The 2013 NFC West: The best division since realignment

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stat-a ... -2002-2013

Since realignment there have been 96 division seasons. The 2013 NFC West ranks first (tied) for win-loss record, first (by a LOT) in scoring differential, 2nd in DVOA and 2nd in Defensive DVOA.

Also, it turns out that teams from good divisions are far more likely to win it all.

The worst division season since realignment was the 2008 NFC West. Four of the six worst division seasons belonged to the NFC West. The bottom twenty had eight NFC West seasons (out of a 12 year sample!).

Pretty funny; and God, I love Football Outsiders. Thanks for the link, Kearly.

Intriguing but don't know if I actually buy it 100%. Give me 1-2 more years though...

FlyHawksFly":29oqf8ds said:

I'm confused...how will giving you a couple more years have any impact on how well the 2013 NFCWest played? I think maybe you are missing the point.

Click to expand...

There are a few different points being made in that article. Perhaps she's referring to the "team that comes from the tougher division usually wins it" part? *shrug*

If Re-Alignment happened in 2001, the NFC Worst would have sent all 4 teams to a Superbowl.

With the Patriots, Steelers, Colts, and Ravens dominating much of the AFC since Re-Alignment, the only 2 Divisions that have sent at least 3 teams to the Superbowl since 2002 have resided in the NFC.

NFC West. (Obvs)
2005 Seahawks
2008 Cardinals
2012 49ers

NFC South
2002 Bucs
2003 Panthers
2009 Saints

Man it sucks for the Falcons though who squandered two opportunities to make the Superbowl in 2004 and 2012.

Am I the only one who thinks the NFC West is due for a bit of regression this year? The Niners have had a terrible offseason and preseason and with the injuries, upcoming suspensions, aging vets, front office tension, and the hangover effect from three straight heartbreaking losses in the playoffs they seem primed for a fall. The Cardinals have lost some key players off their defense and have a QB with an injury history who is about to turn 35. And we all know what just happened to the Rams QB situation. The Seahawks are the only team that will start the season with all their key players in place and just hitting their primes.

I'm not saying it will be a cakewalk by any means but when a division has a historically strong season it's difficult to repeat that and one or more teams are likely to regress.

One fun bit of trivia concerning the NFC West is that it is the only division in football that has won at least one playoff game every year since 2004. Even in the "NFC Worst" days when the rest of the league was laughing at how bad the division was, a team from that division won 1 or more playoff games every single year. No other division can make that claim over the last ten years.

FlyHawksFly":3vgpqlmk said:

MizzouHawkGal":3vgpqlmk said:

Intriguing but don't know if I actually buy it 100%. Give me 1-2 more years though...

Click to expand...

I'm confused...how will giving you a couple more years have any impact on how well the 2013 NFCWest played? I think maybe you are missing the point.

Click to expand...

To me the division has been traditionally a 2 team race or a walkover instead of being balanced like it's getting to be lately so the numbers surprised me. I also believe the NFC West will regress a little this year because of odd injury so I would like more time to see if this year and next affects anything significantly.

Shadowhawk":1yspka9v said:

One fun bit of trivia concerning the NFC West is that it is the only division in football that has won at least one playoff game every year since 2004.

Click to expand...

Well, that is in the article that Kearly linked.

Every time I respond or comment without reading a linked article or watching a linked video, I look like a dumbass.
I'm gunna stop doing it, one of these days, I promise. :{)

kearly":3deex4bt said:

Also, it turns out that teams from good divisions are far more likely to win it all.

Click to expand...

Not that surprising.

Strip it down and you're basically measuring the same thing on both sides of the equation.

It's like saying you're more likely to randomly pull an apple out of a basket of apples than you are to pull an apple out of a basket of apples, oranges, and pears.

SIDEBAR:

TBH it's more complicated than that because apples in a basket of apples aren't competing against each other for half the season, but the same basic point still apples because of Wild Card teams and (to some degree) because of overall league parity.

If you actually wanted to see if "iron" really "sharpens iron" the way to do it would be to remove division winners from the construction of division strengths, and then see if division winners from the top of your new division strength measure (- the winner) still have an increased probability of winning the SB.

If forced to guess I'd go with the null that it doesn't actually matter, or the alternative hypothesis that with short NFL seasons and parity you're better off playing more of your games against inferior opponents than good ones.

The div is taking some hits, though, with Bradford and that Niner injured, and the Niners could implode any time.