If there is a huge difference between TO Margin and Adj. What a team’s turnover margin would have been if it had recovered exactly 50 percent of all the fumbles that occurred in its games, and if the INTs-to-PDs for both teams was equal to the national average, which is generally around 21-22 percent. Sack RateĪn opponent-adjusted measure of sack rates. It takes into account the factors that go into winning a given game (not simply the end result) and adjusts for the quality of opponent. ![]() Used in the team stat profiles, this is a look at how a team would have performed in a given week if playing a perfectly average team, with a somewhat average number of breaks and turnovers. ![]() Pace takes a team’s run-pass ratio into account. Since passes, on average, take up less time (thanks to the fact that 30-50 percent of them are incomplete and stop the clock), pass-heavy offenses are prone to run more plays, therefore limiting the effectiveness of a general plays-per-game measure. This takes into account both a team’s tempo (in terms of seconds per play) and the type of plays it runs. The idea is to divvy credit for a given rush between both the runner and the blockers. Line YardsĪn opponent-adjusted version of the line measure derived from the formula found here. (Think of five-star ratings as an A+.) Adj. It is set up so that a four-star rating is an A grade, three-star is a B grade, etc. I am sharing the actual decimal rating instead of the star rating, but the gist is that anyone above a 0.8950 is a four- or five-star, anyone above 0.7950 is a three-star, etc. The Composite rating has proven to be the most reliable from a projections standpoint, so that is what I use in the annual preview series. We find this kind of edge 28 times, and the early Christmas recipient won all but one of those (96 percent).247Sports catalogues both its own recruiting ratings and a composite rating compiled from a few different recruiting services. But when it comes about, that program’s fandom is happy and the opponent miserable. ![]() There aren’t many contests that a coach’s squad owns a four-plus turnover edge. Forty times this occurred last year in close-spread contests, and the beneficiary won 35 of those. Teams that created just one more turnover than their opponent won nearly twice as much as they lost! Ī two-TO margin bumped the likelihood of victory up to better than three out of every four games (50-16 win-loss, or 76 percent).īy the time a team incurs a three-turnover bulge, it’s about over for the opponent. To that end, I utilized Phil Steele’s magazine, reviewing games where the spread was a mere touchdown or less.įirst, I will confess I figured a one-turnover difference would produce minimal meaning over the course of a sixty-minute battle. So, to help us determine turnovers’ true impact, I chose to look only at contests where the teams were considered closely matched. On the flip side, one team may be so much better it can afford to be charitable and still win comfortably. ![]() If we analyzed the mismatches, our results could be skewed, due to the weaker teams forced into obvious passing downs, leading to interceptions, etc.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |