Here's an interesting article from FP Mike Lombardi Cracks the Code to Winning in the NFL
note: the volume of games when looking at winning percentages
Somethings I think:
Some of them are obvious, some aren't so obvious and some even with the knowledge it's hard to predict (for example predicting 6+sacks by a D is not easy to do or predicting the number of turnovers in a game).
As for the 50+ combined attempts rushing and passing on offense, with the NFL teams increasing offensive tempo, I expect this to occur more often and not be as big a factor as the percentage of wins indicates at this time.
The first half with a lead stat is highly interesting and end of Q3 as well, especially for the 'in game' (aka betting during the game) betting that has escalated in popularity these past few years. I'm much more partial to these only due to volume of games (wins and losses). As a caution, a recent article at CHFF details the 2012 SD team that lost 5 half time leads (see http://www.coldhardfootballfacts.com/content/2012-san-diego-chargers-led-nfl-blown-leads/23215/) It notes as well that PHI and DET gave away four half time leads and three teams did not lose a game if they had the lead at half time (HOU, DEN, ATL)
The comments are hilarious, if you hadn't noticed this article is categorized as History, Statistics, Totally Useless. I guess Joe at NFP, where Lombardi often wrote as well, is not well respected to say the least. As I recall Joe has been writing for NFP as well as contributing w/video. I did notice the interviews w/the books, but I couldn't put 2 cents with what he had to say or the books had to say. So it's never been on my RSS reader, though I will admit to following Matt Bowen of NFP, I suspect he could go anywhere and continue to write his nice insights on the game itself.
Basic football is what wins. You need to know starters, you need to follow coaching tendencies on both sides of the ball and there are few ST coaches who really gave an edge to their team, but now with this past season implementation of 30yd kickoffs and the subsequent increase in the number of touchbacks, I suspect their relevance will be less of an impact, unless they can find those exceptional directional punters.
Interestingly enough BUF carried an extra kicker for the first part of the season, I think it was six weeks or so. Perhaps it was just an experiment, but the FG kicker normally does kickoffs as well. The question for most ST coaches is should I carry a better more accurate FG kicker or a kicker who can get the ball into the endzone. Depending on the kicker their can be a trade off and this weighs in on ST coaches decisions. If you can coach good coverage and the players cover well, then a more accurate FG kicker is your first choice, if not, I would consider getting an end zone kicker as the number of 80yd drives resulting in a TD each game are perhaps one or two at best (this is instinct talking) and only the better offenses can do this. If you are an average offensive than I would expect zero to one and the bottom fourth of offensives I suspect may get a TD every other game or every two games (again instinct talking from following teams over the years)
Perhaps one day I might make a statistical attempt and quantifying some of my thoughts, but then I would need to write them all down and that would be a bit arduous for me. For now I'll let instinct rule and watch what the statistical heads find.
No comments:
Post a Comment