Tweet
In the first eight years of their existence, Carolina was an unbelievable 8-25 in games decided by three points or less. This season they are 6-0 in such games, which can either be viewed as a remarkable turnaround or simply the law of averages catching up. Either way, the difference between being just good enough to lose close games and just good enough to win them is huge in the NFL. The Panthers have won three games in overtime on the road this year, having to rally after blowing fourth quarter leads in all three. In the last two weeks they rallied from fourth quarter deficits to beat Tampa Bay and Washington. While relinquishing fourth quarter leads is disconcerting, Carolina has shown they know how to win. Through their first six games the Cowboys averaged 25 points per game. In their last four, they've averaged less than eight.
In their last seven games, the Chiefs have won only two of them by more than seven points. As embarrassing as their season has been, the Raiders should not be casually dismissed. They have only lost one game this year by more than 10 points. Despite not having their best runner, Charlie Garner, in their last two games Oakland ran the ball 52 and 43 times, averaging 180 yards rushing. That's about double the 91 yards they were averaging in their first eight games. Garner is back this week and will be facing a Kansas City squad that has surrendered 39 runs of ten yards or more, the fifth worst total in the NFL. The line on this game is high for a lot of reasons, including the Chiefs' turnover ratio, which I write about below. Another is the fact that Rick Mirer is now quarterbacking for Oakland. He may be the most ridiculed QB in the league. But the fact that he is still at it 11 years after coming out of Notre Dame is a testament to his determination to make it in the NFL. And having watched the tapes of his last two starts, it is surprising how well he is throwing the ball. In those two contests he completed 27 of 38 passes, earning quarterback ratings of 106.4 and 111.9. For the season, he has completed 63.6% of his passes. Those are decent enough stats on a team that also knows how to run the ball.
It will be interesting to see how Jake Plummer performs Sunday. After spending his entire college and pro career in the Arizona desert, he will be asked to lead the Bronco offense amid temperatures expected to be in the low 20's with gusting winds and possible snow showers. That's Bear weather. The Bears' season can be divided into two halves. In the first five games, Kordell Stewart was the quarterback and the Bears were outscored by 72 points. In their last five games, with Chris Chandler at QB, they have outscored their opponents by 10. Certainly Stewart shouldn't be blamed entirely for the dicotomy in scoring. Over the last five games, running back Anthony Thomas has gotten healthy and the offensive line has settled in after being decimated by injuries. And just as importantly, several rookies have risen to the occasion and become solid contributors for Chicago.
Jacksonville has had quite a tune-up for their visit to the Jets. In their last two games they have faced Peyton Manning and Steve McNair. The Jaguars accounted themselves well against those two teams that are a combined 16-4. In the last six quarters of those two contests they held the Colts and Titans to one touchdown and two field goals. In their last seven games, Jacksonville has lost at Houston on the last play of the game, beaten San Diego, was tied with Miami in the fourth quarter, lost to Tennessee, was driving to tie the game in the last two minutes at Baltimore, beat Indianapolis and had a first and goal with an opportunity to tie the game in the last minute at Tennessee.
Detroit is bereft of NFL talent at most positions, but Steve Mariucci has to be given credit for keeping his team practicing and playing hard. Not only is Minnesota allowing over 32 points per game in their last four encounters, but in their last three, they are surrendering a stunning 6.4 yards per rush. The turnaround in the Vikings' season is easy enough to explain. In their first six games they were plus 13 in turnovers and won (and covered) all six. In their last four contests, they are minus six in turnovers and lost (and failed to cover) all four. So let me tell you about turnovers. . . . .
Based on the number of times I read and hear about it, it appears to have come to the attention of the media and football handicappers that turnovers are crucial in determining the outcome of games. You can't follow pro football without constant references to team's fortunes being in lockstep with their turnover ratio. Because of this, many bettors have made the mistaken assumption that teams that have a positive turnover ratio are likely to be good bets and teams that have a negative ratio are to be avoided. Nothing could be further from the truth. As I have written before, while turnovers may be predictable to some extent at the college level due to the huge disparity in talent among Division I teams, at the pro level turnovers are largely happenstance. In my October 4th column I pointed out that teams that had the worst turnover ratios last season were doing better against the pointspread than the teams that had finished '02 with the best ratios. Now I will take it a step farther. Not only does it make no sense to favor good turnover teams over bad turnover teams, you actually would be better off betting the exact opposite-looking to play the less successful turnover teams, especially when they are facing a team with a clearly superior turnover ratio. Here is a chart showing all games this season since week six, where the two teams had a difference of at least 10 in their turnover ratios when they played.
Week Teams Turnovers Worst Turnover Team
Against The Spread
6 Denver 0 Lost
Minnesota +10
6 Chicago -7 Won
Seattle 10
7 Seattle 10
Cincinnati -1 Won
7 NY Giants -8 Won
Minnesota 13
7 San Francisco 7
Arizona -14 Won
7 NY Jets 5
Philadelphia -6 Won
7 Buffalo -2 Lost
Kansas City 11
8 NY Giants -7 Won
NY Jets 5
8 New Orleans -8 Won
Tampa Bay 11
8 Cincinnati 4
Arizona -14 Won
8 Pittsburgh -6 Lost
Seattle 5
8 Green Bay -4 Won
Minnesota 12
8 New England 8
Denver -5 Lost
9 Indianapolis 5
Jacksonville -5 Won
9 Cleveland -3 Lost
Kansas City 18
9 Minnesota 13
San Diego -5 Won
10 Arizona -13 Lost
Cleveland -3
10 Kansas City 18
Cincinnati 3 Won
10 St. Louis 5
Chicago -6 Won
10 Jacksonville -5 Won
Tennessee 12
10 Green Bay -8 Won
Tampa Bay 7
10 Minnesota 11
Oakland -1 Won
10 Pittsburgh -6 Lost
San Francisco 8
How is this possible? How can teams that are giving the ball away offer more pointspread value than opportunistic teams that have proven adept at taking the ball away to the tune of 16-7? The answer is simple. At the pro level, fumbles and interceptions are crucial to the outcomes of games. The public's perception of teams therefore gets skewered by the randomness of turnovers. Teams that are winning with the help of turnovers are often not nearly as good as their won-loss record and teams that are losing games due to turnovers are often not as bad as their record indicates. When two teams at opposite ends of the turnover spectrum meet, you often get two scoops of extra value if you take the team that has been less fortunate, because you are getting a slightly underrated team against a slightly overrated team. To doublecheck the value inherent to taking poor turnover teams against superior turnover teams, I went back to last year and checked the results for the second half of the season (weeks 9-17) using the same parameters. The team with the worst turnover ratio by 10 or more was 27-24-2 against the spread. Though not an impressive record, the above .500 mark is consistent with what I have noticed over the years and combined with the results thus far this season, an obvious conclusion can be drawn: football "experts" who profess to like a team's chances of covering the spread because they are "better at creating turnovers" don't understand NFL pointspreads. Superior turnover teams have their pointspreads suitably inflated (and conversely poor turnover teams are deflated) to not only make such logic invalid, but to actually make it profitable to be a contrarian.
Here are my plays this week:
Jacksonville Jaguars
Seattle Seahawks
New Orleans Saints
Detroit Lions
Carolina Panthers
Chicago Bears
Oakland Raiders
San Francisco 49'ers-Green Bay Packers OVER
Cincinnati Bengals-San Diego Chargers OVER
In their last seven games, the Chiefs have won only two of them by more than seven points. As embarrassing as their season has been, the Raiders should not be casually dismissed. They have only lost one game this year by more than 10 points. Despite not having their best runner, Charlie Garner, in their last two games Oakland ran the ball 52 and 43 times, averaging 180 yards rushing. That's about double the 91 yards they were averaging in their first eight games. Garner is back this week and will be facing a Kansas City squad that has surrendered 39 runs of ten yards or more, the fifth worst total in the NFL. The line on this game is high for a lot of reasons, including the Chiefs' turnover ratio, which I write about below. Another is the fact that Rick Mirer is now quarterbacking for Oakland. He may be the most ridiculed QB in the league. But the fact that he is still at it 11 years after coming out of Notre Dame is a testament to his determination to make it in the NFL. And having watched the tapes of his last two starts, it is surprising how well he is throwing the ball. In those two contests he completed 27 of 38 passes, earning quarterback ratings of 106.4 and 111.9. For the season, he has completed 63.6% of his passes. Those are decent enough stats on a team that also knows how to run the ball.
It will be interesting to see how Jake Plummer performs Sunday. After spending his entire college and pro career in the Arizona desert, he will be asked to lead the Bronco offense amid temperatures expected to be in the low 20's with gusting winds and possible snow showers. That's Bear weather. The Bears' season can be divided into two halves. In the first five games, Kordell Stewart was the quarterback and the Bears were outscored by 72 points. In their last five games, with Chris Chandler at QB, they have outscored their opponents by 10. Certainly Stewart shouldn't be blamed entirely for the dicotomy in scoring. Over the last five games, running back Anthony Thomas has gotten healthy and the offensive line has settled in after being decimated by injuries. And just as importantly, several rookies have risen to the occasion and become solid contributors for Chicago.
Jacksonville has had quite a tune-up for their visit to the Jets. In their last two games they have faced Peyton Manning and Steve McNair. The Jaguars accounted themselves well against those two teams that are a combined 16-4. In the last six quarters of those two contests they held the Colts and Titans to one touchdown and two field goals. In their last seven games, Jacksonville has lost at Houston on the last play of the game, beaten San Diego, was tied with Miami in the fourth quarter, lost to Tennessee, was driving to tie the game in the last two minutes at Baltimore, beat Indianapolis and had a first and goal with an opportunity to tie the game in the last minute at Tennessee.
Detroit is bereft of NFL talent at most positions, but Steve Mariucci has to be given credit for keeping his team practicing and playing hard. Not only is Minnesota allowing over 32 points per game in their last four encounters, but in their last three, they are surrendering a stunning 6.4 yards per rush. The turnaround in the Vikings' season is easy enough to explain. In their first six games they were plus 13 in turnovers and won (and covered) all six. In their last four contests, they are minus six in turnovers and lost (and failed to cover) all four. So let me tell you about turnovers. . . . .
Based on the number of times I read and hear about it, it appears to have come to the attention of the media and football handicappers that turnovers are crucial in determining the outcome of games. You can't follow pro football without constant references to team's fortunes being in lockstep with their turnover ratio. Because of this, many bettors have made the mistaken assumption that teams that have a positive turnover ratio are likely to be good bets and teams that have a negative ratio are to be avoided. Nothing could be further from the truth. As I have written before, while turnovers may be predictable to some extent at the college level due to the huge disparity in talent among Division I teams, at the pro level turnovers are largely happenstance. In my October 4th column I pointed out that teams that had the worst turnover ratios last season were doing better against the pointspread than the teams that had finished '02 with the best ratios. Now I will take it a step farther. Not only does it make no sense to favor good turnover teams over bad turnover teams, you actually would be better off betting the exact opposite-looking to play the less successful turnover teams, especially when they are facing a team with a clearly superior turnover ratio. Here is a chart showing all games this season since week six, where the two teams had a difference of at least 10 in their turnover ratios when they played.
Week Teams Turnovers Worst Turnover Team
Against The Spread
6 Denver 0 Lost
Minnesota +10
6 Chicago -7 Won
Seattle 10
7 Seattle 10
Cincinnati -1 Won
7 NY Giants -8 Won
Minnesota 13
7 San Francisco 7
Arizona -14 Won
7 NY Jets 5
Philadelphia -6 Won
7 Buffalo -2 Lost
Kansas City 11
8 NY Giants -7 Won
NY Jets 5
8 New Orleans -8 Won
Tampa Bay 11
8 Cincinnati 4
Arizona -14 Won
8 Pittsburgh -6 Lost
Seattle 5
8 Green Bay -4 Won
Minnesota 12
8 New England 8
Denver -5 Lost
9 Indianapolis 5
Jacksonville -5 Won
9 Cleveland -3 Lost
Kansas City 18
9 Minnesota 13
San Diego -5 Won
10 Arizona -13 Lost
Cleveland -3
10 Kansas City 18
Cincinnati 3 Won
10 St. Louis 5
Chicago -6 Won
10 Jacksonville -5 Won
Tennessee 12
10 Green Bay -8 Won
Tampa Bay 7
10 Minnesota 11
Oakland -1 Won
10 Pittsburgh -6 Lost
San Francisco 8
How is this possible? How can teams that are giving the ball away offer more pointspread value than opportunistic teams that have proven adept at taking the ball away to the tune of 16-7? The answer is simple. At the pro level, fumbles and interceptions are crucial to the outcomes of games. The public's perception of teams therefore gets skewered by the randomness of turnovers. Teams that are winning with the help of turnovers are often not nearly as good as their won-loss record and teams that are losing games due to turnovers are often not as bad as their record indicates. When two teams at opposite ends of the turnover spectrum meet, you often get two scoops of extra value if you take the team that has been less fortunate, because you are getting a slightly underrated team against a slightly overrated team. To doublecheck the value inherent to taking poor turnover teams against superior turnover teams, I went back to last year and checked the results for the second half of the season (weeks 9-17) using the same parameters. The team with the worst turnover ratio by 10 or more was 27-24-2 against the spread. Though not an impressive record, the above .500 mark is consistent with what I have noticed over the years and combined with the results thus far this season, an obvious conclusion can be drawn: football "experts" who profess to like a team's chances of covering the spread because they are "better at creating turnovers" don't understand NFL pointspreads. Superior turnover teams have their pointspreads suitably inflated (and conversely poor turnover teams are deflated) to not only make such logic invalid, but to actually make it profitable to be a contrarian.
Here are my plays this week:
Jacksonville Jaguars
Seattle Seahawks
New Orleans Saints
Detroit Lions
Carolina Panthers
Chicago Bears
Oakland Raiders
San Francisco 49'ers-Green Bay Packers OVER
Cincinnati Bengals-San Diego Chargers OVER