Well, to be fair, the numbers themselves ain't lyin'. The interpretation, though, borders on the downright moronic. Here are the stats they present in order to "compare" the PHI and NE punting games. First, I will present the raw numbers: Punts: PHI 43, NE 22 Punting yards: PHI 1812, NE 899 [Gross] Punting average: PHI 42.1, NE 40.9 Inside 20: PHI 13, NE 8 Touchbacks: PHI 3, NE 4 Blocked: PHI 0, NE 0 Net punting average: PHI 35.3, NE 36.2 Now here's where it gets interesting. And by interesting, I mean "teh suck." In brackets, I have indicated the "rankings" assigned to the various stats (1 = best, 32 = worst). Punts: PHI 43 , NE 22  Punting yards: PHI 1812 , NE 899  Yep. . . . apparently more punts is a good thing. [Gross] Punting average: PHI 42.1 , NE 40.9  Because, of course, gross punting average is so important. Inside 20: PHI 13 , NE 8  And it obviously hasn't occurred to them that the number of punts inside the 20 is necessarily a function of the number of punts. Touchbacks: PHI 3 , NE 4  You know, I thought that touchbacks were a bad thing. I guess I was wrong. Blocked: PHI 0 , NE 0  Funny, they look tied to me. . . . Net punting average: PHI 35.3 , NE 36.2  Finally, they get one right. Average punting stats rank: PHI 26.2, NE 29.5 Yep. They take these flawed statistics, and then simply average them out to declare that Philly has the edge in the punting game. Better still, for the life of me, I can't figure out how they got those moronic averages in the first place (last I checked, 177/7 is a lot less than 29.5).