Passer Rating Differential
Final Statistics for the 2010 Season
Become a CHFF Insider to access 2011 Quality Stats, our weekly 2011 picks and brand-new features, including weekly Quality Stats Power Rankings for all 32 NFL teams, the Correlation to Victory and Predictive Rate of Victory of each Quality Stat and for other commonly used indicators, and exclusive statistical features for CHFF Insiders only.You'll learn on CHFF Insider, for example, that teams that won the passer rating battle have won 80% of all NFL games over the past two seasons (409-103).
Become a CHFF Insider today!
***
Passer Rating Differential is one of our newest Quality Stats, introduced in 2009, but might be "the most important stat in football," as we called it on Sports Illustrated. Read about its introduction here. We've also written about its historic importance here and in other places. Teams that dominate PRD dominate on the field.)
Passer Rating Differential is obtained by subtracting a team's Defensive Passer Rating from its Offensive Passer Rating. It is a Quality Stat because it has a direct correlation to victory. Teams with a high Passer Rating Differential are successful. Teams with a low Passer Rating Differential are not successful.
PASSER RATING DIFFERENTIAL UPDATE
Data is current through the end of the 2010 season.
Final 2010 Passer Rating Differential
| Team | Off. PR | Def. PR | Net | |
| 1 | Green Bay | 98.93 | 67.23 | +31.7 |
| 2 | New England | 109.76 | 81.23 | +28.53 |
| 3 | San Diego | 101.85 | 76.14 | +25.71 |
| 4 | Pittsburgh | 95.25 | 73.78 | +21.47 |
| 5 | Tampa Bay | 96.25 | 77.57 | +18.68 |
| 6 | Baltimore | 93.64 | 76.34 | +17.3 |
| 7 | Kansas City | 90.06 | 78.08 | +11.98 |
| 8 | Philadelphia | 92.06 | 80.61 | +11.45 |
| 9 | Atlanta | 90.80 | 82.19 | +8.61 |
| 10 | New Orleans | 90.81 | 83.16 | +7.65 |
| 11 | Chicago | 79.49 | 74.39 | +5.1 |
| 12 | N.Y. Giants | 85.28 | 80.53 | +4.75 |
| 13 | Indianapolis | 91.79 | 91.7 | +0.09 |
| 14 | N.Y. Jets | 76.53 | 77.05 | -0.52 |
| 15 | Dallas | 90.39 | 92.75 | -2.36 |
| 16 | Cincinnati | 82.37 | 85.16 | -2.79 |
| 17 | St. Louis | 76.46 | 80.22 | -3.76 |
| 18 | Tennessee | 82.59 | 86.38 | -3.8 |
| 19 | Denver | 86.75 | 93.02 | -6.27 |
| 20 | Detroit | 82.00 | 89.17 | -7.16 |
| 21 | Oakland | 77.4 | 85.56 | -8.15 |
| 22 | Houston | 92.02 | 100.49 | -8.48 |
| 23 | Miami | 75.5 | 85.03 | -9.53 |
| 24 | Cleveland | 74.98 | 84.83 | -9.85 |
| 25 | San Francisco | 79.36 | 89.96 | -10.6 |
| 26 | Washington | 77.99 | 89.62 | -11.63 |
| 27 | Jacksonville | 83.43 | 98.53 | -15.11 |
| 28 | Buffalo | 75.16 | 92.58 | -17.41 |
| 29 | Seattle | 72.04 | 89.69 | -17.65 |
| 30 | Minnesota | 67.65 | 86.39 | -18.74 |
| 31 | Arizona | 60.49 | 83.55 | -23.06 |
|
32
|
Carolina
|
56.96
|
80.96
|
-23.99
|
| Rank | Passer Rating Differential_R | Team | Off PR | Def PR | PRD |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2 ↑ 1 | 2 | New England | 109.76 | 81.23 | 28.53 |
| 23 ↓ 3 | 23 | Miami | 75.50 | 85.03 | - 9.53 |
| 30 ↓ 1 | 30 | Minnesota | 67.65 | 86.39 | - 18.74 |
| 27 ↓ 3 | 27 | Jacksonville | 83.43 | 98.53 | - 15.11 |
| 7 ↓ 2 | 7 | Kansas City | 90.06 | 78.08 | 11.98 |
| 22 ↑ 1 | 22 | Houston | 92.02 | 100.49 | - 8.48 |
| 13 ∼ | 13 | Indianapolis | 91.79 | 91.70 | 0.09 |
| 20 ↑ 2 | 20 | Detroit | 82.00 | 89.17 | - 7.16 |
| 1 ∼ | 1 | Green Bay | 98.93 | 67.23 | 31.70 |
| 12 ∼ | 12 | N.Y. Giants | 85.28 | 80.53 | 4.75 |
| 10 ↓ 1 | 10 | New Orleans | 90.81 | 83.16 | 7.65 |
| 14 ↑ 3 | 14 | N.Y. Jets | 76.53 | 77.05 | - 0.52 |
| 21 ↑ 6 | 21 | Oakland | 77.40 | 85.56 | - 8.15 |
| 8 ∼ | 8 | Philadelphia | 92.06 | 80.61 | 11.45 |
| 4 ↑ 3 | 4 | Pittsburgh | 95.25 | 73.78 | 21.47 |
| 3 ↓ 1 | 3 | San Diego | 101.85 | 76.14 | 25.71 |
| 25 ↑ 3 | 25 | San Francisco | 79.36 | 89.96 | - 10.60 |
| 29 ↑ 1 | 29 | Seattle | 72.04 | 89.69 | - 17.65 |
| 17 ↓ 3 | 17 | St. Louis | 76.46 | 80.22 | - 3.76 |
| 6 ↓ 2 | 6 | Baltimore | 93.64 | 76.34 | 17.30 |
| 9 ↑ 2 | 9 | Atlanta | 90.80 | 82.19 | 8.61 |
| 19 ↑ 2 | 19 | Denver | 86.75 | 93.02 | - 6.27 |
| 31 ∼ | 31 | Arizona | 60.49 | 83.55 | - 23.06 |
| 5 ↑ 1 | 5 | Tampa Bay | 96.25 | 77.57 | 18.68 |
| 16 ↓ 1 | 16 | Cincinnati | 82.37 | 85.16 | - 2.79 |
| 11 ↓ 1 | 11 | Chicago | 79.49 | 74.39 | 5.10 |
| 26 ↓ 1 | 26 | Washington | 77.99 | 89.62 | - 11.63 |
| 32 ∼ | 32 | Carolina | 56.96 | 80.96 | - 23.99 |
| 18 ↑ 1 | 18 | Tennessee | 82.59 | 86.38 | - 3.80 |
| 28 ↓ 2 | 28 | Buffalo | 75.16 | 92.58 | - 17.41 |
| 15 ↑ 3 | 15 | Dallas | 90.39 | 92.75 | - 2.36 |
| 24 ↓ 8 | 24 | Cleveland | 74.98 | 84.83 | - 9.85 |
Quality Stats
- Quality Stats Power Rankings
- Quality Standings
- Scoreability
- Bendability
- Real Passing Yards per Attempt
- Defensive Real Passing Yards per Attempt
- Offensive Passer Rating
- Defensive Passer Rating
- Passer Rating Differential
- Offensive Hog Index
- Defensive Hog Index
- The Relativity Index
- Correlation to Victory
- Predictive Rate of Victory
Premium Articles
- Super Bowl XLVII: Baltimore-San Francisco (-4)
- Jim Harbaugh 'System' Makes San Francisco 49ers NFL's Deadliest ATS Machine
- Baltimore Ravens Reach Super Bowl Despite Roller Coaster Season, Doubting Public
- Comeback Player Of the Year Spurs CHFF To Huge Late-Season Run
- San Francisco 49ers Biggest Road Favorite In Modern Title Game History
- Baltimore at New England (-8): AFC's Best Rivals Fight For Super Bowl
- San Francisco (-4.5) at Atlanta: The 49ers Wow! Factor
- Wild Divisional Round: Real And Spectacular Picks Week In Review
- Playoff History Is Kind To Home Teams ATS
-
Houston at New England (-9.5): Rematches A Bitch For Patriots
- All Premium Articles



