Turnovers: History, or Indicator

Many people have asked me, during my nearly 30 years as a sports handicapper, how I interpret turnovers by football teams. Are they merely representative of a team's performance so far that season, thus helping to explain a team's record up to that point? Or, are they a leading indicator of things to come?

The answer is, of course, both. Every coach will tell you that turnovers will "kill you." And every handicapper can probably relate half a dozen terrible "bad-beat" stories in which a late turnover ruined an otherwise well-analyzed wager that seemed destined for collection.

Because of the collision nature of football, some giveaways are inevitable for every team. However, I have always disagreed with other handicappers and fans who believe turnovers are a relatively random part of the game. I will agree to the extent that some of them are random. After all, there are big, fast guys running into each other on every play. However, I believe the majority of turnovers are either caused by one team in a game, or are symptomatic of the other team.

Thus, for my money, turnovers are a "handicappable" factor and a significant leading indicator of how teams will perform in certain matchups. Let's talk about turnovers a little.

Fumbles. This is the type of turnover that most handicappers believe is random in nature. I say only partly so. Smart coaches and smart players are mindful of ball security at all times, especially on change-of-possession plays and near the end of games. Smart coaches don't use careless players on their kickoff and punt return teams. And they put the ball in the hands of their most reliable backs in the closing minutes of a game. They know that a fumble at those times can cost them a victory, so they try to minimize the risk, even if it means using a slower, less-talented player (especially on returns). Younger coaches, or those who emphasize speed and raw talent over discipline, are more prone to take risks. Thus, their teams often have more fumbles. Smarter, older coaches give more than just lip service to holding on to the ball. They go out of their way to teach proper technique, they put more emphasis on details and execution, and they will take playing time away from players who lack concentration when they get on the field of battle. And good defensive coaches teach their players how, and when, to try to strip the ball from opponents. So, while the collisions in the game are mostly random, the number of fumbles caused and lost over the course of the season is not necessarily random.

Interceptions. They, of course, are much less random than fumbles. Inexperienced QBs tend to throw more interceptions than veterans. Undisciplined QBs tend to throw more than those who have learned to be wiser. And some QBs are simply not careful with the "bladder." Interceptions are also more likely against heavy pass-rush pressure, against tight secondary coverage, and when a team's offense becomes more predictable due to tough down-and-distance situations or when it is trailing, especially late in games, and doubly so when a team is out of timeouts.

Blocked kicks. They aren't found in the familiar, published turnover-margin totals, which include only fumbles and interceptions. But for my money, and I use the word "money" specifically, they are turnovers of a high order. Some teams are good at getting them (Virginia Tech and Fresno State in the colleges, and Carolina in the pros, for example), and many teams are not. Most blocked kicks do not happen by accident. There is malice aforethought on the part of the "blocking" team, whose coaches choose to use many starters or other specific personnel on their kick-block units. And good special-teams coaches can identify opposing kickers and punters who are prone to having one of their boots rejected.

Now, here's some evidence from 2002 as to how good and bad habits regarding fumbles and interceptions can be leading indicators of pointspread performance. College teams that had a positive turnover margin of more than +15 last season (counting games against Division I-A opponents only) were 64-40 vs. the spread (61.5 percent). College teams that had negative turnover margins of more than -15 were 15-50 vs. the spread (23.1 percent)!

The top three teams in turnover margin in the NFL last year were a combined 33-18 (64.7 percent) against the spread; the bottom three teams in turnover margin in the NFL were 16-32 (33.3 percent) against the spread. The top turnover margin team in the NFL last season was Tampa Bay at +26, and we all know what happened with the Bucs (Super Bowl champs).

Chuck Sippl is the senior editor of The Gold Sheet, the first word in sports handicapping for 47 years. The amazingly compact Gold Sheet features analysis of every football and basketball game, exclusive insider reports, widely followed Power Ratings, and a Special Ticker of key injuries and team chemistry. Look for it at your local newsstand. If you haven't seen it and would like to peruse a complimentary copy, call The Gold Sheet at (800) 798-GOLD (4653) and be sure to mention you read about it in Card Player. You can look up The Gold Sheet on the web at www.goldsheet.com.