Fox power rating!!!

[big_neil]

It's next to impossible to have 500 yds racked up on your defense and still win.

Well KC gave up next to 500 to Dallas, but were UNlucky to lose?

 

[DallasDW00ds0n]

Forcing a fumble is lucky? news to me

screw this guy, and **** the skins

 

[theogt]

Because power ratings are totally subjective.

But this one is completely OBJECTIVE. That's the problem. He attempted to do some Aikman efficiency type rating but it always comes out with irrational results. Strangely, the Colts, only after winning their 13 straight game, just now took the top spot this year. Over the past 5-6 weeks Dallas has been plummeting on his charts, both in our wins and in our losses. My guess is the main culprit is our low yards/attempt.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/5163328
How do we drop??? and how do the skins who Barly beat the cards stay in the top 10 ???

how did the Skins even get into the top 10, is what I want to know

 

[playit12]

Forcing a fumble is lucky? news to me

screw this guy, and **** the skins

As the other posted pointed out, these are the only national media rankings that I know of that are completely objective not subjective.

As for the luck of a fumble, the group have found that the "recovery" of a fumble is statistically non-coorelating to a team or person. So this means that if a team gets back a fumble is entirely the luck of the draw. They do weight the fumble depending on where and how it happened. For instance, a team is more likely to recover a botched snap then a fumble downfield by the reciever.

What has really improved the Skin's numbers this year is that they have been absolutely horrible at recovering (again this is nothing to do with causing) fumbles. Something like less than 10% of all fumbles are recovered, when statistically it should be around 50%. The reason this is taken into account is this...

Two teams play the exact same quality of football... both teams fumble 4 times. While one team recovers all 4 of their fumbles the other team fails to recover any of thiers. The team that is plus 8 on turnovers of course goes on to win, BUT... are they a better team? And by that I mean, if both those teams play a third team who would win? What they have found is that the ability to recover fumbles doesn't follow week to week. So the next week the team that lost recovers all the fumbles and wins. When washington keeps loosing all these games, mostly on never winning the turnover battle, the losses aren't being weighted as heavily when they are well under the statistical probability of recovering fumbles.

By the way, since someone posted before, Aaron is a Pat's Fan.

 

[kojak]

A lucky fumble?? How about LJ who completely wiffed on his block against the blitzing Fujita. LJ may be a good runner, but he sucks as a blocker. Which is why we never made the trade for him last year. Bill will not tolerate a back who can't pick up the blitz.

 

[theogt]

Bill will not tolerate a back who can't pick up the blitz.

One thing is for sure. You can't blame JJ's inability to pick up a blitz on his ankle sprain.

 

[austintodallas]

Funny how they dropped us even though we won because they said we won as a result of some lucky plays going our way. (fumbles, missed FG, etc.)

However, I doubt they moved us up when Washington and Seattle beat us as a result of some lucky plays going their way. (INT, missed FG, etc.)

Exactly.

 

[Seven]

Well KC gave up next to 500 to Dallas, but were UNlucky to lose?

Pretty much.

 

[Seven]

We put up big offensive numbers as well. It was a close game but KC did not kick out butts if they had kicked our butts they would have won. KC did post big offensive numbers so did Dallas.

They did and they didn't.

Difference is...... KC did what they wanted when they wanted. They helped themselves lose. Our defense was supposed to be better than theirs. They ran and passed all over us. How many yards did Larry Johnson have??? ONE Larry Johnson. If it wasn't for three dropped passes in their first drive we'd be sitting at 7-6. That was a tempo setter and continued throughout the game. How bout the last drive when they moved the ball into field goal range. Again, a receiver WIDE open. Happened all day long. Drew was throwing on a rope cause he had to. Green coulda lobbed balls all day and still made completions. Johnson could've jogged and still had 100 yards. As a matter of fact he did jog. Twice.....right into the endzone. We we're victorious and I'm damn glad for it. KC is good. Offensively, they owned us.

 

[Doomsday101]

They did and they didn't.

Difference is...... KC did what they wanted when they wanted. They helped themselves lose. Our defense was supposed to be better than theirs. They ran and passed all over us. How many yards did Larry Johnson have??? ONE Larry Johnson. If it wasn't for three dropped passes in their first drive we'd be sitting at 7-6. That was a tempo setter and continued throughout the game. How bout the last drive when they moved the ball into field goal range. Again, a receiver WIDE open. Happened all day long. Drew was throwing on a rope cause he had to. Green coulda lobbed balls all day and still made completions. Johnson could've jogged and still had 100 yards. As a matter of fact he did jog. Twice.....right into the endzone. We we're victorious and I'm damn glad for it. KC is good. Offensively, they owned us.

KC did not kick our butts, they played great offense something they have done all year long. Dallas offense also put up some big numbers against them and that is why we won. Your version and mine of what constitutes a butt kicking appears to be very different.

 

[Seven]

KC did not kick our butts, they played great offense something they have done all year long. Dallas offense also put up some big numbers against them and that is why we won. Your version and mine of what constitutes a butt kicking appears to be very different.

10-4.

 

[demdcowboys#1]

how are the 5-8 eagles ahead of the 8-5 falcons, and 8-5 pats?

My question is how we dropped and they have the iggles d ranked better than ours?

This guy really.............im not gonna go any further
he pisses me off every week with his chicken ---- rankings
i rarely ever look at them

that foxsports DVOA or w/e it is, is completely bull -----!!!

Its just some guys rankings anyway, he looks like something isnt right in his head anyway

 

[cowboyfan4life_mark]

KC did kick our butt. That win was amazing. It's next to impossible to have 500 yds racked up on your defense and still win.

Not when you do 461.

 

[EndGame]

Please. We're only one spot ahead of the Iggles, and we beat them twice, AND they've already been eliminated from the playoffs?

 

[ZenItRam]

Now LW
11 13 Dallas Cowboys
Dallas Cowboys (8-5)

That noise from the driveway is the sound of all the 9-4s pulling away. Do you really want to know why I'm rooting for Drew Bledsoe? Because when he did that Q&A for the Fox pregame show last week, and they asked him whom he'd like to have dinner with, one of his selections was JFK. And this comes in an arena in which many, many sentiments fall in the other direction.

Here's the link .... http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2005/writers/dr_z/12/14/ranks.week15/index.html

 

[jrockster77]

Because it is nothing more than this guys opinion.

Actually, if you read the article, Fox's rankings are based on the DVOA (Defense-adjusted Value Over Average) system. Its basically comparing stats to the league average, or something like that.

I agree that power-rankings are bunk...but you guys should be happy. If you notice in the Seahawks comments, it says:

Hey, they've found a defense. You say, "Well, anyone can take advantage of Mike McMahon and Alex Smith." Perhaps, but it isn't like the Seahawks are going to be facing veteran studs in the postseason. Orton, Simms and Manning all lack experience, and veterans Delhomme and Bledsoe are turnover-prone. NEXT: at TEN

Notice they say they'll be facing Bleedsoe in the playoffs, but no mention of Brunell.

 

[jrockster77]

how are the 5-8 eagles ahead of the 8-5 falcons, and 8-5 pats?

My question is how we dropped and they have the iggles d ranked better than ours?

This guy really.............im not gonna go any further
he pisses me off every week with his chicken ---- rankings
i rarely ever look at them

that foxsports DVOA or w/e it is, is completely bull -----!!!

Its just some guys rankings anyway, he looks like something isnt right in his head anyway

It has nothing to do with Schat -- its based on the DVOA.

 

[playit12]

It has nothing to do with Schat -- its based on the DVOA.

For as much as I often enjoy this board, their brains turn to mush when Stats are brought up. I think I've found myself a position as the permanent DVOA appologist here. I don't post at ES where the crowd is about on Par with "The Ranch", and I don't mean that as a compliment, but I do think that CPND has a much better grasp of DPAR and DVOA than the more verbal posters in this thread.

What I really don't understand is the bias? I mean Aaron didn't come up with this one night at dinner. He and several friends starting playing around with the numbers to do something better than what the NFL has. About the same reasons that Aikman came to his formula. They didn't go into trying to make the Pats look good and the Cowboys look bad, they measured each change against the last 5 years of stats. Only if it actually predicted wins better did they keep the change. At the end of the day, they publish exactly what they did, why the did it, and how you can duplicate if you so desire.

So it just sounds stupid when you complain about our ranking. It's like reading the newspaper and yelling at the DMN because Bledsoe only had a 78 QB raiting, and you felt he played better than that. Or yelling at the guy that made up QB rankings, because Drew had a 78. I mean, what do you want? Why is it people on this board have intelligent things to say about Aikman's raitings (that for instance he uses total yardage for 20% of his rankings, even though yardage is a very poor indicator of success) but all they can say about DVOA is that Aaron has funny hair or we are never ranked high enough? At the end of the day it makes us look just as stupid as Skin's fans that think all the refs in the game are out to make them lose games. Aaron doesn't care about your team! Get over it!

 

[AdamJT13]

It's interesting to compare the DVOA rankings to the Sagarin rankings, since they're comprehensive formulas but with completely different considerations. The Sagarin rankings are based only on the results of the games (who wins, who loses and the scores), no matter what happens during them. The DVOA rankings are based only on what happens on each play during a game, no matter who wins or loses or what the final score is.

Since the Sagarin rankings are based on the full season, the best comparison is to use the DVOA full-season rankings instead of the overall rankings, which are weighted toward recent games. (It should be noted that the DVOA full-season rankings list two teams tied for 20th but no team 19th. I've changed that to two teams tied for 19th, since it's either that or a typo.)

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sagarin . .DVOA. . Diff.
Indianapolis Colts. . . . . . . 1 . . . 1 . . . 0
Denver Broncos . . . . . . . . 2 . . . 3 . . . 1
Seattle Seahawks. . . . . . . 3 . . . 4 . . . 1
Cincinnati Bengals. . . . . . . 4 . . . 2 . . . -2
San Diego Chargers. . . . . . 5 . . . 6 . . . 1
New York Giants . . . . . . . .6 . . . 5 . . . -1
Jacksonville Jaguars . . . . . 7 . . . 7 . . . 0
Pittsburgh Steelers . . . . . .8 . . . 9 . . . 1
Kansas City Chiefs . . . . . . 9 . . . 8 . . . -1
Dallas Cowboys . . . . . . . . 10 . . . 14 . . 4
Chicago Bears. . . . . . . . . .11 . . . 10 . . -1
New England Patriots . . . . 12 . . . 19 . . 7
Washington Commanders . . . . .13 . . . 11 . . -2
Carolina Panthers . . . . . . .14 . . . 13 . . -1
Tampa Bay Buccaneers. . . 15 . . . 12 . . -3
Atlanta Falcons . . . . . . . .16 . . . 18 . . 2
Minnesota Vikings . . . . . . .17 . . . 17 . . 0
Philadelphia Eagles . . . . . .18 . . . 15 . . -3
Miami Dolphins. . . . . . . . . 19 . . . 16 . . -3
Oakland Raiders . . . . . . . .20 . . . 19 . . -1
Green Bay Packers . . . . . .21 . . . 22 . . 1
Baltimore Ravens . . . . . . . 22 . . . 24 . . 2
Cleveland Browns . . . . . . 23 . . . 21 . . -2
St. Louis Rams. . . . . . . . . 24 . . . 30 . . 6
Detroit Lions . . . . . . . . . .25 . . . 23 . . -2
Arizona Cardinals . . . . . . .26 . . . 26 . . 0
New York Jets . . . . . . . . .27 . . . 29 . . 2
Buffalo Bills. . . . . . . . . . .28 . . . 28 . . 0
New Orleans Saints . . . . . 29 . . . 27 . . -2
Tennessee Titans . . . . . . 30 . . . 25 . . -5
San Francisco 49ers . . . . .31 . . . 32 . . 1
Houston Texans . . . . . . . 32 . . . 31 . . -1

As you can see, they're pretty similar for most teams -- 17 teams are within one spot in both rankings, and eight more are within two spots. The four biggest outliers (teams with the biggest difference in the rankings) are the Cowboys (10th in Sagarin, 14th in DVOA), Patriots (12th in Sagarin, 19th in DVOA), Rams (24th in Sagarin, 30th in DVOA) and Titans (30th in Sagarin, 25th in DVOA). But I have yet to pinpoint one particular reason why those teams' rankings can be so different using different methods, so it's probably a different reason for each team. The Cowboys, for example, might be better than their DVOA because they have the highest penalty margin in the league, and as far as I can tell, DVOA doesn't account for penalties.

Personally, I think combining the two rankings produces a more accurate ranking than either one on its own.