Promotion Banner

Week 17 Luck-Driven NFL Power Rankings: New Teams at Top & Bottom

Week 17 Luck-Driven NFL Power Rankings: New Teams at Top & Bottom article feature image
Credit:

Stephen Maturen/Getty Images. Pictured: Kirk Cousins.

Our NFL Luck Rankings — a betting-focused version of Power Rankings developed by Action Network’s Predictive Analytics team — are updated for Week 17.

While the table remains relatively similar at the top, things are different further down the board. The Chicago Bears drop to dead last after coming in as the unluckiest team of Week 16. Their league-worst 1-7 record in close games is a big factor, but they’ve even been unlucky in some of their blowout losses.

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 17 NFL Luck Rankings!

The ultimate NFL betting cheat code

Best bets for every game

Our NFL model’s biggest weekly edges

Profitable data-driven system picks

Luck-Based NFL Power 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.

 

RANK Team Luck%
1 26.2%
2 23.4%
3 17.9%
4 17.3%
5 17.0%
6 13.3%
7 12.5%
8 9.3%
9 7.6%
10 6.2%
11 5.3%
12 4.5%
13 3.8%
14 3.6%
15 0.7%
16 -1.2%
17 -2.7%
18 -3.2%
19 -3.3%
20 -3.6%
21 -4.0%
22 -4.4%
23 -5.7%
24 -8.1%
25 -8.5%
26 -9.4%
27 -11.5%
28 -12.3%
29 -17.1%
30 -22.0%
31 -23.5%
32 -23.8%

Using NFL Luck Rankings To Redefine Bad Beats

Action Network’s Predictive Analytics team rolled out its 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.

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 Dallas wins 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 on 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?

This site contains commercial content. We may be compensated for the links provided on this page. The content on this page is for informational purposes only. Action Network makes no representation or warranty as to the accuracy of the information given or the outcome of any game or event.