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