Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/content/85/8979285/html/wp-includes/post-thumbnail-template.php:1) in /home/content/85/8979285/html/wp-content/plugins/wp-super-cache/wp-cache-phase2.php on line 62
2012 NFL Final Standings, Playoffs, Awards Predictions | The DC Times

The DC Times

A New Way to Look at the Cowboys, NFL, and Fantasy Football


2012 NFL Final Standings, Playoffs, Awards Predictions

Subscribe to The DC Times
Never miss a post again!

I’ve been picking games on The DC Times since I started the site, including preseason projections like this post and individual games. I’ve picked every single regular season game for the past two years, compiling a pretty impressive record.

In Week 17 of 2011, I went 15-1 straight up. I’ve always wanted to pick every game in a week correctly, but I’ve never done it. On the season, my record was:

  • 175-81 straight up (68.4 percent)
  • 132-113-11 against the spread (53.9 percent)
  • 139-111-6 on totals (55.6 percent)

My record in 2010 was better against the spread:

  • 164-92 record on straight up picks (64.1 percent)
  • 138-110-8 against the spread (55.6 percent)
  • 127-121-8 on over/under (51.2 percent)

The reason I think my track record is solid is because I’ve picked every single game, not just ones in which I feel confident. If you laid $1,100 on every game I picked over the past two years (on both the spread and total), you would have made $35,500. I doubt more than a few hundred of you did such a thing.

My 2012 Week 1 picks will be posted tomorrow.

In addition to picking individual games, my full season predictions have been fairly accurate as well. Over the past three seasons, I have correctly predicted 25 of the 36 playoff teams (69.4 percent). I even wrote an article on the art of predicting playoff teams, explaining why I don’t buy into the theory that you should choose six new teams each season. . .

While it is a virtual certainty that some (and often times, many) different teams will make the playoffs in a given season, I disagree with the notion that it is rational to displace a talented team with a mediocre one in one’s playoff predictions simply to accommodate the “six new teams will make the playoffs” trend.

The reasoning is simple.  For the sake of argument, let’s suppose that all of the playoff teams from last season really do have a 50 percent chance of making the playoffs again this year, while the non-playoff teams have a 30 percent chance of making it (which would be the case if 12 teams are each a coin flip). We’ll label last year’s playoff teams as P1, P2. . .P12, and last year’s non-playoff clubs as N1, N2. . .N20.

Which group of 12 teams is the most likely to make the playoffs in 2010? It is actually the same group as last season (in this hypothetical example). Of course, the chance of that exact group of 12 making it again is incredibly small. . .but that isn’t a reason to not predict it will happen.

The reason is that, while we can be fairly certain the group of playoff teams will contain some newcomers, we don’t know which newcomers it will be, and we don’t know which teams they’ll replace. To predict that a team with a 30 percent chance of making the playoffs will do so at the expense of a team with a 50 percent chance is simply bad math.

The logic is the same when you are filling out your NCAA brackets.  Assuming the teams with the higher seeds are better (which is generally the case), the most statistically plausible bracket is one that picks every favorite to win. What are the chances this comes to fruition? Probably a billion-to-one. What are the chances that multiple underdogs win?  A virtual certainty. So why pick all favorites? Because we don’t know which underdogs will win and, statistically speaking, choosing all favorites to win is the most likely scenario (as compared to all other individual game combinations).

Think about it. If we choose 62 favorites and one underdog (there are 63 games ), the chances of winning the bracket are just slightly less than choosing all 63 favorites. As we choose more underdogs, our chances diminish.

I really want to drive this point home, so here is another analogy. Let’s say you have a lopsided die that is just slightly weighted toward the number ‘six.’ Numbers one through five have a 16 percent chance of showing up on any given roll, while the number six has a 20 percent chance of coming up.

Now, let’s say you must predict the outcome of 100 future rolls of the die. What would you choose? Nearly everybody I know would select some “random” combination of numbers, perhaps with slightly more of the number six to account for the slight increase in likelihood of it coming up.

That prediction would be wrong, however. The most likely scenario (as compared to all specific alternatives) is that the number six comes up all 100 times. Even though you could roll the die your entire life and never see the number six come up even 25 straight times, much less 100, that is the statistically correct prediction.

People have a tough time believing this because the chances of six not coming up, at least once, are a lock. Why bet against certainty? The answer is because we aren’t betting that six won’t come up 100 straight times, but rather we are asked to predict a very specific combination of numbers. If we were asked to predict whether the die will show either six or ‘one through five,’ we’d obviously choose the latter, but we aren’t making vague forecasts.

The same is true in predicting playoff football teams. While teams obviously change from year-to-year and randomness has its effect on seasonal outcomes, the fact that the most likely group of 12 playoff teams is the 12 best teams (or the best in each division and the next two best in each conference, to be exact) is statistically irrefutable.

So will I pick the same 12 teams from last year in my 2010 predictions? Nope, because one season isn’t nearly a large enough sample size to determine a team’s level of talent. In fact, in any given season, the chances of the 12 best teams actually making the playoffs are almost zero.

Look at the AFC North last year, for example. Three teams (the Bengals, Ravens, and Steelers) all finished within one game of each other. There were probably thousands of seemingly random phenomena throughout the course of the season that could have altered the order of those standings. Maybe a crucial fumble took a weird bounce and ended up in one team’s hands over another. Maybe one team’s headsets lost power for a minute during a vital drive. Maybe Joe Flacco ate a bad meal the night before a game and consequently didn’t play well.

Whatever the reasons, the group of 12 playoff teams from 2009 is almost certainly not the best 12 teams from the season. In the die example, we know the probability of each number showing up. In football, we don’t know the probabilities. We must infer them from the previous season, personnel changes, and so on. If teams played 1,000 seasons, then I might have a different opinion, but we have just one to examine.

So when making your 2010 NFL predictions this season, don’t worry about the “50 percent rule” or the “NFC South loser always wins the division” rule. Instead, use a combination of statistics and your gut to select the six best teams from each conference, disregarding who “should” miss the playoffs this year because they made it last year.

Remember, the previous outcomes of random events have no bearing on future ones.  Making choices using that methodology is no better than neglecting to choose the number six because it came up on the last roll of the die.

So with that lecture out of the way, here are my 2012 NFL predictions. . .

NFC East
1. Philadelphia Eagles 11-5
2. Dallas Cowboys 10-6
3. New York Giants 9-7
4. Washington Redskins 7-9

NFC North
1. Green Bay Packers 13-3
2. Detroit Lions 10-6
3. Chicago Bears 9-7
4. Minnesota Vikings 4-12

NFC South
1. Atlanta Falcons 12-4
2. New Orleans Saints 11-5
3. Carolina Panthers 8-8
4. Tampa Bay Bucs 4-12

NFC West
1. San Francisco 49ers 9-7
2. Seattle Seahawks 7-9
3. Arizona Cardinals 4-12
4.  St. Louis Rams 3-13

AFC East
1. New England Patriots 12-4
2. Buffalo Bills 9-7
3. New York Jets 8-8
4. Miami Dolphins 4-12

AFC North
1. Baltimore Ravens 11-5
2. Pittsburgh Steelers 10-6
3. Cincinnati Bengals 7-9
4. Cleveland Browns 4-12

AFC South
1. Houston Texans 11-5
2. Tennesee Titans 7-9
3. Indianapolis Colts 5-11
4.  Jacksonville Jaguars 4-12

AFC West
1. San Diego Chargers 9-7
2. Denver Broncos 9-7
3. Oakland Raiders 8-8
4. Kansas City Chiefs 7-9

2012 Playoff Teams

  • NFC

1. Green Bay Packers
2. Atlanta Falcons
3. Philadelphia Eagles
4. San Francisco 49ers
5. New Orleans Saints
6. Dallas Cowboys

  • AFC

1. New England Patriots
2. Houston Texans
3. Baltimore Ravens
4. San Diego Chargers
5. Pittsburgh Steelers
6. Denver Broncos

  • NFC Playoffs

Philadelphia over Dallas
New Orleans over San Francisco
Green Bay over New Orleans
Atlanta over Philadelphia
Green Bay over Atlanta

  • AFC Playoffs

Baltimore over Denver
San Diego over Pittsburgh
New England over San Diego
Baltimore over Houston
New England over Baltimore

  • Super Bowl

Green Bay over New England 34-31

  • Awards

Coach of the Year: Mike Smith, Atlanta Falcons
Offensive MVP:  Aaron Rodgers, Green Bay Packers
Defensive MVP: DeMarcus Ware, Dallas Cowboys
Offensive Rookie of the Year: Robert Griffin III, Washington Redskins
Defensive Rookie of the Year: Melvin Ingram, San Diego Chargers

Be Sociable, Share!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *