Originally Posted by Livinginthe past
Im trying to think of logical reasons why this trend should exist.
Maybe teams with a huge negative turnover tend to play more conservative the year after in order to limit turnovers - maybe they more aggressive on defense..... who knows?
One of the first things that springs to mind would be having a rookie QB going into his 2nd year in the year the results suddenly improve.
I'd like to hear Kirwans theory on why the trend exists because after a little more digging there is a very erratic nature to the results.
We'll start in 2003 with the 4 worst teams in terms of turnover margin.
I may take a look at the top 4 teams over the last 4 years and see if they show a more consistent pattern.
what kirwan did, is like you did for 2003:
29. Chargers -11
30. Cardinals -13
31. Bills -16
32. Giants -16
In 2004 all teams show a remarkable improvement - 2 teams improve their differential by 26 turnovers! (I think thats statistically crazy)
3. Chargers +15 (+26)
7. Bills +10 (+26)
15. Giants +4 (+20)
18. Cardinals +1 (+14)
he then did that for the 4 teams at the bottom in 2004, 2005, 2006 (for instance baltimore was 1 of the bottom 4 in 2006 who had a dramatic increase). he didnt just track 4 teams for 4 years.
so out of the 16 teams who finished in the bottom 4 in the last 4 years, all of them showed an increase the following year at an average of 20. that is pretty amazing. he said the trend he saw was mainly a coaching change (tomlin?) and qb change (say baltimore switching to mcnair). he also said most teams will make turnovers more of a focus in camp like his jets did the year they were at the bottom.
i would say 1 year would be a fluke but 4 years is definitely a steady trend i dont see a team as focused and talented as the steelers breaking.
nevertheless its a good piece of research and i cant wait for the article (especially if he thinks its important enough for the coaches to read and present to their players).