Which would help explain our below .500 record.
Brian Billick wrote:
Toxic differential favors Seattle Seahawks, Philadelphia Eagleshttp://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap200000 ... hia-eagles
We're 10 weeks into the 2013 season, and besides the six elite teams at the top (Seahawks, Saints, Panthers, Chiefs, Broncos, Patriots), it's hard to get a clear reading on much of the league. Are the Lions for real? Are the Colts and Bengals contenders or pretenders? Which team out of the 4-5 mob is best poised to make a run?
One way to get a sense of these answers is a synthesis of statistics I like to call toxic differential. Though I've been tracking the concept faithfully since my days as an offensive coordinator for the Vikings in the late 1990s, it's been in circulation among coaches for much longer.
Toxic differential essentially combines turnover differential and explosive-play differential. (Explosive plays are those that gain 20-plus yards.) The reason some of us have been drawn to this concept is that it is an interactive statistic. Coaches have been teaching the importance of avoiding turnovers since the football was first inflated, but toxic differential illustrates that it's not enough to merely avoid turning the ball over; you also need to generate big offensive plays. On the flip side, you can't just sit back on defense and play a deep prevent all the time; you must create turnovers, too.
On both sides of the ball, gambling to generate a big play often leaves you open to committing a big error. Toxic differential does a good job of showing how well teams balance risk and reward.
Now that you're familiar with the TD concept, here are this year's numbers through Week 10: