ESPN/538: Pats Super Bowl Path Is the Easiest in Modern NFL History

[Off The Grid]

Is our path to the Super Bowl easier than most? Of course. Every single year.

Why? Because we never have to play the ****ing Patriots.

 

[Nehalem]

Yup. As I said in another thread, an SB win this year would somewhat make up for 2008, when the Patriots were on a roll come season’s end and could have steamrolled to the title had they gotten in.

Except that one their worst loses of the season came to the Steelers. Note this was after Cassel had 2 consecutive 400 yard passing games.

While Brady owns the Steelers, Matt Cassel didn't. If they get in good chance they end up losing the AFCCG in Pittsburgh. At the very least I don't think you can say Patriots could just cake walk their way to the title.

Edit: It looks like the Patriots would have faced Steelers in the divisional round.

So the path to the Super Bowl would be
11-5 Baltimore
12-4 Pittsburgh
13-3 Titans or 8-8 chargers

Hardly a cakewalk

 

[patfanken]

Didn't the "undefeated" Dolphins only play 2 or 3 winning teams the ENTIRE season? How is that not the easiest path to the Superbowl?

 

[QuantumMechanic]

Based off DVOA, which adjusts for opponent, they have a better pass defense than the Broncos did when they won, and that was the previous best pass defense of the 2000s.

One thing to keep in mind is that FO redefined DVOA several years ago. It used to be an absolute measure relative to a fixed baseline year. Now it is a relative measure relative to each year’s league averages.

For example, if defense X in 2017 was 50% better than the 2017 average it will get a -50% (approximately). If defense Y in 2014 was 30% better than the 2014 average it will get a -30% even if Y was actually a better defense than X (perhaps all defenses were crappier in 2017).

Point is that you can no longer use DVOA to compare between years. The best you can do is say something like “the 2017 Foobars were more above 2017 averages than the 2015 Quxxes were above 2015 averages.”

 

[Joey007]

In a sense they aren’t wrong. But I attribute it more to how successful New England has remained over the years, with the rest of the league failing to maintain success in this recent era.

 

[XLIX]

Here is the fundamental problem with 538's analysis:

They base their analysis primarily off of each team's ELO ratings, similar to how chess players are ranked. BUT, the problem is, they generate those ELO ratings using more than just this year's data. It is actually a running total going back to when the franchises were founded.

Tennessee and Jacksonville are each punished heavily for being so bad prior to this year. For example, 11-7 Atlanta is ranked almost 100 points ahead of 12-6 Jacksonville. Does that make sense? Also ranked ahead of Jacksonville are three 9-7 teams: Dallas, LA Chargers and Seattle.

So yes, according to 538, the Chargers are a tougher opponent than the Jaguars. Sorry if I have a hard time taking such an analysis terribly seriously.

 

[primetime]

One thing to keep in mind is that FO redefined DVOA several years ago. It used to be an absolute measure relative to a fixed baseline year. Now it is a relative measure relative to each year’s league averages.

For example, if defense X in 2017 was 50% better than the 2017 average it will get a -50% (approximately). If defense Y in 2014 was 30% better than the 2014 average it will get a -30% even if Y was actually a better defense than X (perhaps all defenses were crappier in 2017).

Point is that you can no longer use DVOA to compare between years. The best you can do is say something like “the 2017 Foobars were more above 2017 averages than the 2015 Quxxes were above 2015 averages.”

Good point. That said, you could make the argument that the Jaguars of this year having the largest margin between them and the median pass defense since 2003 at the very least puts them in a vague category of "historically good" even if it doesn't measure definitively compared to the 2015 Broncos or whatever.

(For what it's worth, I'm fairly confident the Patriots will win this game comfortably.)

 

[Soliel]

Good point. That said, you could make the argument that the Jaguars of this year having the largest margin between them and the median pass defense since 2003 at the very least puts them in a vague category of "historically good" even if it doesn't measure definitively compared to the 2015 Broncos or whatever.

(For what it's worth, I'm fairly confident the Patriots will win this game comfortably.)

I agree.

I do not buy the jags being as good or better than the no fly zone broncos simply on strength of schedule for one and they don’t have good run defense. Pats by 20 or so.
That freak Kellerman must be silenced