| If someone where to ask me: "Is their one
| |
| | effort-especially in regards to rushing
|
| particular NFL statistic that you would
| |
| | yards against-create a situation that is
|
| class as indispensable when working
| |
| | hard for even seasoned handicappers to
|
| against the point spread"? It wouldn't
| |
| | lay off of. How can you not like a team
|
| take me long to respond. The answer-Pass
| |
| | that appears to be impenetrable both in
|
| Defense ratings, or PDE for short.
| |
| | the air and on the ground?
|
| This may come as a surprise to those
| |
| | Pittsburgh and Tampa Bay have fallen
|
| purists who believe that the NFL is built
| |
| | victim to this situation the most over
|
| on the rushing game, but yes, how well a
| |
| | the past 13 seasons with Denver and
|
| team defends against the pass is a huge
| |
| | Baltimore not far behind. This particular
|
| predictor of future results and this
| |
| | trend is well distributed, however, as
|
| article will explore how this stat can
| |
| | 93.8% of teams in the league have been
|
| directly influence the mind-set and
| |
| | involved at one time or another since
|
| subsequent betting actions of the
| |
| | '94.
|
| 'Average-Joe' bettor, under the right
| |
| | There are a handful of Secondary
|
| circumstances.
| |
| | conditions that round out this situation.
|
| The most effective way to measure the
| |
| | Teams looking to get even after a late
|
| quality of a teams Pass Defense (as far
| |
| | field-goal beat them in a previous
|
| as handicapping versus the point spread
| |
| | meeting are not included, as well as
|
| is concerned) is by using Yards-per-Play
| |
| | games where the opponent is coming in off
|
| averages, adjusted for the strength of
| |
| | a Straight-Up Dog win. The full details
|
| Pass Offenses a team has faced during the
| |
| | are below.
|
| season.
| |
| | (Notes: ASMR stands for Average Spread
|
| As an example: going into the last week
| |
| | Margin Rating. A positive rating
|
| of the 2006 season, Chicago ranked 2nd in
| |
| | indicates a trend that is stronger than
|
| the league with a PDE Rating of +0.75.
| |
| | average versus the line, negative-weaker
|
| This was calculated by taking Chicago's
| |
| | than average. TDIS% is the percentage of
|
| Yards-per-Pass play average on defense
| |
| | teams in the league that have been
|
| (4.77) and subtracting it from how well
| |
| | involved in this situation at one time or
|
| their pool of opponents passed the ball
| |
| | another. WT% is the percentage of teams
|
| themselves (5.52 Yards-per-Pass play on
| |
| | that are .500 or better and SPR is the
|
| offense). 5.52 - 4.77 = +0.75. It should
| |
| | average spread for teams in this
|
| be noted that, whether I am calculating
| |
| | situation. For more details, please
|
| an offensive rating, or defensive-a
| |
| | consult Page 13 of my 2007 NFL Game
|
| positive number always indicates a team
| |
| | Sheets Guide.)
|
| that is better than average, while a
| |
| | Situational Trend #46 Summary (Last
|
| negative rating indicates a team that is
| |
| | Updated: Jan 15th, 2008)
|
| performing below average in the category
| |
| | Primary Conditions (Building Blocks)
|
| we are looking at.
| |
| | 1) Pass Defense Rating (PDE) > +0.50.
|
| Now that I have explained the math, what
| |
| | 2) Last game Rushing Yards Against (RYA)
|
| are the potential uses for this stat? One
| |
| | < 75.
|
| particular situation where PDE shows its
| |
| | 3) Last game Total Plays Against (TPA) <
|
| predictive power is when the team in
| |
| | 60.
|
| question has a PDE rating > +0.50 and is
| |
| | Secondary Conditions (Tighteners)
|
| coming off a game in which they shut down
| |
| | 1) Exclude Clutch FG Loss in Last Meeting
|
| their opponents ground attack.
| |
| | (LM4).
|
| The public loves to bet on teams with
| |
| | 2) Over Under (OU) < 44 in the Current
|
| tough pass defenses and as a result,
| |
| | Game.
|
| since 1994, teams with a PDE rating >
| |
| | 3) Opponent not off a SU Dog win.
|
| +0.50 are a dismal 706-789 (47.2%) ATS.
| |
| | Situation Stats
|
| This is the first Primary condition for
| |
| | ASMR: -0.9
|
| this particular situation. The 2nd is
| |
| | Home%: 42.7
|
| that our focus team is coming off a game
| |
| | Dog%: 32.7
|
| in which they limited their opponent to
| |
| | TDIS%: 96.9
|
| less than 75 rushing yards. After this
| |
| | WT%: 84.2
|
| stipulation, the record now
| |
| | SPR: -2.63
|
| becomes167-260 (39.1%) ATS which would
| |
| | Top Teams: PIT(20); TB(14); DEN(13);
|
| have meant a profit of $7630 betting
| |
| | BAL(12)
|
| against this team with $110 wagers at 10
| |
| | Situation Records
|
| 11 odds.
| |
| | Overall (Since '94): 32-127 ATS
|
| If we include another Primary condition
| |
| | 2007 Season: 3-10 ATS
|
| that specifies our team in question also
| |
| | 2006 Season: 4-13 ATS
|
| limited their last opponent to less than
| |
| | 2005 Season: 1-9 ATS
|
| 60 total offensive plays-we end up with a
| |
| | 2004 Season: 5-11 ATS
|
| brutally effective situational trend that
| |
| | Last 3 Results. Pick in Brackets.
|
| is 73-157 (31.7%) ATS since 1994.
| |
| | 2007 WK18-SD 17 TEN 6 (TEN +10) L
|
| Teams with tough pass defenses that are
| |
| | 2007 WK18-SEA 35 WAS 14 (WAS +3.5) L
|
| coming off a strong defensive
| |
| | 2007 WK17-TEN 16 IND 10 (IND +5.
|
