This whole thing with the Pats does make me wonder: just how are we supposed to assess a team's turnover differential? The Pats ability to create and avoid turnovers was downright ridiculous this season, unusually so. I mean, on one hand you can say that the games happened the way they did and as such the Pats really did perform as well as their numbers and records indicated, but on the other hand, you can say that the absurd turnover numbers was more a product of luck than anything else and that their true talent level lies far below where they appeared to be.
I guess what I'm trying to say is that when evaluating a team's actual ability, turnover numbers have such an enormous impact while yet being a product of luck. So what are we supposed to do about that, especially in regards to extremely fluky statistical outliers like this year's Patriots.