NFL PLAYOFFS...........................2017

Thanks for the kind words............................

First we need to break-down the info........................

Achillies nice to see you around...................................

What the 2003 or 2004 Pats ddi has nothing to do with what this 2016  Pats team will do in the SB.

That will be determined by the quality of this team and the quality of their opponent.

YDS PER POINT.....................................

Teams with at least a 2 pt diff in yds/pt ....................10-4 ATS 

in games involving bye teams or stronger stats WC round teams.

When the team better by 2 pts in yds/pt is also better in total yds..................6-0 ATS......................ave margin of victory 24 pts

85 Bears won 46-10

86 Giants won 39-20

91 Skins won 37-24

92 Boys won 52-17

96 Packers won 35-21

2000 Ravens won 34-7

All 6 games won by 13 pts or more, the 91 Skins were up 37-10 in the 4th quarter and let-up a bit to give-up back to back possesions and 2 quick TDs to Bills before crunching down.

96 Packers did get a bit lucky with a kick return TD and 2 pt conversion at the end plus I think another long punt return.

Let's look at the teams 2 pts better but not better in total yards.......................

88 9ers ..........won 20-16

89 9ers ..........won 55-10

95 Boys ...........won 27-17

2001 Pats ......won 20-17

2006 Colts .......won 29-17

2013 Seahawks ....won 43-8

2014 Pats...............won 28-24

just 2 of 7 games decided by 13 pts or more. and 4 of 7 decided by 10 or more.

But taking a closer look at those games, both 95 Pitt and 2006 Bears were driving well into the 4th quarter to win the games and both threw INT's that were returned deep into their own territories and pretty much sealed the win for their opps and then they gave up the TD after to make the score a double digit win when the games did not play-out like a double digit win at all.

So the basic reality is only 2 of those 7 games were played-out like  a  strong double digit win and when we look at those 2 games the winning team was easily better in most all other aera's and playing on  historical levels .

Both 89 9ers and 2013 Seahawks would rank as the strongest teams in my PR's since 1978. Historically strong .

Now let's look at the other Pats teams, 2 teams with close wins makes the close game list above, the 2001 Pats and the 2014 Pats , the 2004 Pats VS eagles the Eagles were better in both yds/pt and total yards if we throw-out the final 2 games of regular season in which the starters did not play because they had clinched everything they could by game 14 and were blown-out in both games 15 and 16..

The Pats have never played any opp in SB being better in both yds/pt by a good amount at least 2 pts and total yds diff except the surprise WC rounds teams Panther and 2 Giant teams which are a different animal that came in a period of hot teams in the playoffs.

When we take a closer look at 3 of the Pats SB winning teams we find the 2001, 2003 and 2014 Pats are the 3 weakest bye teams to win the SB since 1978 in total yds diff.

Would you expect a blowout from these weak teams ?

The strongest Pats SB winning team in total yds was the 2004 Pats who have the largest margin of victory of any Pats  SB winning teams through the postseason, but the Pats ran into an opp in SB better then they were in both yds/pt and total yds diff.

2016 Pats are now the strongest team in total yds and yds/pt combination  and if they should win the SB will likely be at least a very bare minimum of a 7 pt win but a 10 pt or better win is easily likely and the Pats team strongest in total yards diff /yds/pt combo will become the most dominate postseason team if they should win this game.

The 2 go hand-in-hand as the info strongly suggest a bigger Pats win can very much be expected in this game if the Pats should win SU...........................................

Hardly the strongest team of all SB winning teams.

No worries, I know who your post was intended for..............

I made a mistake in Pats yds/pt.......should be +6.88 not 5.88......which makes the Pats look even better.

So when we factor in both yds/pt and total yds diff we now have Pats -8.37 over Falcons

In SB works better with a 6 pt diff to closing line.....10-5 ATS.

We would need Pats to drop to -2 for a play.

Updating the Pats Yds/pt also chances this method, we now have Pats -8.19

with a 6 pt diff to closing line,,,,,,,,10-3 ATS since 85.

again we'd need the line to drop to -2 for a play.

 or make another PR , not sure yet which way is best.

Last couple of days I worked up another PR using yds/pt X 3.5, yds/QBPR X2, QBPR diff , and total yards diff into a formula and so far I like this method the best.

Pats -12.17 over Falcons

and not because it picks Pats but coz it is 13-2 ATS since 85 with a 5 pt diff to closing line.

If we look at other Pats SB's involving bye teams...................

2001 Rams -17.42 but Pats getting +14 so no play

2004 Eagles -5.13, Eagles lost but covered +7

2014 Seahawks -5.28, closing line was Pats +1, so no play.

This is the very 1st time Pats played oa bye team being far better in key indicators like yds/pt, QBPR diff and total yards diff.

Should not be a surprise the Pats played close games finding a way to win those games , but if the Pats win this game they just my cover the -12.17 line.

10 of 15 favs on this method who won SU covered my line.

of course we had a number of dogs who were  fav who covered but lost SU like the 2004 Eagles.

the method had 8 dogs with a 5pt diff to closing line and went 7-1 ATS, losing only with 98 Falcons -1.38 over Denver -7 and Den won by 14 i think.

If Pats win this game they this likely will not be another close SB for them.................................

Pats came into playoffs on a unsustainable level of play.

But regression does not always carry over to playoffs and regression had it's worst year this season, so whether we ignore this or not , but we should not completely ignore it.

Pats did have a regression in 1st playoff game with Texans, playing pretty bad but managed to cover with some non-repeatable things like kick return for TD and a number of punts dropped deep into Texans territory, so yea basically they got lucky.

Luck does not shine on the same team every game, had the Pats not got lucky I'd be on them, they are the better team with the better defense and the type team with far more balance which historically has won SB's.

Falcons are playing better in playoffs as measure by PLAYOFF ONLY PR and has a great track record since 1997, WE CAN NOT IGNORE THIS.

But when we take regression into consideration, the Pats were due for regression in the playoffs so maybe not a surprise Falcons are playing better.

Had the Pats not gotten so lucky VS Texans, but because they did and won easily after playing poorly and now with  the public loves the Pats here with 65% on them according to vegasinsiders.

And the public is on a 5-1 run, fade the public after periods of success, it's hard to imagine public doing well all season and in playoffs and winning here to.

When all things are considered I just do not see a good play on either side, just can not find it, can not even find a lean , to many indicators fav each team.

Will have to pass on the game and waitout much better plays coming in NBA Playoffs................................

I hope the Pats win coz they were no.1 ranked in PR's and our favs to win SB, so it be nice to notch another win there.

Best of Luck guys, thanks for listening and enjoy the SB.................................

I totally agree but my interpretation is different than yours. I believe that was the hiccup game for the Pats and it should have been much closer. They got lucky to cover and win easily but sometimes that happens. The Falcons have not had their hiccup. Hell, they have not even been challenged. NE also played a close first half with the Steelers (especially if the Steelers had scored a TD at the end of the half). There is something to be said for being battle-tested. The Falcons have had a cakewalk (by all counts). 

 How will they respond to getting punched in the mouth? Do you have any metrics that measures or accounts for teams that are battle tested? Denver last year, Seattle the year they beat Denver. The Ravens the year they won the SB had to go through Denver and NE. All those teams were more battle tested. Sometimes a team is so dominant (like the 86 Bears) that being battle tested means little to nothing, but how does it factor in when teams are more evenly matched?

Good luck in your future endeavors.

Yea I agree the Texans game could very well be the hiccup game for Pats.

Is one of the reasons I can not take Falcons even though the playoff only PR clearly on them with great record since 97.

But normally regression needs a team to not cover the spread and that was what I was talking about as far as Pats getting lucky covering the huge line.

It took alot of lucky unrepeatable things like kick return TD and all those punts dropped deep and Texans still almost covered, had Pats not gotten those lucky plays highly unlikely they cover.

If they did not cover bodes better for regression.

Just did a big write-up on battle tested teams but it did not post.

Oh well, not doing it again.