It's Finally Time For The Redskins To Change Their Name

Europeans came to America, committed genocide against the societies that lived here, adopted a racial slur for these people, and then assigned that slur to the NFL team in our nation's capital. Even political conservatives like Charles Krauthammer believe that the team's name is "unmistakably patronizing and demeaning".

It's sad and horrible and shameful. It's as if the capital of Germany had a soccer team called the Berlin Kikes. Yes, it really is that bad. If you don't think it's that bad, it's only because you've gotten used to it.

But until now, we haven't had the cojones to change the name, because the Redskins haven't sucked badly enough. Nobody wants to change the name of their team when they make the playoffs and have the league's most exciting player under center (as was true in 2012, with a healthy Robert Griffin III at quarterback).

But after you go 3-13 and lose your last 8 games, your team is an embarrassment. And a name change starts to look pretty good. The last-place Seattle Supersonics changed their name (and city) in 2009. Two years later, they were in the NBA finals.

The Western Conference Champion Oklahoma Thunder (formerly the last-place Seattle Supersonics)

Picking a New Name

Thankfully, the Redskins' new name is obvious: the Washington Pitbulls.

The NFL team in our nation's capital needs to have a distinctly American name. We can't call them the "Eagles" or the "Patriots", because those names are already taken by teams within a 6-hour train ride. And we don't want to end up with a uniquely uninspiring name like the "Nationals" or "Senators" or "Capitals".

If you have been to D.C., you know that it is not a city about nature. Washington D.C. is not a showcase for pristine lakes and mountain views. It is not Portland or Denver or San Diego. You can't refer to a team from our nation's capital as the "Grizzlies" or the "Rockies". At the least, you can't do it with a straight face.

Washington is a city built around people: politicians and pundits, lobbyists and lawyers. It is a city of stubborn partisans who pick a cause, clamp down, and don't let go. It is, simply put, a city of pit bulls.

And a city of pit bulls is the appropriate capital for a country that revolves around our dogs. We love our dogs more than we love our people. We just cut $5 billion from SNAP (aka "food stamps") but we spend more than $30 billion each year on our dogs.

Mitt Romney lost the 2012 election because he strapped the family dog to the roof of his car. If he had done the same thing to one of his five sons, he would probably be in the White House right now.

          

The pit bull is the only truly American dog. "Pit bull" isn't even an official breed. Instead, the name refers to a variety of mutts that are loosely related to the American Staffordshire Terrier, Staffordshire Bull Terrier or the American Bulldog.

And just like Americans, pit bulls can be white or black, yellow or brown, large or small, energetic or lazy. It's time for the Redskins to change their name, and there is only one logical choice.

Making The Pro Bowl Matter

If the NFL wants to boost ratings for the Pro Bowl, they need to make it count for something.

NFL fans are serious. They will show up in sub-zero weather to root for a last-place team. But they won't bother to turn on the TV for an exhibition game that doesn't have any effect on the actual season.

The solution: Give the top draft picks to the conference that wins the Pro Bowl.

Won-Loss records would still be used to rank teams within each conference. But the Pro Bowl winner is guaranteed to get the #1 pick.

For example, this is the current draft order for the 2014 NFL draft:

Pick #	Team	Pick #	Team
1	Houston Texans (AFC)	17	Dallas Cowboys (NFC)
2	St. Louis Rams (NFC)	18	New York Jets (AFC)
3	Jacksonville Jaguars (AFC)	19	Miami Dolphins (AFC)
4	Cleveland Browns (NFC)	20	Arizona Cardinals (NFC)
5	Oakland Raiders (AFC)	21	Green Bay Packers (NFC)
6	Atlanta Falcons (NFC)	22	Philadelphia Eagles (NFC)
7	Tampa Bay Buccaneers (NFC)	23	Kansas City Chiefs (AFC)
8	Minnesota Vikings (NFC)	24	Cincinnati Bengals (AFC)
9	Buffalo Bills (AFC)	25	San Diego Chargers (AFC)
10	Detroit Lions (NFC)	26	Indianapolis Colts (AFC)
11	Tennessee Titans (AFC)	27	New Orleans Saints (NFC)
12	New York Giants (NFC)	28	Carolina Panthers (NFC)
13	St. Louis Rams (NFC)	29	New England Patriots (AFC)
14	Chicago Bears (NFC)	30	San Francisco 49ers (NFC)
15	Pittsburgh Steelers (AFC)	31	Denver Broncos (AFC)
16	Baltimore Ravens (AFC)	32	Seattle Seahawks (NFC)

If this rule had been in place, and the AFC had won, this would be the resulting draft order:

Pick #	Team	Pick #	Team
1	Houston Texans (AFC)	17	St. Louis Rams (NFC)
2	Jacksonville Jaguars (AFC)	18	Atlanta Falcons (NFC)
3	Cleveland Browns (AFC)	19	Tampa Bay Buccaneers (NFC)
4	Oakland Raiders (AFC)	20	Minnesota Vikings (NFC)
5	Buffalo Bills (AFC)	21	Detroit Lions (NFC)
6	Tennessee Titans (AFC)	22	New York Giants (NFC)
7	Pittsburgh Steelers (AFC)	23	St. Louis Rams (NFC)
8	Baltimore Ravens (AFC)	24	Chicago Bears (NFC)
9	New York Jets (AFC)	25	Dallas Cowboys (NFC)
10	Miami Dolphins (AFC)	26	Arizona Cardinals (NFC)
11	Kansas City Chiefs (AFC)	27	Green Bay Packers (NFC)
12	Cincinnati Bengals (AFC)	28	Philadelphia Eagles (NFC)
13	San Diego Chargers (AFC)	29	New Orleans Saints (NFC)
14	Indianapolis Colts (AFC)	30	Carolina Panthers (NFC)
15	New England Patriots (AFC)	31	San Francisco 49ers (NFC)
16	Denver Broncos (AFC)	32	Seattle Seahawks (NFC)

And this would be the draft order if the NFC had won:

Pick #	Team	Pick #	Team
1	St. Louis Rams (NFC)	17	Houston Texans (AFC)
2	Atlanta Falcons (NFC)	18	Jacksonville Jaguars (AFC)
3	Tampa Bay Buccaneers (NFC)	19	Cleveland Browns (AFC)
4	Minnesota Vikings (NFC)	20	Oakland Raiders (AFC)
5	Detroit Lions (NFC)	21	Buffalo Bills (AFC)
6	New York Giants (NFC)	22	Tennessee Titans (AFC)
7	St. Louis Rams (NFC)	23	Pittsburgh Steelers (AFC)
8	Chicago Bears (NFC)	24	Baltimore Ravens (AFC)
9	Dallas Cowboys (NFC)	25	New York Jets (AFC)
10	Arizona Cardinals (NFC)	26	Miami Dolphins (AFC)
11	Green Bay Packers (NFC)	27	Kansas City Chiefs (AFC)
12	Philadelphia Eagles (NFC)	28	Cincinnati Bengals (AFC)
13	New Orleans Saints (NFC)	29	San Diego Chargers (AFC)
14	Carolina Panthers (NFC)	30	Indianapolis Colts (AFC)
15	San Francisco 49ers (NFC)	31	New England Patriots (AFC)
16	Seattle Seahawks (NFC)	32	Denver Broncos (AFC)

This has the additional advantage of eliminating worries about teams "tanking". There's no point in intentionally losing games to get the #1 pick if you might drop to pick #17 after the Pro Bowl.

But, unlike some other other anti-tanking ideas, this system continues to give better picks to weaker teams, to help create parity.

The One-Ton Offensive Line?

The NFL is getting out of hand. You can't play on the line of scrimmage unless you top 350 pounds. It's making the game less fun to watch and less fun to play. And leading to more injuries. But the worst part is that high school kids around the country think they need to weigh that much for a shot at playing in Division I in college -- and to have ANY shot at playing in the pros. And the sad fact is that they are right.

It's time to institute a 300-pound weight limit. At first thought, that seems unfair, even discriminatory. Research shows that the obese have trouble competing for everyday jobs, and now we're going to lock them out of the NFL?!?

But we all know that linemen aren't plucked from the ranks of couch potatoes. They are talented athletes that have added mountains of muscle and fat in high school and college just so they can compete. And there are other sports with weight limits -- like boxing, wrestling, weightlifting, and of course Tug-O-War.

I'd recommend phasing this rule in slowly. Start at 360 and drop it down by 10 pounds per year. If you announced it tomorrow, high school and college kids around the country would immediately be trying to get UNDER 300 pounds, so they could play in the NFL. It would do wonders for the 99% of these kids that never even make it to draft day and just end as fat guys in their twenties with sore backs and bad knees.

Worst Ad In Super Bowl History?

OK. I realizing I'm feeling hyperbolic tonight. But my jaw dropped when I saw this Silverado ad in the first quarter.

The first 38 seconds were an amusing depiction of the impending 2012 apocalypse. But then our driver meets up with his friends and wonders why one of them hasn't arrived yet:

Chevy Driver 1: “Where’s Dave?”

Chevy Driver 2: "Dave didn’t drive the longest-lasting, most dependable truck on the road. Dave drove a Ford.”

Bzzt. Wrong answer!

Here's what they should have said:

Chevy Driver 1: “Where’s Dave?” 

Chevy Driver 2: "Dave didn’t make it. Dave didn't drive a Silverado.”

Why this ad failed:

1) Every ad man knows you don't spend good ad dollars just to plug the competition. But the most memorable line of this $7 million-dollar debacle ends with the word "Ford" and doesn't include the word "Chevy" (or "Silverado"). Oops.

2) No women. Forty-six percent of Super Bowl viewers are female. Not including the animated ads, this was probably the only ad (other than the creepy one for David Beckham's underwear) that didn't include women. Seriously, what's the point of surviving the apocalypse if there's no one to breed with?

3) Ten years after 9/11 and four years after the Wall Street meltdown, you aren't going to win any points by bashing another American brand. GM could have picked on Toyota or Nissan, the only two full-size truck brands that have actually gained market share over the last 10 years.

4) When you take $50 billion in bailout money, you don't get to use it to bash a company that employs over 100,000 Americans. Sixty-one percent of GM is still owned by the federal government. Your tax dollars are being used to bash the one major American car company that didn't need bailout money. Not good.

5) As if in response to the above, Chrysler aired this brilliant ad at the beginning of halftime. During the Super Bowl (America's national holiday) you don't sell American cars by denouncing American brands. You sell American cars with optimism and patriotism.

This ad just felt like the execs at GM trying to start a pissing match with Ford. Ironically, Ford won the pissing match without even wasting any pee. And the folks at GM are just left standing there with their pants down.

Related post: Worst Call In Super Bowl History

Worst Call In Super Bowl History

Photo by Ed Yourdon

I realize that it's hyberbolic to call today's safety call the worst in 46 Super Bowls. But somebody needs to do it. Right now, there are thousands of people out there Googling "worst super bowl call ever", and they need to be able to find something.

On the Patriots' very first play of the game, Brady dropped back in the pocket, couldn't find a receiver, and threw the ball away. The refs called intentional grounding, and awarded a safety because Brady was in the end zone at the time. WTF?!?

This led to 2 points for the Giants, and gave the ball back to New York, leading to another 7 points. The Giants' first 9 points were a direct result of this absurd call.

Brady didn't even throw it out of bounds like he normally does. And he didn't just spike it into the ground like Peyton Manning always does. He threw it 45 yards downfield.

I have never seen intentional grounding called on a 45-yard pass. Never. And I can't find anyone who has.

The average NFL quarterback "throws the ball away" a couple times per game. Peyton Manning and Tom Brady probably do it three or more times each game. Twelve minutes later, Eli chucked it out of bounds under similar conditions. But no grounding call.

I'm not blaming the game per se on that call. The Giants D played well, Manningham made an unbelievable catch, Eli was surprisingly accurate, and Welker couldn't hold on to the most important pass of the game. But that is certainly the worst call I can remember in a Super Bowl.

The offensive pass interference in Super Bowl XL was pretty dubious, but it was a judgment call that the ref had to make in real time. So if the ref see a lot of contact and throws a flag, that's the way the ball bounces. But on today's safety, the refs had all the time in the world to get together and make the right call, and they still blew it. That's the amazing thing. You can't criticize the refs too badly when they have to make a call in real-time on a close play. But when you have the time to get it right, you should get it right!

Considering how bad this call was, I'm surprised that Brady and Belicheck didn't throw a complete hissy fit. But keeping a level head was the right thing to do. NFL rules don't allow for a penalty to be overturned, so it's not worth getting ejected. Also, I think they were just stunned at seeing a call that has never been called in the history of the league.

Cris Collinsworth, in an attempt I assume to quell any controversy, did point out that the referee's call matched the rules in the rulebook: Brady was under pressure, in the pocket, and in the end zone. But he sounded surprised as he made this argument. As in "I've never seen this call before, but I'm being told that this counts as intentional grounding according to the letter of the rules."

Photo by Abqtrucker on flickr

Of course, Collinsworth and everyone outside New York knew it wasn't intentional grounding. It was just another QB throwing the ball away when he can't find someone open -- something that Peyton Manning and Tom Brady have been doing for 10 years (and a skill that has helped pave their way to Canton). If Eli Manning had made the same throw I wouldn't have been screaming for intentional grounding. It wouldn't have even have occurred to me. Instead, I would have been commending Eli for his poise in the pocket, and getting ready for 2nd down.

I have seen worse calls in the playoffs. But I haven't seen a worse call in the Super Bowl. Perhaps this is payback for "The Tuck Rule". By all common sense, Brady fumbled the ball in that game. But according to the rulebook, it was incomplete. So, this call was the same thing. Everyone knew it wasn't intentional grounding, but the refs chose this one play to apply the rulebook as written (and then ignore that section of the rulebook for the rest of the Super Bowl).

"Throwing the ball away" is so common in the NFL that we have a phrase for it. If every time you "threw the ball away" you were called for intentional grounding, we wouldn't call it "throwing the ball away"; we would call it "intentional grounding". And we wouldn't have every talking head on ESPN heaping praise on every QB who chucks the ball out of bounds instead of trying to force a play downfield.

Heck, even Madden even has a player rating called "Throw The Ball Away" that specifies whether a QB is more likely to thow an intentional incompletion or try to make something happen. And, as we already knew, Tom Brady and Peyton Manning have high ratings in this area.

As an NFL fan, I would like to see intentional grounding called more often. The defense should be rewarded for getting pressure on the QB. But you don't all-of-a-sudden decide to start calling this penalty in the last and most important game of the season.

Related post: Worst Ad In Super Bowl History?

Super Bowl MVP Predictions

Photo by Keith Allison

As mentioned on Sunday, we used Football Mogul to predicts the results of Super Bowl XLVI by simulating the game 100,000 times. We also recorded the MVP of each game.

Odds are that it will go to a quarterback. But there's a 48.7% chance of someone else taking home the MVP trophy.

Player	MVP Chance
Tom Brady (NE)	31.6%
Eli Manning (NYG)	19.7%
Wes Welker (NE)	5.9%
Rob Gronkowski (NE)	5.7%
Aaron Hernandez (NE)	4.7%
Victor Cruz (NYG)	4.6%
Hakeem Nicks (NYG)	4.1%
Ahmad Bradshaw (NYG)	3.4%
BenJarvus Green-Ellis (NE)	3.4%
Deion Branch (NE)	2.6%
Jason Pierre-Paul (NYG)	2.1%
Vince Wilfork (NE)	1.2%
Brandon Jacobs (NYG)	1.8%
Mario Manningham (NYG)	1.4%
Jerod Mayo (NE)	0.9%
Justin Tuck (NYG)	0.9%
Osi Umenyiora (NYG)	0.8%
Kyle Arrington (NE)	0.7%
Antrel Rolle (NYG)	0.6%
Lawrence Tynes (NYG)	0.5%
Devin McCourty (NE)	0.5%
Danny Woodhead (NE)	0.4%
Chad Ochocinco (NE)	0.3%
Jake Ballard (NYG)	0.3%
Stephen Gostkowski (NE)	0.3%
Stephen Hoyer (NE)	0.2%

Note: This simulation assumed that Gronkowski is at 90% because of a high ankle sprain. If he's 100% healthy, his chance to win the MVP will be higher than Wes Welker's.

I'm amused by the 1-in-500 chance that Brady gets injured and Hoyer leads the Pats to their 4th Super Bowl victory.

I'm a bit surprised that Julian Edelman didn't make the list, as the only guy that's playing on offense, defense and special teams. He could conceivably get a receiving TD, a return TD, and a "Pick 6".

Related article: Football Mogul Predicts Super Bowl XLVI

The NFL's "Worst" Pass Defenses

In tonight's 45-7 drubbing of the Broncos by the Patriots, I have to admit that the 2nd half was pretty boring.

Here's what I did see that was interesting:

CBS put up a graphic showing that the best teams in the NFL this year also had the worst pass defenses. This wasn't the first time I had seen this stat trotted out as "proof" that the Packers, Saints and Pats have horrible pass defenses.

Team	Won	Lost	Pass Yards Allowed Per Game	NFL Rank
Green Bay Packers	15	1	301.2	32nd
New England Patriots	13	3	283.0	31st
New Orleans Saints	11	5	266.7	30th

Well ... duh.

Teams that win most of their games are often playing with the lead. That means that their opponents are playing from behind. Teams trying to catch up have to pass more. And teams that pass more get more pass yards.

Furthermore, these three teams have the three best QBs in the NFL. With Brady, Brees and Rodgers leading your passing attack, it doesn't take very long to score. And teams that pass use up less time on the clock. That gives opponents of these teams even more opportunity to rack up passing yards.

The problem with Passing Yards is that it's an absolute stat, not a rate stat. So circumstances that cause a team to pass more will make it look like they are "better" passing teams.

To show that good teams allow more passing yards, I took the free version of Football Mogul and created a universe where every team had the exact same players on defense. And then I used the "Simulator Tool" to simulate the 2011-2012 one hundred times, to look at the impact that a team's offense has on their passing yards allowed:

Team	Wins	Pass Yards Allowed Per Game
Great Teams	13 - 16	259.7
Good Teams	10 - 12	257.2
Average Teams	7 - 9	244.3
Bad Teams	4 - 6	240.1
Horrible Teams	0 - 3	241.6

As you can see, the better teams allow more passing yards. Using passing yards allowed to measure a football defense is like using double plays to measure a baseball defense. Counterintuitively, bad teams turn more double plays, simply because they allow more base runners, and you need someone on base to turn a double play.

If the talking heads really wanted the truth, they would show this:

Team	Won	Lost	Opponent Passer Rating	NFL Rank
Green Bay Packers	15	1	82.2	11th
New England Patriots	13	3	84.7	16th
New Orleans Saints	11	5	88.1	24th

Alas, saying that the Patriots have an "average passing defense" doesn't make for eye-catching on-screen graphics. So for now we'll have to continue to hear about New England's incompetent secondary.

2011 Offensive Line Rankings

Based on career stats for all active linemen (adjusted for age, and weighted for recent performance and injuries) here are ratings for the current offensive lines for all 32 NFL teams. For individual ratings for each offensive lineman, you can download this year's version of Football Mogul, which is 100% free (no time limits or registration required).

Rank	Team	Overall	Run Blocking	Pass Blocking	2010 Rank
1	New Orleans Saints	94	94	94	1
2	Carolina Panthers	92.5	98	87	4
3	Tennessee Titans	89	85	93	2
4	Minnesota Vikings	87.5	95	80	10
5	New England Patriots	87	82	92	5
6	Baltimore Ravens	86.5	90	83	7
7	Atlanta Falcons	85.5	81	90	6
8	Denver Broncos	85.5	86	85	14
9	Cincinnati Bengals	85.0	79	91	16
10	New York Jets	84.5	84	85	3
11	Buffalo Bills	84.5	89	80	26
12	New York Giants	84.0	79	89	13
13	Houston Texans	83.5	79	88	20
14	San Diego Chargers	83.5	76	91	19
15	Dallas Cowboys	83.5	85	82	9
16	San Francisco 49ers	83.0	85	81	18
17	Philadelphia Eagles	83.0	84	82	21
18	Arizona Cardinals	82.5	81	84	11
19	Green Bay Packers	82.0	86	78	22
20	Detroit Lions	81.5	81	82	28
21	Oakland Raiders	81.5	83	80	29
22	Jacksonville Jaguars	81.0	86	76	17
23	Miami Dolphins	81.0	86	76	8
24	Tampa Bay Buccaneers	80.5	76	85	25
25	Cleveland Browns	80.0	76	84	15
26	Chicago Bears	79.0	77	81	24
27	Pittsburgh Steelers	78.5	83	74	27
28	Kansas City Chiefs	78.5	80	77	23
29	Indianapolis Colts	77.0	74	80	12
30	Seattle Seahawks	73.0	75	71	30
31	Washington Redskins	73.0	76	70	32
32	St. Louis Rams	72.0	76	68	31

Go For Two!

Photo by Keith Allison

While most New England fans are still recoiling from today's loss to the Jets, I thought I would take a moment to draw your attention to a huge error by coach Belichick that significantly reduced our chance to win the game.


With less than two minutes left in the game, the Patriots scored a touchdown and kicked the extra point, to bring themselves within 7 points of the Jets.

Before the score, the Patriots were down 31-17. It's pretty clear at this point in the game that the only way the Patriots could win is to score two touchdowns while preventing the Jets from scoring.

So, any assessment of the correct strategy should assume that the Pats will score two touchdowns while holding New York scoreless.

The league average success rate for 2-point conversions is 47.9%. Using this rate, it doesn't make sense to "go for 2" if you can tie the game by kicking the extra point. Here's a quick example of how the math works out in that situation (when the trailing team is behind by just 1 point after scoring the touchdown, but before the point-after):

(PAT success is 98.7%):

1) Team scores touchdown to bring score within 1 point. Team kicks extra point.

Chance of leading after this score: 0%.
Chance of being tied after this score: 98.7%.
Chance of trailing after this score: 1.3%.

2) Team scores touchdown to bring score within 1 point. Team goes for two.

Chance of leading after this score: 47.9%.
Chance of being tied after this score: 0%.
Chance of trailing after this score: 52.1%.

A team that ends the game in the lead wins that game. If they end the game trailing on the scoreboard, they lose. All things being equal, a team that ends the game tied has a 50% chance of winning that game.

So, we can award 1.0 wins for a result that puts the team in the lead; 0.5 wins for a result that ties the game; and 0.0 wins for a result after which the scoring team is still trailing.

Using those values, kicking the extra point produces 0.4935 wins but going for two results in only 0.4790 wins.

However, if the trailing team needs *two* touchdowns, the math is totally different.

1) Team trails by 14 points and scores two touchdowns. Team never goes for two:

Chance of leading after both scores: 0%.
Chance of being tied after both scores: 97.42%.
Chance of trailing after both scores: 2.58%.

2) Team trails by 14 points and goes for two after the first touchdown:

Chance of pulling within 6 points: 47.9%.
Chance of pulling within 7 points: 0%.
Chance of pulling within 8 points: 52.1%.

Then, when the team scores a 2nd time, they kick the extra point *if it would give them the lead*. If the team scored 8 points with the first touchdown, they have already tied the game before kicking the extra point.

2a) Team trails by 6 points before the touchdown, and kicks the extra point:

Chance of leading after both scores: 98.7%.
Chance of being tied after both scores: 1.3%.
Chance of trailing after both scores: 0.0%.

If the two-point conversion failed on the first touchdown, the team has to go for two in an attempt to just tie the game:

2b) Team trails by 8 points before the touchdown, and goes for two:

Chance of leading after this score: 0.0%.
Chance of being tied after this score: 47.9%.
Chance of trailing after this score: 52.1%.

To see the overall chance of winning the game with this strategy (going for two after the first touchdown), we have to combine the odds from 2a and 2b:

2) Team trails by 14 points and goes for two after the first touchdown

Chance of leading after both scores: 47.28%.
Chance of being tied after both scores: 25.58%.
Chance of trailing after both scores: 27.14%.

Assuming a 50% chance of winning tie games, here's what we get:

Going for two after the first score: .6007 wins
Kicking the extra point after the first score: .4866 wins

Going for two after the first score increases the chance to win the game by 23.4%. That's a huge difference (and one that Belichick shouldn't have passed up).

The key is that when you know that you need *two* touchdowns, you can make the decision whether to go for 2 on the second touchdown, *already knowing whether you had a successful conversion on the first touchdown*. If you weren't successful, then you need to go for two to tie the game. But if you succeeded on the first touchdown, you can just kick the extra point on the second touchdown, and win the game by 1 point.

2010 Offensive Line Rankings

Based on stats from the last 12 seasons (yes, Matt Birk has been in the league since 1998), here are ratings for the current offensive lines for all 32 NFL teams.

Rank	Team	Overall	Run Blocking	Pass Blocking
1	New Orleans Saints	95	95	93
2	Tennessee Titans	94	95	92
3	New York Jets	92	94	89
4	Carolina Panthers	92	94	88
5	New England Patriots	91	84	97
6	Atlanta Falcons	90	85	93
7	Baltimore Ravens	89	94	83
8	Miami Dolphins	88	93	82
9	Dallas Cowboys	88	91	86
10	Minnesota Vikings	87	92	83
11	Arizona Cardinals	87	81	93
12	Indianapolis Colts	86	75	97
13	New York Giants	86	82	89
14	Denver Broncos	85	81	89
15	Cleveland Browns	84	81	88
16	Cincinnati Bengals	84	80	88
17	Jacksonville Jaguars	82	91	72
18	San Francisco 49ers	81	83	79
19	San Diego Chargers	81	72	91
20	Houston Texans	80	71	90
21	Philadelphia Eagles	80	81	79
22	Green Bay Packers	79	92	67
23	Kansas City Chiefs	79	85	72
24	Chicago Bears	78	69	88
25	Tampa Bay Buccaneers	77	72	83
26	Buffalo Bills	76	85	68
27	Pittsburgh Steelers	75	81	67
28	Detroit Lions	75	76	74
29	Oakland Raiders	74	79	69
30	Seattle Seahawks	73	72	74
31	St. Louis Rams	73	75	71
32	Washington Redskins	72	74	69

For more information on each offensive lineman, check out the individual ratings in Football Mogul.

Fixing Overtime In The NFL (Revisited)

We already have a great solution to the problem of the coin flip in overtime games. Nevertheless, it has been almost four years, and we're still stuck with the old system.

After the Vikings-Saints NFC Championship game (and the Colts' failed attempt to go 16-0) the argument for this change to the rules is even more compelling. If this rule had been implemented, both the Saints and the Colts would have still had something to play for in the last month of the season.

To summarize, we can fix the following two problems with one rule change:

1) The coin-flip winner has an unfair advantage in overtime.
2) Teams like the 13-0 Saints and 14-0 Colts have no incentive to win after they have clinched the top playoff spot.

The solution is elegantly simple: automatically award the coin flip to the home team.

In addition to eliminating the coin flip, there are a number of other positive effects:

1) This increases the importance of home field advantage in the playoffs. If a team like the Colts go 14-2, they get an edge if a playoff game goes to overtime (just as the home team in baseball has a strategic advantage).

2) We now know who the "home team" is in the Super Bowl. And it matters. This would have been pivotal this season: the Colts and Saints would continue to play hard, knowing that if they met in the Super Bowl, home-field advantage would be determined by their regular-season record. Instead, we got five unwatchable games by two teams that had nothing to play for.

3) It adds drama to the final minutes of a game, and clarifies strategy for coaches. If you're the away team, and you're up against a good offense, you want to play for the win, not the tie, in any last-minute play calls. You go for two if you have the chance. And you go for the touchdown instead of the field goal on 4th down. More excitement, and less overtime (which tends to run into the next game, which doesn't make most football fans happy).

4) It increases attendance. As the NFL becomes more fun to watch on TV, ticket sales are suffering. Giving the home team a bigger advantage increases the likelihood that a home-team fan will have a great experience at the stadium (by getting to see his or her team win).

Wes Welker For MVP

Photo by Mike Gil 

Peyton Manning was announced two days ago as the MVP for the 2009 NFL season. But yesterday, without even leaving Bob Kraft's luxury box, Wes Welker proved that he was the one who should have received the award.

With Welker on the roster, the Pats were 7-0 at home this season. Without Welker, they lost in Foxboro to the Ravens, 33-14. It seems silly to pin a 19-point loss on an injury to one guy. But the evidence shows that Wes Welker turns Tom Brady from a "very good" quarterback into "the best quarterback ever".

Brady's career Passer Rating with Welker: 108.1. That's easily the best Passer Rating ever. It's not even close. According to Football Mogul, Steve Young has a career Passer Rating of 96.8. Peyton Manning and his vaunted four MVPs: just 95.2. Take Welker away from Brady and his career Passer Rating drops to 88.7, more than two points behind Chad Pennington!

The difference is just as stark in the playoffs. Brady's Passer Rating in playoff games with Welker is 97.1, including an amazing 70.6% overall completion rate. Without Welker, Brady's playoff Passer Rating is a mediocre 83.2. And the icing on this shit cake is a 49.1 Passer Rating in Sunday's game versus the Ravens.

Julian Edelman caught two touchdowns in Brady's first home playoff loss. But he didn't move the chains like Welker. And he didn't free up Moss to go deep. Brady spent a lot of time holding the ball and getting pressured, because he didn't have Wes to go to when he needed to.

For some final perspective, note that Matt Cassel's season with the Patriots (and with Welker) in 2008 was better than four of Brady's seasons without Welker. But it was worse than the seasons that Brady has had with Welker. So, Brady is better than Cassel. But Wes is better than both of them.

So, my vote for 2009 NFL MVP goes to Wesley Carter Welker. Without Wes, the Patriots may not have even made the playoffs this year. Tell Peyton to give back that trophy!

Belichick Made The Right Call

Photo by Keith Allison

Last night, near the end of an important game against the Indianapolis Colts in Week 10, the New England Patriots faced 4th-and-2 on their own 28-yard-line. The Patriots were ahead by 6 points, with 2 minutes and 8 seconds left on the clock. Conventional wisdom said the Patriots should punt the ball, to force Manning to try to drive the length of the field for a game-winning score. Instead, the Patriots went for it and failed to convert. The Colts went on to win.

Commentators are already arguing about whether Coach Belichick showed too little faith in his defense, or too much faith in his offense. It has nothing do with faith. It's all about giving your team the best chance of winning. And the numbers say that Belichick made the right call.

To assess whether Belichick chose wisely, I used Football Mogul to simulate the situation that the Patriots faced. Football Mogul had access to every detail of the game, including current rosters and playbooks for each team. It even takes into account the weather and wind, and the fatigue level of the New England defense.

Specifically, I simulated the remainder of the game exactly 20,000 times. For 10,000 of these simulations, the Patriots went for it on 4th-on-2. For the other 10,000 simulations, the Patriots punted.

We could look at this simply in terms of what chance the Colts had to drive down the field and score, depending on whether or not the Patriots punted. However, that doesn't take into account all of the things that can happen during a football game. For example, in some of the simulations when the Patriots went for it, the Colts got an interception return for a touchdown. This gave Indy the lead, but also gave Brady two minutes to drive down the field for a game-winning field goal. Similarly, the "safe" choice to punt sometimes resulted in a blocked punt and an instant touchdown for the Colts.

Thus, the only way to accurately find the best call is to simulate the exact game situation thousands of times, taking into account all of the different possible results that can happen in an NFL game.

The verdict: Belichick made the right call.

Breaking down the numbers, we see that when the Patriots went for it, they got the first down in 55.2% of all the simulations. After the first down, they won the game 94.3% of the time (the Colts' one timeout gives them the chance to get the ball back and still score a last-second touchdown, which they were able to do about 1 time in 20, even when the Patriots got the first down).

When the Patriots went for it and didn't convert, the Colts won the game 76.1% of the time. Most of these were because Peyton drove the ball 28 yards for the score. But sometimes the Colts won for another reason. For example, the Colts might score a quick touchdown, leaving Brady enough time to get a winning field goal, but still have enough time to score on the following kickoff return (leading to the Colts winning 42-37).

All-in-all, Belichick's call to go for it gave the Patriots a 62.8% chance of winning the game.

On the flip side, punting the ball only gave the Patriots a 41.3% chance of winning the game. That's right; the Colts won the game 58.7% of the time when the Patriots punted.

So, not only did Belichick make the right call. It wasn't even close. He made the call that increased his team's chance of winning by more than 50% (from 41.3% to 62.8%).

The End Of The 50-Yard Field Goal

Stephen Gostkowski, the kicker for the New England Patriots, has one of the strongest legs in the NFL. Most of his kickoffs go into the opponent's end zone -- many of them for touchbacks.

But he doesn't have any 50-yard field goals this year. That's because Coach Belichick hasn't asked him to try any. Gostkowski has a 93% success rate on kicks less than 50 yards. But no attempts beyond that distance.

This stat is part of a larger trend in the NFL.

In 1994, the NFL changed the rules for missed field goals, so that the team taking possession got the ball at the point of the kick -- not at the previous line of scrimmage. This is only a 7-yard difference. But it's enough to shift the odds away from the decision to try long field goals.

This rule helped create a "no man's land" near the opponent's 35-yard line. On 4th down, it doesn't make sense to punt from within 40 yards of the end zone -- there's a good chance you'll kick too far and end up with a touchback, and a net gain of only 15-20 yards.

But a field goal attempt doesn't make much sense either. Let's assume the average kicker has a 50% success rate on 52-yard field goal attempt (this is a kick from the opponent's 35-yard line). Half the time, you get 3 points. The other half of the time, the other team gets the ball with good field position -- at their own 42-yard line. Getting the ball at your 42-yard line is worth, on average, about 1.8 points.

So, half the time you get 3 points; but the rest of the time you lose 1.8 points. This means that a field goal attempt from the opponent's 35-yard line is worth less than a point (0.6 to be more exact).

By contrast, having the ball at your opponent's 30-yard line is worth about 4 points. So even if you have less than a 50% chance of getting the 1st down, it frequently makes sense to go for it instead of trying to kick the field goal.

Although kickers continue to get stronger and more accurate, we'll see fewer and fewer long field goals as more coaches continue to realize that 50-yard field goal attempts are bad bets.

Fixing Overtime In The NFL

Every year there's a clamor to "fix" overtime in the NFL. The complaint is that the results of a crucial game (especially a playoff game) can often be "decided by a coin flip".

The most popular idea is to adopt something like the NCAA, where each team is guaranteed a chance to score. I've also heard the idea to get rid of "sudden death" and play overtime periods until one team ends the game with the lead, much like in the NBA. I've even heard that field goals should be outlawed in overtime.

All of these ideas are horrible.

Football is a tough game. We don't want games stretching on to five or six hours. We also don't want to miss our favorite team's game on TV because the previous game runs over.

The solution is elegantly simple: play with the current sudden death rules, but automatically award the coin flip to the home team.

In addition to eliminating the coin flip, there are a number of other positive effects:

1) This increases the importance of home field advantage in the playoffs. If a team like the Colts goes 14-2, they should get an edge if a playoff game goes to overtime (just as the home team in baseball has a strategic advantage).

2) We now know who the "home team" is in the Super Bowl. And it matters. This could have been especially important this season, in that when the Seahawks and Colts faced off in Week 15, they would have had home-field advantage to play for. Instead, nothing was on the line and the game was unwatchable.

3) It adds drama to the final minutes of a game, and clarifies strategy for coaches. If you're the away team, and you're up against a good offense, you want to play for the WIN, not the tie, in any last-minute play calls. You go for two if you have the chance. And you go for the touchdown instead of the field goal on 4th down. More excitement, and less overtime (which tends to run into the next game, which doesn't make most football fans happy).

Related post: Fixing Overtime In The NFL (Revisited)

How To Turn Anything Into An Incomplete Pass

Here's the rule I've learned after years of instant replay in the NFL:

By throwing that red flag, you can turn ANYTHING into an incomplete pass.

Brady fumbles. Belichick goes to his sock and pulls out the challenge flag. Incomplete pass.

Polamalu intercepts. Dungy grasps at straws desperately. Incomplete pass.

I've seen this happen more than once. The two examples I just mentioned are the most absurd. But completions and interceptions get overruled all the time for one simple reason. Using today's NFL rules, a complete pass frequently LOOKS like an incomplete pass when viewed in slow motion.

Shift everything down to 1/8 speed and the refs see the tiniest movements of the ball in the receiver's hands. They say he was "bobbling it" and never established control. A perfectly good completion in real-time can look like a turbulent froth of primordial ooze when viewed under the microscope.

I play ultimate frisbee whenever I can. It's a lot like football in that your job is to catch the "ball" before it hits the ground. It's a classic American game of of "People vs. Gravity". Like the NFL, some ultimate players make some AMAZING catches: laying out for a disc that's about to hit the grass or go out of bounds. These feats of athleticism should be rewarded, regardless of weather the disc grazed a blade of grass as the player was finishing his catch.

For the NFL, I say "loosen up the completion rules". If it looks like a completion in real-time, it probably was a completion. Give these guys credit for the outstanding plays they are making, and play on!