Divisional Playoffs Prediction Thread

[Kurt Angle Mark 0]

Falcons over Rams by double digits.

Well I hope since they already beat them 34-17 earlier in the season

 

Vikings over Eagles

 

Colts will destroy the Patriots

My crazy ass prediction of the year

 

Steelers over Jets

[alfdogg 0]

And just for the fuck of it, I went 3-1 in my WC weekend picks

There are also too many Pats fans on this board, it's weird.

Pats fan: "WHAT? Are you kidding? There are NOT! If anything, there are too many COLTS fans on this board. As a matter of fact, the Patriots should have MORE fans, all things considered."

I think Alf is the only Colts fan here.

[The Ghost of bps21 0]

Steelers, Falcons, Eagles, Patriots

[The Czech Republic 0]

And just for the fuck of it, I went 3-1 in my WC weekend picks

There are also too many Pats fans on this board, it's weird.

Pats fan: "WHAT? Are you kidding? There are NOT! If anything, there are too many COLTS fans on this board. As a matter of fact, the Patriots should have MORE fans, all things considered."

I think Alf is the only Colts fan here.

I like the Colts too! They're relatively nearby, they play entertaining football, Peyton Manning is cool, and the uniforms are HAWT. Sometimes I secretly wish the Colts would move to Chicago so we could be a two-team town again like we were until 1960, but I know it would never work.

 

I like the Colts.

[iggymcfly 0]

OK, I too went 3-1 on Wildcard weekend, and here's what I see in the next round.

 

Eagles over Vikings:

The Eagles are on paper, a much better team, even without TO, and we all know that the trademark Eagles collapse doesn't hit until the NFC Championship game.

 

Falcons over Rams:

Only playing the biggest choke artists in the NFC allowed the Rams to escape the first round unscathed. A tremendous Falcons defense and a couple big plays from Michael Vick should make sure that doesn't happen in the second round.

 

Colts over Patriots:

I've been on the Pats bandwagon all year as far as the team I actually believed was going to win the Super Bowl, and I think that even now they could probably beat the Steelers, but I really don't see how they can stop that Colts offense without Ty Law. When you have the best passing offense in history against a team whose secondary is missing their best player, it's just an impossible matchup.

 

Jets over Steelers:

Getting John Abraham back (if he comes back) should be a huge lift for the defense. The Jets have one of the best defenses in the league, and if they can shut down Betti like they shut down Tomlinson, the Steelers will have to force some throws, and Roethlisberger will make some mistakes. I just think that with most of the other matchups even, I'd a lot rather have Pennington at QB than Roethlisberger in a pressure-packed playoff game.

[MARTYEWR 0]

Steelers 20, Jets 7

Patriots 30, Colts 27

Vikings 24, Eagles 17 (OMG!111!! UPSET!!!11111!!)

Falcons 27, Rams 10

[KingPK 0]

Steelers 23. Jets 19

Patriots 42, Colts 28

Eagles 27, Vikings 24 (OT)

Falcons 28, Rams 21

 

The way to keep the Colts at bay (since physical play with the receivers will be a no-no) is to let Manning go nuts in the middle of the field, and clamp right down in the red zone (the Pats are 4th or 5th in red zone D, I think). And like I keep saying, the Pats have put up plenty of points against Indy. In the opener, they kicked 5 FGs; turn some of those into TDs, and that game wouldn't have been close.

[HarleyQuinn 0]

Indianapolis Colts vs Top 10 Defenses(According to NFL.com, by PPGA)

- Week 1 vs New England Patriots(2nd): Lost 27-24

- Week 15 vs Baltimore Ravens(6th): Won 20-10

- Week 17 vs Denver Broncos(9th): Lost 33-14

- AFC Wild Card vs Denver Broncos(9th): Won 49-24

Record: 2-2

 

So, out of their whole schedule, the Colts faced only 3 teams that were in the Top 10 in terms of points per game allowed. In those games, they averaged 27 points. Take out the AFC WC game and it becomes 19.

 

Indianapolis Colts vs Top 10 offenses(ranked by PPG)

- Week 8 vs Kansas City Chiefs(2nd): Lost 45-35

- Week 1 vs New England Patriots(4th): Lost 27-24

- Week 3 vs Green Bay Packers(5th): Won 45-31

- Week 16 vs San Diego Chargers(3rd): Won 34-31

- Week 9 vs Minnesota Vikings(6th): Won 31-28

- Week 17 vs Denver Broncos(9th): Lost 33-14

- AFC Wild Card vs Denver Broncos(9th): Won 49-24

Record: 4-3

 

In those games where they faced the top 10 offenses by PPG, they averaged 31 points allowed a game. Take out that AFC WC game and it becomes 33 points a game.

 

Sure, their offense is seemingly unstoppable but they really did poorly against very good defenses. Look at their schedule and they faced such "tough" defenses as Oakland, Houston, Kansas City, and Green Bay. When their defense gets put up against a tough offense, they cave and allow a heckuva lot of points. Sure the Colts won in the WC game by scoring 49 points but they still allowed 24.

[Vern Gagne 0]

Eagles

Falcons

Steelers

Don't know yet

 

Just has long as the Eagles destroy the Vikings. God, I hate the stupid Vikings fans here. Fuck Joe Buck, Howie Long can die for what he said about Randy Moss.

[therealworldschampion 0]

From what I've heard, Moss is questionable for the game on Sunday with that ankle. I have no doubt that he will play, but he's going to be hobbled probably.

[Your Paragon of Virtue 0]

When I said stalwart I meant for the fact that he's been there forever. But he is one of the better coaches in the league. They have never really had a team that you could say was the best, so you can't blame him for not winning the SB in that sense. Neil O Donnell?

[CanadianChris 0]

Indianapolis Colts vs Top 10 Defenses(According to NFL.com, by PPGA)

- Week 1 vs New England Patriots(2nd): Lost 27-24

- Week 15 vs Baltimore Ravens(6th): Won 20-10

- Week 17 vs Denver Broncos(9th): Lost 33-14

- AFC Wild Card vs Denver Broncos(9th): Won 49-24

Record: 2-2

This tells me very little.

 

First, the Denver regular season game was completely meaningless, and they played their second- and third-stringers, so you can't include that game. (The fact that they blew them out two weeks later should indicate how meaningless it was).

 

Second, Indianapolis was in the game against the Pats until the very end. You can even make the argument that the Pats were lucky to have won that game, as Manning had an excellent game, but was done in by two Edgerrin James fumbles.

 

Indianapolis Colts vs Top 10 offenses(ranked by PPG)

- Week 8 vs Kansas City Chiefs(2nd): Lost 45-35

- Week 1 vs New England Patriots(4th): Lost 27-24

- Week 3 vs Green Bay Packers(5th): Won 45-31

- Week 16 vs San Diego Chargers(3rd): Won 34-31

- Week 9 vs Minnesota Vikings(6th): Won 31-28

- Week 17 vs Denver Broncos(9th): Lost 33-14

- AFC Wild Card vs Denver Broncos(9th): Won 49-24

Record: 4-3

 

In those games where they faced the top 10 offenses by PPG, they averaged 31 points allowed a game. Take out that AFC WC game and it becomes 33 points a game.

But they still finished 4-2 against these teams (again, the Denver game was meaningless) and were a couple of bounces from being 5-1.

 

Sure, their offense is seemingly unstoppable but they really did poorly against very good defenses. Look at their schedule and they faced such "tough" defenses as Oakland, Houston, Kansas City, and Green Bay.

The games you showed hardly indicated poor play. They dominated two of their three opponents when it counted, and almost upset the defending champs on their own field.

 

When their defense gets put up against a tough offense, they cave and allow a heckuva lot of points. Sure the Colts won in the WC game by scoring 49 points but they still allowed 24.

The fact that Indy was up 35-3 wouldn't have anything to do with the defense softening a bit in the second half, would it? Denver's 24 amounted to nothing more than garbage-time points. Plus, the fact that the Colts offense is so efficient means the defense is on the field more, and will tend to allow more points. It was the same situation in Buffalo with the K-Gun offense, and they made it to four Super Bowls.

[2GOLD 0]

The Jags did a damn fine job against the Colts this season. Too bad they couldn't handle their business against easy teams cause they might have gave the Colts a run for their money.

[HarleyQuinn 0]

First, the Denver regular season game was completely meaningless, and they played their second- and third-stringers, so you can't include that game.  (The fact that they blew them out two weeks later should indicate how meaningless it was).

 

Second, Indianapolis was in the game against the Pats until the very end.  You can even make the argument that the Pats were lucky to have won that game, as Manning had an excellent game, but was done in by two Edgerrin James fumbles.

 

So let's exclude the Denver regular season game. They still didn't fare well against good defenses. Were they in the games? Yes but they weren't blowing them out and acting like they were impossible to beat. At the start of the 4th quarter, the Colts were down 27-17 until the TD pass to Stokely. Colts D gets an INT but then Edge fumbles on the ensuing drive. Vandy then misses the game tying 48 yard FG. So, they were definitely in the game but IMO, their offensive exploits are fairly overrated. I think the Colts will definitely have their work cut out for them trying to do what they did to Denver against New England.

 

But they still finished 4-2 against these teams (again, the Denver game was meaningless) and were a couple of bounces from being 5-1.

 

Yes, they went 4-2 but what I'm saying is that the defense is very poor when it comes to allowing points to be scored against them. If that offense has an off day, then the Colts D doesn't have enough to stop the opposition from putting up 28-35 points. Also notice that of those 6 games, 4 of those games were decided by less than 10 points.

 

The fact that Indy was up 35-3 wouldn't have anything to do with the defense softening a bit in the second half, would it?  Denver's 24 amounted to nothing more than garbage-time points.  Plus, the fact that the Colts offense is so efficient means the defense is on the field more, and will tend to allow more points.  It was the same situation in Buffalo with the K-Gun offense, and they made it to four Super Bowls.

 

So they were up 35-3, big deal? The Colts D shouldn't be letting a team suddenly get back into the game. At one point, the Broncos were down 35-17 with 1:10 left in the 3rd. All they needed was a fumble or an INT to turn into a TD and stopping the Colts O on their next drive, then scoring a TD on their ensuing drive to suddenly make it 35-31 with a TD putting them in the lead. Just because the Colts offense is amazing doesn't allow the defense to rest on their laurels. As far as the Bills go, they also lost all 4 super bowls.

 

They lost 20-19 off a missed FG despite having 7:40 left in the 4th to take the lead before then. They then lost 37-24, 52-17, and 30-13. Sure they made it to four super bowls, but they got smacked around in all of them with the exception of SB XXV. Look at SB XXXVI and XXXVII to see better examples. New England and Tampa Bay both had great defenses and were able to stop the great offenses of St. Louis and Oakland. As a result, since the offense couldn't score, their defenses couldn't stop them and the better defensive teams won even though they weren't known for their offense.

[iggymcfly 0]

So, you're basically saying that great offenses can get to the Super Bowl, but not win? If that's your argument, (and a pretty simplistic argument it is), it still does nothing to keep the Colts from beating the Pats and then winning their next game against the Jets/Steelers.

[C Dubya 04 0]

So they were up 35-3, big deal? The Colts D shouldn't be letting a team suddenly get back into the game. At one point, the Broncos were down 35-17 with 1:10 left in the 3rd. All they needed was a fumble or an INT to turn into a TD and stopping the Colts O on their next drive, then scoring a TD on their ensuing drive to suddenly make it 35-31 with a TD putting them in the lead. Just because the Colts offense is amazing doesn't allow the defense to rest on their laurels. As far as the Bills go, they also lost all 4 super bowls.

This paragraph sounds a little ridiculous. You could basically say that about any game ever. All Oklahoma needed against USC was a turnover for a touchdown and then an onside kick returned for a touchdown and then another touchdown and then it was only a 10 point game, so they would just need another touchdown to only need one more to win.

 

The Colt's D definitely played softer in the second half because of the lead. It's almost impossible for a team not to.

[HarleyQuinn 0]

So, you're basically saying that great offenses can get to the Super Bowl, but not win? If that's your argument, (and a pretty simplistic argument it is), it still does nothing to keep the Colts from beating the Pats and then winning their next game against the Jets/Steelers.

While it may not, I'd say it gives the Patriots/Steelers slightly better odds of beating the Colts than if it was the Colts playing the Raiders.

 

As far as the fairly simplistic argument that a great offense can't win the SB, there's a reason that people say defenses win championships.

 

Brackets show losing teams rank in offense, defense by PS and PA.

 

2003: Patriots ranked 12th, 1st(Panthers 15th, 10th).

2002: Tampa Bay ranked 18th, 1st(Raiders 2nd, 6th).

2001: Patriots ranked 6th, 6th(Rams 1st, 7th).

2000: Ravens ranked 14th, 1st(Giants 15th, 5th).

1999: Rams ranked 1st, 4th(Titans 7th, 15th)

1998: Broncos ranked 2nd, 9th(Falcons 4th, 4th).

1997: Broncos ranked 1st, 6th(Packers 2nd, 5th).

1996: Packers ranked 1st, 1st(Patriots 2nd, 14th).

1995: Cowboys ranked 3rd, 3rd(Steelers 5th, 9th).

1994: 49ers ranked 1st, 6th(Chargers 5th, 9th).

1993: Cowboys 2nd, 2nd(Bills 7th, 5th).

1992: Cowboys 2nd, 5th(Bills 3rd, 14th).

1991: Redskins 1st, 2nd(Bills 2nd, 19th).

1990: Giants 15th, 1st(Bills 1st, 6th).

 

With the exception of the two Denver SB wins, every single team that won the SB had a better defense than the loser as far as PA goes. Every single defense in those SB's ranked in the Top 15, except the 1990-1991 Buffalo Bills. Every SB winner's D ranked in the Top 9. Are you telling me that the #1, #19 Indianapolis Colts can beat out the #11, #1(Pittsburgh), #4, #3(New England), or #17, #4(Jets) defenses and make it to the SB then beat the #8, #2 or #16, #14 defense(Philadelphia and Atlanta)?

 

As far as the "you can say that for every game" comment, that's true but then again the USC Trojans had a damn good defense entering the game against Oklahoma. It's not like they were ranked in the lower 20 out of all the teams or anything. What I'm saying is that bad defenses tend to get scored upon regardless if they had a 50 point lead or a 14 point lead. Good defenses manage to stop the offensive output and limit the points put up, thus allowing their teams a better chance at winning.

[EVIL~! alkeiper 0]

Even from that table, my impression is that winning teams have great offenses, aside from a recent trend favoring defenses. I would blame that on the Baltimore Ravens of a few years ago.

 

A team with a great defense would have a better shot at an upset, however, because a lower scoring game gives a better chance of an upset.

 

One thing though that is usually missing from these things is pace. A team may have a low ranked offense and defense simply because they run the ball more often and eat clock. Their score would be lower, but they wouldn't necessarily be a weak offensive team. Some accounting for possessions needs to exist. Of course, I have no idea whether any of that is really true, but it's worth consideration.

[HarleyQuinn 0]

Ya had me interested in looking at rushing attempts on the season(not sure where I'd find time of possession) so I figured I'd do that as well. ** = team had more rushing attempts on the season.

 

- 2003:

Patriots ranked 12th, 1st: 11th in Rushing Attempts

**Panthers ranked 15th, 10th: 2nd in Rushing Attempts

- 2002:

Tampa Bay ranked 18th, 1st: Ranked T-25th in Rushing Attempts

Raiders 2nd, 6th: Ranked T-25th in Rushing Attempts

- 2001:

**Patriots ranked 6th, 6th: Ranked T-8th in Rushing Attempts

Rams 1st, 7th: Ranked 24th in Rushing Attempts

- 2000:

**Ravens ranked 14th, 1st: Ranked 5th in Rushing Attempts

Giants 15th, 5th: Ranked 6th in Rushing Attempts

- 1999:

Rams ranked 1st, 4th: Ranked T-17th in Rushing Attempts

**Titans 7th, 15th: Ranked 12th in Rushing Attempts

- 1998:

**Broncos ranked 2nd, 9th: Ranked 1st in Rushing Attempts

Falcons 4th, 4th: Ranked 4th in Rushing Attempts

- 1997:

**Broncos ranked 1st, 6th: Ranked 6th in Rushing Attempts

Packers 2nd, 5th: Ranked 12th in Rushing Attempts

- 1996:

**Packers ranked 1st, 1st: Ranked 14th in Rushing Attempts

Patriots 2nd, 14th: Ranked 22nd in Rushing Attempts

- 1995:

**Cowboys ranked 3rd, 3rd: Ranked 4th in Rushing Attempts

Steelers 5th, 9th: Ranked 5th in Rushing Attempts

- 1994:

**49ers ranked 1st, 6th: Ranked 5th in Rushing Attempts

Chargers 5th, 9th: Ranked 8th in Rushing Attempts

- 1993:

Cowboys 2nd, 2nd: Ranked 6th in Rushing Attempts

**Bills 7th, 5th: Ranked 2nd in Rushing Attempts

- 1992:

Cowboys 2nd, 5th: Ranked 3rd in Rushing Attempts

**Bills 3rd, 14th: Ranked 1st in Rushing Attempts

- 1991:

**Redskins 1st, 2nd: Ranked 1st in Rushing Attempts

Bills 2nd, 19th: Ranked 5th in Rushing Attempts

- 1990:

**Giants 15th, 1st: Ranked 2nd in Rushing Attempts

Bills 1st, 6th: Ranked 9th in Rushing Attempts

 

=== 1990 Giants: 15th in Offense, 3rd in Defense ===

- 2nd in Rushing Attempts

1991 Bills: 19th in Defense, 2nd in Offense

- Ranked 5th in Rushing Attempts

1992 Bills: Ranked 14th in Defense, 3rd in Offense

- Ranked 1st in Rushing Attempts

1994 Chargers: Ranked 9th in Defense, 5th in Offense

- Ranked 8th in Rushing Attempts

1995 Steelers: Ranked 9th in Defense, 5th in Offense

- Ranked 5th in Rushing Attempts

1996 Patriots: Ranked 14th in Defense, 2nd in Offense

- Ranked 22nd in Rushing Attempts

1999 Titans: Ranked 15th in Defense, 7th in Offense

- Ranked 12th in Rushing Attempts

2000 Giants: Ranked 15th in Offense, 5th in Defense

- Ranked 6th in Rushing Attempts

2001 Patriots: Ranked 6th in Defense, 6th in Offense

- Ranked T-8th in Rushing Attempts

2002 Tampa Bay: Ranked 18th in Offense, 1st in Defense

- Ranked T-25th in Rushing Attempts

2003 Panthers: Ranked 15th in Offense, 10th in Defense

- Ranked 2nd in Rushing Attempts

 

Offensively, it seemed to have some corellation compared to defense. In 7 of 14 Super Bowls(excluding 2002 since they tied), the team with the better defense had more rushing attempts. So it's pretty much split half that way. Also below are the SB results with the ** = leader in RA during the season.

 

2003 Superbowl

NE: 35 carries, 38:58

**CAR: 16 carries, 21:02

 

2002 SB

TB: 42 carries, 37:14

OAK: 11 carries, 22:46

 

2001 SB

**NE: 25 carries, 26:30

STL: 22 carries, 33:30

 

2000 SB

**BAL: 33 carries, 34:06

NYG: 16 carries, 25:54

 

1999 SB

STL: 13 carries, 23:34

**TEN: 36 carries, 36:26

 

1998 SB

**DEN: 36 carries, 31:23

ATL: 23 carries, 28:37

 

1997 SB

**DEN: 39 carries, 32:25

GBP: 20 carries, 27:35

 

1996 SB

**GBP: 36 carries, 34:15

NEP: 13 carries, 25:45

 

1995 SB

**DAL: 25 carries, 26:11

PIT: 31 carries, 33:49

 

1994 SB

**SF4: 32 carries, 31:31

SDC: 19 carries, 28:29

 

1993 SB

DAL: 35 carries, 34:29

**BUF: 27 carries, 25:31

 

1992 SB

DAL: 29 carries, 31:12

**BUF: 29 carries, 28:48

 

1991 SB

**WAS: 40 carries, 33:43

BUF: 18 carries, 26:17

 

1990 SB

**NYG: 39 carries, 40:33

BUF: 25 carries, 19:27

[iggymcfly 0]

There's a big story on Page 2 that goes through this in depth. It basically shows that a good offense is just as important to a championship team as a good defense, and that a good passing game is actually more important than a good running game.

[Damaramu 0]

Ok I got a question that relates to the playoffs. I didn't know where to put it so I'll stick it in here.

 

Let's say we have The Patriots and Jets.

 

The Patriots lose a game at the Jets.

The Jets lose a game at the Patriots.

Neither team loses another game all season.

Who wins the division?

[Edwin MacPhisto 0]

I'm pretty sure you end up in goofy points-related tiebreakers.

[Guest Failed Mascot]

there's a good chance that Robert Mathis will be out for Sunday's game. If that's true then Dwight Freeney becomes easier to stop.

[KingPK 0]

There's a big story on Page 2 that goes through this in depth. It basically shows that a good offense is just as important to a championship team as a good defense, and that a good passing game is actually more important than a good running game.

But Tom's season long look into the correlation between running and winning (results here) kind of flies in the face of that. Though the Pats never really had a "dominant" RB in either '01 or '03.

 

I guess it's really all about balance (which the Pats had last year), or total dominance on one side of the ball (see: the 2000 Ravens, the 1985 Bears) that decides if a team is worthy of a title.

 

Of course, you really can't discount Special Teams either (which pretty much won the '01 AFC title game, and two Super Bowls).

[CanadianChris 0]

Ok I got a question that relates to the playoffs. I didn't know where to put it so I'll stick it in here.

 

Let's say we have The Patriots and Jets.

 

The Patriots lose a game at the Jets.

The Jets lose a game at the Patriots.

Neither team loses another game all season.

Who wins the division?

Whoever had the stronger schedule. If they're the same, whoever ranks higher in points scored and allowed.

[Your Paragon of Virtue 0]

Quinn is trying to say that the Colts don't blow out great defenses.

 

Shocking I know.

 

The Colts have one of the best offenses in the history of the NFL, the Pats have one of the best defenses in the history of the NFL.

 

The Colts have one of the most intelligent QB's in the history of the NFL, with a knack for playing on the fly. The Pats one of the most intelligent coaches in the history of the NFL, with a knack for creating crazy plays/schemes on the fly.

 

Unlike everyone else, instead of using biases to try and unfairly bash certain aspects of both teams (Tom Brady isn't that great a QB, the Colts defense is the worst in the league, etc.) I'm going to sit back and appreciate the great game that is surely to unfold.

 

On paper.

[EVIL~! alkeiper 0]

But Tom's season long look into the correlation between running and winning (results here) kind of flies in the face of that. Though the Pats never really had a "dominant" RB in either '01 or '03.

 

I first caught Tom's analysis last week. I'm sorry, but I don't see how anyone can draw substantial conclusions from that. Teams that have an opportunity to run the ball 30+ times a game are going to score alot of points, yes. Did they win because they rushed 30 times, or did they rush 30 times because they had more possessions? In addition, the study makes no account for how much the team benefits from the passing game. The data makes no account for passing. Tom's conclusions may be right, I don't know. But the data presented hardly qualifies as proof. And Tom, if you're reading this, I hope you view it as constructive critisism. I don't mean to demean your studies. I just think you can make them better.

[KingPK 0]

Well, the more you rush, the more clock you chew up, and the less time the opposing offense has on the field.

 

I still think to win, teams have to have good balance on offense (or a couple of big playmakers), can stop the run, hold teams off in the red zone, and cause more turnovers than they give up. That seems to be the best recipe for success in the NFL.

[HarleyQuinn 0]

2004 Rankings(Offensively)

New England Patriots

- 5th in Rushing Attempts per Game

- 7th in Rushing Yards per Game

- 22nd in Passing Attempts per Game

- 12th in Passing Yards per Game

- TOP: 7th with 31:22

 

Indianapolis Colts

- 20th in Rushing Attempts per Game

- 15th in Rushing Yards per Game

- 15th in Passing Attempts per Game

- 1st in Passing Yards per Game

- TOP: 25th with 28:40

 

New York Jets

- 3rd in Rushing Attempts per Game

- 3rd in Rushing Yards per Game

- 30th in Passing Attempts per Game

- 22nd in Passing Yards per Game

- TOP: 4th in 31:51

 

Pittsburgh Steelers

- 1st in Rushing Attempts per Game

- 2nd in Rushing Yards per Game

- 32nd in Passing Attempts per Game

- 28th in Passing Yards per Game

- TOP: 1st with 34:00

 

Atlanta Falcons

- 4th in Rushing Attempts per Game

- 1st in Rushing Yards per Game

- 31st in Passing Attempts per Game

- 30th in Passing Yards per Game

- TOP: 21st with 29:10

 

Minnesota Vikings

- 28th in Rushing Attempts per Game

- 18th in Rushing Yards per Game

- 8th in Passing Attempts per Game

- 2nd in Passing Yards per Game

- TOP: 15th with 30:02

 

St. Louis Rams

- 30th in Rushing Attempts per Game

- 26th in Rushing Yards per Game

- 5th in Passing Attempts per Game

- 5th in Passing Yards per Game

- TOP: 9th with 31:05

 

Philadelphia Eagles

- 31st in Rushing Attempts per Game

- 24th in Rushing Yards per Game

- 9th in Passing Attempts per Game

- 7th in Passing Yards per Game

- TOP: 26th with 28:26

 

== Thoughts: Interesting to note that the most complete teams offensively(in terms of attempts/yards per game) are the Indianapolis Colts and the New England Patriots. The other teams are extremely skewed towards one end of the spectrum so to speak. Also interesting to see that in the AFC; the Steelers, Jets, and Patriots, teams with great defenses and great running games, are near the top of the NFL in Time of Possession.

[Your Paragon of Virtue 0]

Well yes because running the ball is more time consuming, and having a great defense means you have the ball longer.

 

I don't want to pull out the gaudy stats, but basically the Colts are the only team to rank in the top five over a season in three important statistical categories in the history of the NFL. I don't remember what they were though, one of them was points scored which is obvious, I think another one was total yards or passing yards, and I can't remember anything else.