NFL: who will be the turnaround teams?

[Valuist]

The annual turnover rate for making the playoffs in the NFL is right around 50% so expect a number of new faces. We all know (at least I think we do) that win/loss records can be very deceiving; strength of schedule, turnovers and injuries all play significant roles. Here's some teams that won 8 games or less that could be primed to improve this season:

Philly (8-8 last year)--no limb here as oddsmakers feel they have an excellent shot at winning the division. Minus 14 in turnovers last year was a killer. They need Vick to stay healthy but a lot of talent here.

NY Jets (8-8 last year)---I couldn't care less that they don't have a TD in preseason. The adrenaline isn't flowing yet. They are loaded w/talent defensively and will be in every game. Maybe Tebow is the answer there. I suspect he will get his chance.

Miami (6-10 last year)--actually finished the season outscoring their opponents by net 16 pts so they had quite a few narrow losses. Of course if they elect to play Tannenhill over Matt Moore it could become a moot point.

San Diego (8-8 last year) Clearly the most talent in that weak division but Norv and special teams always seem to hold them back. Minus 7 in TO last year. Just not a believer in any of the other divisional teams.

Carolina (6-10 last year) Newton had a big rookie season and looks like a star for years to come. Their defense was poor last year but they went defense heavy in the draft and I expect improvement under Rivera.

Washington (5-11 last year) Not as crazy as it sounds. If RGIII is the real deal, 9 wins would not shock me. People forget the NYG was 7-7 w/2 games to play last year. The division is more even than people realize.

Seattle (7-9) Would rather have seen Flynn start than Russell Wilson, who's been lighting up 3rd string defenses. This is another sub .500 team last year who outscored opponents for the season and playing out there they are often overlooked. SF is very ripe to take a step back; 1st place schedule for Niners this year after big move forward. SF was plus 28 in T/O; I look for that to even out this season. Ariz and St Louis just appear to be too weak to contend.

Tampa (3-13) Playoffs would probably be a stretch but do expect improvement. Classic example of a team who took a nice move forward (2010) only to take a bigger step back (2011) as expectations rose. Freeman probably not as good as his 2010 numbers suggest, but not as bad as 2011 showed. New coach may inject some enthusiasm here. Could see Saints taking a step back w/all their defensive problems.

[rastajenk]

How about Indy? I'm not convinced that the loss of one player last year, even if it was Manning, would mean a setback of 10 or 11 games from all those playoff seasons they had. They played like they knew a major reset was in the works, but it's not like they're horrible at every position, like Detroit was not long ago.

And their division is not very intimidating; wouldn't surprise me if they surprised some of the experts.

[Striker]

How about Indy? I'm not convinced that the loss of one player last year, even if it was Manning, would mean a setback of 10 or 11 games from all those playoff seasons they had. They played like they knew a major reset was in the works, but it's not like they're horrible at every position, like Detroit was not long ago.

And their division is not very intimidating; wouldn't surprise me if they surprised some of the experts.
What effect do you think losing those guys on the O line will have? Having to play the entire NFC North doesn't do them any favors. If they go 1-3 against them that would be considered the best they could do IMO.

[Valuist]

How about Indy? I'm not convinced that the loss of one player last year, even if it was Manning, would mean a setback of 10 or 11 games from all those playoff seasons they had. They played like they knew a major reset was in the works, but it's not like they're horrible at every position, like Detroit was not long ago.

And their division is not very intimidating; wouldn't surprise me if they surprised some of the experts.

That ONE player masked a ton of weaknesses. They would jump teams early, get up 10-14 points, and force the opponent into a passing game. Their D was undersized but fast, built for artificial turf and their two top defenders were the 2 defensive ends. When they were forced into a game of smashmouth, they couldn't handle it. Now their top tackler from last year, Pat Angerer, is out for awhile. Defensively they are horrific. I think Luck will be good but 6 wins this season would be considered a success for the Colts.

[Robert Fischer]

Seattle (7-9) Would rather have seen Flynn start than Russell Wilson, who's been lighting up 3rd string defenses. This is another sub .500 team last year who outscored opponents for the season and playing out there they are often overlooked. SF is very ripe to take a step back; 1st place schedule for Niners this year after big move forward. SF was plus 28 in T/O; I look for that to even out this season. Ariz and St Louis just appear to be too weak to contend.

Seattle is my pick for turnaround team from your list.

Good Coaching, and the instinctive Wilson was a steal. Flynn can be a top backup or start effectively if needed.

Team isn't that far from 10 wins, but would need some players to step up. If receiving threats S.Rice and K.Winslow can regain some prior form would be a step in that direction.

[horses4courses]

Philly (8-8 last year) Minus 14 in turnovers last year was a killer.

I have felt for a long time that in football stats turnovers should be broken down into two categories.
As in tennis, with forced and unforced errors, football should follow suit with forced and unforced turnovers.

There is a big difference between a careless running back, or receiver, turning over the ball in error,
and a defensive player making a good play to strip a ball away.

Good teams force turnovers, bad ones incur a large number of them.
Just sayin.....

[Valuist]

I have felt for a long time that in football stats turnovers should be broken down into two categories.
As in tennis, with forced and unforced errors, football should follow suit with forced and unforced turnovers.

There is a big difference between a careless running back, or receiver, turning over the ball in error,
and a defensive player making a good play to strip a ball away.

Good teams force turnovers, bad ones incur a large number of them.
Just sayin.....

That is a good point. It would be a very subjective stat. I also feel interceptions are more skill than fumble recoveries. But there are exceptions to that as well. INTs as a result of a deflected pass or off a receiver's hands, are more luck. There is an art to stripping the ball, but when its on the ground anyone can recover. Teams with the huge positive TO differential, like SF, NE and GB are all going to have a difficult time duplicating their 2011 win totals.

[Robert Fischer]

Was able to stream the 1st half of the Seattle game last night and was impressed once again.

If you go to youtube and look at any of the Russel Wilson running highlights this preseason, you will see an O-Line that keeps blocking and keeps moving until the play is well over.

Last night I don't remember any QB runs, but there were several screen passes and pass-protections where the line was very good as a unit.

Flynn was sharp as well, there was depth of guys who could come in and make plays, and the defense was deep and quick to the ball.

[RaceBookJoe]

I am hoping that the Redskins are a bit of a turnaround team, but they still have a lot of areas of concern. They should be entertaining games though :)

[Valuist]

There will be a few. How about Jacksonville? What if, and its a big what if, but what if Blaine Gabbert takes a big step forward? Jones-Drew ends his holdout and Blackmon becomes a Rookie of the Year threat? Have actually heard positives about Gabbert improving this year. They still have the Colts and Titans in that division.

[rastajenk]

How about Indy? I'm not convinced that the loss of one player last year, even if it was Manning, would mean a setback of 10 or 11 games from all those playoff seasons they had. They played like they knew a major reset was in the works, but it's not like they're horrible at every position, like Detroit was not long ago.

And their division is not very intimidating; wouldn't surprise me if they surprised some of the experts.

I dunno, I just felt like, well, shucks, I just felt like bumping this up. :p

[cj]

I'm not picking on anyone here because I'm sure if I made a list it would have looked similar, but all of the teams listed originally are still pretty bad.

[Valuist]

I'm not picking on anyone here because I'm sure if I made a list it would have looked similar, but all of the teams listed originally are still pretty bad.

I would disagree re: Tampa and Seattle. And if RG3 gets any help at all, the Redskins would be a playoff contender.

[cj]

I would disagree re: Tampa and Seattle. And if RG3 gets any help at all, the Redskins would be a playoff contender.

Tampa is better, forgot about them. Seattle will be a big dog against anybody in the playoffs I would think. They just aren't very good in my opinion. They had one fluke win for sure, and a few other smoke and mirror wins too.