Download the App Image

Luck-Driven NFL Power Rankings: Giants Back on Top; Jaguars at Bottom

Luck-Driven NFL Power Rankings: Giants Back on Top; Jaguars at Bottom article feature image
Credit:

Steph Chambers/Getty Images. Pictured: Brian Daboll.

Our NFL Luck Rankings — a betting-focused version of NFL Power Rankings developed by Action’s Predictive Analytics team — are in for Week 10 with a familiar face back at the top.

Thanks to the Philadelphia Eagles’ first loss of the 2022 season, they are no longer the luckiest team in the NFL. That title once again belongs to their division rival, the New York Giants. The Giants were the luckiest team of Week 10, with the win over Houston moving them to 7-1 in one possession games.

These Luck Rankings are designed to help you identify which teams’ results have been luckier — or unluckier — than their on-field performance indicates.

For more on how our luck rankings work, check out this detailed overview of the concept.

Without further ado, let’s dive into the Week 11 NFL Luck Rankings!

Note: Luck% represents the win probability swing between a team’s expected winning percentage from their on-field performance and their actual winning percentage.

Luck-Based NFL Power Rankings

 

RANK Team Luck%
1 34.4%
2 28.4%
3 26.6%
4 24.6%
5 18.9%
6 18.5%
7 17.4%
8 15.9%
9 15.8%
10 13.0%
11 12.2%
12 3.2%
13 3.0%
14 -2.0%
15 -2.7%
16 -2.9%
17 -3.2%
18 -3.3%
19 -4.8%
20 -9.0%
21 -9.2%
22 -11.1%
23 -11.8%
24 -12.5%
25 -14.0%
26 -15.6%
27 -16.3%
28 -17.0%
29 -17.7%
30 -21.1%
31 -24.8%
32 -25.6%

Using NFL Luck Rankings To Redefine Bad Beats

Our Predictive Analytics team rolled out our inaugural NFL Luck Rankings in Week 5 of the 2022 season as a tool to evaluate possible edges on spreads — and to redefine bad beats in the NFL.

These rankings account for a lot of factors, but they are largely focused on quantifying a team’s on-field performance and comparing it to the actual score of games.

As an example, let’s say the Cowboys are playing the Rams, and the Cowboys win 22-10 despite being 5.5-point underdogs. Hypothetically, you backed the Rams to cover the 5.5-point spread in this game.

In the classical sense of bad beat, you wouldn’t call losing by 12 and failing to cover by 17.5 points a bad beat.

But what if I told you the way these teams actually played on the field was much closer? In fact, what if I told you based off the start of every play, the Rams should have won the game by seven points and covered!? Now, I bet you feel a whole lot worse!

How would you rate this article?