you make.
The Broncos must avoid mistakes and put pressure on Brady.

Players to watch: The Broncos linebackers are the key. They have to play within their schemes and make plays at the right times, because Brady will look defenders off and create confusion. The Denver defense must stay disciplined. For the Patriots, Deion Branch and David Givens will need to find openings and get free for Brady. I expect New England to have to play catch-up, so they will open up the offense and the receivers will need to come through. They are solid players who make plays.

Pick: Broncos, 28-21

BostonIrish · 01-13-2006, 05:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by angryllama

Obviously, my bone of contention with this guy's analysis is that he eventually decides to use his statistical ranking of the Pats after week 12. He is blatantly taking his sample from the Patriots' most productive stretch and subjecting the Broncos' analysis to the same stretch of games. During that stretch Denver played Dallas, KC, Baltimore, Buffalo, Oakland and SD. The Pats played KC, the Jets twice, Buffalo, Miami, and Tampa Bay. There are some obvious similarites in the schedule, but a sample size that small will likely produce more pronounced differences than a larger one would, like say, the whole season. Outliers affect the whole more dramatically. A schedule that includes the Jets twice would pad anybody's statistics. I believe that Denver gave up an entire 12 yards rushing to NY and shut them out 27-0.

HE did say the reason he picked week 12 was because that was the first week the Patriots had all their players back. His stats are based on the healthy Pats versus the healthy Broncos, at least according to what he wrote.

epicSocialism4tw · 01-13-2006, 06:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BostonIrish

HE did say the reason he picked week 12 was because that was the first week the Patriots had all their players back. His stats are based on the healthy Pats versus the healthy Broncos, at least according to what he wrote.

If you start from the point of week 12, you dont get an entirely healthy Broncos squad through to the end of the season. Significant players missed time during that period, and in the last game Denver pounded SD with their reserves. They won the game, but the statistics were odd from that mathup. Van Pelt completed 2 of 7 throws for 7 yards. The defense sat many of the starters. The stats are definately in an odd state of flux for the Broncos in that period of time. I like his analysis, but statistically you have to take it with a grain of salt.

Merlin · 01-13-2006, 06:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by angryllama

If you start from the point of week 12, you dont get an entirely healthy Broncos squad through to the end of the season. Significant players missed time during that period, and in the last game Denver pounded SD with their reserves. They won the game, but the statistics were odd from that mathup. Van Pelt completed 2 of 7 throws for 7 yards. The defense sat many of the starters. The stats are definately in an odd state of flux for the Broncos in that period of time. I like his analysis, but statistically you have to take it with a grain of salt.

I am pretty sure he compensated for those factors, especially considering NE didn't even try to win their last game.

BostonIrish · 01-13-2006, 06:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by angryllama

If you start from the point of week 12, you dont get an entirely healthy Broncos squad through to the end of the season. Significant players missed time during that period, and in the last game Denver pounded SD with their reserves. They won the game, but the statistics were odd from that mathup. Van Pelt completed 2 of 7 throws for 7 yards. The defense sat many of the starters. The stats are definately in an odd state of flux for the Broncos in that period of time. I like his analysis, but statistically you have to take it with a grain of salt.

I agree, you have to take all analysis with a grain of salt. Afterall, these guys and everyone else is making a prediction that no one can say with complete certainty they KNOW will happen. It is good stuff though.

Merlin · 01-13-2006, 06:12 PM

Actually, a more accurate statistically analysis would have to try and replicate the circumstances you are trying to predict; i.e. DENVER AT HOME AND NE AT AWAY GAMES. As a statistician he knows this is important. As a football fan he knows this is very important. As a football fan with an understanding of statistics, he knows this is CRITICAL. Look at any team's stats away and at home. It is highly unlikely that they are consistent. The game planning is different, the strategy is different, and the effects of the location are different. So what do we know here that is relevant?

1. It is harder to rush away from home because timing is affected by noise
Advantage Broncos in rushing attack and rushing D

So how does the return of the players affect that? He would have to provide that data.

2. TB is marginally good away from home this yr. The injuries in this case are irrelevant because all we are talking about is players who have returned and made a difference. So what are Brady's stats away from home? You don't want to know. And Denver and Plummer's, try inverse correlation to Brady.

Both of the above are critical in any statistical analysis and ironically they are both TOTALLY IGNORED. Again, that is my problem with FO, some times there are statistical issues that are easy and clear to discern, he should have the knowledge to recognize it, but he seems to be completely oblivious to them.

epicSocialism4tw · 01-13-2006, 06:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Merlin

Actually, a more accurate statistically analysis would have to try and replicate the circumstances you are trying to predict; i.e. DENVER AT HOME AND NE AT AWAY GAMES. As a statistician he knows this is important. As a football fan he knows this is very important. As a football fan with an understanding of statistics, he knows this is CRITICAL. Look at any team's stats away and at home. It is highly unlikely that they are consistent. The game planning is different, the strategy is different, and the effects of the location are different. So what do we know here that is relevant?

1. It is harder to rush away from home because timing is affected by noise
Advantage Broncos in rushing attack and rushing D

So how does the return of the players affect that? He would have to provide that data.

2. TB is marginally good away from home this yr. The injuries in this case are irrelevant because all we are talking about is players who have returned and made a difference. So what are Brady's stats away from home? You don't want to know. And Denver and Plummer's, try inverse correlation to Brady.

Both of the above are critical in any statistical analysis and ironically they are both TOTALLY IGNORED. Again, that is my problem with FO, some times there are statistical issues that are easy and clear to discern, he should have the knowledge to recognize it, but he seems to be completely oblivious to them.

Well, at least he did say that he was a Pats homer.

OrangeShadow · 01-13-2006, 06:01 PM

the guys as footballoutsiders are pretty funny and actually intellectual

listopencil · 01-13-2006, 06:43 PM

Pretty good article by the Pats fan. Enjoyable read.

01-13-2006, 09:14 AM	#1
Lidderer & Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 1,780	In-depth divisional playoff previews http://www.footballoutsiders.com/200...previews/3521/ quite the tease only giving the nfc one just now, but the other will be up shortly, and i'll post it too. best previews out there.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

01-13-2006, 02:48 PM	#2
Lidderer & Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 1,780	http://www.footballoutsiders.com/200...previews/3523/ afc preview

01-13-2006, 02:49 PM	#3
Lidderer & Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 1,780	New England at Denver No long preview here. Picking the Patriots to lose a playoff game at this point is silly, not to mention disrespectful. The numbers say that New England has a 126% chance of winning this game. Frankly, Denver fans might want to consider doing something else Saturday night. Needlepoint, perhaps. (hums quietly) (still humming) (taps foot) Are they gone? Did we get rid of the people who don’t want to read anything negative about the Patriots? OK, good, now we can get around to discussing these two teams like normal adults. This is where I usually put in the disclaimer about the fact that I’m a Patriots fan and at Football Outsiders we want to put our biases out in the open. The last two years, I was accused of being a Patriots homer because our numbers said the Patriots were the best team in football. This year, Patriots fans hate me. I’m here to do objective analysis and not let me personal rooting interests decide what I write, but it puts me in the very strange position where rooting for my team — and they are still my team, nothing will change that — also means that I’m rooting for another week of nonstop e-mails from Patriots yahoos, only some of which will get intercepted by the intern. What the Patriots are attempting to do this year would be historic, and I’m not talking about becoming the first team to ever win three straight Super Bowls, as I detail in an excerpt from an article I wrote for Wednesday’s New York Sun. THE PATRIOTS AIM TO MAKE HISTORY, TWICE If the Patriots win this year’s Super Bowl, they will not only be the first team to ever win three in a row. They will also be the worst regular-season team to ever win the Super Bowl, period. Only one team has ever won the Super Bowl with the same 10-6 record as this year’s Patriots: the 1988 San Francisco 49ers. Patriots fans might object that New England wasn’t really trying to win its final game and should have finished 11-5. Still, only two teams have won the Super Bowl with an 11-5 record, the 1980 Oakland Raiders and the Patriots themselves in 2001. Most readers know of the Pythaogrean projection, which estimates how many games a team will win based simply on points scored and allowed (explained here). In a 16-game season, only one team has won the Super Bowl despite less than 10 projected wins: the 1980 Oakland Raiders, with 9.5 projected wins. This year’s Patriots had just 9.1 projected wins. (The leaders were Indianapolis with 12.7 and Seattle with 12.3.) To win their third straight Super Bowl, New England would face the most difficult playoff path in NFL history. Last year’s Patriots defeated three teams with a combined 40 wins to set a record for the strongest opposition in a three-game Super Bowl run. The Baltimore Ravens, however, faced four teams with a combined 48 wins when they won the Super Bowl as a wild card in 2000. If the Patriots were to win their third straight Super Bowl, they would have to go through Jacksonville (12-4), Denver (13-3), probably Indianapolis (14-2), and either Seattle (13-3) or another NFC team (11-5). That opposition represents 50 or 52 wins depending on the NFC champion. New England quarterback Tom Brady is often compared to Joe Montana, and the Patriots will try to follow the path of Montana’s 1988 49ers, the only team to win the Super Bowl after a 10-6 season. Though the 49ers were not defending champions, they had a five-year playoff streak and were coming off a 13-2 season. The 49ers struggled their way to a 6-5 record before reeling off four straight wins to claim yet another NFC West championship. (Like the Patriots, the 1988 49ers lost their final game after clinching a playoff spot.) The 49ers got past Minnesota and then won the NFC Championship by beating the league’s top team, Chicago, thus avenging an earlier Monday night loss. A 20-16 comeback win over Cincinnati in the Super Bowl completed the unlikely title run. But while the 49ers may have accomplished a feat that the Patriots are trying to duplicate, they were not the only team to try. The 1984 Washington Redskins were coming off back-to-back Super Bowl appearances. At midseason, after getting creamed by the archrival New York Giants, they were just 5-4. But they finished with six wins in seven games to enter the playoffs as one of the league’s hottest teams — only to lose their first playoff game to Chicago. The 1974 Dolphins had won the previous two Super Bowls but started the season just 3-2. They won eight of nine to finish the season, but lost in the playoffs to the team with the most wins that year, Oakland. The 1998 Packers and 1979 Cowboys also followed back-to-back Super Bowls with playoff seasons but found that championship experience could not make up for weaknesses that opened up that season, and each failed in the postseason. Obviously, not all of these teams are alike, and Patriots fans will object, saying that the Patriots now are not the same as the team that was 4-4 at midseason. And that’s where our usual preview begins… How do we identify a great football team? Do we look at the past few weeks, or the entire season, or should we go back to last season too? Perhaps we should toss out numbers and judge based on playoff experience, home field advantage, or unquantifiable qualities like "swagger." No game this year poses this question like the rematch of Denver and New England. The Broncos are 13-2 since an opening day upset by Miami. The two losses came on the road by a combined five points. The wins included a 28-20 victory over the defending champions, but the game wasn’t really that close: Denver was winning 28-3 in the third quarter before New England came back against a prevent defense. But the Patriots now are very different from the Patriots then. In that loss, the Patriots played without All-Pro defensive tackle Richard Seymour, inside linebacker Tedy Bruschi, third receiver/nickel back Troy Brown, and their top two running backs, Corey Dillon and Kevin Faulk. Patriots cornerback Duane Starks was repeatedly beaten by Denver wide receivers that day, and rookie safety James Sanders was making his first career start. Both have now been replaced by players who, while not as good as the players from the 2004 Patriots, are at least league average. The Patriots are red hot now, with five wins in their last six games, including last week’s 28-3 demolition of 12-4 Jacksonville. What few people realize is that the Broncos today aren’t the Broncos of that game either. Early in the season, Denver was eeking out close wins despite terrible play in some very important situations. Through six weeks, the Denver offense ranked 28th in third-down conversion rate, and the Broncos were one of the league’s worst red zone teams on both offense and defense. Since playing New England, the Denver offense is seventh in third-down conversion rate. Red zone DVOA on offense has gone from 23rd in the NFL to ninth, and red zone DVOA on defense has gone from 28th to sixth. WHEN THE PATRIOTS HAVE THE BALL The NFL says that Denver has the fourth-worst pass defense in the league. Football Outsiders says that Denver has the fourth-best pass defense in the league. What’s going on here? The Broncos’ defense is a prime example of why the official NFL team rankings by total yardage are ridiculous. The NFL says the Broncos are 29th in pass defense, allowing 228 yards per game. Of course, the Broncos also face 38.3 passes per game, two more than any other team and six more than the NFL average. All three of their division rivals rank in the top 12 in passing yards. Only four defenses had more interceptions and only two caused more fumbles on passing plays. This wacky NFL ranking is one reason why people don’t realize just how good Denver was this season. In reality, Denver’s pass defense provides a good match for the Patriots, who have the best air attack outside of Indianapolis. Denver’s run defense is mediocre, and so is New England’s running game. Actually, the Denver defense is much like the Jacksonville defense that the Patriots faced last week, except healthy. The one big difference is that Denver’s pass rush never gets to the quarterback, and the Broncos were last in the league in adjusted sack rate, which measures sacks per pass play adjusted for situation and opponent. The Broncos are the best defense against tight ends and second-best against slot receivers, but middle of the road against starting wideouts. So expect more of Deion Branch and David Givens, and less of Ben Watson and Troy Brown. And while Denver’s defense has improved in the red zone, New England has one of the best red zone offenses in football. WHEN THE BRONCOS HAVE THE BALL Denver built that victory over New England on big plays: a 72-yard pass to Rod Smith, a 55-yard pass to Ashley Lelie, and a 68-yard run by Tatum Bell. But both pass plays came against cornerback Duane Starks, who was burned so often early in the season that the Patriots finally had to stick him on injured reserve, unable to pay the fire insurance. Starks is recovering, but if he comes back next year, he’ll have to wear a mask like Dr. Doom. Meanwhile, as I’ve noted numerous times, the Patriots defense has led the league for three straight years when it comes to allowing the fewest rushing yards on long runs more than 10 yards from the line of scrimmage. That run by Bell happens to be the only carry over 20 yards allowed by New England all year. Bell also carried the ball on the second-highest run against New England, the only one of 20 yards. The Patriots played LaDainian Tomlinson, Larry Johnson, Warrick Dunn, Cadillac Williams — and none of these guys could break one for 20 yards. Of course, after those two runs, Bell showed why he may never be an every-down back: He tires out too quickly. After gaining 109 yards on his first seven carries, he gained only five yards on his final six carries (and had a fumble). The Patriots should be more worried about the consistent pounding of Mike Anderson than they should be about the potential for Bell to make a big play. But they’ve allowed just 3.2 yards per carry to running backs since Seymour returned in Week 10, so they match up well with Denver’s league-best running game. More likely, Denver will gain yardage with a succession of medium-length passes. New England’s secondary has improved without Starks, but it is still the team weakness. In particular, the Patriots keep getting burned by second and third receivers, while keeping number one receivers in check. They gave up big games to guys like Samie Parker and Donte Stallworth. Last week, Matt Jones, Ernest Wilford, and even Reggie "The Canty Dance" Williams gained more yardage than Jimmy Smith. For Denver, that means Ashley Lelie, who has had a strong second half. Third receiver Charlie Adams can be found way, way down here on our secondary table of wide receivers near guys like Tyrone Calico, Taylor Jacobs, and Bobby Wade. Patriots fans expect Denver quarterback Jake Plummer to make a mistake like the Plummer of the past, but Plummer has only thrown four interceptions in his last 14 games, while the Patriots were near the bottom of the league with just 10 picks — half of which came from quarterbacks named "Losman" or "Bollinger." And as good as the New England offense is in the red zone, the New England defense is just as bad. SPECIAL TEAMS Broncos kicker Jason Elam actually had a subpar year, once numbers are adjusted for the altitude in Denver. But with longer kickoffs at home, he doesn’t need to worry so much about New England’s strong kick returns (ranked eighth in the league). The thin air is also supposed to allow longer field goals, but Elam missed his three longest kicks at home, a 52-yarder and two 53-yarders. Adam Vinatieri also missed a 53-yarder here in the first matchup, but he’s still the greatest clutch kicker in NFL history. OUTLOOK And now, I would like to share a secret with the class. As most of you know, the formula used for weighted DVOA is based on an attempt to be as accurate as possible for every single NFL team over the last few years. Obviously, some teams can’t be painted with the same broad brush, and this is what New England fans (with the exception of the one living at my house) claim about the current Patriots. DVOA Since Week 12 (Meaningless Games Excluded) TEAM OFF DEF ST TOTAL NE 12.1% -18.6% 0.7% 31.4% DEN 19.0% -6.1% 0.0% 25.1% So, out of curiosity, I decided to figure out the DVOA rating for New England and Denver, but only since the Patriots got all their players back. That would go back to Week 12, the loss to Kansas City. Patriots fans may object that the current streak of strong play began the next week, but that’s not fair to Denver, which lost to the Chiefs on the road in Week 13 just like New England did in Week 12. So we go Week 12-16, plus the first half of Week 17 for Denver, and the wild card game for New England. Surprise! Even if we include both Kansas City losses — and Denver’s loss was closer than New England’s loss — New England actually comes out ahead since Week 12. So the Patriots have a much better chance to win this game than the full-season numbers might indicate, but the Broncos are a much better team than people are giving them credit for. On a neutral field, with equal rest, the Patriots would probably be a slight favorite. But they play the regular season for a reason, and the home field and extra week of preparation give the Broncos a slight advantage in a game that could easily go the other way.

01-13-2006, 03:18 PM	#4
Merlin Ring of Famer Join Date: Apr 2005 Posts: 2,798	Obviously his weights for rushing D still have some problems when analyzing Denver. There is now way they should be rated ~17. We have seen them time and time again stop great rushing teams in the first half when it mattered, and allow meaningless rushes when Denver had big leads. Although FO accounts for these factors, the weightings must be off as Denver's D would indicate. Ironically, this is not the first time this season his weighting system has been fairly biased against Denver. Statistical anomalies exist, but it is very strange that his system hit Denver twice in one season. There must be something about Denver's style of play that must confound his data gathering/analysis. That being said, I like his stuff, and for the moment it is by far the best out there.

01-13-2006, 03:29 PM	#5
epicSocialism4tw Tebowing the long haul all the way to the title Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: TX, USA Posts: 37,072 Adopt-a-Bronco: Champ Bailey	Obviously, my bone of contention with this guy's analysis is that he eventually decides to use his statistical ranking of the Pats after week 12. He is blatantly taking his sample from the Patriots' most productive stretch and subjecting the Broncos' analysis to the same stretch of games. During that stretch Denver played Dallas, KC, Baltimore, Buffalo, Oakland and SD. The Pats played KC, the Jets twice, Buffalo, Miami, and Tampa Bay. There are some obvious similarites in the schedule, but a sample size that small will likely produce more pronounced differences than a larger one would, like say, the whole season. Outliers affect the whole more dramatically. A schedule that includes the Jets twice would pad anybody's statistics. I believe that Denver gave up an entire 12 yards rushing to NY and shut them out 27-0.

01-13-2006, 04:56 PM	#7
Dagmar ...there ain't no devil ..there's just God when he's drunk. Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Morrison Posts: 17,132 Adopt-a-Bronco: Tim Tebow	Another http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3690072/..._spt_novacek05 Jay Novcek... Patriots (11-6) at Broncos (13-3) Time: 8 p.m. ET, CBS This could be a real good game. Home-field advantage will play a huge role for the Broncos, who play so well at home. The way Denver can do things offensively, mixing a strong running game with bootlegs by Jake Plummer and deep passes, New England will have a hard time tuning into the Denver attack. To beat the Patriots, a team has to do everything well: Run, use play action and pass. This will be a tough team for New England to defend. For the Broncos defense, they need to be patient. Tom Brady is such a calm quarterback, and he tricks defenses into trying too hard to stop him. He doesn’t make mistakes, and he will jump on any errors you make. The Broncos must avoid mistakes and put pressure on Brady. Players to watch: The Broncos linebackers are the key. They have to play within their schemes and make plays at the right times, because Brady will look defenders off and create confusion. The Denver defense must stay disciplined. For the Patriots, Deion Branch and David Givens will need to find openings and get free for Brady. I expect New England to have to play catch-up, so they will open up the offense and the receivers will need to come through. They are solid players who make plays. Pick: Broncos, 28-21

01-13-2006, 06:12 PM	#12
Merlin Ring of Famer Join Date: Apr 2005 Posts: 2,798	Actually, a more accurate statistically analysis would have to try and replicate the circumstances you are trying to predict; i.e. DENVER AT HOME AND NE AT AWAY GAMES. As a statistician he knows this is important. As a football fan he knows this is very important. As a football fan with an understanding of statistics, he knows this is CRITICAL. Look at any team's stats away and at home. It is highly unlikely that they are consistent. The game planning is different, the strategy is different, and the effects of the location are different. So what do we know here that is relevant? 1. It is harder to rush away from home because timing is affected by noise Advantage Broncos in rushing attack and rushing D So how does the return of the players affect that? He would have to provide that data. 2. TB is marginally good away from home this yr. The injuries in this case are irrelevant because all we are talking about is players who have returned and made a difference. So what are Brady's stats away from home? You don't want to know. And Denver and Plummer's, try inverse correlation to Brady. Both of the above are critical in any statistical analysis and ironically they are both TOTALLY IGNORED. Again, that is my problem with FO, some times there are statistical issues that are easy and clear to discern, he should have the knowledge to recognize it, but he seems to be completely oblivious to them.

01-13-2006, 06:01 PM	#14
OrangeShadow armed and dangerous Join Date: Jul 2004 Posts: 6,771	the guys as footballoutsiders are pretty funny and actually intellectual

01-13-2006, 06:43 PM	#15
listopencil [sarcasm]text[/sarcasm] BOOM! Winner. Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: The People's Republic Of California Posts: 8,580 Adopt-a-Bronco: Broncos FO	Pretty good article by the Pats fan. Enjoyable read.