The Falcoholic: FanPosts

Offensive Line Performance

2009-11-06T19:37:08Z

I recently found published stats (Sacks Allowed, Penalties, etc.) for Offensive Linemen at the Washington Post website. The numbers are from STATS, Inc. Here's the main numbers:

Name (Position)	Sacks Allowed	False Start Penalties	Holding Penalties
Sam Baker (LT)	1.5	2	2
Justin Blaylock (LG)	0.5	1	0
Todd McClure (C)	0.5	0	0
Harvey Dahl (RG)	2.5	0	1
Tyson Clabo (RT)	1.0	0	0

They also include Yards from Sacks Allowed, total Penalties (including Personal Fouls, etc.) and Penalty Yards. For an example, here's the link to Harvey Dahl. I also like to use Football Outsiders O-Line stats. Through Week 8, the Falcons are #8 in Adjusted Line Yards (Run Blocking), and #4 in Adjusted Sack Rate (Pass Protection). Their website also gives ranks for ALY in 5 running directions: Left End, Left Tackle, Mid/Guard, Right Tackle, Right End. They are above average in every direction except Left Tackle and Mid/Guard.

These numbers, taken together, seem to imply that Tyson Clabo has been the best performer along the O-Line so far this season. Is he worthy of a long-term extension (he's 28), or is Garrett Reynolds going to be in that spot next year? What should Dimitroff do to improve the middle of the line? I will try to remember to update these numbers at the end of the season.

Professor Frink Wants YOU!

2009-11-04T20:31:20Z

via i38.tinypic.com

Actually, I need your opinions, my good people.

Despite having been happy with my old rating algorithm for some years, I'm not quite as happy these days. I've discovered that when you publish something for all to see, you have a lot less margin for error. As much as I like the simplicity of my spreadsheet, I think I can do a little better.

My main concern is that the existing method overly penalizes winning teams like the Saints, who are outstanding on one side of the ball but mediocre on the other. To rank them in 7th place is IMO something that should probably be addressed. Last year, for example, the Steelers won the Super Bowl with a subpar offense and a great defense. So far this year, 3 of the 4 winningest teams have a below average defense (or offense). If this trend is the new reality in the NFL, I'd rather change than stubbornly stick with something that's worked in the past, but not quite as well now.

At the risk of getting too cute with a simple process, I'm thinking of adding a couple of new variables to the formula. Winning percentage is one measure of a team's quality that is undeniably relevant, as is Point Differential. Rather than weighing offense and defense at 50% apiece, my new mix would be:

Offense (curved, as before), 25%

Defense (curved), 25%

Point Differential per Game (curved), 25%

Winning Percentage, 25%.

Here are what the Week 8 rankings would look like using the new algorithm:

Rank	Power Rating		W-L-T	PF/G	PA/G	DIFF/G	Offense Rating	Defense Rating	Differential Rating
1	93.7	Colts	7-0-0	28.1	13.0	15.1	0.829	0.978	0.941
2	86.0	Patriots	5-2-0	28.3	14.0	14.3	0.834	0.962	0.929
3	85.5	Saints	7-0-0	39.0	22.0	17.0	0.995	0.465	0.960
4	78.8	Eagles	5-2-0	29.0	19.0	10.0	0.859	0.729	0.847
5	77.0	Vikings	7-1-0	30.5	21.8	8.8	0.903	0.488	0.815
6	76.3	Cowboys	5-2-0	28.1	19.4	8.7	0.829	0.695	0.814
7	74.0	Broncos	6-1-0	20.0	13.7	6.3	0.396	0.967	0.738
8	72.8	Ravens	4-3-0	28.4	19.6	8.9	0.839	0.684	0.818
9	71.0	Packers	4-3-0	26.7	19.1	7.6	0.769	0.718	0.780
10	70.4	Steelers	5-2-0	23.9	18.4	5.4	0.622	0.772	0.709
11	69.4	Bengals	5-2-0	23.3	18.3	5.0	0.589	0.781	0.693
12	65.0	Jets	4-4-0	22.1	16.8	5.4	0.521	0.872	0.707
13	62.5	Texans	5-3-0	24.8	21.0	3.8	0.671	0.558	0.646
14	60.3	Giants	5-3-0	26.5	22.9	3.6	0.759	0.385	0.641
15	59.5	Falcons	4-3-0	24.4	21.3	3.1	0.654	0.531	0.622
16	59.3	Chargers	4-3-0	26.4	22.7	3.7	0.756	0.400	0.645
17	57.4	Cardinals	4-3-0	22.4	20.4	2.0	0.539	0.610	0.576
18	54.8	Bears	4-3-0	22.7	21.4	1.3	0.556	0.518	0.547
19	51.6	49ers	3-4-0	21.0	20.0	1.0	0.454	0.647	0.535
20	45.1	Dolphins	3-4-0	25.1	25.3	-0.1	0.692	0.197	0.488
21	40.5	Seahawks	2-5-0	19.3	21.0	-1.7	0.355	0.558	0.423
22	39.2	Redskins	2-5-0	13.7	17.6	-3.9	0.115	0.827	0.338
23	34.0	Bills	3-5-0	15.4	21.1	-5.8	0.170	0.546	0.270
24	33.1	Panthers	3-4-0	18.3	23.7	-5.4	0.302	0.313	0.281
25	30.4	Jaguars	3-4-0	19.0	25.3	-6.3	0.340	0.197	0.251
26	14.7	Chiefs	1-6-0	15.0	25.9	-10.9	0.156	0.162	0.126
27	13.7	Raiders	2-6-0	9.8	25.1	-15.4	0.037	0.207	0.053
28	11.6	Lions	1-6-0	16.1	29.3	-13.1	0.201	0.037	0.083
29	11.1	Titans	1-6-0	16.3	30.1	-13.9	0.207	0.024	0.072
30	8.8	Browns	1-7-0	9.8	26.1	-16.4	0.037	0.147	0.043
31	6.8	Rams	1-7-0	9.6	27.6	-18.0	0.035	0.081	0.029
32	5.3	Buccaneers	0-7-0	13.7	29.0	-15.3	0.115	0.043	0.054

(I omitted Win% from the table due to space and readabilty considerations, but it does figure into the final ratings.)

Though hardly perfect by any means, this version seems to "smell" somewhat better, at least to me.

Since I publish this for your amusement, kind readers, I would appreciate YOUR feedback on this momentous issue. Do the results seem more realistic this way? Does the added complexity strike anyone as a negative? If so, is that negative outweighed by better results?

Like Linus waiting for the Great Pumpkin, I look forward to any constructive remarks youse guys have to offer. Thanks, everyone!

Ask Hogs Haven: Your Redskins Questions Answered...

2009-11-04T04:06:33Z

Hey Falcons fans...this is Kevin, the Editor over at HogsHaven.com. Tough loss Monday Night, but at least you have a good team and a personnel staff that is not in shambles. Having said, post any questions and I'll answer them for you.

A couple notes:

- DeAngelo Hall will be returning some punts on Sunday, which he hasn't done since 2007.
- John Abraham will probably have 3+ sacks on Sunday. Losing Chris Samuels has been devastating for the Skins, especially since he's the only lineman the Skins have drafted in the first round since 2000. His replacement, Stephon Heyer, an undrafted lineman from University of Maryland, has been getting worked over.
- Skins defense is good, but it gets worn down in the second half since the Skins Offense cannot stay on the field.
- Jim Zorn has lost some of the locker room, so coming off a BYE shouldn't help us too much
- Losing Chris Cooley to a broken foot blows, but Fred Davis should not be ignored. He spent his BYE week in D.C. working on route running and blocking.

Professor Frink’s Power Rankings, Week 8

2009-11-03T22:59:31Z

via i37.tinypic.com

Brace yourself for some provocative Week 8 numbers. Have fun!

RATINGS COMPUTATION (must-read for newbies):

At its heart, this is a VERY simple method of calculating ratings, using only two stats. The results aren't supposed to be a perfect reflection of the real world, so don't take them too seriously! It is interesting how such a crude algorithm can be as accurate as it is, though.

Here's how the ratings are calculated. The first step is to calculate two simple stats: Points For per Game, and Points Against per Game, for each team. These two leaguewide data sets for offense & defense both conform to a "Bell Curve", or Normal Distribution, that can be graphed. Depending on where each team lies on that graph, they have a value between 0 and 1. (This isn't something pulled from thin air. It's a very common, standardized statistical analysis technique. The purpose is to more accurately measure each team's position within the population of all league teams.) You now have every team rated from 0 to 1, on offense and on defense. Add those two numbers and you've got a total rating for each team. Last, multiply by 50 to convert the ratings onto a 0-to-100 scale to make them more readable and intuitive. There you go. Simple, right?

Rank	Power Rating		W-L-T	PF/G	PA/G	Offense Rating	Defense Rating	Total
1	90.3	Colts	7-0-0	28.1	13.0	0.829	0.978	1.806
2	89.8	Patriots	5-2-0	28.3	14.0	0.834	0.962	1.796
3	79.4	Eagles	5-2-0	29.0	19.0	0.859	0.729	1.588
4	76.2	Cowboys	5-2-0	28.1	19.4	0.829	0.695	1.524
5	76.1	Ravens	4-3-0	28.4	19.6	0.839	0.684	1.523
6	74.4	Packers	4-3-0	26.7	19.1	0.769	0.718	1.487
7	73.0	Saints	7-0-0	39.0	22.0	0.995	0.465	1.460
8	69.7	Steelers	5-2-0	23.9	18.4	0.622	0.772	1.393
9	69.6	Jets	4-4-0	22.1	16.8	0.521	0.872	1.393
10	69.6	Vikings	7-1-0	30.5	21.8	0.903	0.488	1.391
11	68.5	Bengals	5-2-0	23.3	18.3	0.589	0.781	1.371
12	68.1	Broncos	6-1-0	20.0	13.7	0.396	0.967	1.363
13	61.4	Texans	5-3-0	24.8	21.0	0.671	0.558	1.229
14	59.3	Falcons	4-3-0	24.4	21.3	0.654	0.531	1.185
15	57.8	Chargers	4-3-0	26.4	22.7	0.756	0.400	1.156
16	57.4	Cardinals	4-3-0	22.4	20.4	0.539	0.610	1.148
17	57.2	Giants	5-3-0	26.5	22.9	0.759	0.385	1.145
18	55.1	49ers	3-4-0	21.0	20.0	0.454	0.647	1.101
19	53.7	Bears	4-3-0	22.7	21.4	0.556	0.518	1.074
20	47.1	Redskins	2-5-0	13.7	17.6	0.115	0.827	0.942
21	45.7	Seahawks	2-5-0	19.3	21.0	0.355	0.558	0.913
22	44.4	Dolphins	3-4-0	25.1	25.3	0.692	0.197	0.889
23	35.8	Bills	3-5-0	15.4	21.1	0.170	0.546	0.716
24	30.7	Panthers	3-4-0	18.3	23.7	0.302	0.313	0.615
25	26.8	Jaguars	3-4-0	19.0	25.3	0.340	0.197	0.537
26	15.9	Chiefs	1-6-0	15.0	25.9	0.156	0.162	0.318
27	12.2	Raiders	2-6-0	9.8	25.1	0.037	0.207	0.244
28	11.9	Lions	1-6-0	16.1	29.3	0.201	0.037	0.238
29	11.5	Titans	1-6-0	16.3	30.1	0.207	0.024	0.230
30	9.2	Browns	1-7-0	9.8	26.1	0.037	0.147	0.184
31	7.9	Buccaneers	0-7-0	13.7	29.0	0.115	0.043	0.158
32	5.8	Rams	1-7-0	9.6	27.6	0.035	0.081	0.116
			means =	21.8	21.6
		Means may not match until all teams have played the same number of games.

Crazy looking numbers, you say? After kicking the Gamble-Tron 2000 and recalibrating the Frinkometer, they actually make some sense when you consider how the algorithm works.

Look at the Saints, Vikings, and Broncos. Every one of those teams is great on one side of the ball and below average on the other. Mathematically, these 3 teams cannot exceed a Power Rating of 75 as long as they remain below average on that one side of the ball. I'm not saying it's just and fair, but it IS how the math shakes out. If you remove those three turds from the punch bowl, the ratings look a lot more plausible.

Just for fun and a semi-reality check, let's look at teams ranked by Point Differential per Game (DIFF/G), instead. It's a most useful stat that correlates very highly with winning percentage.

Rank	DIFF/G		W-L-T	PF/G	PA/G
1	17.0	Saints	7-0-0	39.0	22.0
2	15.1	Colts	7-0-0	28.1	13.0
3	14.3	Patriots	5-2-0	28.3	14.0
4	10.0	Eagles	5-2-0	29.0	19.0
5	8.9	Ravens	4-3-0	28.4	19.6
6	8.8	Vikings	7-1-0	30.5	21.8
7	8.7	Cowboys	5-2-0	28.1	19.4
8	7.6	Packers	4-3-0	26.7	19.1
9	6.3	Broncos	6-1-0	20.0	13.7
10	5.4	Steelers	5-2-0	23.9	18.4
11	5.4	Jets	4-4-0	22.1	16.8
12	5.0	Bengals	5-2-0	23.3	18.3
13	3.8	Texans	5-3-0	24.8	21.0
14	3.7	Chargers	4-3-0	26.4	22.7
15	3.6	Giants	5-3-0	26.5	22.9
16	3.1	Falcons	4-3-0	24.4	21.3
17	2.0	Cardinals	4-3-0	22.4	20.4
18	1.3	Bears	4-3-0	22.7	21.4
19	1.0	49ers	3-4-0	21.0	20.0
20	-0.1	Dolphins	3-4-0	25.1	25.3
21	-1.7	Seahawks	2-5-0	19.3	21.0
22	-3.9	Redskins	2-5-0	13.7	17.6
23	-5.4	Panthers	3-4-0	18.3	23.7
24	-5.8	Bills	3-5-0	15.4	21.1
25	-6.3	Jaguars	3-4-0	19.0	25.3
26	-10.9	Chiefs	1-6-0	15.0	25.9
27	-13.1	Lions	1-6-0	16.1	29.3
28	-13.9	Titans	1-6-0	16.3	30.1
29	-15.3	Buccaneers	0-7-0	13.7	29.0
30	-15.4	Raiders	2-6-0	9.8	25.1
31	-16.4	Browns	1-7-0	9.8	26.1
32	-18.0	Rams	1-7-0	9.6	27.6

Interesting that the Vikings and Broncos don't exactly dazzle using this yardstick, either. The 4-3 Ravens and Packers are in the top 8 using both methods as well. I'm just guessing, but I betcha Saints fans prefer this latter ranking. What a spread there!

Coming back to Power Rankings, the Ravens rose 9 spots; the Cowboys and Texans rose 6. Teams with the largest declines were the Giants, 9 slots, and Broncos, down 7.

That's all folks! Remember that this is simple, math-driven Fun With Numbers. Feedback is welcome, but please don't comment just to gripe about where your team's rated; the algorithm plays no favorites. You can download the spreadsheet here if you like playing with the numbers. Cheers!

Falcons 36, Saints 24

2009-11-03T21:50:25Z

(NOTE: I also posted this on The Beat Blog, but I felt it needed seen here as well.)

This was a good game, but some of the Saints fans (very specifically, SOME of them - I actually like the Saints fans more than most team's fans in the NFL, they seem to be very gracious and well mannered as a whole) need to stop denying that the Falcons had a chance. All of this about scoring 50 pts and having a bad night…utter bull crap. Yes, they did win, and I’m not trying to discredit that, but some haters also should recognize that the Falcons looked like the better football team for the majority of the game. We played excellently, and I can list several reasons that we didn’t win that had very little to do with our team as a whole, and rather, with individual players, and even more so, with the refereeing. And, to be fair, I’ll count what happened wrong with you guys as well.

Jason Elam and John Carney: 2 missed for Elam, 1 for Carney. That brings the score to 33 : 38

Roddy White interference for INT TD: Now it’s 33 : 31, Falcons ahead.

Miracle 68 Yard TD with Possible Interference: 29 : 31 now, since they would have likely made the FG. 26 : 31 if you want to be touchy.

Roddy White Defensive Interference in the End Zone: Back up to 33 : 31, or even 36 : 31. Falcons on top.

3rd and 5 Defensive Holding: Everyone knows it was crap, even the Saints-worshipping announcers. Give it up. You punt it, 7 points off the boards for the saints, and the score is 36: 24.

This is being generous and not counting the times the Saints held John Abraham – I counted at least 5. But nothing’s definitive there. And Michael Jenkin’s drops don’t even count here. Nor does the miracle INT with a tip at the 10 yard line. It’s all up to interpretation.

So yes, I believe the Atlanta Falcons had every shot at winning the game by a double digit margin. Falcons 36, Saints 24. Not counting all the other bad calls. Or the huge break through run where Pierre Thomas got the TD in the first quarter – an easy stop, and yet we failed. Falcons had this game on their fingertips, and played some damn great football. But this is all extremely obvious, extremely preventable stuff. We had this, we won this, it sucks that it's over, but we showed just what type of a football team we are. Finished through to the end.

I can’t wait till the Georgia Dome battle occurs.

tloz' Pre-Game Pep Up

2009-11-02T22:43:36Z

Right now, the two busses carrying our beloved Atlanta Falcons are heading to the Superdome.

Bus 1 and 2 rolling. Let's get it!!! - @FalconsHamz

The coverstory of ESPN.com reads "AIR OF SUPERIORITY: The unbeaten, pass-happy Saints face a Falcons secondary filled with misfits and misfortune. Care to guess how this one will end?" It links to Pat Y's article detailing how miserable our secondary is, where Chris Houston is touted as the best option we have and how our corner backing corps wouldn't even start for most other teams.

As far as I can tell, not a single talking head has picked the Falcons to win this game. Heck, even I picked against the Falcons this week.

We know that the MNF crew will likely be talking non-stop about how great the Saints are (and deservedly so).

All the more reason for our 'Birds to come out firing. All the more reason to be glued to the edge of your seat, to be decked out in Falcon red, white, and black, all the more reason to be yelling at the top of your lungs come 8:30 EST. Regardless, win or lose, we are Falcoholics. Get those mugs, steins, and glasses ready. It's time to drink it up.

Go Falcons!

interesting story

2009-11-02T06:02:49Z

on the run game by ledbetter. especially the note about the 3-4 and 4-3 defenses for the falcons. made me feel a little bit better about turner and our run game. Also do any of you guys think the stecker signing really means anything or that he will amount to anything in our offense im kind of curious he was always a pretty decent runningback.

http://www.ajc.com/sports/atlanta-falcons/falcons-looking-for-answers-176868.html?cxtype=rss_sports

falcons/saints history/falcons victory monday night

2009-11-01T08:37:25Z

Falcons vs Saints coverage

I could be wrong,but i think we beat saints,wildcard game,early 90's,when glanville was coach,then lost to redskins,in 2nd round.thats in past ,the saints are good,but so are the falcons,the playoffs this past Jan.,the saints were at home,falcons were in playoffs.final score monday night- falcons 27 saints 24Falcons vs Saints coverage Falcons vs Saints preview Canal Street Chronicles Atlanta Falcons Atlanta Falcons schedule Blogging The Boys Falcons vs Cowboys boxscore Falcons vs Cowboys recap Falcons vs Cowboys coverage Canal Street Chronicles Falcons vs Saints preview Falcons vs Saints coverage

Falcons vs Saints preview Falcons vs Saints coverage Canal Street Chronicles Blogging The Boys go falconswin win win win win win were just as good the saints,final score -falcons 27 saints 24

Digging Deeper into the Box Score: Week 7

2009-10-29T19:55:14Z

Cowboys... ugh.

Offense

It was a pretty ugly game offensively, and I don’t think we want to re-live all the gory details, so here’s some of the lowlights:

Matt Ryan – 5.7 Yards per Attempt, 2 Interceptions, the 4 Sacks, plus 2 Fumbles (only 1 Lost)

Michael Turner – 2.8 Yards per Carry on 18 Attempts (at least he didn’t fumble again)

Roddy White – 8.3 Yards per Catch, only 55% Catch Rate (6/11)

Tony Gonzalez – 9.3 Yards per Catch, 57% Catch Rate (4/7)

Their defenders were physical, aggressive, and we had no answer for them.

Defense

The Run Defense was actually pretty solid, except for a stretch in the 3rd Quarter when they had runs of 9, 12, 1, 7, and 13 (with a Romo scramble mixed in). Taking into consideration the Cowboys rushing average coming into the game, holding them to 3.8 Yards per Running Back Carry (excluding Romo’s scrambles) was a good accomplishment. The problem was they were completely unable to slow down the passing game. Romo’s YPA was 10.7 (almost double Ryan’s), and Miles Austin abused whoever happened to be “covering” him at the time (Houston, Grimes, and DeCoud all got beat for big plays).

If you really want to torture yourself, there is a great breakdown of formations, personnel packages, and big plays from a Cowboys perspective here.

Below are the individual stats:

Name	Plays	Stop Rate	Defeats
Erik Coleman	11	50%	1
Thomas DeCoud	10	50%	4
Brent Grimes	5	60%	1
Curtis Lofton	4	100%	0
Chris Houston	3.5	57%	0
Stephen Nicholas	3	100%	1
Mike Peterson	2.5	80%	0
Chevis Jackson	2	0%	0
John Abraham	1.5	33%	0.5
Jamaal Anderson	1	100%	1
Thomas Johnson	1	100%	1
Kroy Biermann	0.5	100%	0.5
Jonathan Babineaux	0.5	100%	0
Trey Lewis	0.5	0%	0

Notice anything yet? The Linebackers weren’t making many plays – the Safeties were. Mike Peterson, in particular, was way below his usual level of production. Keep in mind that these Stop Rates are inflated a bit by the fact that Touchdowns (and when a player runs out of bounds on their own) aren’t counted as “Plays”. The full effect will be seen when I update the coverage numbers.

Special Teams: Coy Wire, Kroy Biermann, Jason Snelling, and Mike Schneck (that’s right, the Long Snapper) each got one tackle. Also, Michael Koenen did a good job on Kickoffs, giving the Cowboys poor starting field position. They only returned one Kick for 16 yards, plus two Touchbacks (his final KO was an onsides kick). Too bad the offense couldn’t score more often. The Punts were generally pretty good, too – but we won’t mention the Punt Coverage.

Reminder:

Successful Play – 45% of yardage needed on First Down, 60% of yardage needed on Second Down, 100% of yardage needed on Third or Fourth Down.

Stop Rate – Percentage of Plays stopping the offense short of a Successful Play.

Defeat – A Stop on Third or Fourth Down, and Interception, or a Play that results in a Fumble (whether the defense recovers or not – that means the defender who causes the Forced Fumble gets the Defeat, not the guy who comes up with a Fumble Recovery).

Don't forget that these aren't my Defensive Stats, I'm just compiling the numbers. They are from Football Outsiders.

Have We Jumped the Gun On Our Comrade Leader?

2009-10-28T13:08:35Z

This time last year we were flipping head over heals at the moves that our fearless leader took to lead up into the playoffs. Matty Ice was playing like, well, Matty Ice. Turner was teaching defenses a whole new meaning to the word trucking, and Curtis Lofton was lighting people up like the Fourth of July. While Sam Baker was nursing a back injury, he too came back to be effective once healed. Add to that the contributions of Chevis Jackson and the big play ability of your friend and mine, Harry Douglas and all in all Comrade T.D. pretty much knocked the socks off of his first draft.

Now as the 2009 Draft day came around, we all sat back and said "In Dimitroff we trust." But my question is, did we speak to soon?..

I believe that what the Coaching staff has done so far has been phenomenal, and the moves made by T.D. have over all been fantastic. But in light of the recent news that William "C4" Moore is now on injured reserve that leaves the 2009 Draft in question. Both our First and Second round picks (who were also both slated to be starters) are now on injured reserve while our 3rd is no where to be seen. And all i've seen out of our 4th, Sidbury, who I like, is an offsides penalty. Could we have possible put too much faith in our fearless leader? I doubt that, i still think he made some great moves. I mean, come on, Tony G.?!? But perhaps, just maybe, he reached a little bit in this draft. Both of Jerry and Moore had a history of injuries that were overlooked. Anyways, enough talk from me. I believe in T.D., Smitty and their ability to make this work. Last year earned that and more from me. But unless Tye Hill starts lighting it up against the Saints I think I'm going to have to grade this offseason a good bit lower than I initially thought.

But who cares about what I think, what do the other Falcoholics believe?

Professor Frink’s Power Rankings, Week 7

2009-10-27T18:19:24Z

via i37.tinypic.com

Fresh from the Gamble-Tron 2000, the Week 7 ratings await your perusal. Enjoy!

RATINGS COMPUTATION (for the uninitiated):

At its heart, this is a VERY simple method of calculating ratings, using only two stats. The results aren't supposed to be a perfect reflection of the real world, don't take them too seriously. It's interesting, though, that such a crude algorithm can be as accurate as I've seen it be over the last few years.

Rank	Power Rating		W-L-T	PF/G	PA/G	Offense Rating	Defense Rating	Total
1	91.9	Colts	6-0-0	29.8	12.8	0.884	0.953	1.837
2	88.0	Patriots	5-2-0	28.3	14.0	0.834	0.926	1.760
3	81.6	Packers	4-2-0	26.8	16.0	0.776	0.856	1.631
4	75.9	Saints	6-0-0	39.7	21.2	0.996	0.522	1.518
5	75.4	Broncos	6-0-0	22.2	11.0	0.530	0.979	1.509
6	72.5	Eagles	4-2-0	27.2	19.3	0.790	0.660	1.450
7	70.2	Jets	4-3-0	21.7	14.9	0.504	0.900	1.404
8	69.8	Giants	5-2-0	27.9	20.4	0.818	0.579	1.397
9	69.8	Vikings	6-1-0	29.4	21.1	0.872	0.524	1.396
10	69.2	Cowboys	4-2-0	26.5	19.8	0.761	0.624	1.384
11	67.4	Steelers	5-2-0	23.9	18.4	0.626	0.722	1.348
12	66.3	Bengals	5-2-0	23.3	18.3	0.594	0.731	1.325
13	65.9	Falcons	4-2-0	24.0	19.0	0.634	0.683	1.318
14	65.7	Ravens	3-3-0	28.2	21.7	0.830	0.483	1.313
15	64.9	Cardinals	4-2-0	22.7	18.2	0.559	0.739	1.298
16	56.2	Seahawks	2-4-0	19.7	18.2	0.386	0.739	1.124
17	55.8	49ers	3-3-0	22.2	20.3	0.530	0.586	1.116
18	54.9	Chargers	3-3-0	26.8	23.8	0.776	0.322	1.097
19	52.0	Texans	4-3-0	23.9	22.6	0.626	0.414	1.040
20	44.9	Redskins	2-5-0	13.7	17.6	0.123	0.775	0.898
21	43.9	Dolphins	2-4-0	24.3	25.3	0.652	0.225	0.878
22	42.1	Bills	3-4-0	16.1	19.7	0.210	0.632	0.843
23	40.1	Bears	3-3-0	21.5	24.0	0.491	0.310	0.801
24	34.1	Jaguars	3-3-0	20.0	24.5	0.404	0.277	0.681
25	24.5	Panthers	2-4-0	15.7	24.2	0.191	0.299	0.490
26	18.1	Chiefs	1-6-0	15.0	25.9	0.165	0.196	0.361
27	14.2	Lions	1-5-0	17.2	31.3	0.256	0.027	0.283
28	13.0	Browns	1-6-0	10.3	25.6	0.048	0.212	0.260
29	12.9	Raiders	2-5-0	8.9	25.3	0.031	0.228	0.259
30	9.7	Buccaneers	0-7-0	13.7	29.0	0.123	0.071	0.194
31	7.2	Titans	0-6-0	14.0	33.0	0.132	0.012	0.144
32	3.7	Rams	0-7-0	8.6	30.1	0.028	0.046	0.073
			means =	21.7	21.5
		Means may not match until all teams have played the same number of games.

What's up with the (cough) beloved Saints? Despite winning, they fell to 4th place! How can this be, you ask? The Saints are a textbook example of how this algorithm skews the numbers. Despite being about as good as an offense can be, the defense is the very embodiment of "average" (by the numbers at least). This effectively puts a cap on their power rating of about 75 or so. The Broncos are a mirror image of the Saints, with the emphasis on defense in their case. Note the teams above them all have a more favorable balance of O and D.

Teams on the rise were led by the Jets (the turd in this week's punchbowl) and Bengals, up 7 slots. Falling furthest were the Falcons (groan) and Bears, down 9 slots.

Hope y'all enjoy, you heah? Your Falcoholic feedback is welcome. You can download the spreadsheet here. Cheers!

Digging Deeper into the Box Score: Week 6

2009-10-26T21:28:46Z

This is a belated version of Digging Deeper for the Bears game.

Offense

This was another poor game for Michael Turner, and if not for a few good runs in the second half, it could’ve looked much worse. His first four runs were for 1, 1, -3, and -2 yards. That kind of “production” is putting the offense in tough spots with long to-go situations. He ended up with a 46% Success Rate (6/13) compared to 100% for Norwood (4/4) and 67% for Snelling (2/3). He has always been a bit of a boom or bust type runner, but so far there has been too many “busts” and not enough “boom”. Turner wasn’t the only player to start off slow, though, with the offense going 3 and out the first three series of the game (and the first two series of the second half).

Actually, the whole offense was broken on first downs. Runs on first downs had a 55% Success Rate – Passes only had a 45% Success Rate, including an Interception. There were zero Successful Pass Plays on first down in the second half (well, unless you count a 7 yard scramble by Ryan a “pass play”).

Part of the problem on offense was that Ryan seemed to be forcing the ball to Tony G – he only had 4 Receptions on his 9 Targets (44% Catch Rate).

Defense

Name	Plays	Stop Rate	Defeats
Curtis Lofton	8.5	82%	2
Erik Coleman	8	25%	0
Mike Peterson	7	86%	2
Thomas DeCoud	7	29%	2
Chris Houston	6	17%	1
Jonathan Babineaux	3.5	100%	2.5
John Abraham	3.5	43%	0.5
Brent Grimes	3.5	57%	2
Brian Williams	3	33%	0
Jamaal Anderson	2	50%	0
Thomas Johnson	2	100%	1
Coy Wire	2	50%	0
Stephen Nicholas	1	100%	0

This was DeCoud’s coming out party with the two Interceptions. It was just another great game by Lofton and Peterson, with the high Stop Rates and multiple Defeats. Quietly, Babineaux is having another very good season. His Defeats included a Forced Fumble and half of a Sack (shared with Abe). On the negative side, I want to know what’s going on with Stephen Nicholas. I haven’t seen anything that seems like he’s doing a bad job, but he is losing playing time to Coy Wire, Nickle packages with an extra defensive back, etc.

Special Teams Tackles: Coy Wire and William Moore 1.5 each; Stephen Nicholas, Kroy Biermann, Christopher Owens, and Curtis Lofton 1 each. What is Lofton doing on Special Teams? I don’t know – I didn’t even check the tape to see if that was a mistake, I went straight from the play-by-play.

Reminder:

Successful Play – 45% of yardage needed on First Down, 60% of yardage needed on Second Down, 100% of yardage needed on Third or Fourth Down.

Stop Rate – Percentage of Plays stopping the offense short of a Successful Play.

Defeat – A Stop on Third or Fourth Down, and Interception, or a Play that results in a Fumble (whether the defense recovers or not – that means the defender who causes the Forced Fumble gets the Defeat, not the guy who comes up with a Fumble Recovery).

We have loss our Identity (please get your mojo back)

2009-10-26T19:36:59Z

As I sat down and watched every Falcons game this year, I realize that we have loss our identity. We are a run first offense that passes off of playaction and then hit defenses with the no huddle offense. Please don't give me this well they are stacking the box. They stacked the box last year and we still ended up with the #1 rushing team in football. Here's what makes this season different.

First of all, we are playing better defenses than we played last season. I am the first to admit that playing the Lions, Packers, Raiders, Chargers, Broncos and the Saints twice helped us from an offensive stand point last year. Nevertheless, those team have been replaced by the Giants, Jets, Patriots, Bills and the new and improved Saints defenses. That will make it hard for any running game even Minnesota. What I do not get is we will come out and pass, pass and pass and pass.... Then we will run plays that allows opposing defensive tackle enough time to get into our backfield and disrupt the whole timing.  I am still shaking my head.  I still like our offensive coordinator and I do think he is doing a pretty good job this year overall.

Fellow fans, Matt Ryan is not Peyton Manning yet. He has a long way to go to fill those shoes.   I mean whatever happen to us allowing him to learn and improve week end and week out? Yes some of us have crown him when we still should be observing and allowing him to grow as a pro qb. This one I fault the fans and the organization for pumping his head up. I mean when Tony Gonzalez compares him to a young Peyton or Thomas Dimtroff compares him to a Tom Brady I shake my head. I personally think the kid can be the best qb to play the game if he continues to work hard, study and learn from his mistake. However, he is not a elite nor a top flight qb just yet. He is a kid that is a year in a half removed from college. Yesterday showed that he still has a lot of learning to do in the "your team is in a hole on the road against a offense that is scoring touchdowns and you have been hit 11 times and sacked 4 times" category. So Matty Ice, back to the film room, disect each play and come away knowing that if you would have remained cool under pressure that you could have possibly out gunned Romo..... It would have helped if Jenkins start back catching the ball as well. He has dropped 3 passes in the last 2 games (1 in chicago and 2 this game).

Finally, we are losing our identity b/c without Norwood, defenses don't have to worry about preparing for a game breaker that can get to the edges. A starting runningback best friend is a solid backup that compliments his style of running. That would be Norwood. Although we have not been giving him that many touches in his career, what we have been doing is placing him on the field so that teams could be accountable for him. When you do this, it opens up your passing game as well as the inside and off tackle runs. Now defenses are licking their chops bc they know that Turner is not going to get outside too many times.

Yes we have lost our identity but we are still 2 games over .500 against this horrible schedule that we have to play. I say that we must have a quality team bc we have scored when we had to in 4 out of the 6 games. That not a bad percentage figuring that both of the superbowl teams from last year got at least 2 losses. All in all, let's not abandon the running game even though we are not having success at it. We got to make teams continue to defend it until we break one loose. The more our line gets to see other team defend it the better they will be able to adjust to what the defense is doing. I do see us winning minimum 10 games this year however I got us going 11-5 this year. I hope they prove me wrong and go 13-3 however I am not too optimistic about it.   This is not a negative post, just my personal observations thus far. I am still happy with where we are as a team. I just hope we click before Tony Gonzalez gets too slow to draw double teams.

Brooking a trash-talker now?!

2009-10-26T15:27:11Z

Maybe we should have kept Keith Brooking around. I mean, sure, his skills have diminshed to the point that he has very little use on the field, but at least we could have preserved his reputation as a hard working, humble player with a team-first attitude. I am not sure who that was we saw yesterday wearing Brooking's number for the silver and blue. He sort of looked like Ray Lewis, well, except for the making great plays part. He only looked like Lewis AFTER the whistle...jawing, talking, jumping up and down....doing the bird dance? Really? Keith Brooking? It takes less than one season playing for the Cowboys and one of the proudest LBs in Falcons history has turned into this?

I thnk he had 2 tackles in the box score - but at least a dozen dances, celebrations and other nonsense that doesn't show up in the box score. Oh yeah, it looked like he was the one who blew the assignment when Weams was quarantined for the easiest TD you'll see in the NFL.

I understand he spent a lot of time apologizing to the Falcons after the game for his behavior - but he's always been better than that.

The Future Must be Now!

2009-10-26T14:56:56Z

Mike Smith has seen the future, and it isn't good. The game against New Orleans this week is basically a playoff game. Without a win, we're just playing for fun.

Michael Turner is cooked. Michael Jenkins is a girlyman. The Defensive Secondary is slow and short, and they can't tackle.

And, Matt Ryan doesn't know how to improvise. Tony Romo does. Matt Ryan is really smart, maybe too smart. Seems to be playing strictly by the playbook. Needs to learn to cheat some. Scrambling, pumpfakes, irregular counts. Something, anything.

Tony Gonzalez would have helped us out a lot more during last year's playoff run, but wasn't ready to be traded. Now, if things breakdown, Ryan looks at Tony. Granted the guy is good receiver. But it's not gonna happen this year. So he might play well next year, but he knows he's not the answer to this team's fate.

The bottom line is that Mike Smith needs to shake-up this lineup fast.

Right now, Jason Snelling is better than Michael Turner.

Right now. Eric Weems is better than Michael Jenkins.

Right now. We need a fullback that can block.

Right now we need a quarterback who can improvise.

Right now. We need a defensive back who can tackle. UFL, CFL, what about Brian Finneran for Chrissakes? He'd do it if it meant he could get playing time! Let's go Dimitroff!

Poll

The Player most likely to see increased playing time against the Saints.

Ask Canal Street Chronicles!

2009-10-26T05:02:52Z

I don't know about you guys but I've been looking forward to this Monday night game against the Falcons for quite some time now. This will be the Saints first division matchup of the year.

In preparation for this very important meeting between our two teams go ahead and ask me, lead blogger for SB Nation's Saints blog, Canal Street Chronicles, any questions you may have about the Saints. Myself and CSC readers will check in periodically and answer them to the best of our ability.

But let me ask you guys a question as well...Can you handle the Saints?

Mid-Season Thoughts: They Aren't Who We Thought They Were

2009-10-26T01:14:15Z

After witnessing the most painful Falcons loss of the young season, I began to ponder exactly why our team, young and inexperienced as it is, can't seem to hang with the big boys.

To date, we have played both of America's teams, New England and Dallas, and have come away 0-2. We can sit here and make excuses all night long. Refs sucked, defense sucked, we were in their stadium, etc. etc. Regardless of my opinion on those, especially the ref one, the fact is, we lost. What's worse is the Saints won today, putting us 2 games behind, now.

So as I sit here typing this, I'm wondering "Why on Earth did we look so bad?" I kind of posted about it in the ATL-DAL open blog, but to start off, here are some observations I've made throughout the season (in no particular order):

1) Eric Weems can play ball. He's a great athlete and he'll hopefully be around for years to come.

2) Jamaal Anderson was made to play DT. Aside from when our entire D started to fail, JA98 had some good plays at DT. I really think he's found his spot on our defense.

3) Where is Michael Turner? Could last season really have been a fluke? Many of the haters have said that his big games were against the dumps of the NFL's rushing defenses last year, but to amass 1,700 yards is no small feat, fluke or not. However, Turner hasn't shown up this season, leading many Falcons fans (including myself) to wonder what's going on. He's looked a step slower this year, and with Norwood out, we need someone to step up. Snelling has done a good job in the backup role, but how long can Turner hold out with his increasingly negative production?

4) Despite having some crippling injuries, there isn't a game we can't win. I know many of us will be questioning our team after the miserable loss to the 'Boys. I don't blame you in the least. We played miserably, and that's not the makings of a great team. We're still a "good" team with knocking on the door of "decent" imminent. That being said, we've been competitive in every game we've played.

5)The Ewing Theory. I first learned about it on one of Bill Simmons' columns on ESPN. I believe he's tinkered with it since he posted a column on it 8 years ago. But if you don't know the theory, you should look it up. I think it fits this team perfectly.

Allow me, if you will, to speculate for the future. While not directly involving one player, the Ewing Theory fits the Falcons perfectly. The schedule, crappy as it is, can't get much worse next year. Regardless of how this season ends (Please, God, let us get 9 wins) some of our expectations won't be met. With the way we played Dallas today, this season could go south quickly if we do not adjust.

As I began thinking about the Saints being so good this year, I came to the realization that the Saints are 2 weeks away from equaling their total wins from last year. "Why the sudden change?" I asked myself. Without doing an absurd amount of research, not much, if anything, has changed from last year's Saints team. Malcolm Jenkins was added. I believe DC Gregg Williams was added this year, too.

The Saints last year were plagued with injuries, most notably on defense. On top of that, they had many, many recurring injuries to keep them 'unhealthy', if you will. This year, they've spent another year together, they've gotten their health right, and look at them, they're destroying EVERYONE.

I think next year is our year. Gonzalez has one more year after this one on his contract, I believe, and we'll have Harry Douglas/Peria Jerry/Brian Williams (if he can still play) back from injury. Now how does the Ewing Theory fit this team, you ask? Well, look at the Saints now. They're dominating, they probably won't be stopped this year, while we play backseat to them. Then, the Ewing theory kicks in next season. If the Saints hold their team together, nobody will notice the secret juggernaut we're building in the shadows. Then it's game time. We've been severely hurt by injuries this year. When we get everyone back next season (and keep them here) I think we can make a run, and I think we'll surprise some people along the way depending on how ugly this season ends up. Not saying this season is gone, as we're still 4-2 and in a decent position, but we may not quite get where we want to this year.

In short, I think we're going to end up as the Saints of last year, just with 9 or 10 wins. Injuries + schedule may just be a little too much for this team to overcome this year.

Any thoughts or opinions are welcome here. :)

The excuses are already coming.

2009-10-24T04:52:57Z

The Cowboys are soooooo banged up but I guess the Falcons are in the best shape ever? It's hard to tell from the wording of the headline. Yet one more sports publication riding on the nuts of the NFC East which in my opinion is highly over rated.

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slug=tsn-cowboysrideintofalco&prov=tsn&type=lgns

Excuses are like buttholes everyone has one the 'Boy's just stink worse than others. Comments,denials, affirmations?

Should we be worried about Michael Turner?

2009-10-21T15:26:36Z

Michael Turner has been having a little trouble matching last year's production. If the Falcon's hope to make a serious run at the Super Bowl, the running game is going to have to show up in a much bigger way.

Moreover, I've been wondering about Turner's fumbling problem too. Maybe his sore thumb from last year hasn't totally healed and he's worrying about fumbling with each carry.

He seems to be going down a lot easier as well. Not as many yards after contact as last year. With opposing defense's committed to stopping the run, there have been few running lanes for Turner to shoot through untouched.

Norwood going down really hurts our change of pace at that position. Did they sign anybody else this week?

Poll

Should we be worried about Michael Turner?

Yes

56 votes

No

42 votes

98 votes | Poll has closed

Professor Frink’s Power Rankings, Week 6

2009-10-20T04:25:40Z

via i37.tinypic.com

Here's this week's summary, for your viewing pleasure. Now featuring even more columns of hot, tasty data! Ratings and other details await you ahead.

Here's how the ratings are calculated. (In trying to be brief, I didn't explain this too well last week; I beg your pardon if I'm overly verbose this time.) The first step is to calculate Points For per Game, and Points Against per Game, for each team. Easy enough; here's the statistics geek part. These two leaguewide data sets for offense & defense both conform to a "Bell Curve", or Normal Distribution, that can be graphed. Depending on where each team lies on that curve, they have a value between 0 and 1. The purpose of this is to more accurately measure each team's true position among the population of the league's teams. Now you have every team rated from 0 to 1, on offense and on defense. Add those two numbers and you've got an overall rating for each team. Last, multiply by 50 to convert the ratings onto a 0-100 scale, making them more readable and intuitive. Whew.

This week I added three data columns for the offensive and defensive "curved" ratings & totals. Without further fanfare, here are this week's ratings:

Rank	Power Rating		W-L-T	PF/G	PA/G	Offense Rating	Defense Rating	Total
1	87.3	Colts	5-0-0	27.4	14.2	0.821	0.925	1.747
2	85.2	Patriots	4-2-0	27.2	15.2	0.812	0.892	1.704
3	84.8	Saints	5-0-0	38.4	18.6	0.996	0.701	1.696
4	78.5	Falcons	4-1-0	24.6	15.4	0.687	0.883	1.570
5	76.3	Broncos	6-0-0	22.2	11.0	0.543	0.982	1.526
6	76.0	Vikings	6-0-0	31.5	20.2	0.940	0.580	1.520
7	75.2	Giants	5-1-0	29.7	19.8	0.898	0.606	1.505
8	73.0	Packers	3-2-0	26.0	18.6	0.759	0.701	1.460
9	71.1	Eagles	3-2-0	27.2	19.8	0.813	0.609	1.422
10	65.5	Steelers	4-2-0	23.3	18.7	0.614	0.696	1.310
11	65.3	Ravens	3-3-0	28.2	21.7	0.851	0.456	1.307
12	65.0	Cowboys	3-2-0	24.4	19.6	0.676	0.625	1.301
13	63.6	Cardinals	3-2-0	22.4	18.4	0.558	0.715	1.273
14	62.5	Bears	3-2-0	23.8	19.8	0.642	0.609	1.251
15	59.1	49ers	3-2-0	22.4	19.6	0.558	0.625	1.183
16	56.8	Jets	3-3-0	19.0	17.3	0.351	0.785	1.136
17	56.1	Seahawks	2-4-0	19.7	18.2	0.390	0.731	1.121
18	52.6	Dolphins	2-3-0	22.4	21.2	0.558	0.494	1.052
19	50.5	Bengals	4-2-0	19.7	19.7	0.390	0.620	1.010
20	50.3	Texans	3-3-0	23.8	22.8	0.643	0.362	1.005
21	47.8	Redskins	2-4-0	13.2	16.0	0.099	0.857	0.956
22	40.1	Chargers	2-3-0	24.8	27.2	0.698	0.104	0.801
23	32.6	Jaguars	3-3-0	20.0	24.5	0.410	0.242	0.652
24	32.4	Bills	2-4-0	15.5	21.5	0.178	0.470	0.647
25	24.4	Chiefs	1-5-0	16.3	24.0	0.213	0.276	0.489
26	22.8	Panthers	2-3-0	17.0	25.0	0.244	0.211	0.455
27	18.9	Raiders	2-4-0	10.3	23.2	0.042	0.336	0.378
28	14.6	Browns	1-5-0	11.5	24.7	0.061	0.231	0.292
29	13.5	Lions	1-5-0	17.2	31.3	0.253	0.017	0.270
30	11.4	Buccaneers	0-6-0	14.8	28.0	0.152	0.077	0.229
31	6.5	Titans	0-6-0	14.0	33.0	0.124	0.007	0.130
32	4.9	Rams	0-6-0	9.0	28.2	0.027	0.072	0.099

Hope youse guys like the format changes, your feedback is welcome. You can download the spreadsheet here. Cheers!