|
Year
|
AFC
|
NFC
|
||||||
|
Favorite
|
Spread
|
Underdog
|
Result
|
Favorite
|
Spread
|
Underdog
|
Result
|
|
|
2002
|
(1) OAKLAND
|
8
|
(2) Tennessee
|
OAK 41-24
|
(1) PHILADELPHIA
|
4
|
(2) Tampa Bay
|
TB 27-10
|
|
2003
|
(1) NEW ENGLAND
|
3
|
(3) Indianapoils
|
NE 24-14
|
(1) PHILADELPHIA
|
4
|
(3) Carolina
|
CAR 14-3
|
|
2004
|
(2) New England
|
3
|
(1) PITTSBURGH
|
NE 41-27
|
(1) PHILADELPHIA
|
5.5
|
(2) Atlanta
|
PHI 27-10
|
|
2005
|
(2) DENVER
|
3
|
(6) Pittsburgh
|
PIT 34-17
|
(1) SEATTLE
|
3.5
|
(5) Carolina
|
SEA 34-14
|
|
2006
|
(3) INDIANAPOLIS
|
3.5
|
(4) New England
|
IND 38-34
|
(1) CHICAGO
|
2.5
|
(2) New Orleans
|
CHI 34-14
|
|
2007
|
(1) NEW ENGLAND
|
14
|
(3) San Diego
|
NE 21-12
|
(2) GREEN BAY
|
8
|
(5) New York Giants
|
NYG 23-20
|
|
2008
|
(2) PITTSBURGH
|
6
|
(6) Baltimore
|
PIT 23-14
|
(6) Philadelphia
|
3.5
|
(4) ARIZONA
|
ARI 32-25
|
|
2009
|
(1) INDIANAPOLIS
|
8
|
(5) New York Jets
|
IND 30-17
|
(1) NEW ORLEANS
|
4
|
(2) Minnesota
|
NO 31-28
|
|
2010
|
(2) PITTSBURGH
|
4
|
(6) New York Jets
|
PIT 24-19
|
(6) Green Bay
|
3.5
|
(2) CHICAGO
|
GB 21-14
|
|
2011
|
(1) NEW ENGLAND
|
7
|
(2) Baltimore
|
NE 23-20
|
(2) SAN FRANCISCO
|
2
|
(4) New York Giants
|
NYG 20-17
|
|
2012
|
(2) NEW ENGLAND
|
8
|
(4) Baltimore
|
BAL 28-13
|
(2) San Francisco
|
3.5
|
(1) ATLANTA
|
SF 28-24
|
|
2013
|
(1) DENVER
|
5
|
(2) New England
|
DEN 26-16
|
(1) SEATTLE
|
3.5
|
(5) San Francisco
|
SEA 23-17
|
|
2014
|
(1) NEW ENGLAND
|
6.5
|
(4) Indianapolis
|
???
|
(1) SEATTLE
|
7.5
|
(2) Green Bay
|
???
|
|
Year
|
1-Score Games
|
# Favs Win
|
# Favs Cover
|
|
|
2002
|
0
|
1
|
1
|
|
|
2003
|
0
|
1
|
1
|
|
|
2004
|
0
|
2
|
2
|
|
|
2005
|
0
|
1
|
1
|
|
|
2006
|
1
|
2
|
2
|
|
|
2007
|
1
|
1
|
0
|
|
|
2008
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
|
|
2009
|
1
|
2
|
1
|
|
|
2010
|
2
|
2
|
2
|
|
|
2011
|
2
|
1
|
0
|
|
|
2012
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
|
|
2013
|
1
|
2
|
2
|
|
|
2014
|
???
|
???
|
???
|
First off, 2002-2005 had some pretty uneventful championship Sundays. Of the 8 games in that time, 3 featured upsets (mostly thanks to Donovan McNabb and the Eagles), and none featured a game that ended up closer than 10 points.
Since 2006, at least one championship Sunday game every year has ended with the losing team within one-score of the winner. To put it more simply, at least one championship game eveyr year since 2006 had a team win by 8 points or less. Two years in that 8-year stretch saw both games end with the winning team ahead by one score.
But just because a game ends up a blowout doesn't mean the favorite did the stomping. Since 2002,
- Both favorites have won their conference championship games 5 times. Both favorites have covered the spread 4 times.
- One favorite has won 7 times. One favorite has covered 6 times.
- The underdogs have never won both games on Championship Sunday. Both underdogs have covered twice (2007 and 2011).
So it is true that we're likely in for some kind of drama this weekend, whether it be from an underdog pulling the upset or a game coming down to the final whistle. Before we move on to the games themselves, a few more facts regarding Championship Sundays since 2002:
- The AFC favorite is 10-2 straight up (only losses: Denver in 2005 and New England in 2012), and 8-4 against the spread.
- The NFC favorite is 7-5 straight up, and 6-6 against the spread.
- In years where the AFC game features a spread of 6 points or more, the favorite is 5-1 straight up (only loss: New England in 2012), and 3-3 against the spread.
- This is only the second time since 2007 that the NFCC features a spread higher than 7. The other time was 2007, when the Giants upset Green Bay.
- In years where the NFC game features a spread of 4 points or more, the favorite is 2-3 both straight up and against the spread.
Green Bay at SEATTLE (-7.5)
Team
|
Green Bay
|
Seattle
|
|||
Reg.
Season
|
Rank
|
Reg.
Season
|
Rank
|
||
Efficiency Statistics
|
Total
|
47.90
|
3
|
87.29
|
1
|
Rush YPC
|
4.4
|
10
|
5.3
|
1
|
|
Def YPC
|
4.3
|
19
|
3.4
|
2
|
|
Pass YPA
|
8.3
|
2
|
7.7
|
6
|
|
Def YPA
|
6.4
|
10
|
5.9
|
2
|
|
Total
|
2.0
|
3
|
3.7
|
1
|
|
Takeaways
|
27
|
8
|
24
|
20
|
|
Giveaways
|
13
|
1
|
14
|
3
|
|
Big Plays For
|
101
|
2
|
110
|
1
|
|
Big Plays Vs
|
78
|
17
|
44
|
1
|
|
Differential
|
37
|
3
|
76
|
1
|
|
Points Scored
|
2.88
|
1
|
2.25
|
8
|
|
Points Allowed
|
1.99
|
19
|
1.49
|
2
|
|
Differential
|
0.89
|
1
|
0.76
|
3
|
|
3rd Down/ Red Zone
|
3rd Down For
|
47.21%
|
3
|
42.45%
|
11
|
3rd Down Against
|
40.29%
|
18
|
37.13%
|
8
|
|
Red Zone For
|
57.81%
|
10
|
51.67%
|
20
|
|
Red Zone Against
|
56.25%
|
20
|
59.46%
|
26
|
|
DVOA
|
Offense
|
24.60%
|
1
|
16.70%
|
5
|
Defense
|
-1.00%
|
16
|
-16.30%
|
1
|
|
Special Teams
|
-2.30%
|
22
|
-1.70%
|
19
|
|
Total
|
23.30%
|
3
|
31.30%
|
1
|
|
Weighted Total
|
24.00%
|
3
|
32.80%
|
1
|
|
Okay, so how do the Packers go into Seattle and do what only two teams have done in the past 3 seasons (win at CenturyLink Field)? Well...
They need to run the ball effectively. And effectively doesn't even necessarily mean "well". They don't need to run for 5+ ypc. What they need to do is run well enough to keep doing it all game long. Obviously this means they cannot fall behind by too much, but they need to be able to pick up a few yards here and there reliably. If they can't get more than 1-2 yards reliably in the running game? They're going to abandon it. Frankly, they won't have a choice. If they can get 3-5 yards pretty consistently, pick up multiple 3rd and shorts, and break off the occasional 7-10 yarder? Then Aaron Rodgers might start finding holes downfield.
They need to turn Seattle over. Seattle's offense is better than most give it credit for (mostly because their defense is just so good, people assume it's carrying the offense like Baltimore in 2000). So you have to steal away a possession or two to keep the Seahawks offense out of rhythm. Seattle doesn't turn the ball over often, so if you get a chance at a takeaway, you have to get the ball.
You have to bottle up Russell Wilson. If you let Wilson get free and start scrambling, you will give up chunk plays. Either on the ground or through the air. You have to be able to pressure Wilson without losing contain...AND you have to stay disciplined downfield. With most quarterbacks, once they start to run, they lose sight of their receivers down the field. Wilson doesn't.
Finally, you need to make some championship plays. Arizona beat Seattle last year thanks to a touchdown pass that the cornerback got his hand on before Michael Floyd secured it. Dallas beat Seattle this year because on 3rd and 20 Tony Romo dodged a sack and lofted a pass that Terrence Williams somehow caught on the sideline while keeping his tiptoes in play. You don't have to be perfect (Carson Palmer threw 4 interceptions that day and Dallas turned the ball over twice and gave up a blocked punt for a touchdown), but you are going to have to have a few moments of brilliance.
Can Green Bay do all of this? I'm skeptical. I don't trust their running game against Seattle, especially since run defense is the one area where Seattle's defense has been better than last year's unit. I trust Aaron Rodgers to get yards, but not in chunks. In his two games against Seattle since 2012, Rodgers has a ypa of 5.7 in both games. And I certainly don't trust a Dom Capers defense against a great running game or a mobile quarterback...let alone against a team that has both. Capers has consistently shown himself to be behind the curve when it comes to defending the Russell Wilsons and Colin Kaepernicks of the league, and I don't see what's changed.
Finally, look at these two quarterbacks:
Comp%
|
YPA
|
TD/INT
|
Passer Rtg
|
|
QB A
|
54.90%
|
5.25
|
0.67
|
68.2
|
QB B
|
59.67%
|
6.88
|
1.00
|
77.5
|
Quarterback B is Geno Smith in the 2014 season. Quarterback A is Aaron Rodgers on the road against a top-10 defense this season (SEA, DET, BUF).
The pick: Seahawks 27, Packers 17 (SEAHAWKS -7.5)
Indianapolis at NEW ENGLAND (-6.5)
Just looking at the data at the top of this post, if there is going to be an upset this weekend, you'd be hard pressed to make a strong case that it's going to come from the AFC game. If you instead dive in and look at these two teams...you're equally as hard-pressed to make the case that the Colts will pull off the upset.
The Colts and Patriots have faced each other 3 times in the last 3 years (the Andrew Luck era, if you will). Here are the final scores:
11/16/2014: Patriots 42, COLTS 20
1/11/2014: PATRIOTS 43, Colts 22
11/18/2012: PATRIOTS 59, Colts 24
In the 2012 game, the Colts' undoing was 3 non-offensive touchdowns for New England (1 punt return and 2 pick-6's) and 3 turnovers from Andrew Luck. In last year's playoffs, Luck provided 4 turnovers and the Colts allowed LeGarrette Blount to run over, around, and through them to the tun of 24 rushes, 166 yards (6.9 ypc!) and 4 touchdowns. This season, the names changed but the results didn't: Jonas Gray ran for 201 yards on 37 carries (a 5.4 ypc) and 4 touchdowns. The good news was that Andrew Luck only threw one interception. The better news was that Tom Brady threw his first 2 interceptions in this mini-series. The bad news, of course, was everything else.
If you're a Colts fan looking for hope you're likely clutching onto last week's game very tightly and pointing at it while making a general spectacle of yourself. Denver clearly had an above-average ground game in the second-half of this season, and the Colts held them to 88 yards on 4.4 ypc. That's a little bit below average (an average YPC this season was 4.14) but a little bit below average is a giant step in the right direction for the Colts' run defense.
The problem with this line of thinking is context. You haven't been reading about how Peyton Manning looks phyiscally done and should retire yesterday since last Sunday because Manning did look like a credible threat to throw the ball down the field. The Colts' whole game-plan was designed to keep bodies near the line of scrimmage and force Manning to beat them over the top. Indianapolis didn't believe he could do it, and they were right.
Now, Tom Brady hasn't been lighting the league on fire beating teams over the top, but he's not physically incapable of it, either. Brady gets into a rhythm hitting the quick passes, and then when the defense cheats up, he'll loft one over the top (or more likely, up the seam to Gronkowski) to do maximum damage. In the end, it's pick your poison for Indianapolis: devote resources to Gronkowski and/or getting after Brady, and New England will likely run the ball down their throats again. Devote more focus to the running game, and the Colts simply don't have enough players in the secondary to cover all of Tom Brady's weapons (the "LaRon Landry is going to have to cover somebody" problem). Oh, and Indy's pass rush isn't very good, which doesn't help.
If you're going to pick the Colts here, you're essentially banking on a shootout where Andrew Luck puts up 34-38 points without turning the ball over while your defense tricks Brady into a mistake or two. Based on recent history I just don't see it happening.
The pick: Patriots 37, Colts 20 (PATRIOTS -6.5)
Miles' picks: Seahawks, Patriots
Indianapolis at NEW ENGLAND (-6.5)
Team
|
Indianapolis
|
New England
|
|||
Reg.
Season
|
Rank
|
Reg.
Season
|
Rank
|
||
Efficiency Statistics
|
Total
|
-8.74
|
20
|
8.95
|
11
|
Rush YPC
|
3.9
|
22
|
3.9
|
22
|
|
Def YPC
|
4.3
|
19
|
4.0
|
8
|
|
Pass YPA
|
7.7
|
7
|
7.1
|
20
|
|
Def YPA
|
6.8
|
17
|
6.7
|
14
|
|
Total
|
0.5
|
14
|
0.3
|
17
|
|
Takeaways
|
26
|
10
|
25
|
14
|
|
Giveaways
|
31
|
29
|
13
|
1
|
|
Big Plays For
|
84
|
10
|
68
|
20
|
|
Big Plays Vs
|
92
|
30
|
80
|
19
|
|
Differential
|
-13
|
21
|
0
|
14
|
|
Points Scored
|
2.23
|
10
|
2.59
|
3
|
|
Points Allowed
|
1.85
|
11
|
1.72
|
9
|
|
Differential
|
0.38
|
10
|
0.87
|
2
|
|
3rd Down/ Red Zone
|
3rd Down For
|
41.01%
|
13
|
44.14%
|
7
|
3rd Down Against
|
33.17%
|
1
|
40.19%
|
16
|
|
Red Zone For
|
55.00%
|
12
|
58.21%
|
9
|
|
Red Zone Against
|
66.00%
|
32
|
47.83%
|
7
|
|
DVOA
|
Offense
|
-0.90%
|
17
|
13.60%
|
6
|
Defense
|
-2.30%
|
13
|
-3.40%
|
11
|
|
Special Teams
|
3.30%
|
8
|
5.50%
|
5
|
|
Total
|
4.70%
|
12
|
22.40%
|
4
|
|
Weighted Total
|
1.80%
|
13
|
31.40%
|
2
|
|
Just looking at the data at the top of this post, if there is going to be an upset this weekend, you'd be hard pressed to make a strong case that it's going to come from the AFC game. If you instead dive in and look at these two teams...you're equally as hard-pressed to make the case that the Colts will pull off the upset.
The Colts and Patriots have faced each other 3 times in the last 3 years (the Andrew Luck era, if you will). Here are the final scores:
11/16/2014: Patriots 42, COLTS 20
1/11/2014: PATRIOTS 43, Colts 22
11/18/2012: PATRIOTS 59, Colts 24
In the 2012 game, the Colts' undoing was 3 non-offensive touchdowns for New England (1 punt return and 2 pick-6's) and 3 turnovers from Andrew Luck. In last year's playoffs, Luck provided 4 turnovers and the Colts allowed LeGarrette Blount to run over, around, and through them to the tun of 24 rushes, 166 yards (6.9 ypc!) and 4 touchdowns. This season, the names changed but the results didn't: Jonas Gray ran for 201 yards on 37 carries (a 5.4 ypc) and 4 touchdowns. The good news was that Andrew Luck only threw one interception. The better news was that Tom Brady threw his first 2 interceptions in this mini-series. The bad news, of course, was everything else.
If you're a Colts fan looking for hope you're likely clutching onto last week's game very tightly and pointing at it while making a general spectacle of yourself. Denver clearly had an above-average ground game in the second-half of this season, and the Colts held them to 88 yards on 4.4 ypc. That's a little bit below average (an average YPC this season was 4.14) but a little bit below average is a giant step in the right direction for the Colts' run defense.
The problem with this line of thinking is context. You haven't been reading about how Peyton Manning looks phyiscally done and should retire yesterday since last Sunday because Manning did look like a credible threat to throw the ball down the field. The Colts' whole game-plan was designed to keep bodies near the line of scrimmage and force Manning to beat them over the top. Indianapolis didn't believe he could do it, and they were right.
Now, Tom Brady hasn't been lighting the league on fire beating teams over the top, but he's not physically incapable of it, either. Brady gets into a rhythm hitting the quick passes, and then when the defense cheats up, he'll loft one over the top (or more likely, up the seam to Gronkowski) to do maximum damage. In the end, it's pick your poison for Indianapolis: devote resources to Gronkowski and/or getting after Brady, and New England will likely run the ball down their throats again. Devote more focus to the running game, and the Colts simply don't have enough players in the secondary to cover all of Tom Brady's weapons (the "LaRon Landry is going to have to cover somebody" problem). Oh, and Indy's pass rush isn't very good, which doesn't help.
If you're going to pick the Colts here, you're essentially banking on a shootout where Andrew Luck puts up 34-38 points without turning the ball over while your defense tricks Brady into a mistake or two. Based on recent history I just don't see it happening.
The pick: Patriots 37, Colts 20 (PATRIOTS -6.5)
Miles' picks: Seahawks, Patriots
Divisional Picks: 3-1 (.750)
Divisional Picks (Miles): 2-2 (.500) - He picked Patriots, Seahawks, Cowboys, Broncos
2014 Postseason: 5-3 (.625)
Miles' 2014 Postseason: 5-3 (.625)
2013 Postseason: 4-5-2 (.455)
Miles' 2013 Postseason: 6-3-2 (.636)
2012 Postseason: 6-4-1 (.591)
2011 Postseason: 6-5 (.545)
2011 Postseason: 6-5 (.545)
2014 Season: 130-122-3 (.516)
2014 Midweek Picks: 13-5
No comments:
Post a Comment