Turnover differential

[hoosier]

NFP is running an article on turnover differential from year to year (http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/...he-future.html). While the article shows a clear and unsurprising correlation between positive differential and winning, the author's main point is that teams that achieve a very high positive differential one year tend to regress toward the mean in the following year. The Packers under McCarthy and Rodgers seem to be an exception to that trend: since Rodgers took over in 2008 they are the only team to record positive differentials each year.

This countertrend is probably a product of coaching staff emphasis on ball security and stripping together with Rodgers's remarkable ability to avoid interceptions. McCarthy says he wants to emphasize tackling during camp this summer--approach angles more than technique. It will be interesting to see if the defense can improve on tackling while replicating past success with strip tackles.

[Smidgeon]

I remember McGinn used to preach that turnovers were pure chance....until recently. I don't have an article or chat, but I remember him admitting he was dead wrong on the turnover thing, that it was something that could be taught but that few places knew how to do it or something like that.

[hoosier]

Correction: Baltimore also has had plus turnover differential each of the last four seasons (the Packers are the only team with five straight years of + differential). Does that make two places that know how to teach it?

[smuggler]

Well, this only shows the differential. To look at defensive ability to produce turnovers, you'd have to look at total turnovers. I'd imagine some teams with bad offenses probably get shafted a little.

[Upnorth]

Turnovers are touted universally as one of the keys to winning football games. 5 years in a row to me says that our coaching staff has gotten the players on both sides of the ball to buy in to the program. Two questions, do special teams turnovers count as well? Do failed 4th down attempts factor count? (on the chart above I mean)

[Upnorth]

Just had a thought here, so we peaked on turnovers differential and scoring last year. teams who peak tend to regress the next year. Does this give you a little bit of fear for the season? Or does the pass defense improving offset these enough for you?

[denverYooper]

Well, this only shows the differential. To look at defensive ability to produce turnovers, you'd have to look at total turnovers. I'd imagine some teams with bad offenses probably get shafted a little.

I was thinking this about the Bears

[ThunderDan]

Just had a thought here, so we peaked on turnovers differential and scoring last year. teams who peak tend to regress the next year. Does this give you a little bit of fear for the season? Or does the pass defense improving offset these enough for you?

I think the reason we won so many games last year with our horid defense was the turnovers. Those kept us in games and put our explosive O back on the field. In 2010 our D was much better and we didn't have half the turnover margin yet we won the Super Bowl.

[smuggler]

Yeah, the turnovers didn't come in the playoff game.

Truth is, even if we regress in TO differential, that only effects the regular season record. So, we might only be 12-4 instead of 14-2.

In the playoffs, your regular season TO differential doesn't really matter.

[Joemailman]

Just had a thought here, so we peaked on turnovers differential and scoring last year. teams who peak tend to regress the next year. Does this give you a little bit of fear for the season? Or does the pass defense improving offset these enough for you?

Since Capers has been the DC, the Packers have been 1st or 2nd in the NFL in INT's. Combine that with Rodgers not throwing many INT's, and the Packers have had a huge advantage in INT differential. I don't see that changing much.

2009: 30-8
2010: 24-9
2011: 31-8

[smuggler]

Those are pretty good numbers.

[KYPack]

I remember McGinn used to preach that turnovers were pure chance....until recently. I don't have an article or chat, but I remember him admitting he was dead wrong on the turnover thing, that it was something that could be taught but that few places knew how to do it or something like that.

McGinn is a funny duck. There is some areas that he has real insight into. He has some strange blind spots, tho. His ideas about turnovers was one of em. He also never remotely understood the ZBS when we ran it or got the idea that we couldn't implement it fully with Cliffy in there.

That said, he might be the top football writer in the country.

Time and grade, ya know.

[Fritz]

I like apple turnovers.

[denverYooper]

Correction: Baltimore also has had plus turnover differential each of the last four seasons (the Packers are the only team with five straight years of + differential). Does that make two places that know how to teach it?

Baltimore has been in the black for every year of Harbaugh's tenure.

New England was only negative in 1 year.

It might be interesting to look at HC (and QB) and how that relates to these numbers.

[hoosier]

Baltimore has been in the black for every year of Harbaugh's tenure.

New England was only negative in 1 year.

It might be interesting to look at HC (and QB) and how that relates to these numbers.

I also missed New England the first time around, I guess either I cannot read or should refrain from starting threads just after lunch.

Indianapolis is another team that defied the regression-to-means trend for a long time (2003-09).

The Packers are doing it with a combination of a QB who doesn't throw interceptions and a ball hawking defense. Indy's defense never had great ball hawks in the secondary but Freeny and Mathis forced a lot of sack-fumbles and Manning always had low interception numbers. It seems to me the one constant is probably the QB. If Jay Cutler or Rex Grossman is your QB, it's going to be hard to end up positive year in, year out.