Interesting Stat...

[SpartaChris]

From Andy Freeland, head researcher for NBC's Sunday Night Football, moderator at FootballProsLive.com and all around good guy:

This week the Texans host the Cowboys, who have the 4th ranked offense (395 yards/game), but are tied for 26th in scoring (13.5 ppg) with the Rams. There is a great but overlooked stat for scoring efficiency - points per 100 yards. The Packers currently lead the NFL with 9.46 points/100 yards. The Cowboys are 31st with 3.42, only the Vikings are worse at 3.07.

FPL - Stat geek observations from 2 weeks of football

Basically, we score more points going the length or the field than any other team right now. While it's obviously not a stand alone stat, it does give you some insight into the overall scoring efficiency of the team. Higher is better.

For those wondering, the Bears calculate out to be 5.97 points/100 yards.

 

[Mr. StyleZ]

Credit to Jordy Nelson and special teams.

Also of course, the crazy number of ballhawks this team has.

 

[SpartaChris]

Oh totally. The stat is more an efficiency measure of how bad a team is. If you use 7 points per 100 yards as the benchmark, then teams with a higher ratio score more efficiently then teams with a lower score. This is due to things like turnovers, special teams getting you in great field position, things like that.

During the offseason I heard a lot of talk from Vikings fans about how the fix was in and how they should have won because they put up way more yards of offense and blah blah blah..

If we dial that game down to scoring efficiency, the Vikings had 475 yards of offense and 28 points, averaging to 5.89 points/100 yards. The Saints on the other hand put up 31 points on 257 yards of total offense, giving us a score of 12.06 points/100 yards.

What this boils down to is the Saints doing more with less in that game. Turn overs and excellent special teams play gave the Saints a much shorter field to worth with, which would explain why the Vikings had more offense in the game. Simply put, they had to. Any less and the game would have been a blow out.

Anyway, I find it to be a fascinating complement to the basics of analyzing how good a team really is.

 

[FrankRizzo]

Great stat, but again as Clay says, it's only 2 games.
And one of them was against the Bills which doesn't count really.

If we lead after 16, 18, 19 games, then I'll be really excited.

 

[SuperStinkyCheese]

The best indicator of a teams overall performance in a game is overall points compared to the other teams total points. 99% of the time, the team with the most points at the end of the game will win. Usually, in the cases when this is not true, official error or windy conditions are a big factor.

For this upcoming game I would look at QB arms. Statistically speaking, QBs with less then two arms have not won any games in the NFL. I'm showing that Rodgers will have one of his arms ripped off by Peppers in the first quarter, and the second arm will simply atrophy in fear possibly possibly also falling off before the end of the game. Fortunately cheeseheads have pioneered whole arm replacement using bratwurst and Rodgers should come back neext season. Odds aren't good for the Pack taking that fact into account.

 

[Powarun]

Even if its only week 2 that is a good stat, especially since its over 7.

It also looks like the Bears fans have invaded us and are showing how pathetic they are.:chisux:

 

[Kitten]

The best indicator of a teams overall performance in a game is overall points compared to the other teams total points. 99% of the time, the team with the most points at the end of the game will win. Usually, in the cases when this is not true, official error or windy conditions are a big factor.

So you are saying by your own profound logic, you count the Bears win over the Lions as a loss???

 

[ivo610]

yeah some sites measure it and call it scorability. The cowboys were in the same boat last year with alot of yards for so little points.

 

[Green_Bay_Packers]

2 Games yes I am happy but lets hope its lasts 10 or all season