Week 7 Drive Report: The NFC North Is a Four-Team Race
All four NFC North teams now make the playoffs in at least half of our simulated seasons, after Green Bay's playoff chance jumped from 31% to 51%. Plus the Rams' slide after a field-goal loss to Arizona, Houston's offense, and how our Week 6 forecasts did.
By Advanced Football StatsPublished
Ratings entering Week 7 of the 2026 season, built from every drive through the previous week's games, compared with the ratings entering Week 6.
Every team in the NFC North now makes the playoffs in at least half of our simulated seasons. Green Bay's 23-13 win over Dallas lifted the Packers from 31% to 51%, joining Minnesota (72%), Chicago (69%) and Detroit (64%). Four teams with a real shot, and only one division title to go around.
Power rankings: biggest movers
Power rank orders teams by their simulated win rate against the rest of the league.
| Team | Rank | Change | Sim. win rate | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Riser | San Francisco 49ers | 2 (was 9) | +7 | 52.7% → 59.5% |
| Riser | New York Jets | 19 (was 26) | +7 | 40.7% → 46.7% |
| Riser | Houston Texans | 11 (was 16) | +5 | 48.7% → 54.7% |
| Faller | Los Angeles Chargers | 30 (was 21) | −9 | 44.7% → 37.8% |
| Faller | Los Angeles Rams | 8 (was 1) | −7 | 65.3% → 56.4% |
| Faller | Tennessee Titans | 32 (was 25) | −7 | 41.3% → 36.8% |
San Francisco is back near the top. The 49ers beat Washington 23-17 with touchdowns on 3 of their 9 drives and 38 yards a drive, and they move from No. 9 to No. 2, behind Buffalo. They still lead the league in combined drive efficiency.
Last week's No. 1, the Rams, fall to No. 8 after an 18-16 home loss to Arizona. The Cardinals never reached the end zone, but they kicked six field goals on 10 drives, while the Rams turned the ball over on downs twice and lost a fumble. The Chargers, now 0-6, drop to No. 30 after going without a touchdown in Kansas City.
Offense: drive efficiency movers
The offensive rating is the team's effect on how drives end in our drive model. Higher is better.
| Team | Rank | Change | Rating | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Riser | New York Jets | 25 (was 30) | +5 | −0.248 → −0.144 |
| Riser | Jacksonville Jaguars | 8 (was 12) | +4 | +0.074 → +0.141 |
| Riser | Houston Texans | 17 (was 20) | +3 | −0.065 → +0.022 |
| Faller | New Orleans Saints | 19 (was 13) | −6 | +0.064 → −0.008 |
| Faller | Baltimore Ravens | 13 (was 8) | −5 | +0.112 → +0.057 |
| Faller | Cleveland Browns | 30 (was 26) | −4 | −0.170 → −0.227 |
The best offensive game of the week came in London, and both teams had a hand in it. Houston averaged 45 yards a drive and scored touchdowns on 4 of 10 drives in a 34-31 win over Jacksonville; the Jaguars scored four touchdowns of their own on 40 yards a drive. Both offenses climbed. The Jets scored on five of their 11 drives in New England, but four of those were field goals.
New Orleans is the odd one out among the fallers: the Saints scored 34 points against the Giants, yet averaged only 19 yards a drive across 16 possessions, with seven punts. Four Giants turnovers gave them extra chances. Baltimore and Cleveland combined for 14 punts in a 13-10 game.
Defense: drive efficiency movers
The defensive rating measures how a defense changes opponents' drive outcomes. Higher is better.
| Team | Rank | Change | Rating | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Riser | Baltimore Ravens | 10 (was 18) | +8 | −0.001 → +0.022 |
| Riser | New York Giants | 22 (was 29) | +7 | −0.061 → −0.021 |
| Riser | Cleveland Browns | 8 (was 14) | +6 | +0.006 → +0.026 |
| Faller | Jacksonville Jaguars | 27 (was 19) | −8 | −0.008 → −0.038 |
| Faller | New York Jets | 15 (was 8) | −7 | +0.047 → +0.012 |
| Faller | Houston Texans | 11 (was 5) | −6 | +0.063 → +0.019 |
The other side of that Baltimore-Cleveland game shows up here: both defenses climbed, each holding the other to about 20 yards a drive. The fallers are London's two defenses and the Jets', which gave up three touchdowns in Foxborough. As usual, defensive ratings move less than offensive ones, so these rank changes rest on small differences.
Playoff chances: biggest swings
Each team's chance to make the playoffs from our full-season simulation, which plays out the rest of the schedule and applies the NFL's tiebreakers.
| Team | Record | Playoff chance | Change (pts) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Up | Green Bay Packers | 4-2 | 31% → 51% | +20 |
| Up | Carolina Panthers | 3-2 | 66% → 80% | +14 |
| Up | Houston Texans | 2-4 | 25% → 38% | +13 |
| Down | Los Angeles Rams | 2-4 | 54% → 35% | −19 |
| Down | Baltimore Ravens | 4-2 | 73% → 58% | −15 |
| Down | Seattle Seahawks | 3-3 | 61% → 48% | −13 |
Out west, the NFC West is starting to look settled. San Francisco's chance is up to 96%, and the 49ers win the division in most of our simulations. Behind them, the Rams (35%) and Seattle (48%, after a 17-14 loss in Denver with three turnovers) both lost ground. In the AFC, Baltimore's chance fell from 73% to 58% after the loss in Cleveland, while Houston's 34-31 win in London pushed the 2-4 Texans from 25% to 38%.
Want to see how this week could change your team's chances? Pick the winners in our playoff scenario planner and watch the odds move.
How our forecasts did
Week 6 was another coin-flip week. Our forecasts picked the winner in 7 of 14 games, with a Brier score of 0.258 (lower is better; calling every game 50-50 scores 0.250). The misses that stung: the Rams at 69% against Arizona, Seattle at 67% in Denver, and Indianapolis and Baltimore, both near 61%, losing to Tennessee and Cleveland.
Through three weeks we're 26 for 44 (59%) with a Brier score of 0.240. Every forecast is in our public prediction log before kickoff, so you can check each one.
Top 5 in combined drive efficiency entering Week 7
| Rank | Team | Record | Combined efficiency | Offense rank | Defense rank | Ball security rank | Takeaways rank | Playoff chance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | San Francisco 49ers | 6-0 | +0.313 | 2 | 12 | 2 | 10 | 96% |
| 2 | Buffalo Bills | 5-1 | +0.256 | 1 | 30 | 6 | 32 | 89% |
| 3 | Los Angeles Rams | 2-4 | +0.235 | 5 | 6 | 23 | 17 | 35% |
| 4 | New England Patriots | 4-2 | +0.217 | 6 | 7 | 24 | 20 | 83% |
| 5 | Kansas City Chiefs | 5-0 | +0.180 | 8 | 17 | 16 | 3 | 90% |
How these numbers work
Ratings come from our Bayesian drive-survival model, which estimates how each offense and defense changes the way drives end. Combined efficiency adds the drive-ending and turnover ratings of the offense and the defense (0 = league average); the offense and defense ranks are by each side's combined rating. Ball security and takeaways are the turnover parts on their own: how rarely an offense gives the ball away, and how often a defense takes it. Ranks run from 1 (best) to 32; tied values share a rank. Read the methodology for details.
Full tables: power rankings, combined drive efficiency, offensive drive efficiency and defensive drive efficiency, plus every team's playoff chances.