I'm sure it still doesn't matter to some people. But everyone
just knew our defense was going to look worse than our 2011 defense mainly because of the offenses we played in 2012 compared to the offenses we played in 2011.
Personally, I look at SOS & how a team did vs that SOS to gauge how good that team really was. Was the 2012 Giants a much worse team than the 2011 Giants? They finished 9-7 to win their division in 2011 (I think) then went on a run to the Super Bowl. 2012, they finished 9-7 against a tougher schedule. 2012 .547 (toughest in the league) vs 2011 .492
(19th in the league).
Baltimore had a .523 schedule in 2012 & they finished 10-6, which I think is more impressive than the Texans 12-4 vs a .473 schedule in 2012
Denver finished with the #1 seed in the AFC at 13-3 against an even tougher schedule than the Ravens .543...... very impressive.
Of course, we have to look at their 2012 final SoS
to put it in perspective. This is kind of a catch 22 because their final SoS is affected by that team winning or losing to it's opponent.
So in hindsight, the Atlanta Falcons had the easiest schedule, .422 followed by the Bengals, Colts, Broncos, & Chargers. The Ravens played against a .496 SoS, just like the Texans.
Six teams finished over .500 playing a .500+ schedule. All but the Bears & the Giants were in the play offs. 49ers, Seahawks, Packers, Bears, Vikings, & Giants. So those are some damn good teams. The Cowboys finished 8-8 vs a .500+ schedule, so don't count them out of the mix in 2013. The Rams, Saints, Panthers, Bucs, & Dolphins finished 7-9 against .500+ competition, so we should keep an eye on them as well.
The truly worst team in the NFL of 2012, imo, was the Oakland Raiders finishing with only 4 wins against a .469 schedule followed by the Buffalo Bills, 6-10 @ .480. Well, the Raiders did sweep the Chiefs, so I gotta think about that one some more.