Every football season, I pick up a very comprehensive college football magazine that a gentleman named Phil Steele puts together. Tons of statistical data on every 1-A school is at my fingertips, as well as some very informative forecast articles.

One of those pieces is called "Turnovers = Turnaround". The premise is that a school with a significantly negative turnover margin one year tends to improve their record the following year. Conversely, the school with a significantly positive turnover margin will fall back to the pack the following season.

I am not going to lie. I was inspired and fascinated. This got me thinking…can we apply this theory to fantasy football?

First, let’s take a look at the current state of the NFL. For whatever reason, since the 1999 Rams went on their unheard of run to the Super Bowl after going 4-12 the year before (and being one of the worst teams of the decade), we have seen teams come out of nowhere to get to (and win) championships. Look at the list of teams:

1999: St. Louis vs. Tennessee
2000: Baltimore vs. New York Giants
2001: New England vs. St. Louis
2002: Tampa Bay vs. Oakland
2003: New England vs. Carolina
2004: New England vs. Philadelphia
2005: Pittsburgh vs. Seattle
2006: Indianapolis vs. Chicago
2007: New York Giants vs. New England

Thirteen different teams made it to the title game in this span, and six teams were first-time participants (Titans, Ravens, Buccaneers, Panthers, Eagles, and Seahawks). Heck, the Steelers and Giants ran the table on the road; something that had never happened before and then happens twice in three years.

So my theory is that most of the teams in the league are equal in talent (a couple of elite and a few really dreadful), and therefore the league is set up to give every team a chance to win it all. But what is going to differentiate one team from the next? Turnover margin and ability to get good field position bring more scoring opportunities, and should therefore determine the outcome of most games. Catching one extra break per game is the difference between ten wins and ten losses. But, once again, can it work for fantasy football?

For the purpose of this study, we are going to answer the following questions, which will be our guidelines:
1. Does a team’s offensive yards gained and point total increase the year after posting a turnover differential of -10 or lower?
2. Does a team’s offensive yards gained and point total decrease the year after posting a turnover differential of +10 or higher?
3. Are there other elements at work that can help explain when either situation does not follow the above criteria?

After a visit to NFL.com, I compiled the turnover rates from 2003-2007 along with each team’s ranking in total points scored and total yards gained year-to-year, giving us five years of statistical data to work with. Please note that there are duplicate numbers in the rankings to reflect ties.

For your viewing pleasure, here is all of the data in fancy Excel format:
Key: TO = Turnover +/-, PTS = League Rank in Total Points, YDS = League Rank in Total Offensive Yards.

CLICK HERE TO VIEW GIVE & TAKE TABLE

Red text indicates a negative turnover margin. Cells highlighted in blue are the years and teams that qualified for the study from year-to-year, based on our criteria above. The cells highlighted in purple indicate the teams to keep an eye on for the upcoming season, which we will preview in each of the team details below.

You will also notice that three teams did not qualify for this study as they have never had a give/take ratio +10 or better nor -10 or worse (Falcons, Eagles, and Redskins).

So when we look at our findings, improvement/decline on offense only happened 26 of 46 times, which means we see these cases occur 57% of the time. But, let us detail the contributing factors that explain why certain instances do not hold true. Here are some observations of the teams that did not experience this dramatic change 50% of the time or better (from 2003 to 2007).

- Indianapolis and New England are a combined 0 for 4. This is because these are two elite franchises with great quarterbacks (Tom Brady, Peyton Manning) who just do not turn the ball over. Plus, the Colts have had a fantastic offense for years, finishing in the Top 5 every year, while the Patriots have made the leap into the super-productive offenses this past season.
- Kansas City, once upon a time, used to be an upper-echelon offense with RB Priest Holmes (based on the same offense Coach Dick Vermeil used in St. Louis).
- Minnesota used to have QB Daunte Culpepper throwing to WR Randy Moss, so while there was a drop from +11 in 2003 to +1 in 2004, the personnel was good enough to overcome that.
- Green Bay, who went 0 for 2, had QB Brett Favre turning the ball over at an alarming rate. No matter how talented the players might be, scoring chances fell.
- Cleveland has been a really miserable franchise until the recent turnaround in 2007.
- San Diego has had LaDainian Tomlinson the best running back (and maybe best overall football player) in the league during this time. Something like turnover differential is not going to stop him from producing unbelievably.

These teams went a combined 2 for 13! So if you removed the cases of elite offenses at play (since you would likely be starting players from those teams every week anyway), this turnover theory works 73% of the time. The teams who hang around the middle of the pack are most affected by this phenomenon, not the top-tier and bottom-feeding offenses.

Who do we watch for in 2008? I have chosen five candidates to potential move up (or down) to the middle of the pack.

Baltimore Ravens
The thing that has plagued this team for so long is inconsistent quarterback play, so they are going to be all over the map on offense, while the defense has been consistently pulling its weight. Although the Ravens may be starting rookie QB Joe Flacco right away, improving on a -17 ratio is not that hard, especially with a potential two-headed backfield in Willis McGahee and Ray Rice, and a defense that is still very good.

St. Louis Rams
There is so much talent (QB Marc Bulger, RB Steven Jackson, WR Torry Holt), but a cluster of injuries to offensive linemen really hampered the Rams ability to do anything when they had the ball. When Bulger missed time, the offense was even worse. With a draft that brought depth to the offensive line and receiver positions (Donnie Avery and Keenan Burton), I expect that St. Louis comes back up again, so you may be able to draft some of these guys later than they went last season.

San Francisco 49ers
It is hard to be worse the dead last in points and yards. We all saw how good RB Frank Gore was in 2006 and we all expected the Niners to really turn the corner as a team. Then injuries and ineffectiveness happened to QBs Alex Smith and Trent Dilfer, respectively. Gore was beat up for a good part of the year and there were no receivers to really speak of. With off-season additions of RB DeShaun Foster and WR Isaac Bruce, there is some veteran ability at these important skill positions. But, keep an eye on who wins the quarterback battle between Smith and Shaun Hill. Hill was very effective down the stretch in his limited time.

Seattle Seahawks
Things appear to be changing in Seattle. RB Shaun Alexander was no good for the second straight year and was released and now we could see a two-back approach with Julius Jones and Maurice Morris. WR Bobby Engram is coming off of a career year at age 35 and is unlikely to reproduce that effort. Coach Mike Holmgren is leaving after this season. With the Seahawks coming off of a +10 ratio, I think things are going to get worse before they get better.

Oakland Raiders
I know this one looks crazy since we have seen a historically bad offense the 2006 team fielded, but why can’t RB Darren McFadden do the same for the Raiders that RB Adrian Peterson did for the Vikings? An effective running game might give 2nd-year QB JaMarcus Russell opportunities to connect with some receivers. It made QB Tarvaris Jackson look tolerable at times. So if McFadden is everything he is supposed to be, WRs Javon Walker and Ronald Curry, and TE Zach Miller could all have nice seasons.

To conclude, this theory that I have outlined is not what you should base your opinions on, but rather use it as a tool to help you forecast the bounce-back and declining middling teams and not the super-elite ones. Good luck to you all in your preparations for another exciting fantasy football season.