Takeaway/Giveaway Ratio and Winning

[SteelerSask2]

Some people here question the connection between takeaway/ giveaway and winning, So I'm going to keep an ongoing tally game by game and then at the end of the season we can make an impartial decision as to its importance.
Gm 1: -1 W 30-27
Gm 2 -3 L 26-6
Gm 3 +2 W 37-19

 

[ark steel]

I'd guess that there is a pretty good correlation between the +/- on takeaways and a winning team. Del posted about it a few times, but not sure if he ever posted actual stats.

The problem might be that a team that doesn't get any turnovers, but doesn't turn the ball over would have the same zero as a team that throws 5 int's and gets 5 int's. Where those Int's occur would swing the game, not the measurement of the +/-.

 

[SteelerSask2]

The significance of the turnover ie leading to points or stopping points of course plays a role. However, the idea that a defense that forces punts and field goals but never creates turnovers is laughable. Turnovers are the biggest single factor in wins and losses. I believe this thread will bear that out.

 

[SteelerSask2]

Game 4. Even. TB got 7 off theirs and the Steelers got none. Coupled with all the penalties it allowed a team to hang around that shouldn't have.

 

[Troglodyte]

If you don't think giveaway takeaway is strongly correlated with winning, you must have not paid very close attention to whatever football games you've watched! Perhaps just another example of how fantasy football has skewed peoples thinking about the game?

 

[Troglodyte]

It blows my mind that there is even debate about this. Not turning the ball over is the first commandment of football!

 

[Southern Steeler]

I don't think that anyone who truly understands football will ever question the fact that turnover ratio is the single most relevant statistic in the game. And it isn't even close.

We already know that your tally will show that.

 

[SteelerSask2]

Oh no there are many people who believe that forcing punts is good enough. I think everyone believes that turning the ball over is a killer. I think a lot of people don't get that in the modern NFL forcing fumbles even if it means some shoddy tackling is necessary.

 

[Troglodyte]

Forcing punts doesn't gain any field position the vast majority of the time. If the average punt was returned 40 yards, then yes there wouldn't be much difference. Turnovers also often result in point swings. For example, James Harrison 99 yard int return was a 14 point swing.

 

[insaniti]

I don't think the argument is committing turnovers, rather creating turnovers. ie, if you go five games without committing a turnover, OR creating a turnover, can you really say how many of those games you've won or lost?

The problem lies in WHERE and WHEN these turnovers are created. An INT in the first quarter at the 30 isn't as damaging as the an INT deep in your own territory in the fourth quarter. Neither are good, but one allows the rest of the game to still be played and gives your D a chance while the other puts the team in scoring position just by picking the pass off and doesn't allow much time to make up for it after.

 

[Troglodyte]

I don't think the when should matter. Too much attention is paid to what happens at the end of the game instead of the entirety of the game. Nobody is talking about Suishams missed FG at the end of the first half. But had it come at the end of the game (and been shorter), everybody would be talking about it, but the end result is the same. Don't want to lose because your kicker missed a last second FG? Don't let it come down to that.

 

[SteelerSask2]

Gm 5 Jax. +1 17-9 Win. First interception was as good as a punt and the Steelers got no points. Second sealed the win. Two fumbles neither recovered could have made this a blow out.