EA Sports’ yearly release in their NCAA Football video game franchise is due to hit on Tuesday, July 13th; in preparation for that, I have gone through the ratings for all of the teams included in this year’s game to run some data analysis.  The goal of this research is to provide some data surrounding how the EA Sports team has decided to rate each school’s team in the game, and how that affects potential conferences to use in the game’s multiplayer Online Dynasty mode.

Please note that the ratings used in this analysis are taken from video recorded at the Electronics Entertainment Expo and may not reflect the retail team ratings when the game is officially released.

First off, we will look at the numbers taken as a result of averaging the rating for each team in each conference.  Schools are rated in three major categories:

• Overall Rating
• Offensive Rating
• Defensive Rating

By averaging each conference member school’s ratings, we arrive at the following results for best overall conference in terms of school ratings:

The first six conferences–the SEC, Pac-10, Big Ten, Big 12, ACC, and Big East–are the schools that receive “Automatic Qualifier” status in the NCAA Division I Football Bowl Subdivision.  The last five conferences–the MWC, C-USA, WAC, MAC, and Sun Belt–do not receive “Automatic Qualifier” status; this explains the large disparity in average roster ratings between the lowest “Automatic Qualifier” conference–the Big East–and the highest “Non-Automatic Qualifier” conference, the Mountain West Conference.

Of course, there is one catch; these ratings are taken from the E3 build of NCAA Football 11, which gave #1 Alabama ratings of 99/99/99 in Overall/Offense/Defense.  It seems unlikely that Alabama will maintain this perfect set of ratings for the final retail version of the game, which means that the Southeastern Conference will have ratings drop across the board in terms of averages.

When considering a conference to select in an Online Dynasty–particularly an Online Dynasty where all members of the dynasty will play as teams from a single conference–the overall averages of schools is a minor consideration.  More important, however, is to consider how balanced the schools in a conference are; if a conference has teams that are very evenly balanced, then the playing field is significantly more level for gamers.  However, a conference that has a large gap between teams could potentially be problematic in an Online Dynasty because serious mis-matches are more likely to occur.  With that in mind, here is a breakdown of how balanced the conferences are in NCAA Football 11:

Based strictly on these numbers–which represent the rating point difference between the top team and bottom team in a conference–then the Big East clearly offers the most balanced conference of teams in NCAA Football 11, while the WAC is most skewed between teams.  There is a catch here as well, however, as the Western Athletic Conference fields #5 Boise State–a team that has a 93 Overall rating–while the highest Overall rating in the conference otherwise is the 78 for Fresno State.  Only 16 rating points separate Fresno State and San Jose State, the worst team in the conference, so the WAC is reasonably balanced when the Broncos are removed.

In order to break down each conference individually, I’ve also run the numbers for each conference for analysis below.  After each image will be a quick reaction to the suitability of that conference for balanced Online Dynasty play.  I will present these in order from most balanced to least balanced, from the Big East to the WAC.

Big East Conference

Suitability for Balanced Play: 5 out of 5

Just over ten points separate #16 Pittsburgh and West Virginia at the top of the conference from Louisville and Syracuse at the bottom, making the Big East a great selection for users seeking a balanced Online Dynasty.  There are only 8 teams in the conference, however, so the Online Dynasty would operate below the maximum of 12 players.

Pacific 10 Conference

Suitability for Balanced Play: 4.5 out of 5

The Pac-10 provides a surprisingly balanced experience–only 13 points separate #13 USC from Washington State–while also having a legitimate sense of “star quality” regarding the big name schools involved in the conference.  While there won’t be much worry from a balance standpoint, be prepared for some healthy debate concerning who gets to play as which school if you choose this conference for your Online Dynasty.

Big 12 Conference

Suitability for Balanced Play: 4.5 of 5

Despite nearly going defunct this summer, the Big 12 Conference actually provides a fairly balanced conference for use in NCAA Football 11; 14 rating points separate #15 Oklahoma from Kansas State.  This is another conference offering a lot of big-name schools for large Online Dynasty groups without skewing the playing field too strongly one way or another.

Atlantic Coast Conference

Suitability for Balanced Play: 4.5 of 5

The ACC features a slew of teams in the inital Top 25 of NCAA Football 11, but there is still only a rating point differential of 14 between #14 Miami (FL) and Duke.  The star quality isn’t quite as prevalent here compared to other conferences in the game, but there is ample reason to believe that a level playing field could be had with an ACC Online Dynasty.

Sun Belt Conference

Suitability for Balanced Play: 4 of 5

The Sun Belt Conference is the first “Non-Automatic Qualifier” conference, and it doesn’t really have any big-name schools to make for a “sexy” Online Dynasty in NCAA Football 11.  That said, there is a solid balance between the squads in this conference, though the overall ratings for these teams are well below the ratings of teams in the conferences more balanced than this one.

Mid-American Conference

Suitability for Balanced Play: 4 of 5

The MAC offers a similar situation to the Sun Belt Conference: solid balance between teams which aren’t high-profile, and teams whose ratings trend downwards very quickly.  It might be difficult to collect a group of people willing to play in an Online Dynasty dedicated to the Mid-American Conference, but if you can do so, nobody will feel particularly overpowered in the conference.

Southeastern Conference

Suitability for Balanced Play: 3.5 of 5

The issue with #1 Alabama again rears its head here, and if the team is not 99/99/99 in the final retail copy of NCAA Football 11, then all of these numbers for the SEC will be changed.  It may well end up that the SEC is more balanced than the numbers would show here, considering that Alabama is 7 points ahead of #6 Florida and #17 LSU when considering the E3 ratings.  At the moment, however, this popular and powerful conference sits just about in the middle of the pack when it comes to balanced play for Online Dynasty use.  Again, the major issue will be players fighting over the popular teams while hoping to avoid getting saddled with Kentucky or Vanderbilt.

Big Ten Conference

Suitability for Balanced Play: 3.5 of 5

The Big Ten Conference boasts four teams in the Top 25 for NCAA Football 11 at retail, but now we’re starting to see bigger rating point spreads between the top and bottom of conferences in the game.  Nearly 20 rating points separate #2 Ohio State from Illinois; while the middle of the pack is fairly balanced, those players who control Northwestern, Indiana or Illinois might find themselves at a marked disadvantage.

Conference USA

Suitability for Balanced Play: 3 of 5

The Conference-USA squads aren’t going to be able to stand up to the big boys of the NCAA, and even within this 12-school conference there are nearly 20 rating points separating UCF and Rice.  The middle of the conference is solid from a balance standpoint, but four teams on the outside–UCF and #25 Houston over 80, Tulane and Rice under 70–skew the overall balance of this conference when being considered for Online Dynasty play.

Mountain West Conference

Suitability for Balanced Play: 2.5 of 5

The major appeal of the Mountain West Conference comes from the interesting offensive strategies employed by its teams; certainly not in terms of the balance between teams in the conference.  #8 TCU is 22 rating points better than New Mexico within the conference play, and there is a significant breadth in ratings across the entire conference.  An Online Dynasty focused on the MWC would certainly create some interesting match-ups, but there are certain teams that would be difficult to succeed with from a game balance standpoint.

Western Athletic Conference

Suitability for Balanced Play: 1.5 of 5

#5 Boise State throws the Western Athletic Conference completely out of whack… get it?  The Broncos are 14 rating points higher than Nevada, the second-best team in the conference; they are an incredible 31 points higher than San Jose State, who sit at the bottom of the group.  While Boise State will be leaving the WAC in the future, an Online Dynasty in NCAA Football 11 would be very difficult to achieve from a balance standpoint unless the Broncos were left to be controlled by the computer in the dynasty.  Even an unskilled player would be quite capable of running at the head of the conference given the points spread in the WAC.

Of course, that only covers 117 of the 120 teams on the game disc in NCAA Football 11; there remain three Division I FBS Independents:

But since Army, Navy and Notre Dame are all doing fairly well on their own without having to be a part of a conference in the NCAA, that’s all the time we’ll be giving them here.

Now, before anybody gets on my case about this, please note that I’m aware that users can change conference lineups to be whatever they wish in NCAA Football 11.  However, for people like myself who enjoy playing the game based on how the conferences are going to be aligned for the coming season, this breakdown will hopefully be useful in working out which conferences are the strongest and which are most suitable for balanced play.

In just over a week, NCAA Football 11 will be out in video game retailers everywhere, and the team ratings in the final version of the game may differ from these numbers.  That said, this research should give everyone a solid head-start to thinking about what conference they might go with–or what team might be their new in-game favorite–for Online Dynasty in EA Sports’ latest version of their college football franchise.

Have any feedback, comments, or insights?  Feel free to weigh in through the comments below!

Before we move on completely, however, it is important to note one particular side-story that has been overlooked from Super Bowl XLIV: this year’s Super Bowl  championship game was the first such match-up between two teams who play their home games in a dome or retractable-roof stadium.

However, in the NFL it isn’t as simple as teams that play indoors versus teams that play outdoors.  After all, of the four major American sporting leagues, only the NFL hosts outdoor games regardless of temperature or weather conditions and only the NFL hosts outdoor games during the fall and winter months.  The NFL has teams all over the country representing different climates, and temperatures change drastically from September to February.

Looking ahead to Super Bowl XLVIII (48), which will be played in 2014, the question of NFL climates has particular importance.  At this time, there are three bids to serve as host city for the game: the new Meadowlands Stadium in East Rutherford, New Jersey, Sun Life Stadium in Miami, Florida, and Raymond James Stadium in Tampa Bay, Florida.  Obviously, one of these cities is not like the others: a championship game played at Meadowlands Stadium would be the first Super Bowl ever played outdoors in a city referred to as a “cold-weather city” for the NFL.  This is a tricky situation because Meadowlands Stadium is currently considered a front-runner to host the game; Sun Life Stadium just hosted Super Bowl XLIV, Raymond James Stadium hosted last year’s Super Bowl XLIII, and Meadowlands Stadium will be the newest facility of the three, opening for play this fall.  But many people involved in the NFL are not high on the idea of the Super Bowl being played in the harsh winter environment.

This research originally began as an evaluation of whether or not indoor teams in the NFL had an unfair advantage over their outdoors competitors, but through actually doing the research it became clear that climate—and obviously the quality of team personnel—plays a significant role in team success as well.

The first piece of this research involved defining the home-team environments of all 32 NFL franchises.  Using an admittedly-small sample size of each team’s 2009 schedule, I calculated the average game temperature of each team’s home games.  The average temperatures ranged from 79.25°F (Miami Dolphins) to 40.38°F (Cleveland Browns), for a high-low differential of 38.87°F and an average overall game temperature of 60.15°F.  With a spread of nearly 40°F, it was easy enough to decide how the groups would be divided into groups based on their climates.

 Group #1: Hot-Weather Teams – Average Game Temperature of 70°F or Higher

8 NFL Teams (25% of League) – 2 AFC, 6 NFC

• Miami Dolphins – 79.25° F
• San Diego Chargers – 73.63° F
• Tampa Bay Buccaneers – 71.75° F (including one game at Wembley Stadium, London, England)
• Minnesota Vikings – 70° F (climate-controlled dome)
• Atlanta Falcons – 70° F (climate-controlled dome)
• New Orleans Saints – 70° F (climate-controlled dome)
• Detroit Lions – 70° F (climate-controlled dome)
• St. Louis Rams – 70° F (climate-controlled dome)

Group #2: Warm-Weather Teams – Average Game Temperature Between 60°F and 69°F

7 NFL Teams (22% of League) – 4 AFC, 3 NFC

• Dallas Cowboys – 69.88° F (retractable-roof stadium)
• Jacksonville Jaguars – 69.88° F
• Arizona Cardinals – 68.50° F (retractable-roof stadium)
• Houston Texans – 68.13° F (retractable-roof stadium)
• Indianapolis Colts – 66.00° F (retractable-roof stadium)
• Oakland Raiders – 62.00° F
• San Francisco 49ers – 60.63° F

 Group #3: Cool-Weather Teams – Average Game Temperature Between 50°F and 59°F

11 NFL Teams (34% of League) – 6 AFC, 5 NFC

• Carolina Panthers – 57.25° F
• Philadelphia Eagles – 56.63° F
• Cincinnati Bengals – 56.38° F
• New York Giants – 56.38° F
• Baltimore Ravens – 56.25° F
• New England Patriots – 55.00° F
• Tennessee Titans – 54.50° F
• Washington Redskins – 53.50° F
• Seattle Seahawks – 53.38° F
• Denver Broncos – 52.88° F
• Kansas City Chiefs – 50.25° F

 Group #4: Cold-Weather Teams – Average Game Temperature Between 40°F and 49°F

6 NFL Teams (19% of League) – 4 AFC, 2 NFC

• New York Jets – 49.63° F
• Chicago Bears – 49.50° F
• Buffalo Bills – 49.13° F (including one game at Rogers Centre in Toronto, Ontario, Canada)
• Green Bay Packers – 47.13° F
• Pittsburgh Steelers – 47.00° F
• Cleveland Browns – 40.38° F

Conveniently enough, Groups #1 and #2 comprise 15 NFL teams and Groups #3 and #4 comprise 17 NFL teams—making for a near-even split.  All 9 teams that could be classified as “indoor” teams—playing either in a dome or retractable-roof stadium—fit into either Group #1 or #2.

With the NFL franchises divided along these climate lines, the next task was to analyze the performance of teams over a set period of time.  Since I’ve been doing the majority of my research with the last decade of play—2000 through 2009—I decided to use that same sample.

The first numbers I wanted to look at concerned the teams that made the Super Bowl and had home-field advantage in the playoffs.  From 2000-2009, the teams that made the Super Bowl came from the following distribution of the 4 groups:

• Group #1 – Hot-Weather: 2 Wins in 3 Appearances (Rams 2001, Bucs 2002, Saints 2009)
• Group #2 – Warm-Weather: 1 Win in 4 Appearances (Raiders 2002, Colts 2006, Cardinals 2008, Colts 2009)
• Group #3 – Cool-Weather: 5 Wins in 10 Appearances (Ravens/Giants 2000, Patriots 2001, Patriots/Panthers 2003, Patriots/Eagles 2004, Patriots/Giants 2007)
• Group #4 – Cold-Weather: 2 Wins in 3 Appearances (Steelers 2005, Bears 2006, Steelers 2008)

From this early stage, the numbers were surprising: although Group #3 comprises the highest number of teams by this climate alignment, they had far-and-away the most Super Bowl appearances over the 2000’s.  Over half of the Super Bowl teams from the 2000’s had 50°-59°F game temperatures, and half of the Super Bowl winners came from Group #3 (although on 4 occasions, Group #3 teams were playing each other).

The next set of numbers concerned the home field for the AFC Championship Game and NFC Championship Game over the past decade:

• Group #1 – Hot-Weather: 2 Wins in 2 Appearances (Rams 2001, Saints 2009)
• Group #2 – Warm-Weather: 4 Wins in 5 Appearances (Raiders 2000, Raiders 2002, Colts 2006, Cardinals 2008, Colts 2009)
• Group #3 – Cool-Weather: 5 Wins in 8 Appearances (Giants 2000, Eagles 2002, Patriots 2003, Eagles 2003, Eagles 2004, Broncos 2005, Seahawks 2005, Patriots 2007)
• Group #4 – Cold-Weather: 2 Wins in 5 Appearances (Steelers 2001, Steelers 2004, Bears 2006, Packers 2007, Steelers 2008)

Similar numbers here, although Group #2 and Group #4 teams had more appearances as the home-field team for the Conference Championship Games.

The last playoff-related numbers I considered were the #1 and #2 seeds from 2000-2009 from the AFC and NFC:

• Group #1 – Hot-Weather: 10 (3 as #1 Seed, 7 as #2 Seed)
• Group #2 – Warm-Weather: 6 (4 as #1 Seed, 2 as #2 Seed)
• Group #3 – Cool-Weather: 17 (10 as #1 Seed, 7 as #2 Seed)
• Group #4 – Cold-Weather: 7 (3 as #1 Seed, 4 as #2 Seed)

Again, the colder weather teams have more appearances as #1 and #2 seeds from 2000-2009 than the warmer weather teams.  These numbers come as a particular surprise to me, as it has been a constantly-held belief that teams playing indoors or in warmer climates have an advantage over the cold-weather, outdoor teams.  The success of the Indianapolis Colts in particular has been looked at as evidence of this advantage, but teams like the Patriots and Steelers won half of the Super Bowls in the 2000’s as cool and cold-weather teams.

Given these numbers, it is interesting that the Super Bowl is an event that has been solely the domain of domed or retractable-roof stadiums in warm climates.  The below-freezing temperatures of early NFL Championship games at Lambeau Field have been an integral part of the league’s history, but the Super Bowl era has denied the fans the creation of new memories in that cold-weather vein.  Nobody wants to see the Super Bowl decided by adverse weather conditions, so I can understand why the league tries to control the conditions of the game as much as possible, but with over half the league playing home games in sub-60°F temperatures it seems only fair that the Super Bowl move on to Meadowlands Stadium and other cold-weather venues.

Of course, the research didn’t stop there; I also went through the season-by-season statistics from the past decade to see which teams had the most home game victories from 2000-2009.  Before getting into specifics, here are the rankings of the teams based on their overall home victories by climate group:

• Group #1 – Hot-Weather: 5^th, T10th, 14^th, 15^th, T17th, T24th, T27th, 32^nd (Average: 18^th)
• Group #2 – Warm-Weather: 2^nd, 13^th, 16^th, T17th, T24th, 29^th, 30^th (Average: 19^th)
• Group #3 – Cool-Weather: 1^st, 3^rd, 6^th, 8^th, 9^th, T10th, T17th, T17th, 22^nd, 23^rd, T24th (Average: 13^th)
• Group #4 – Cold-Weather: 4^th, 7^th, T10th, T17th, T27th, 31^st (Average: 16^th)

Again, the colder-weather teams had better results; from the top 10 teams (which featured a 3-way tie at 10^th) the numbers were split as follows:

• Group #1 – Hot-Weather: 2 teams (5^th and T10th)
• Group #2 – Warm-Weather: 1 team (2^nd)
• Group #3 – Cool-Weather: 6 teams (1^st, 3^rd, 6^th, 8^th, 9^th, T10th)
• Group #4 – Cold-Weather: 3 teams (4^th, 7^th, T10th)

Through this research, one thing emerges clearly; despite the seemingly rational belief that teams playing in warm-weather climates or in climate-controlled indoor stadiums would have better home records, teams that play outdoors in colder climates are amongst the most successful home teams in the NFL.

Now that all of the analysis is out of the way, I leave you with the breakdown of team results based on home-field wins from 2000-2009:

• 1^st: New England Patriots – 61 Regular Season Home Wins (.763 %)
• 2^nd: Indianapolis Colts – 60 Regular Season Home Wins (.750 %)
• 3^rd: Baltimore Ravens – 58 Regular Season Home Wins (.725 %)
• 4^th: Pittsburgh Steelers – 57 Regular Season Home Wins (.713 %)
• 5^th: Minnesota Vikings – 55 Regular Season Home Wins (.688 %)
• 6^th: Denver Broncos – 54 Regular Season Home Wins (.675 %)
• 7^th: Green Bay Packers – 53 Regular Season Home Wins (.663 %)
• 8^th: Philadelphia Eagles – 52 Regular Season Home Wins (.650 %)
• 9^th: Seattle Seahawks – 51 Regular Season Home Wins (.638 %)
• T 10^th: San Diego Chargers – 49 Regular Season Home Wins (.613 %)
• T 10^th: Tennessee Titans – 49 Regular Season Home Wins (.613 %)
• T 10^th: Chicago Bears – 49 Regular Season Home Wins (.613 %)
• 13^th: Dallas Cowboys – 48 Regular Season Home Wins (.600 %)
• 14^th: Tampa Bay Buccaneers – 46 Regular Season Home Wins (.575 %)
• 15^th: Miami Dolphins – 45 Regular Season Home Wins (.563 %)
• 16^th: Jacksonville Jaguars – 44 Regular Season Home Wins (.550 %)
• T 17^th: Atlanta Falcons – 43 Regular Season Home Wins (.538 %)
• T 17^th: New York Jets – 43 Regular Season Home Wins (.538 %)
• T 17^th: Kansas City Chiefs – 43 Regular Season Home Wins (.538 %)
• T 17^th: New York Giants – 43 Regular Season Home Wins (.538 %)
• T 17^th: San Francisco 49ers – 43 Regular Season Home Wins (.538 %)
• 22^nd: Carolina Panthers – 42 Regular Season Home Wins (.525 %)
• 23^rd: Cincinnati Bengals – 41 Regular Season Home Wins (.513 %)
• T 24^th: Arizona Cardinals – 40 Regular Season Home Wins (.500 %)
• T 24^th: Washington Redskins – 40 Regular Season Home Wins (.500 %)
• T 24^th: St. Louis Rams – 40 Regular Season Home Wins (.500 %)
• T 27^th: Buffalo Bills – 38 Regular Season Home Wins (.475 %)
• T 27^th: New Orleans Saints – 38 Regular Season Home Wins (.475 %)
• 29^th: Houston Texans – 30 Regular Season Home Wins in 8 Seasons (.469 %)
• 30^th: Oakland Raiders – 35 Regular Season Home Wins (.438 %)
• 31^st: Cleveland Browns – 31 Regular Season Home Wins (.388 %)
• 32^nd: Detroit Lions – 29 Regular Season Home Wins (.363 %)

Breakdown between AFC and NFC teams by conference here:

American Football Conference

• 1^st: New England Patriots
• 2^nd: Indianapolis Colts
• 3^rd: Baltimore Ravens
• 4^th: Pittsburgh Steelers
• 5^th: Denver Broncos
• 6^th: San Diego Chargers
• 7^th: Tennessee Titans
• 8^th: Miami Dolphins
• 9^th: Jacksonville Jaguars
• 10^th: New York Jets
• 11^th: Kansas City Chiefs
• 12^th: Cincinnati Bengals
• 13^th: Buffalo Bills
• 14^th: Houston Texans
• 15^th: Oakland Raiders
• 16^th: Cleveland Browns

 Interesting to note that out of two AFC teams playing indoors, one was 2^nd for the conference and the other was 14^th, while cool- or cold-weather teams made up 4 of the Top 5.

National Football Conference

• 1^st: Minnesota Vikings
• 2^nd: Green Bay Packers
• 3^rd: Philadelphia Eagles
• 4^th: Seattle Seahawks
• 5^th: Chicago Bears
• 6^th: Dallas Cowboys
• 7^th: Tampa Bay Buccaneers
• 8^th: Atlanta Falcons
• 9^th: New York Giants
• 10^th: San Francisco 49ers
• 11^th: Carolina Panthers
• 12^th: Arizona Cardinals
• 13^th: Washington Redskins
• 14^th: St. Louis Rams
• 15^th: New Orleans Saints
• 16^th: Detroit Lions

While the top NFC team was an indoor team, only two additional indoor teams (of the 7 total for the NFC) broke the top half of the conference.  The bottom three teams in the conference all play in domed environments.

And for one last tidbit of information, a list of teams with seasons of 8-0 home records over the past decade:

• New England Patriots – 4 occurrences (2003, 2004, 2007, 2009)
• Seattle Seahawks – 2 occurrences (2003, 2005)
• Indianapolis Colts – 1 occurrence (2006)
• Pittsburgh Steelers – 1 occurrence (2004)
• Minnesota Vikings – 1 occurrence (2009)
• Denver Broncos – 1 occurrence (2005)
• Green Bay Packers – 1 occurrence (2002)
• San Diego Chargers – 1 occurrence (2006)
• Kansas City Chiefs – 1 occurrence (2003)
• Carolina Panthers – 1 occurrence (2008)
• St. Louis Rams – 1 occurrence (2003)

As well as how those occurrences break down by the climate groups:

• Hot-Weather Teams: 3 (Vikings, Chargers, Rams)
• Warm-Weather Teams: 1 (Colts)
• Cool-Weather Teams: 5 (Patriots, Seahawks, Broncos, Chiefs, Panthers)
• Cold-Weather Teams: 2 (Steelers, Packers)

Though the numbers seem fairly straight-forward, I am interested in any reader opinions; do you agree that cooler-weather teams have an advantage in the NFL?  Are the poor results of indoor teams merely the result of the majority of those franchises having fewer quality players?  Do you think the NFL should consider holding the Super Bowl in cold-weather venues, or should it continue to be a climate-controlled contest?

On the other side of the coin, teams such as the Indianapolis Colts have frequently rested starters at the end of the season due to strong regular season records; they even did it in 2009, despite the chance to be the second team with a 16-0 regular season record and much to the chagrin of their paying fans.  That the Colts essentially gave up a game to the New York Jets, a playoff “bubble” team, didn’t sit right with anyone either and appeared to spark an investigation by NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell (which is the last anyone has really heard of it).  I can understand to some extent, with all of that potential labor trouble lurking.

As an NFL fan and statistics nut, however, I found myself wondering just how often teams had been resting their starters.  Of course, it can be difficult to quantify exactly what it means to “rest” starters, seeing as even teams who rest starters frequently leave them in to play parts of games.  The challenge, then, was to create a set of criteria which could be used in conjunction with game statistics to evauate when teams have had “rest” games over the past few years; games where the goal may have been to rest starters first, and compete for the victory second.

Here are the criteria I decided upon:

Narrowing the Field

• The game occurred in Weeks 15-17 of the NFL season (as teams do not seem to rest starters before that point, to stay fresh for the postseason).
• The game featured a backup quarterback taking at least 30% of the teams passing attempts for the game for reasons other than injury or because a game’s outcome had been decided in a blowout (with a backup QB taking “clean-up snaps”).
• Only the years 2003-2009 are represented because I could find no games matching the first two criteria in 2002 and prior to 2002 at least one team had a “bye” week each week of the season, skewing any results.

The criteria seem simple, and I suppose they are.  The idea of focusing on the quarterback position comes from the ease in handling QB-related statistics; it’s much easier to look at passing attempts and figure out if a team was resting their starters than to look at blocks or tackles, or even WR/TE/RB statistics.  The NFL has become a very QB-centric league–some may argue that it has been for a while–and when a team decides not to play their starting QB, it makes it difficult for them to compete in a given contest.

For the sake of being brief–something I’m not particularly good at–I will provide my statistical findings first and go into detail later on for anyone who is interested in the specifics of this research.  For people with less time on their hands, here’s a quick guide to my results:

A Breakdown of the Statistics

• Number of “rest” games between 2003-2009: 30
• Number of “rest” games in Week 17: 26
• Number of “rest” games in Week 16: 4
• Number of “rest” games in Week 15: 0

Week 15 was on the outside of my criteria, so I wasn’t too surprised to see no results; teams don’t want their starters missing that much time, and many teams don’t clinch the playoffs that early.  The 26 “rest” games in Week 17 represented 23.21% of all Week 17 games played between 2003 and 2009, which means that nearly a quarter of such games fit my criteria.

• Number of “rest” games in 2009: 7
• Number of “rest” games in 2008: 2
• Number of “rest” games in 2007: 5
• Number of “rest” games in 2006: 2
• Number of “rest” games in 2005: 7
• Number of “rest” games in 2004: 5
• Number of “rest” games in 2003: 2

Going by year, it’s difficult to see a consistent pattern of “rest” games (aside from the freaky recurrence of 2, 5, and 7 in the numbers); there seems to be an ebb-and-flow to the occurrences.  Interesting to note, however, that the peak number of 7 is equivalent to nearly half the docket of a Week 17 game slate.  Oftentimes, however, high number results for a year represent years where teams “rested” in Week 16 as well.

• Number of games won by the “resting” team: 7 (0.241 Win %)
• Number of games lost by the “resting” team: 22 (0.759 Win %)

These numbers surprised me somewhat, as the “resting” team won 7 out of the 29 “rest” games from the statistics I observed.  This goes to show, I suppose, that even backup players can win games if the timing is right.  Note that the numbers don’t add up to 30 because one of the “rest” games had both the Titans and Colts resting starters (2008 Week 17), which effectively cancels out that particular result.

• Number of teams who have “rested” from 2003-2009: 16 (50% of league’s teams)
• Number of times a team who “rested” won the Super Bowl in the same season: 1 (Saints in 2009)
• Number of times a team who “rested” made the Super Bowl in the same season: 4 (Saints and Colts in 2009, Seahawks in 2005, Eagles in 2004)
• Number of times a team who “rested” made the Conference Championship Game in the same season: 8 (Saints/Colts in 2009, Packers in 2007, Saints in 2006, Seahawks/Broncos in 2005, Falcons/Eagles in 2004)

I found it interesting that despite the argument made by teams who rest their players that they want to be prepared to win the Super Bowl, only one team that “rested” from 2003-2009 achieved that goal and only four of those teams made it to the game.  It would appear that there is not a direct correllation between “resting” in late season games and seeing ultimate playoff success.  Sure, 8 teams parlayed that “rest” into at least a Conference Championship appearance, but only one Super Bowl win (and only this past season) is particularly telling.

Next is a ranking of which teams have “rested” the most games from 2003-2009:

1. Indianapolis Colts — 7 occurrences
2. Philadelphia Eagles — 3 occurrences
3. New EnglandPatriots — 2 occurrences
4. New Orleans Saints — 2 occurrences
5. Cincinnati Bengals — 2 occurrences
6. Seattle Seahawks — 2 occurrences
7. Green Bay Packers — 2 occurrences
8. Denver Broncos — 2 occurrences
9. Tennessee Titans — 2 occurrences
10. Arizona Cardinals — 1 occurrence
11. San Diego Chargers — 1 occurrence
12. New York Giants — 1 occurrence
13. Dallas Cowboys — 1 occurrence
14. Tampa Bay Buccaneers — 1 occurrence
15. Chicago Bears — 1 occurrence
16. Atlanta Falcons — 1 occurrence

No surprise to me here, since the Colts have always made a big show of performing strong so that they can rest their starters before the playoffs.  Some of the other teams were interesting to note–I had no idea that the Eagles “rested” for games–but the Colts had more than twice as many “rest” games as any other franchise from the 7 seasons of the sample size.  Connecting to my research on Best Team of the 2000s in the NFL, it is interesting to note that just 4 more regular season victories would’ve allowed the Colts to leapfrog Pittsburgh and settle in 2nd Place, even with one fewer Super Bowl; thanks to these 7 “rest” games (and a 2-5 record in them), the Colts came in 3rd.

• Teams with multiple “rest” games in a season: 2009 Colts (2), 2005 Colts (2), 2004 Eagles (2)
• Teams playing “rest” games against another playoff team: 12 occurrences (40% of rest games)
• Teams playing “rest” game when it was a home game: 10 occurrences (34.48% of rest games)

Not much surprise there; just 40% of “rest” games were against another playoff team.  It is a bit surprising that of the 29 “rest” games (Colts-Titans excluded again), 10 occurrences had the “rest” team essentially giving up the game at home in front of their local fans.

• Teams playing “rest” games against a team that would miss the playoffs without a win in that game: 6

I think it’s probably pretty obvious why I’ve concluded on that particular statistic; this means that on 6 separate occasions over the 2003-2009 sample, a team was “resting” starters in a game that had legitimate playoff implications for the team they were playing against.  Since these occasions involved teams that needed to win to stay alive, other teams who were in the playoff race were negatively affected by the decision to “rest” players–just like the 2009 Steelers and 2009 Texans, who won their Week 17 match-ups and still missed the playoffs because the Bengals “rested” against the Jets, who were only in the playoff hunt because the Colts “rested” against them in Week 16.  While the other 24 occasions are less sinister than these 6 that had playoff ramifications, the fact that fans pay full-price for less than a full product remains.

What the Numbers Reveal

Even without considering the specific circumstances surrounding these 30 “rest” games over the past 7 seasons, at least two things should be clear: 1) half of the NFL’s teams have “rested” starters in favor of fielding a competitive team and 2) some of these “rest” games have affected the playoff race.  Even more important than that, however, is the effect on the fans who go to these games.  Attending an NFL game in person is not a cheap expense, and fans expect to see a high-quality product when they put the funds together to watch a game.  These fans put money into the NFL through merchandise, ticket sales, TV viewership, and in return they expect to see players putting their best effort into their performance; especially when even backup players make far more than the average fan.  There are numerous things to consider when the NFL looks at the level of “competition” late in the season–and it’s very subjective to analyze whether or not a team is trying to be competitve–but it would seem that the topic is one the NFL should look into with a legitimate effort and analysis.

Speaking personally as someone who is a fan of the Patriots, I was actually quite disappointed when the Colts decided to pull their starters in their 2009 Week 16 game against the Jets.  I knew that the Colts had a legitimate chance at tying the 16-0 accomplishment, and while I was hoping that they would be beaten to preserve the status of the 2007 New England team, I only wanted them to lose if it was a legitimately-competed showing.  I was honestly sick to my stomach as I got news of Curtis Painter entering the game for Peyton Manning, and that only got worse as the Colts fumbled away the lead and their chance at a perfect season.  It is clear, based on the reaction of Colts fans at the game and around the country after the fact, that Colts fans felt just as sick as I did.

What Should Be Done in Reaction

Of course, if I don’t propose a solution then all I’m doing is complaining about the problem.  One potential solution I would put forward is that if a team is suspected to have “rested’ starters in a game at the end of the season and the league wants to be serious about making sure that the end of the regular season stays competitive, perhaps the starting players on that team should be docked their game check or a portion of the game check equivalent to the amount of time they actually played in the game.  Players might make a stronger push to play if they were going to lose money for not doing so, and it would avoid the shallow “reward” of offering teams draft picks for playing starters (as suggested in the earlier link about Commissioner Goodell’s thoughts on the situation)–a situation that Saints coach Sean Payton has already shrugged off as inconsequential.  If a fan is paying full-price to attend one of these games and the players aren’t putting in a full day, then the players shouldn’t get paid full-price for that day; it’s like leaving work after lunch and expecting to be paid for the afternoon hours that you spent at home.

I understand the argument behind “resting” starters, and the past two seasons we’ve seen players get hurt in “meaningless” Week 17 games: Wes Welker in the Patriots-Texans 2009 game and Ben Roethlisberger in a rout of the Browns in 2008.  But a player could just as likely be hurt in Week 1 (see Tom Brady, 2008) as in Week 17, and fans are paying similar amounts of money to attend in each instance.  A paying fan should not be punished for buying a late-season game ticket.

Now that my overall findings are clear, continue reading on for a breakdown of the 31 games that met these “rest” criteria from 2003-2009.  I have arranged these games in order from most recent to furthest in the past.  If a game had a significant measurable effect on the playoff race for that season, that information will be presented in bolded red text.

Detailed Breakdown of “Rest” Games

1. New Orleans Saints 10 @ Carolina Panthers 23

• 2009 Regular Season Week 17
• Saints Record Before Game: 13-2; Saints had clinched NFC South and ended with #1 seed in NFC
• Panthers Record Before Game: 7-8; Panthers had been eliminated from playoff contention
• Saints Backup QB Mark Brunell played 29 of 29 passing attempts in game (100%).
• Saints Playoff Result: Won Super Bowl XLIV

Comment: A minor example here; both the Saints and Panthers were locked into their finishing places.  Bet Panthers fans might have wanted to see the soon-to-be Super Bowl MVP make at least a token appearance, however.

2. Indianapolis Colts 7 @ Buffalo Bills 30

• 2009 Regular Season Week 17
• Colts Record Before Game: 14-1; Colts had clinched AFC South and #1 seed in AFC
• Bills Record Before Game: 5-10; Bills had been eliminated from playoff contention
• Colts Backup QB Curtis Painter played 17 of 25 passing attempts in game (68%).
• Colts Playoff Result: Lost Super Bowl XLIV

Comment: The lesser of two evils in the Colts “rest” games for 2009; the weather sucked, so it was understandable for Painter to get the majority of passing attempts.  What didn’t make any sense was even starting Manning in the game, after yanking him in the 3rd quarter the week prior.

 3. Green Bay Packers 33 @ Arizona Cardinals 7

• 2009 Regular Season Week 17
• Packers Record Before Game: 10-5; Packers had clinched Wild Card Berth
• Cardinals Record Before Game: 10-5; Cardinals had clinched NFC West
• Cardinals Backup QB Matt Leinart played 21 of 31 passing attempts in game (67.74%).
• Cardinals Playoff Result: Lost Divisional Round Game

Comment: The Packers and Cardinals were destined to meet again by the time this game happened, so you couldn’t really blame the teams for not showing too much in the regular season finale.  It should be noted that Packers QB Aaron Rodgers played the majority of his team’s passing attempts, even in the blowout.

 4. Washington Redskins 20 @ San Diego Chargers 23

• 2009 Regular Season Week 17
• Redskins Record Before Game: 4-11; Redskins had been eliminated from playoff contention
• Chargers Record Before Game: 13-2; Chargers had clinched AFC West and #2 seed in AFC
• Chargers Backup QB Billy Volek played 30 of 45 passing attempts in game (66.67%).
• Chargers Playoff Result: Lost Divisional Round Game

Comment: Another head-scratcher; before the game it was revealed that Volek would get the majority of the playing time.  Why even start Philip Rivers then?  Thankfully for Chargers fans, the opponent was a hapless Redskins team.

 5. Cincinnati Bengals 0 @ New York Jets 37

• 2009 Regular Season Week 17
• Bengals Record Before Game: 10-5; Bengals had clinched AFC North and #4 seed in AFC
• Jets Record Before Game: 8-7; Jets clinched AFC Wild Card Berth and #5 seed in AFC with win
• Bengals Backup QB J.T. O’Sullivan played 8 of 19 passing attempts in game (42.11%).
• Bengals Playoff Result: Lost Wild Card Game

Comment: The Bengals laid a real egg here, and it didn’t even pan out for them as they lost big again to the Jets in the Wild Card Round of the playoffs just a week later.  Maybe Cincinnati wasn’t so much resting as much as showing that they weren’t on the same level as New York.  Important result here, as the Jets needed the victory or else the Texans would’ve made their first playoff appearance.

 6. New England Patriots 27 @ Houston Texans 34

• 2009 Regular Season Week 17
• Patriots Record Before Game: 10-5; Patriots had clinched AFC East
• Texans Record Before Game: 8-7; Texans were eliminated from playoff contention when Jets beat Bengals in Week 17
• Patriots Backup QB Brian Hoyer played 12 of 38 passing attempts in game (31.58%).
• Patriots Playoff Result: Lost Wild Card Game

Comment: The Patriots were coy about how much time starters would play leading into the game, but the early injury to Wes Welker sure threw a wrench into things.  Though Hoyer barely played enough passing attempts for this game to meet the criteria, one could imagine that he would’ve played many more if Welker had stayed healthy and Tom Brady didn’t have to practice with Julian Edelman in this game situation.

 7. New York Jets 29 @ Indianapolis Colts 15

• 2009 Regular Season Week 16
• Jets Record Before Game: 7-7; Jets needed to win in Week 16 and Week 17 to be in playoff hunt
• Colts Record Before Game: 14-0; Colts had clinched AFC South and #1 seed in AFC
• Colts Backup QB Curtis Painter played 11 of 32 passing attempts in game (34.38%).
• Colts Playoff Result: Lost Super Bowl XLIV

Comment: The game that sparked this whole discussion: the Colts held a 3rd-quarter lead on the Jets when Peyton Manning was pulled for Curtis Painter.  Despite the chance for 16-0, the Colts essentially forfeited the game by playing their backup QB and letting the Jets into the playoffs.  Especially notable since Jets coach Rex Ryan had only one week prior stated that the Jets were out of the playoff race after a loss to the Falcons that put them on the brink of elimination.

 8. Tennessee Titans 0 @ Indianapolis Colts 23

• 2008 Regular Season Week 17
• Titans Record Before Game: 13-2; Titans had clinched AFC South and #1 seed in the AFC
• Colts Record Before Game: 11-4; Colts had clinched playoff spot and were locked into #5 seed in the AFC
• Titans Backup QB Vince Young played 13 of 17 passing attempts in game (76.47%).
• Colts Backup QB Jim Sorgi played 30 of 37 passing attempts in game (81.08%).
• Titans Playoff Result: Lost Divisional Round Game
• Colts Playoff Result: Lost Wild Card Game

Comment: The rare “double-resting” game; both teams had clinched playoff spots and were locked in seeding.  Neither team won a playoff game that season.

 9. New York Giants 19 @ Minnesota Vikings 20

• 2008 Regular Season Week 17
• Giants Record Before Game: 12-3; Giants had clinched NFC East and #1 seed in the NFC
• Vikings Record Before Game: 9-6; Vikings clinched NFC North with win
• Giants Backup QB David Carr played 11 of 30 passing attempts in game (36.67%).
• Giants Playoff Result: Lost Divisional Round Game

Comment: Hard to complain so much here because of the close nature of the game, which was won by a Ryan Longwell field goal.  However, if the Giants had played all starters and beaten the Vikings, the Bears-Texans game later in the day would’ve put the NFC North up for grabs with a Chicago win.  Even with the #1 seed, New York lost its first playoff game.

 10. Tennessee Titans 16 @ Indianapolis Colts 10

• 2007 Regular Season Week 17
• Titans Record Before Game: 9-6; Titans clinched Wild Card Berth with win
• Colts Record Before Game: 13-2; Colts had clinched AFC South and #2 seed in the AFC
• Colts Backup QB Jim Sorgi played 24 of 40 passing attempts in game (60%).
• Colts Playoff Result: Lost Divisional Round Game

Comment: Another Titans-Colts game on the list, but this time only the Colts “rested”; the Titans needed the win to beat out Cleveland and clinch a Wild Card Berth (the final #6 seed).  Disappointing decision to rest Manning here, at least from the Lake Erie crowd; Nashville didn’t mind so much.

 11. Detroit Lions 14 @ Green Bay Packers 34

• 2007 Regular Season Week 17
• Lions Record Before Game: 7-8; Lions had been eliminated from playoff contention
• Packers Record Before Game: 12-3; Packers had clinched NFC North and #2 seed in the NFC
• Packers Backup QB Craig Nall played 15 of 26 passing attempts in game (57.69%).
• Packers Playoff Result: Lost Conference Championship

Comment: The Lions were out of contention (and outclassed even by Green Bay’s backup QB) so this example isn’t too egregious.  At least the Lambeau crowd got 42% of Brett Favre for his last regular season game as a Packer, right?

 12. Seattle Seahawks 41 @ Atlanta Falcons 44

• 2007 Regular Season Week 17
• Seahawks Record Before Game: 10-5; Seahawks had clinched NFC West and #3 seed in the NFC
• Falcons Record Before Game: 3-12; Falcons had been eliminated from playoff contention
• Seahawks Backup QB Seneca Wallace played 22 of 47 passing attempts in game (46.81%).
• Seahawks Playoff Result: Lost Divisional Round Game

Comment: Not a huge deal in this “Battle of the Birds” here, especially since it was such a close, high-scoring game.  At least there was entertainment for the crowd despite Seattle’s decision to rest att Hasselbeck.

 13. Dallas Cowboys 6 @ Washington Redskins 27

• 2007 Regular Season Week 17
• Cowboys Record Before Game: 12-3; Cowboys had clinched NFC East and #1 seed in the NFC
• Redskins Record Before Game: 8-7; Redskins had clinched Wild Card Berth with earlier results
• Cowboys Backup QB Brad Johnson played 11 of 27 passing attempts in game (40.74%).
• Cowboys Playoff Result: Lost Divisional Round Game

Comment: Dallas had everything cinched up, so they were content to “rest” starters, even though it was a divisional rivalry game and the Redskins were going into the playoffs thanks to earlier results that day.  If the Redskins had needed to win to make it, however, this would’ve been much more grating of a decision.

 14. Tampa Bay Buccaneers 19 @ San Francisco 49ers 21

• 2007 Regular Season Week 16
• Buccaneers Record Before Game: 9-5; Buccaneers had clinched NFC South and #4 seed in the NFC
• 49ers Record Before Game: 4-10; 49ers had been eliminated from playoff contention
• Buccaneers Backup QB Luke McCown played 32 of 52 passing attempts in game (61.54%).
• Buccaneers Playoff Result: Lost Wild Card Game

Comment: The Buccaneers were division winners and couldn’t finish better than 4th, while the 49ers were just hoping for win #4 on the season.  Close game, so it’s not as bad as some of these results, but the Bucs decision to rest starters certainly didn’t translate into postseason success.

 15. Atlanta Falcons 17 @ Philadelphia Eagles 24

• 2006 Regular Season Week 17
• Falcons Record Before Game: 7-8; Falcons had been eliminated from playoff contention the day prior with a Giants win
• Eagles Record Before Game: 9-6; Eagles had clinched playoff spot and clinched NFC East minutes into this game with a Cowboys loss
• Eagles Backup QB A.J. Feeley played 33 of 36 passing attempts in game (91.67%).
• Eagles Playoff Result: Lost Divisional Round Game

Comment: With Atlanta eliminated from the playoffs and the Eagles clinching their division minutes into play, it’s not hard to see why the Eagles rested Donovan McNabb.  No serious playoff implications here.

 16. Carolina Panthers 31 @ New Orleans Saints 21

• 2006 Regular Season Week 17
• Panthers Record Before Game: 7-8; Panthers had been eliminated from playoff contention
• Saints Record Before Game: 10-5; Saints had clinched NFC South and #2 seed in the NFC
• Saints Backup QB Jamie Martin played 24 of 29 passing attempts in game (82.76%).
• Saints Playoff Result: Lost NFC Conference Championship

Comment: In arguably the greatest Saints season (before 2009), New Orleans was content to rest Drew Brees and make the game a celebration of the season instead of the individual event.  With the Saints locked in their playoff position and the Panthers out of contention, nothing overly sinister here.

 17. Arizona Cardinals 13 @ Indianapolis Colts 17

• 2005 Regular Season Week 17
• Cardinals Record Before Game: 5-10; Cardinals had been eliminated from playoff contention
• Colts Record Before Game: 13-2; Colts had clinched AFC South and #1 seed in the AFC
• Colts Backup QB Jim Sorgi played 30 of 33 passing attempts in game (90.91%).
• Colts Playoff Result: Lost Divisional Round Game

Comment: The Colts and Cardinals equally had nothing to play for, though clearly for different reasons.  Interesting that Manning would take even 3 passing attempts on the game, however.

 18. Cincinnati Bengals 3 @ Kansas City Chiefs 37

• 2005 Regular Season Week 17
• Bengals Record Before Game: 11-4; Bengals had clinched AFC North and #3 seed in the AFC
• Chiefs Record Before Game: 9-6; Chiefs missed playoffs with Steelers win in Week 17
• Bengals Backup QB Jon Kitna played 24 of 32 passing attempts in game (75%).
• Bengals Playoff Result: Lost Wild Card Game

Comment: Intriguing that the other example of the Bengals “resting” starters also ended in a blowout where the opposition put up 37 points.  The Bengals were locked into the #3 seed, but the Chiefs needed to win to keep their slim playoff chances alive.  Had the Steelers lost their Week 17 game, Kansas City would’ve made the playoffs–and had a rematch with Cincinnati.

 19. Miami Dolphins 28 @ New England Patriots 26

• 2005 Regular Season Week 17
• Dolphins Record Before Game: 8-7; Dolphins had been eliminated from playoff contention
• Patriots Record Before Game: 10-5; Patriots had clinched AFC East and #4 seed in the AFC
• Patriots Backup QB Matt Cassel played 20 of 28 passing attempts in game (71.43%).
• Patriots Playoff Result: Lost Divisional Round Game

Comment: Not a memorable game for the score–or the amount of time Tom Brady played–but this is the game where Doug Flutie converted the drop-kick field goal attempt for New England.  At least that was entertaining for the home crowd watching the Patriots surrender the game to a division rival.

 20. Seattle Seahawks 17 @ Green Bay Packers 28

• 2005 Regular Season Week 17
• Seahawks Record Before Game: 13-2; Seahawks had clinched NFC West and #1 seed in the NFC
• Packers Record Before Game: 3-12; Packers had been eliminated from playoff contention
• Seahawks Backup QB Seneca Wallace played 17 of 25 passing attempts in game (68%).
• Seahawks Playoff Result: Lost Super Bowl XL

Comment: The Seahawks had wrapped everything up in the NFC, while the Packers were looking for their 4th win of the season.  Almost paid off for Seattle too, except for the loss in Super Bowl XL.

 21. Chicago Bears 10 @ Minnesota Vikings 34

• 2005 Regular Season Week 17
• Bears Record Before Game: 11-4; Bears had clinched NFC North and #2 seed in the NFC
• Vikings Record Before Game: 8-7; Vikings had been eliminated from playoff contention
• Bears Backup QB Kyle Orton played 14 of 23 passing attempts in game (60.87%).
• Bears Backup QB Jeff Blake played 8 of 23 passing attempts in game (34.78%).
• Bears Playoff Result: Lost Divisional Round Game

Comment: It’s still hard to think back to the Chicago Bears and their Rex Grossman era.  Rex was kept on the sidelines while Kyle Orton floundered and was replaced by Jeff Blake in a bad loss to the Vikings.  No playoff win for the Bears either.

 22. Denver Broncos 23 @ San Diego Chargers 7

• 2005 Regular Season Week 17
• Broncos Record Before Game: 12-3; Broncos had clinched AFC West and #2 seed in the AFC
• Chargers Record Before Game: 9-6; Chargers had been eliminated from playoff contention
• Broncos Backup QB Bradlee Van Pelt played 8 of 22 passing attempts in game (36.36%).
• Broncos Playoff Result: Lost Conference Championship

Comment: Well, at least now you can answer the trivia question of who backed up Jake Plummer in Denver in 2005: Bradlee Van Pelt.  Fortunately for the Broncos, this was a relative down year for San Diego.

 23. Indianapolis Colts 13 @ Seattle Seahawks 28

• 2005 Regular Season Week 16
• Colts Record Before Game: 13-1; Colts had clinched AFC South and #1 seed in the AFC
• Seahawks Record Before Game: 12-2; Seahawks had clinched NFC West and clinched #1 seed in the NFC with win
• Colts Backup QB Jim Sorgi played 31 of 43 passing attempts in game (72.09%).
• Colts Playoff Result: Lost Divisional Round Game

Comment: Both teams were at the top of their conferences, though Seattle needed to win to clinch home-field advantage.  Annoying, then, that this showdown of #1 teams wasn’t played out more honestly.  The Colts did not get to 13-1 behind Jim Sorgi, but the Seahawks joined them at 13-2 thanks to that substitution.

 24. Indianapolis Colts 14 @ Denver Broncos 33

• 2004 Regular Season Week 17
• Colts Record Before Game: 12-3; Colts had clinched AFC South and were locked in #3 seed in AFC
• Broncos Record Before Game: 9-6; Broncos win in this game allowed them to earn Wild Card Spot, #6 seed in AFC
• Colts Backup QB Jim Sorgi played 25 of 27 passing attempts in game (92.59%).
• Colts Playoff Result: Lost Divisional Round Game

Comment: Perhaps we should be giving credit to the Colts when they get other teams into the playoffs as well as themselves.  The Broncos needed a win in this game to get the last playoff spot and Jim Sorgi complied, taking all but 2 passing attempts for Indianapolis in the blowout loss.

 25. Atlanta Falcons 26 @ Seattle Seahawks 28

• 2004 Regular Season Week 17
• Falcons Record Before Game: 11-4; Falcons had clinched NFC South and #2 seed in the NFC
• Seahawks Record Before Game: 8-7; Seahawks clinched NFC West with win
• Falcons Backup QB Matt Schaub played 22 of 29 passing attempts in game (75.86%).
• Falcons Playoff Result: Lost Conference Championship

Comment: Again, an exciting game between these teams, but the Falcons were done their postseason seed movement and yielded to a Seattle team who needed the win to clinch their division.  Interesting glimpse of a younger, backup Matt Schaub here.

 26. Cincinnati Bengals 38 @ Philadelphia Eagles 10

• 2004 Regular Season Week 17
• Bengals Record Before Game: 7-8; Bengals had been eliminated from playoff contention
• Eagles Record Before Game: 13-2; Eagles had clinched NFC East and #1 seed in NFC
• Eagles Backup QB Koy Detmer played 31 of 54 passing attempts in game (57.41%).
• Eagles Backup QB Jeff Blake played 23 of 54 passing attempts in game (42.59%).
• Eagles Playoff Result: Lost Super Bowl XXXIX

Comment: Amazing stats here; 54 passing attempts split between 2 Eagles backup QB’s.  The Bengals were out of contention, the Eagles were locked in #1, and Koy Detmer and Jeff Blake combined for 54 passes, 1 passing TD, and 3 INT’s.

 27. Green Bay Packers 31 @ Chicago Bears 14

• 2004 Regular Season Week 17
• Packers Record Before Game: 9-6; Packers had clinched NFC North and #3 seed in NFC
• Bears Record Before Game: 5-10; Bears had been eliminated from playoff contention
• Packers Backup QB Craig Nall played 13 of 26 passing attempts in game (50%).
• Packers Playoff Result: Lost Wild Card Game

Comment: Brett Favre and Craig Nall going 50/50, and the Packers still blew out a bad Chicago team on the road.  No playoff win for Green Bay that year, however, despite hosting a Wild Card game.

 28. Philadelphia Eagles 7 @ St. Louis Rams 20

• 2004 Regular Season Week 16
• Eagles Record Before Game: 13-1; Eagles had clinched NFC East and #1 seed in NFC
• Rams Record Before Game: 6-8; Rams needed to win to be in playoff contention; finished with Wild Card Berth in #5 seed
• Eagles Backup QB Jeff Blake played 14 of 23 passing attempts in game (60.87%).
• Eagles Playoff Result: Lost Super Bowl XXXIX

Comment: Let’s not blame all of the playoff issues on the Colts, however; here the Eagles show that they can do it just as well.  The Eagles had clinched the #1 seed by Week 16, and rested their starters against a 6-8 Rams team that needed to win out to make the playoffs.  Thanks to the 7-point Philadelphia effort, the Rams stayed alive and made the playoffs as a #5 seed.

 29. Tampa Bay Buccaneers 13 @ Tennessee Titans 33

• 2003 Regular Season Week 17
• Buccaneers Record Before Game: 7-8; Buccaneers had been eliminated from playoff contention
• Titans Record Before Game: 11-4; Titans had a chance at AFC South Title but earned AFC Wild Card Berth after Colts won Week 17 Game
• Titans Backup QB Neil O’Donnell played 27 of 27 passing attempts in game (100%).
• Titans Playoff Result: Lost Divisional Round Game

Comment: More obscure QB names; Neil O’Donnell took every snap of this game and still sent the Titans to the playoffs with a win against a weak Tampa Bay team with a Super Bowl hangover.  Had the Colts lost their Week 17 game, Tennessee would’ve won the AFC South with this victory.

 30. Denver Broncos 3 @ Green Bay Packers 31

• 2003 Regular Season Week 17
• Broncos Record Before Game: 10-5; Broncos had clinched an AFC Wild Card Berth for #6 seed in AFC
• Packers Record Before Game: 9-6; Packers won NFC North with win and Vikings loss for #4 seed in NFC
• Broncos Backup QB Danny Kanell played 18 of 27 passing attempts in game (66.67%).
• Broncos Backup QB Jarious Jackson played 9 of 27 passing attempts in game (33.33%).
• Broncos Playoff Result: Lost Wild Card Game

Comment: This poor showing by the Broncos “B” team is probably less memorable than the Vikings late-game meltdown against Arizona that allowed Green Bay to make the playoffs; had the Broncos been playing starters and beaten the Packers, the Vikings would’ve won the NFC North and made the playoffs instead, even with the loss to the Cardinals.

I’m certainly interested in hearing what people think about the nature of these “rest” games and the level of competition present in the NFL as the regular season draws to a close.  Does the league have any right to impose upon teams and how they choose to play games that may be meaningless for them?   Do coaches and players have an obligation to put forward their best team for the paying fans and viewers on TV?  Weigh in by commenting below.

Growing up in the state of Maine, I’ve always been in a bit of a football “dead zone” in terms of being able to easily access NFL merchandise and games.  The New England Patriots–my “hometown” team–play nearly 3 hours from my hometown and a full 5 hours from my current location.  As such, the only true option for me to purchase NFL merchandise has been through online outlets.

For the memorabilia I mentioned in my opening paragraph above, I went through NFLShop.com for the items.  After the New Orleans Saints upset the Indianapolis Colts in Super Bowl XLIV and I had interest in purchasing a jersey to remember that victory–particularly since it was the first Super Bowl my fiancée had ever watched and it was our first Super Bowl since getting engaged.  Unfortunately, NFLShop.com dropped the ball with the Super Bowl XLIV jersey situation.

During the week before Super Bowl XLIV, NFLShop.com uploaded Super Bowl XLIV jersey items for both the New Orleans Saints and Indianapolis Colts.  A number of players from each team were available in Replica jersey style for an MSRP of $84.99 or customizable jerseys in Replica style were available for $99.99.  Prices have since dropped for the Colts–as few fans would want memorabilia from a lost Super Bowl–but the prices remain for the Saints.  Unfortunately, here was the first issue with the jerseys on the Saints side:

Looks fine at first, until you consider these:

The New Orleans Saints Super Bowl XLIV  jerseys offered through NFLShop.com had the wrong color collars.  Let that sink in for a second; the official shop of the National Football League, in producing jerseys for the biggest game of the season (and a rabid New Orleans fanbase), got the details of the jersey wrong.  It isn’t as though the white collar is an alternate jersey design–just look at photos from Super Bowl XLIV.  The standard Replica jerseys (the lower images with black collars) also retail for nearly $10.00 less, albeit lacking the Super Bowl XLIV logo.

Even that, however, wasn’t done successfully; Replica jerseys feature screen-printing for all jersey items: numbers, names, logos, etc.  The Replica Super Bowl XLIV jerseys had the Super Bowl XLIV logo, but they were screen-printed on the jerseys.  Within the first few weeks of sales, numerous customer reviews on the NFLShop.com site cited poor quality of the Super Bowl XLIV logos, with patches coming off the jersey after a few washes.  There were no images cited for reference, but a customer review on the Customized Replica Team Color New Orleans Saints jersey included an image which gives a good idea how the quality of screen-printed jerseys can be affected:

From my own personal experience–having briefly owned a Boston Patriots AFL 50th Anniversary Tom Brady Team Color Replica Jersey–the screen-printing quality varies greatly.  In my jersey experience, the AFL 50th Anniversary logo that was screen-printed on the jersey began peeling before a single washing.  That was the chief reason behind my decision to return the item for my money back (since the Premier/EQT version of the jersey–with the AFC 50th Anniversary Logo stitched on the jersey–went out of production).

New Orleans Saints fans were obviously (and rightfully) upset about the quality of these Super Bowl jerseys, and an MSRP of $84.99 is a steep price to pay for any fan to receive a jersey that has questionable quality.

In the past week, NFLShop.com uploaded a new item: a New Orleans Saints Drew Brees Super Bowl XLIV Premier White Jersey.  As is evident from the product image below, the collar color snafu has been addressed:

However, the issue of screen-printing persists, even though this Premier jersey features sewn tackle-twill numbers and name.  The Fleur-de-Lis logos on the sleeves are still screen-printed, and (perhaps more importantly) the Super Bowl XLIV logo is still screen-printed as well.  I can attest to the improvement in overall quality from Replica to Premier/EQT (having owned examples of both myself) but with an MSRP of $114.99 ($5.00 more than a standard Premier/EQT jersey and $30 more than the Replica jerseys) there are fewer fans who have the money to put into such a jersey.  Even then, those fans who can afford the step-up in jersey quality will still have to “baby” the Super Bowl XLIV logo on the jersey to avoid having it wash away.

Now, I am not a big New Orleans Saints fan.  I am a fan of the National Football League in general, though the Patriots are “my team” thanks to geographic location.  I cheer for the Saints when I get a game on TV, but as I stated earlier, my main motive for buying a Saints Super Bowl XLIV jersey was for nostalgic reasons to remember the first Super Bowl with my fiancée.  Being a bit of a jersey nerd, I could not bring myself to pay $84.99 for a Replica jersey or $114.99 for a neutered Premier/EQT jersey only available in white (I prefer to have a team color jersey; just a personal quirk).

I did what most people would do; I searched out other alternatives.  I went on eBay and found a listing for a black Drew Brees jersey with all jersey elements stitched to the jersey along with a stitched “C” patch and a stitched Super Bowl XLIV patch.  Even better, the Buy-It-Now price was $69.99 and UPS 2-day air shipping was free.  The attached images were consistent with the item description, a new Reebok tag was attached to the jersey, and the skeptical part of my brain turned off as I purchased the item.  After the transaction was complete, of course, the realization dawned–a realization confirmed by research online–that I most likely was not receiving a genuine NFL jersey.  Still, at $15.00 less than the official Replica jersey (before shipping costs) and with no returns allowed by the product seller, I was resigned to my fate.

My jersey arrived in the mail today, and after a quick check of the points noted by the research link above, it was clear that the jersey was not a genuine NFL product.  The people responsible for making it should be commended for the quality of the fake, but there are tell-tale signs as to why it isn’t genuine.  I took my Premier/EQT Tom Brady jersey out of the closet to make some direct comparisons between the jerseys to illustrate the differences, which I have presented below:

So there are the two jerseys side-by-side; a genuine Reebok Premier/EQT Tom Brady next to the eBay-purchased all-stitched Drew Brees.  From a distance, obviously the differences prove negligible.  The jerseys (the Brady is size XL, the Drew Brees is size 52, the numeric equivalent of XL) are about the same size and there are no real glaring issues (numbers being different sizes, for example) between the two.

Obviously, it is necessary to get closer to the jerseys.  For the pictures below (though the color differences are quite noticeable anyway) the left picture is the genuine Brady jersey while the right picture is the Brees jersey.  Clicking will take you to a slightly-bigger version.

The genuine jersey’s equipment patch at the neck has much better spacing between the letters in “EQUIPMENT” and the NFL Shield is much more well-defined in the details.  The Brees jersey has a smaller football in the Shield Logo and less space between the bottom of the Shield and the bottom of the patch.  Also, though these pictures aren’t really close enough to show it, the genuine jersey has the equipment patch stitched on with clear nylon thread while the Brees jersey is stitched on with white thread.

Again, picture quality is a bit hard to discern here, but this is another key difference between the jerseys.  The genuine jersey is made in El Salvador and the Brees jersey is made in Vietnam; as far as the research shows, genuine NFL jerseys are made in either El Salvador or Korea (depending on jersey quality) and no genuine jerseys are made in Vietnam.  Aside from that, there are slight differences: for example, the genuine garment tag has the proper accent mark on the Spanish spelling of “Poliester” while the Brees jersey lacks this.  Not a huge deal–it certainly doesn’t affect the wearability of the jersey–but it is a key difference in knowing that it is not genuine.

To the credit of the people who made the Brees jersey in Vietnam, they got the OnField tag pretty close.  The pictures here don’t show enough detail to really separate the two, but again the Brees jersey has less detail to the NFL Shield and the EQUIPMENT lettering above it.

The neck lining displays a few noticeable differences in quality.  The genuine jersey has a very clean lining, the logos are sharp, and the “Q” in “EQUIPMENT” has a particular font style.  By comparison, the Brees jersey has uneven (to the point of nearly being scalloped) lining, sloppier logos, and a plain font for the “Q”.  Again, not something that would be noticed as you wear the jersey, but a sign of lesser quality in construction.

And the hologram tags from the items.  The square hologram is the most recent hologram I’m aware of, as it came on my Brady jersey as well as a Patriots T-shirt tag that I received at Christmas from my future mother-in-law.  The circular hologram is the older version of the NFL hologram and doesn’t actually function as a hologram; the tags are side-by-side in the same lighting for this photograph but the hologram colors do not show.  The circular hologram also displays the old NFL Shield logo instead of the new one with only 8 stars.

On the front of the NFL jersey is a tag that denotes the size of the item; this tag appears at the bottom-right side of the jersey when you look at it head-on.  This comparison is a bit unfair, as the Premier/EQT jersey and the Authentic jersey (that the Brees jersey is  meant to reflect) have different jock tags here.  Compared to a true Authentic jock tag, the Brees jersey gets it all right (even the spelling, which has been an easy way to differentiate genuine products before)–however, the stitching of the tag to the jersey is subpar compared even to the Premier/EQT.

This comparison detail of the player names is again unfair by direct comparison because the Patriots jersey has a single-color name while the Saints jersey has multiple colors.  Both are stitched to the jersey, but there are blemishes on the Brees jersey.

The final side-by-side comparison shot compares the detail of the numbers on the jersey.  For the genuine Premier jersey, the red part is sewn to the jersey while the gray and white are screen-printed tackle twill on top of the red to represent the layering.  For the Brees jersey, meant to represent an Authentic jersey, the gold and white are actual layers stitched on top of one another.  The gold color seems close to the actual team color, but it wouldn’t surprise me if there were differences put up against a genuine jersey.

And to end the photos, some detail pictures of the captain’s patch (with the correct 3 of 4 stars for Brees’ tenure), Fleur-de-Lis logo from the arms, and the Super Bowl XLIV patch.  The shoulder numbers and Fleur-de-Lis patches have some serious folding issues right in the middle of the patches because of how the item was shipped and (presumably) the quality of the craftsmanship.  The “C” logo is fine, but the Super Bowl XLIV patch has a bend above the “L” in the logo which is pretty visible in the photo detail and may have been a result of shipping.

And as I’ve crossed the 2,000-word mark here and given you all sorts of photographic evidence, you may find yourself asking, “What’s the point of all this?”  And, at this point, I’m not really sure how I would answer the question.  I’ll attempt to break it down into bullet points below.

• If you want to get a really good quality jersey, especially if you have the money to spend and you want professional quality merchandise, you’d be kidding yourself not to go with NFLShop.com to get a genuine jersey.  The Premier/EQT jerseys are really nice for the middle-range price, and I’ve had no problems with my Brady jersey.
• At the same time, NFLShop.com majorly dropped the ball in rolling out merchandise to coincide with Super Bowl XLIV, the biggest event of the 2009-10 NFL season.  As the sole provider of genuine league merchandise, there should be a higher standard of quality expected of them–the collar color snafu is embarrassing, as is having Replica jerseys as the only initial option for Super Bowl XLIV jerseys when Replica jerseys have such issues with quality.
• Given the quality of their Replica jerseys, it would be nice to see NFLShop.com drop their prices to more accurately reflect the quality of the product.  An MSRP of $79.99 for an entry-level jersey is still quite pricey for the average NFL fan.  A big part of why there is this counterfeit market for jerseys, it would seem, is because people can find ways to pay less for the items.  While this Brees jersey is certainly not genuine, it would be hard to argue that it is of lesser quality than the Replica jerseys when the item has all jersey elements stitched instead of screen-printed.
• No matter what, if you’re looking for genuine jerseys, eBay is a dangerous place to be doing it.  I must admit to kicking myself a bit for getting taken by possibly thinking that the jersey I purchased would be a genuine Authentic, even though the listing at no point mentioned those terms.  I gave the seller of the item positive feedback, as they didn’t mislead me, but I did remark in my comments that the item was not genuine NFL merchandise to warn other buyers.
• While on the topic of eBay, I wouldn’t mind seeing stricter regulations for the images people use to sell their items.  If something like an NFL jersey is involved, there should be certain requirements about how many pictures should be displayed and that close-ups (as I used in this story) should also be necessary.  I contacted another seller on eBay who claimed to be selling an all-stitched Team Color Tom Brady jersey with the 50th Anniversary Patriots patch on the front; however, the listing only showed the back of the jersey in a stock photograph.  When I sent a message to the seller asking for specific pictures of the item that would be sent if I won the bidding, I was told in response that those pictures could not be provided but that I could get my money back if I bought the item and was unhappy with it.  I feel as though most people would see that as a good sign that the jersey is not genuine and that pursuing the item would be foolish.

In the long run, I can’t complain too vehemently.  I made a questionable purchasing decision and received an item that has some issues with it.  Would I rather have paid more for the genuine Premier/EQT jersey?  Probably not in this case, where the purchase is more ornamental than anything else.  What started as an attempt to memorialize the first Super Bowl spent with my fiancée turned into an eye-opening journey into the NFL jersey world.  I would welcome any potential readers to share similar stories here so that others can avoid going down this particular road in the future.

Following that trend, I decided to analyze particular statistical trends among the 32 National Football League teams and try to see if there were any connections between these bits of data and the overall ranking for “Best of the 2000′s”.  If you’re interested in seeing the numbers crunched and munched even further, read on.

One of the more “controversial” differences between my formula’s results and the rankings put up by USA Today was the 6-spot differences in the placement of the Oakland Raiders and the Denver Broncos; my formula placed the Raiders 6 spots higher than USA Today’s did and their rankings had the Broncos 6 spots higher than my formula did.

Looking at the numbers for the 2000′s, there is no comparison between the Raiders and Broncos when it comes to regular season victories; Oakland had 62, one of the lower totals of the decade, while the Broncos had a strong 93, placing them in the Top 10 in regular season record.  The major difference between the teams that saw the Raiders end up 16th and the Broncos end up 19th (separated by less than a full point) was that Oakland had a Super Bowl appearance and 3 AFC West Division Titles while the Broncos did not make the Super Bowl and had only 1 AFC West Division Title with 3 AFC Wild Card berths.

The first statistical breakdown I would like to analyze is number of Super Bowl wins in the 2000′s, just as a starting point.  To avoid wasting space below, I will only include teams that actually won the Super Bowl.

Super Bowl Winners of the 2000′s

1. New England Patriots — 3 Wins — Overall Rank: 1st
2. Pittsburgh Steelers — 2 Wins — Overall Rank: 2nd
3. Indianapolis Colts — 1 Win — Overall Rank: 3rd
4. New York Giants — 1 Win — Overall Rank: 5th
5. Baltimore Ravens — 1 Win — Overall Rank: 6th
6. New Orleans Saints — 1 Win — Overall Rank: 7th
7. Tampa Bay Buccaneers — 1 Win — Overall Rank: 8th

Analysis: As should be expected, the teams that won Super Bowls in the decade find themselves in the Top 10 of the rankings overall.  The only hiccup here is that 4th-ranked Philadelphia did not win a Super Bowl (though they made an appearance) and they found themselves ahead of the Giants, Ravens, Saints, and Buccaneers by virtue of a strong regular season record and solid playoff runs.  Even though a team like Tampa Bay did not have a consistent decade, their status as a Super Bowl Champion propels them into this elite realm for the decade on the whole.

Progressing onward, the next statistical breakdown is to look at Super Bowl appearances in the 2000′s.

Super Bowl Appearances of the 2000′s

1. New England Patriots — 4 Appearances — Overall Rank: 1st
2. Pittsburgh Steelers — 2 Appearances — Overall Rank: 2nd
3. Indianapolis Colts — 2 Appearances — Overall Rank: 3rd
4. New York Giants — 2 Appearances — Overall Rank: 5th
5. Philadelphia Eagles — 1 Appearance — Overall Rank: 4th
6. Baltimore Ravens — 1 Appearance — Overall Rank: 6th
7. New Orleans Saints — 1 Appearance — Overall Rank: 7th
8. Tampa Bay Buccaneers — 1 Appearance — Overall Rank: 8th
9. Seattle Seahawks — 1 Appearance — Overall Rank: 9th
10. Carolina Panthers — 1 Appearance — Overall Rank: 11th
11. Chicago Bears — 1 Appearance — Overall Rank: 15th
12. Oakland Raiders — 1 Appearance — Overall Rank: 16th
13. St. Louis Rams — 1 Appearance — Overall Rank: 17th
14. Arizona Cardinals — 1 Appearance — Overall Rank: 20th

Analysis: Unlike the list of Super Bowl Winners, belonging to the list of 14 teams that made the Super Bowl in the 2000′s is not a free pass to the top of the heap.  The 10th (Packers), 12th (Titans), 13th (Chargers), 14th (Vikings), 18th (Jets), and 19th (Broncos) rankings are held by teams that did not make a Super Bowl appearance.  As a result, it is clear that even though Super Bowl appearances have significant weight–a team needing to have won multiple playoff games to reach the Super Bowl–the formula is not blindly set up to place teams with Super Bowl appearances above all others.  Indeed, the Rams and Cardinals are in the bottom half of the league ranking, and the Bears and Raiders just barely make the top half.

Moving to the next progression, I wanted to investigate what effect multiple Division Titles had on the overall ranking.  Again, this list is limited to teams that actually won Division Titles in the 2000′s.

Division Titles of the 2000′s

1. New England Patriots — 7 Division Titles — Overall Rank:  1st
2. Indianapolis Colts — 6 Division Titles – Overall Rank: 3rd
3. Pittsburgh Steelers — 5 Division Titles — Overall Rank: 2nd
4. Philadelphia Eagles — 5 Division Titles — Overall Rank: 4th
5. San Diego Chargers — 5 Division Titles — Overall Rank: 13th
6. Seattle Seahawks — 4 Division Titles – Overall Rank: 9th
7. Green Bay Packers — 4 Division Titles – Overall Rank: 10th
8. New York Giants — 3 Division Titles — Overall Rank: 5th
9. New Orleans Saints — 3 Division Titles — Overall Rank: 7th
10. Tampa Bay Buccaneers – 3 Division Titles — Overall Rank: 8th
11. Tennessee Titans — 3 Division Titles – Overall Rank: 12th
12. Minnesota Vikings — 3 Division Titles – Overall Rank: 14th
13. Chicago Bears — 3 Division Titles — Overall Rank: 15th
14. Oakland Raiders — 3 Division Titles — Overall Rank: 16th
15. Baltimore Ravens — 2 Division Titles — Overall Rank: 6th
16. Carolina Panthers — 2 Division Titles — Overall Rank: 11th
17. St. Louis Rams — 2 Division Titles — Overall Rank: 17th
18. Arizona Cardinals — 2 Division Titles — Overall Rank: 20th
19. Dallas Cowboys — 2 Division Titles — Overall Rank: 21st
20. Miami Dolphins — 2 Division Titles — Overall Rank: 23rd
21. Cincinnati Bengals — 2 Division Titles — Overall Rank: 27th
22. New York Jets — 1 Division Title — Overall Rank: 18th
23. Denver Broncos — 1 Division Title — Overall Rank: 19th
24. Atlanta Falcons — 1 Division Title — Overall Rank: 22nd
25. San Francisco 49ers — 1 Division Title — Overall Rank: 25th
26. Kansas City Chiefs — 1 Division Title — Overall Rank: 28th

Analysis: Let those results marinate for a bit; that means that of 32 teams in the league, 26 different teams won at least 1 Division Title during the 2000′s.  That’s over 80% of the teams in the National Football League having at least one stellar year in the 10-year span.  Of those 26 teams, 14 had 3 or more Division Titles.  However, this analysis also reveals that the formula used here does not over-value Division Titles either; see San Diego, ranked 5th in number of Division Titles won in the 2000′s but only 13th Overall due to playoff disappointments.  Consider the Ravens, who placed 15th of the 26 Division Champions for the 2000′s but ended up in 6th place Overall thanks to playoff success.  And though those controversial Raiders and Broncos are separated by less than a point overall, the Raiders are 14th among Division Champions while the Broncos are 23rd.

When the original analysis to produce my rankings for the NFL in the 2000′s was released, it was quickly pointed out to me that the formula was leaning too much on postseason success; despite my attempts to balance the regular season and playoff results equally.  After making the decision to award 0.10 points for every regular season game a team won during the 2000′s, I was able to arrive at my more complete results that are currently on the blog page.  However, I did not rank the teams based on how many regular season games they won during the decade; this changes now.

Regular Season Victories in the 2000′s

1. Indianapolis Colts – 115 Wins — Overall Rank: 3rd
2. New England Patriots – 112 Wins — Overall Rank: 1st
3. Pittsburgh Steelers – 103 Wins — Overall Rank: 2nd
4. Philadelphia Eagles – 103 Wins — Overall Rank: 4th
5. Green Bay Packers – 95 Wins — Overall Rank: 10th
6. Denver Broncos – 93 Wins — Overall Rank: 19th
7. Baltimore Ravens – 92 Wins — Overall Rank: 6th
8. Tennessee Titans – 91 Wins — Overall Rank: 12th
9. New York Giants – 88 Wins — Overall Rank: 5th
10. San Diego Chargers – 85 Wins — Overall Rank: 13th
11. Minnesota Vikings – 84 Wins — Overall Rank: 14th
12. New Orleans Saints – 83 Wins — Overall Rank: 7th
13. Seattle Seahawks — 82 Wins — Overall Rank: 9th
14. Dallas Cowboys – 82 Wins — Overall Rank: 21st
15. Chicago Bears — 81 Wins — Overall Rank: 15th
16. New York Jets – 80 Wins — Overall Rank: 18th
17. Tampa Bay Buccaneers — 79 Wins — Overall Rank: 8th
18. Carolina Panthers – 79 Wins — Overall Rank: 11th
19. Miami Dolphins – 79 Wins — Overall Rank: 23rd
20. Jacksonville Jaguars – 76 Wins — Overall Rank: 24th
21. Atlanta Falcons – 75 Wins — Overall Rank: 22nd
22. St. Louis Rams – 71 Wins — Overall Rank: 17th
23. Washington Redskins — 70 Wins — Overall Rank: 26th
24. Kansas City Chiefs – 70 Wins — Overall Rank: 28th
25. San Francisco 49ers – 68 Wins — Overall Rank: 25th
26. Cincinnati Bengals – 68 Wins — Overall Rank: 27th
27. Buffalo Bills – 66 Wins — Overall Rank: 29th
28. Oakland Raiders – 62 Wins — Overall Rank: 16th
29. Arizona Cardinals – 62 Wins — Overall Rank: 20th
30. Cleveland Browns – 57 Wins — Overall Rank: 30th
31. Houston Texans – 49 Wins (in 8 seasons) — Overall Rank: 31st
32. Detroit Lions – 42 Wins — Overall Rank: 32nd

Analysis: With 80 wins out of 160 played in the decade being the .500 mark, half the league was at over .500 and the rest had losing records on the decade.  For the most part, the ranking in number of regular season games won matches up pretty well against the overall rank received with the playoff information and seeds factored in through the formula.  There are, of course, notable differentials (teams whose ranks differ by more than 5 places between regular season and overall results), which can be explained most often by playoff performance given the number of playoff appearances:

• Green Bay Packers — 5th in Wins, 10th Overall — Reason: Playoff Performance (3 Playoff Wins in 6 Appearances)
• Denver Broncos — 6th in Wins, 19th Overall — Reason: Playoff Performance (1 Playoff Win in 4 Appearances)
• New Orleans Saints — 12th in Wins, 7th Overall — Reason: Super Bowl XLIV Win (5 Playoff Wins in 3 Appearances)
• Dallas Cowboys — 14th in Wins, 21st Overall — Reason: Playoff Performance (1 Playoff Win in 4 Appearances)
• Tampa Bay Buccaneers — 17th in Wins, 8th Overall — Reason: Super Bowl XXXVII Win (3 Playoff Wins in 5 Appearances)
• Carolina Panthers — 18th in Wins, 11th Overall — Reason: Super Bowl XXXVIII Appearance (5 Playoff Wins in 3 Appearances)
• Oakland Raiders — 28th in Wins, 16th Overall — Reason: Super Bowl XXXVII Appearance, Division Titles (4 Playoff Wins in 3 Appearances)
• Arizona Cardinals — 29th in Wins, 20th Overall — Reason: Super Bowl XLIII Appearance (4 Playoff Wins in 2 Appearances)

After this extended analysis of the numbers, it should be quite clear as to why certain teams “appear” to be ranked higher than they “should be.”  In the running examples of Raiders versus Broncos that I’ve pursued in this analysis, though the Raiders won far fewer games, they also won more Division Titles and had more playoff victories in fewer playoff appearances.  That’s the NFL for you: any given Sunday.

This is why, when deciding upon the “Best Team of the Decade,” it is important to let statistics speak for themselves.  The 2000 season feels a whole lifetime ago, it seems (particularly due to the fundamental shift in culture after the 9/11 attacks that are still fresh in the minds of Americans), and it is easy to forget teams like the Raiders who were dominant to begin the decade before falling apart in later years.

1. PoP:  USA Today:
2. PoP:  USA Today:
3. PoP:  USA Today:
4. PoP:  USA Today:
5. PoP:  USA Today:
6. PoP:  USA Today:
7. PoP:  USA Today:
8. PoP:  USA Today:
9. PoP:  USA Today:
10. PoP:  USA Today:
11. PoP:  USA Today:
12. PoP:  USA Today:
13. PoP:  USA Today:
14. PoP:  USA Today:
15. PoP:  USA Today:
16. PoP:  USA Today:
17. PoP:  USA Today:
18. PoP:  USA Today:
19. PoP:  USA Today:
20. PoP:  USA Today:
21. PoP:  USA Today:
22. PoP:  USA Today:
23. PoP:  USA Today:
24. PoP:  USA Today:
25. PoP:  USA Today:
26. PoP:  USA Today:
27. PoP:  USA Today:
28. PoP:  USA Today:
29. PoP:  USA Today:
30. PoP:  USA Today:
31. PoP:  USA Today:
32. PoP:  USA Today:

Analysis of the Results

In order to craft  a complete comparative analysis of these results, I felt it would be useful to break the rankings down into particular categories.  Category #1 is “Exact Picks,” which means that my formula and the NFL experts at USA Today came up with the same ranking for a particular team.  Category #2 is “Close Matches,” which are teams that ranked within 2 spots of each other in differential between my formula and USA Today’s evaluations.  The third and final category is “Big Differences,” which are teams that were 3 or more spots different between the two evaluations.

 Exact Picks (7 out of 32; 21.88%)

• Patriots at #1
• Eagles at #4
• Giants at #5
• Ravens at #6
• Jaguars at #24
• Bills at #29
• Lions at #32

No surprise to see the Patriots atop both lists, and the #4, #5, and #6 places were locks as well.  Big gap between 6th and 24th for exact picks, then a couple matches at the end as well.

Close Matches (17/32; 53.13%)

• Steelers – 1 Off (2/3)
• Colts — 1 Off (3/2)
• Saints — 1 Off (7/8)
• Buccaneers — 1 Off (8/9)
• Chargers — 1 Off (13/12)
• Vikings — 1 Off (14/15)
• 49ers — 1 Off (25/26)
• Redskins — 1 Off (26/25)
• Bengals — 1 Off (27/28)
• Chiefs — 1 Off (28/27)
• Browns — 1 Off (30/31)
• Texans — 1 Off (31/30)
• Seahawks — 2 Off (9/11)
• Titans — 2 Off (12/10)
• Rams — 2 Off (17/19)
• Falcons — 2 Off (22/20)
• Dolphins — 2 Off (23/21)

A lot of the differences here, being just 1 or 2 places off, reveal a certain subjectivity to the placing in the USA Today rankings–placing the Titans over the Seahawks, for example, while the Seahawks made a Super Bowl appearance and the Titans were shut out.  The majority of these differences are really not worth acknowledging, but I am surprised at the selection of the Colts over the Steelers for #2 when the Steelers were the only team other than the Patriots to take multiple Super Bowl Championships on the decade.  In the formula used here, Super Bowls receive a good amount of weight (equivalent to 20 regular season wins in the formula) and that resulted in Pittsburgh taking second.  It also seems, from USA Today’s comment on the Steelers–”Three different QBs (Stewart, Maddox, Roethlisberger) led them to 10-wins seasons.”–that such an evaluation would be a positive for the Steelers decade due to their QB instability while Indianapolis had one QB under center for the duration of the sample period.

Big Differences (8/32; 25%)

For this category, I will analyze each example individually:

• Packers — 3 Off (10/7)

Analysis: The Packers are a good team–the only team in my formula’s Top 10 without a Super Bowl appearance–but for that reason I’m surprised that they were placed above many teams that did make the big game.  The USA Today comment–”Had six seasons with at least 10 wins — but only three playoff victories.”–isn’t exactly a ringing endorsement either.

• Bears — 3 Off (15/18)

Analysis: Not a huge issue here, except for the fact that the USA Today rankings put the Bears behind teams that did not make Super Bowl appearances, some of these examples more egregious than others.  USA Today said–”One Super Bowl appearance, three playoff seasons … and a lot of disappointment.”–while simultaneously putting the Cowboys ahead of them (those same Cowboys that only won 1 more regular season game than Chicago and had far less playoff success).

• Cardinals — 3 Off (20/23)

Analysis: Lower in the pack, these differences aren’t as important; the Cardinals were bottom-half teams for both rankings.  However, their late-decade success in the NFC West and the Super Bowl appearance made them more valuable through the formula.  The Falcons, Dolphins, and Raiders all ranked above Arizona in USA Today’s evaluation but only the Raiders duplicated their playoff success.

• Jets — 4 Off (18/14)

Analysis: The Jets made the playoffs for 5 seasons of the decade, which is a good number; but 4 of those appearances were Wild Card berths, and the formula doesn’t weigh those as strongly.  This is only further confounded by the Jets not performing strongly in the playoffs until the AFC Title Game this past season.  The USA Today comment, again, hardly endorses the Jets as a top-half of the NFL team–”You might be surprised to learn they earned five playoff berths in decade.”  If the average fan would be surprised by that, it’s unclear how that results in a 14th ranked evaluation.

•  Cowboys — 4 Off (21/17)

Analysis: The comment from the USA Today rankings–”Was lone playoff win of decade (in 2009) a springboard to a better decade in 2010s?”–reveals the nature of how the Cowboys jump 4 spots from the formula’s evaluation: this is a projection to what is thought might happen with the franchise.  In the USA Today list, the Cowboys placed above 5 other teams who had more than 1 playoff victory in the 2000′s.  The Cowboys had a good number of regular season victories in the 2000′s, but the downfall of their decade was poor playoff performance.

• Panthers — 5 Off (11/16)

Analysis: The USA Today comment–”One Super Bowl appearance, but no back-to-back winning seasons.”–is a legitimate gripe for the Panthers.  That said, they were ranked below 6 teams who failed to make a Super Bowl appearance during the 2000′s.  A Super Bowl appearance isn’t everything, but it makes up a significant measure of success in the formula and in the fanbase.

• Raiders — 6 Off (16/22)

Analysis: Even as the author of the formula used in my rankings, I was surprised to see the Raiders fall directly in the middle of the 32 teams.  For them to be dropped 6 spots in the USA Today owes to the comment they made–”Thirty-three wins first three years; 29 rest of the decade.”  The Raiders had a rough finish to the 2000′s after a promising start, which cannot be questioned.  But one criteria of the formula is a separation between the “haves” and the “have-nots” in success getting to the big game; only 14 distinct NFL teams appeared in the Super Bowl this past decade.  Of teams with Super Bowl appearances, they were second-lowest (ahead of Arizona) in the USA Today ranking.

• Broncos — 6 Off (19/13)

Analysis: The comment in the USA Today story–”You might be surprised to learn they earned five playoff berths in decade.”–is confusing for two reasons.  First, the Broncos only had 4 playoff appearances in the 2000′s.  Second, it’s the exact same quote they used for the Jets in 14th place below the Broncos; only the Jets actually made more playoff appearances than Denver.  The Broncos were a strong regular season team, but the lack of significant postseason success ultimately doomed them in my formula.  The folks at USA Today were much more gentle.

Overall Reaction

In the end, I think that the people working at USA Today have put together a solid list of rankings for National Football League teams over the 2000′s decade.  The majority of the rankings between my formula and their selections were within two spots of one another, with only 25% of the teams having differentials of 3 or more places.  The similarity of the list would speak towards the use of statistics in making the list, but there do seem to be certain examples of subjectivity overruling the number results.  In the end, it’s intriguing to see another “Best of the Decade” list so soon after making my own and it certainly helps to spark conversation as we look forward to another new decade of football ahead of us.

With the close to another decade of play in the National Football League, there has been much conversation about just who the greatest teams and players of the 2000’s are.  Much of this discussion, of course, involves personal opinions based on who a particular fan is rooting for.  In the interest of presenting a quantifiable method of measuring the success of the 32 NFL franchises through the 00’s, an entirely new set of data was required.

One of the most oft-argued points when selecting the team of the 2000’s comes down to how much weight one places on regular season success versus postseason play.  Those who support teams with Super Bowl success like the New England Patriots (Super Bowl XXXVI, XXXVIII, and XXXIX Champions) and the Pittsburgh Steelers (Super Bowl XL and XLIII Champions) lean towards an evaluation that heavily favors postseason results, while those who support teams with regular season success like the Indianapolis Colts point to their multiple 10+ win seasons as the measure of greatness.

The difficulty, then, was to concoct a scoring scheme that puts nearly-equal weight on both regular season and postseason results while simultaneously acknowledging that every NFL team’s goal at the beginning of the season is to become Super Bowl Champions. 

In order to account for regular season success while acknowledging that playoff victories are held in greater regard, the formula recognizes a score of 0.10 for every victory a team accumulated during the decade.  This allows regular season success to have a hand in determining which teams had the best decade performance-wise.  Each team played 16 games per season during the decade, resulting in 160 games played per team.  A team with 10 consecutive 16-game-winning seasons would earn a score of 16 points.

This task was made more difficult by the nature of the 2000’s as a decade; for the first two seasons of the decade, there were six divisions in the NFL, but from 2002-2009 the league had expanded to eight divisions.  As such, there were three Wild Card teams per conference in 2000 and 2001 but only two Wild Card teams per conference for the remainder of the decade.

For the 2000 and 2001 seasons, the teams that earned playoff berths were assigned point values based on their result:

• The Division Champion with the #1 seed earned 1 point for having the best regular season record in the conference and home-field advantage.
• The Division Champion with the #2 seed earned 0.75 points for having a playoff bye week.
• The Division Champion with the #3 seed earned 0.50 points for winning their division but being forced to play during Wild Card Weekend.
• The three Wild Card teams in each conference earned 0.25 points for making the playoffs.

For the 2002-2009 seasons, the teams that earned playoff berths earned the following points values:

• The Division Champion with the #1 seed earned 1 point for having home-field advantage in the conference.
• The Division Champion with the #2 seed earned 0.75 points for having a playoff bye week.
• The Division Champions with the #3 and 4 seeds earned 0.50 points for winning their division but having to play a Wild Card game.
• The two Wild Card teams in each conference earned 0.25 points for making the playoffs.

After these base values were assigned based on regular season results, each playoff game won during the postseason in that year was worth an increasing number of points for that team.  These numbers were consistent throughout the decade, as the playoff tree remained the same despite the number of divisions.

• Winning a Wild Card game is worth 0.50 points, to avoid penalizing teams with bye weeks during the playoffs.  This also allows a #3 or #4 seed to earn the same full 1 point as the #1 or #2 seed if they win their Wild Card game.
• Winning a Divisional Round game is worth 1 point.
• Winning a Conference Championship game is worth 1.5 points.
• Winning the Super Bowl is worth 2 points.

This point value system places the highest emphasis on success in the Conference Championship and Super Bowl results while simultaneously avoiding the problem of placing too much added emphasis on postseason results—if it is indeed possible to over-value championship games.

After running the numbers on the season-by-season results of the National Football League from 2000 through 2009, the following final results were reached.  Note that by this system a 71.00 is the highest possible point total, assuming a single team consistently was the #1 seed in their conference, had undefeated regular season campaigns, and won the Super Bowl for ten years in a row.

1st Place: New England Patriots — 34.20

• 3 Super Bowl Wins (Super Bowl XXXVI, XXXVIII, XXXIX)
• 4 Super Bowl Appearances (Super Bowl XXXVI, XXXVIII, XXXIX, XLII)
• 7 AFC East Division Titles (2001, 2003,  2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2009)
• 112 Regular Season Victories (.700 Winning %)

Analysis: The Patriots had the most Super Bowl wins and appearances during the 2000′s, along with the highest number of division titles during that run.  With all those divisional titles, New England was a playoff team for 7 out of the 10 years in the sample.   The Patriots were also second only to the Colts in overall regular season winning percentage for the decade.  Say what you will about “Spygate” or the character (or lack thereof) of some of the names in New England, but the Patriots had far-and-away the highest score based on this formula; nearly 8 points higher than #2.

2nd Place: Pittsburgh Steelers — 26.30

• 2 Super Bowl Wins (Super Bowl XL, Super Bowl XLIII)
• 2 Super Bowl Appearances (Super Bowl XL, Super Bowl XLIII)
• 1 AFC Central Division Title (2001)
• 4 AFC North Division Title (2002, 2004, 2007, 2008)
• 1-time AFC Wild Card Team (2005)
• 103 Regular Season Victories (.644 Winning %)

Analysis: The Steelers ranked second in Super Bowl wins and tied for second in Super Bowl appearances for the 2000′s, so their 2nd Place finish is not all that surprising.  Six years as a playoff team also helps, with only one playoff appearance as a Wild Card (which led to the Super Bowl XL victory).  The Steelers tied with the Eagles for third in regular season winning percentage.

3rd Place: Indianapolis Colts — 26.00

• 1 Super Bowl Win (Super Bowl XLI)
• 2 Super Bowl Appearances (Super Bowl XLI, Super Bowl XLIV)
• 6 AFC South Division Titles (2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2009)
• 3-time AFC Wild Card Team (2000, 2002, 2008)
• 115 Regular Season Victories (.719 Winning %)

Analysis: The Colts tied for second in Super Bowl appearances and joined the fraternity of teams with one Super Bowl win in the decade as well.  A win in Super Bowl XLIV would’ve propelled them into 2nd Place over the Steelers, but 9 playoff appearances in 10 years is still an admirable statistic and the Colts had the most regular season victories of any NFL team in the 2000′s.  The one-and-done nature of some of those playoff runs hurt the scoring in the end. 

4th Place: Philadelphia Eagles — 23.55

• 1 Super Bowl Appearance (Super Bowl XXXIX)
• 5 NFC East Division Titles (2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2006)
• 3-time NFC Wild Card Team (2000, 2008, 2009)
• 103 Regular Season Victories (.644 Winning %)

Analysis: Despite not winning a Super Bowl in the 2000′s, the Eagles ended up in 4th Place overall, ahead of a host of teams with rings.  This can be attributed to Philadelphia’s 8 playoff appearances in 10 years, with multiple trips to the NFC Championship Game and a lone Super Bowl appearance.  The Eagles were quite dominant in the NFC East for the first half of the decade, and tied for 3rd with the Steelers in regular season winning percentage.

5th Place: New York Giants — 19.55

• 1 Super Bowl Win (Super Bowl XLII)
• 2 Super Bowl Appearances (Super Bowl XXXV, XLII)
• 3 NFC East Division Titles (2000, 2005, 2008)
• 3-time NFC Wild Card Team (2002, 2006, 2007)
• 88 Regular Season Victories (.550 Winning %)

Analysis: The Giants tied for second place in terms of Super Bowl appearances and joined the ranks of the Colts and Ravens by winning Super Bowl XLII and upsetting the 18-0 Patriots.  Six playoff appearances for the decade is a solid number as well, though the appearances were split between division titles and wild card berths.

6th Place: Baltimore Ravens — 18.95

• 1 Super Bowl Win (Super Bowl XXXV)
• 1 Super Bowl Appearance (Super Bowl XXXV)
• 2 AFC North Division Titles (2003, 2006)
• 4-time AFC Wild Card Team (2000, 2001, 2008, 2009)
• 92 Regular Season Victories (.575 Winning %)

Analysis:  Baltimore played in the first proper Super Bowl of the 2000′s (though Super Bowl XXXIV was technically held in 2000) and won it as a Wild Card team to take home their biggest points.  The Ravens were a solid 6-time playoff team in the decade as well.

7th Place: New Orleans Saints — 16.55

• 1 Super Bowl Win (Super Bowl XLIV)
• 1 Super Bowl Appearance (Super Bowl XLIV)
• 1 NFC West Division Title (2000)
• 2 NFC South Division Titles (2006, 2009)
• 83 Regular Season Victories (.519 Winning %)

Analysis: With only three playoff appearances on the decade, the Saints might be ranked a little high on the list.  However, their high point score is the result of their recent win in Super Bowl XLIV and a playoff push all the way to the NFC Championship Game in 2006.  It doesn’t hurt that all three playoff appearances came by way of division titles as well.

8th Place: Tampa Bay Buccaneers — 14.65

• 1 Super Bowl Win (Super Bowl XXXVII)
• 1 Super Bowl Appearance (Super Bowl XXXVII)
• 3 NFC South Division Titles (2002, 2005, 2007)
• 2-time NFC Wild Card Team (2000, 2001)
• 79 Regular Season Victories (.494 Winning %)

Analysis: The Buccaneers finished the decade weaker than they started it, but their Super Bowl XXXVII championship helped them make the top 10 of the decade.  With 5 playoff appearances, they did spend half the decade playing in the postseason; three of those as NFC South Champions.  They are, however, the only Top 10 team with a sub-.500 winning percentage on the decade.

9th Place: Seattle Seahawks — 14.45

• 1 Super Bowl Appearance (Super Bowl XL)
• 4 NFC West Titles (2004, 2005, 2006, 2007)
• 1-time NFC Wild Card Team (2003)
• 82 Regular Season Victories (.513 Winning %)

Analysis: Times have gotten tough for Seattle, but for the middle of the decade they were the class of the NFC West, posting four consecutive division titles preceded by a 2003 Wild Card berth.  That dominance puts them in the Top 10.

10th Place: Green Bay Packers — 14.25

• 4 NFC North Division Titles (2002, 2003, 2004, 2007)
• 2-time NFC Wild Card Team (2001, 2009)
• 95 Regular Season Victories (.594 Winning %)

Analysis: Despite not making a Super Bowl in the 2000′s, the Packers still broke the Top 10 by virtue of strong regular season performance and six playoff appearances on the decade (four by way of Division Titles).

11th Place: Carolina Panthers — 13.90

• 1 Super Bowl Appearance (Super Bowl XXXVIII)
• 2 NFC South Division Titles (2003, 2008)
• 1-time NFC Wild Card Team (2005)
• 79 Regular Season Victories (.494 Winning %)

Analysis: A top-tier team at times in the NFC, the Panthers finished just outside of the top 10 due in large part to their sub-.500 winning percentage in the regular season.  It seems as though Carolina was in the postseason more often than their 3 appearances attests to, but a strong performance in a losing effort to the Patriots in Super Bowl XXXVIII helps to shine a positive light on the franchise.

12th Place: Tennessee Titans — 13.85

• 1 AFC Central Division Title (2000)
• 2 AFC South Division Titles (2002, 2008)
• 2-time AFC Wild Card Team (2003, 2007)
• 91 Regular Season Victories (.569 Winning %)

Analysis: The Titans, despite not making a Super Bowl, come in 12th Place thanks in large part to regular season success and three Division Titles.

13th Place: San Diego Chargers — 13.75

• 5 AFC West Division Titles (2004, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009)
• 85 Regular Season Victories (.531 Winning %)

Analysis: A dominant force in the AFC West now, the Chargers had a tough start to the decade that kept them out of the Top 10 despite five consecutive Division Titles.

14th Place: Minnesota Vikings — 13.15

• 1 NFC Central Division Title (2000)
• 2 NFC North Division Titles (2008, 2009)
• 1-time NFC Wild Card Team (2004)
• 84 Regular Season Victories (.525 Winning %)

Analysis: Four playoff appearances, three by way of division titles, but no Super Bowl appearances to show for it.  The Vikings stock would have risen considerably if they hadn’t fumbled away the NFC Championship Game against New Orleans.

15th Place: Chicago Bears — 13.10

• 1 Super Bowl Appearance (Super Bowl XLI)
• 1 NFC Central Division Title (2001)
• 2 NFC North Division Titles (2005, 2006)
• 81 Regular Season Victories (.506 Winning %)

Analysis: With only three playoff appearances in the decade, the Bears placing here comes mainly as a result of their Super Bowl XLI appearance.  The fact that their playoff appearances all came through division titles helped as well.

16th Place: Oakland Raiders — 12.45

• 1 Super Bowl Appearance (Super Bowl XXXVII)
• 3 AFC West Division Titles (2000, 2001, 2002)
• 62 Regular Season Victories (.388 Winning %)

Analysis: Agood example of a “What have you done for me lately?” team, the Raiders took the AFC West title for the first three years of the decade before fading off into the disarray they’re currently experiencing.  Their lone Super Bowl appearance on the decade came in a tough loss to the Buccaneers and former coach Jon Gruden, and helped to offset a poor regular season winning percentage to come in 16th out of the 32 team field.

17th Place: St. Louis Rams — 12.35

• 1 Super Bowl Appearance (Super Bowl XXXVI)
• 2 NFC West Division Titles (2001, 2003)
• 2-time NFC Wild Card Team (2000, 2004)
• 71 Regular Season Victories (.444 Winning %)

Analysis: Despite a Super Bowl appearance on the decade and 4 playoff appearances, the Rams find themselves in the bottom half of the league for the 2000′s due to their poor regular season winning percentage, particularly in their 1-win 2009 campaign.

18th Place: New York Jets — 12.00

• 1 AFC East Division Title (2002)
• 4-time AFC Wild Card Team (2001, 2004, 2006, 2009)
• 80 Regular Season Victories (.500 Winning %)

Analysis: The Jets were wild card darlings in the 2000′s.  A lone AFC East title punctuated their 5 playoff appearances on the decade.  Jets fans can feel optimistic going into the 2010′s with an appearance in the AFC Championship last season.

19th Place: Denver Broncos — 11.80

• 1 AFC West Division Title (2005)
• 3-time AFC Wild Card Team (2000, 2003, 2004)
• 93 Regular Season Victories (.581 Winning %)

Analysis: The Broncos had a strong winning percentage for the regular season, but a lack of postseason success keeps them low in the rankings.

20th Place: Arizona Cardinals — 10.70

• 1 Super Bowl Appearance (Super Bowl XLIII)
• 2 NFC West Division Titles (2008, 2009)
• 62 Regular Season Victories (.388 Winning %)

Analysis: If not for the last two seasons, the Cardinals would’ve come in much lower than 20th place.  As it is, they are the lowest NFL team with a Super Bowl appearance during the 2000′s.  The next few seasons without Kurt Warner will be key in defining which path this franchise follows.  Note that the Cardinals take the tie-breaker over the Cowboys (this is the only tie score under the revised formula) as a result of their Super Bowl appearance.

21st Place: Dallas Cowboys — 10.70

• 2 NFC East Division Titles (2007, 2009)
• 2-time NFC Wild Card Team (2003, 2006)
• 82 Regular Season Victories (.513 Winning %)

Analysis: “America’s Team” made four playoff appearances in the 2000′s, never progressing beyond the Divisional Round.

22nd Place: Atlanta Falcons — 10.25

• 1 NFC South Division Title (2004)
• 2-time NFC Wild Card Team (2002, 2008)
• 75 Regular Season Victories (.469 Winning %)

Analysis: Three playoff appearances, one by way of the NFC South title.  The Falcons made a run in 2004 before losing the NFC Championship game to Philadelphia.

23rd Place: Miami Dolphins — 9.65

• 2 AFC East Division Titles (2000, 2008)
• 1-time AFC Wild Card Team (2001)
• 79 Regular Season Victories (.494 Winning %)

Analysis: Three playoff appearances for the Dolphins, with only one appearance beyond the Wild Card round.  Two division titles in an AFC East dominated by  New England is commendable, and more than the Jets earned at 18th Place.

24th Place: Jacksonville Jaguars — 8.60

• 2-time AFC Wild Card Team (2005, 2007)
• 76 Regular Season Victories (.475 Winning %)

Analysis: Competing in the tough AFC South, the Jaguars turned 2 Wild Card berths into a single playoff victory on the decade. 

25th Place: San Francisco 49ers — 8.05

• 1 NFC West Division Title (2002)
• 1-time NFC Wild Card Team (2001)
• 68 Regular Season Victories (.425 Winning %)

Analysis: Only 2 playoff appearances for the 49ers; both in the early years of the decade.  One playoff victory to go with the Division Title and Wild Card.

26th Place: Washington Redskins — 8.00

• 2-time NFC Wild Card Team (2005, 2007)
• 70 Regular Season Victories (.438 Winning %)

Analysis: The Redskins were able to make 2 Wild Card appearances in the middle of the decade, but they are hampered in the ranking by their low regular season winning percentage.

27th Place: Cincinnati Bengals — 7.80

• 2 AFC North Division Titles (2005, 2009)
• 68 Regular Season Victories (.425 Winning %)

Analysis: The Bengals took a tough AFC North twice in the second half of the decade, but failed to turn regular season results into postseason wins.

28th Place: Kansas City Chiefs — 7.75

• 1 AFC West Division Title (2003)
• 1-time AFC Wild Card Team (2006)
• 70 Regular Season Victories (.438 Winning %)

Analysis: The 2003 Division Title seems long ago for the hapless Chiefs of the decade’s close.  No playoff wins on the decade to go with the 2006 Wild Card.

29th Place: Buffalo Bills — 6.60

• 0 Playoff Appearances
• 66 Regular Season Victories (.413 Winning %)

Analysis: A franchise that once posted four straight Super Bowl appearances (though, admittedly, they lost all four) failed to make the playoffs at all in the 2000′s.

30th Place: Cleveland Browns — 5.95

• 1-time AFC Wild Card Team (2002)
• 57 Regular Season Victories (.356 Winning %)

Analysis: Cleveland made the playoffs once in a 2002 Wild Card campaign that resulted in a one-and-done.  They are the lowest-ranked team with a playoff appearance on the decade.

31st Place: Houston Texans — 4.90

• 0 Playoff Appearances (Franchise Began in 2002)
• 49 Regular Season Victories in 128 Games (.383 Winning %)

Analysis: Since their entry in 2002, the Texans have only posted one winning season and no playoff appearances.  Despite playing for two fewer seasons, their regular season winning percentage is still higher than the Lions.

32. Detroit Lions — 4.20

• 0 Playoff Appearances
• 0-16 Regular Season (2008)
• 42 Regular Season Victories (.263 Winning %)

Analysis: Rough stretch for the Lions in the 2000′s as well; they get the title of last place overall thanks to their winless 2008 campaign.

Results by Current NFL Division

AFC East — (Average Overall Finish: 17.75)

1. Patriots (1st Overall)
2. Jets (18th Overall)
3. Dolphins (23rd Overall)
4. Bills (29th Overall)

AFC North — (Average Overall Finish: 16.25)

1. Steelers (2nd Overall)
2. Ravens (6th Overall)
3. Bengals (27th Overall)
4. Browns (30th Overall)

AFC South — (Average Overall Finish: 17.50)

1. Colts (3rd Overall)
2. Titans (12th Overall)
3. Jaguars (24th Overall)
4. Texans (31st Overall)

AFC West — (Average Overall Finish: 19)

1. Chargers (13th Overall)
2. Raiders (16th Overall)
3. Broncos (19th Overall)
4. Chiefs (28th Overall)

NFC East — (Average Overall Finish: 14)

1. Eagles (4th Overall)
2. Giants (5th Overall)
3. Cowboys (21st Overall)
4. Redskins (26th Overall)

NFC North — (Average Overall Finish: 17.75)

1. Packers (10th Overall)
2. Vikings (14th Overall)
3. Bears (15th Overall)
4. Lions (32nd Overall)

NFC South — (Average Overall Finish: 12)

1. Saints (7th Overall)
2. Buccaneers (8th Overall)
3. Panthers (11th Overall)
4. Falcons (22nd Overall)

NFC West — (Average Overall Finish: 17.75)

1. Seahawks (9th Overall)
2. Rams (17th Overall)
3. Cardinals (20th Overall)
4. 49ers (25th Overall)

Based on the average overall finish from each division in the NFL for the 2000′s, here is a “Power Ranking” for which divisions were toughest (note that this is not a very scientific measure, and is only meant for illustrative purposes):

1. NFC South (Average Overall Finish: 12)
2. NFC East (Average Overall Finish: 14)
3. AFC North (Average Overall Finish: 16.25)
4. AFC South (Average Overall Finish: 17.50)
5. AFC East (Average Overall Finish: 17.75)
6. NFC North (Average Overall Finish: 17.75)
7. NFC West (Average Overall Finish: 17.75)
8. AFC West (Average Overall Finish 19)

So, based on this admittedly unscientific average result formula, the NFC South would be the toughest division to play in during the 2000′s as a decade while the AFC West was the easiest to play in. 

Results by Current NFL Conference

American Football Conference — (Average Overall Finish: 17.625)

1. Patriots (1st Overall)
2. Steelers (2nd Overall)
3. Colts (3rd Overall)
4. Ravens (6th Overall)
5. Titans (12th Overall)
6. Chargers (13th Overall)
7. Raiders (16th Overall)
8. Jets (18th Overall)
9. Broncos (19th Overall)
10. Dolphins (23rd Overall)
11. Jaguars (24th Overall)
12. Bengals (27th Overall)
13. Chiefs (28th Overall)
14. Bills (29th Overall)
15. Browns (30th Overall)
16. Texans (31st Overall)

National Football Conference — (Average Overall Finish: 15.375)

1. Eagles (4th Overall)
2. Giants (5th Overall)
3. Saints (7th Overall)
4. Buccaneers (8th Overall)
5. Seahawks (9th Overall)
6. Packers (10th Overall)
7. Panthers (11th Overall)
8. Vikings (14th Overall)
9. Bears (15th Overall)
10. Rams (17th Overall)
11. Cardinals (20th Overall)
12. Cowboys (21st Overall)
13. Falcons (22nd Overall)
14. 49ers (25th Overall)
15. Redkins (26th Overall)
16. Lions (32nd Overall)

With all of that said, I would invite you as readers to weigh in on this analysis.  Agreements?  Disagreements?  Suggestions?  I welcome them all.  Just be civil, and avoid spiraling out of control by ripping on other teams and starting flame-wars.

The team names and logos included in this post are the property of the National Football League and their respective teams.  I make no claim to ownership of any of these names or logos and will remove them immediately upon request.

The work included in this blog posting and the formulas contained within are the intellectual property of the author, Brian Parker.  Any outside use or reproduction outside of this blog posting is expressly prohibited.  Please contact the author at briparks@hotmail.com to request the right to reproduce this information.