Analyzing an Uncommon Team Stat

[Bluesy]

I thought it might be interesting to look at the numbers of large margin wins/losses among playoff teams from 2013 and see where the Rams ranked.

For the purposes of this thread, the word "big" is defined as any loss/win that was 10 points or more.


NFC
Seahawks: 0 big losses
Panthers: 3 big losess (Bills, Cardinals, and Saints)
Eagles: 5 big losses (Chargers, Chiefs, Broncos, Cowboys, Vikings)
Packers: 3 big losses (Eagles, Giants, Lions)
49ers: 2 big losses (Seahawks, Colts)
Saints: 2 big losses (Seahawks, Rams)

AFC
Broncos: 0 big losses
Patriots: 0 big losses
Bengals: 2 big losses (Browns, Steelers)
Colts: 4 big losses (Chargers, Rams, Cardinals, Bengals)
Chiefs: 2 big losses (Broncos, Colts)
San Diego: 1 big loss (Raiders)


How many of these losses did the Rams have you ask? There were six of them (four of which were divisional games). I also find it important to mention another game where we won big, the Bears game. The Rams and the Eagles were the only two teams to beat the Bears by 10 points or more.

Teams with most "big" wins against 2013 playoff teams:


NFC
Seahawks: 2
Cardinals: 2 (3 big losses)
Rams: 2 (6 big losses)

AFC
Broncos: 2
Chargers: 2
Colts: 2


So as you can see, the only two non-playoff teams with multiple big wins against playoff teams were the Rams and Cardinals. In addition to that, the Rams' opponents in 2013 had a higher win percentage than any of the playoff teams (the Cardinals were slightly behind us).

So what does all this mean?

It means we're used to tough competition more than our division rivals. It means we can still hold our own without our starting QB while being the youngest team in the league. It means that we can go toe to toe with good teams when others can't (e.g. Saints, Bears). And most importantly, it means that it's a great time to be a Rams fan because this year is gonna be a good one.

 

[Alan]

Nice work Bluesy!

 

[Thordaddy]

What it meant to me then and now is ,we were young and inconsistent ,but once consistent we would be dominant

 

[Elmgrovegnome]

It also meant that the offense was anemic with Kellen Clemmens leading the charge.

 

[Bluesy]

What it meant to me then and now is ,we were young and inconsistent ,but once consistent we would be dominant

You're exactly right, and I have a really good feeling that it's gonna be this year. Everyone is realizing what it takes to win. The youngsters have had their eyes opened and understand they can't get complacent, and the veterans are tired of losing.

 

[Bluesy]

Thanks for the replies fellas. If you can't tell, I'm getting excited for this season. Hence why I'm digging into stats and trying to find whatever I can to occupy my football cravings.

 

[CGI_Ram]

What it meant to me then and now is ,we were young and inconsistent ,but once consistent we would be dominant

Was going to post the same thing.

I love the effort put into this post, Bluesy. Interesting stuff!

 

[Bluesy]

Was going to post the same thing.

I love the effort put into this post, Bluesy. Interesting stuff!

Thanks. I thought it was interesting so I thought I'd share

It helps support the theory that we would be division champs in other divisions. And it also backs up the statement that the NFC west is the best division in football right now.

 

[RamBall]

If the Rams can put 2012s division record with 2013s non division record, they would be 10-5-1. Time for some consistency, gotta give it their best every week.