The defense will be better with Zeke

[Sydla]

You can look back and see I never made any argument about any of the bolded.

But you kind of are when you say "Elliott will help the defense".

He really won't. He will/can help the offense but in the end, the defense's success lays largely on how they play themselves, not anything Elliott does. Further, if one is using the theory that the offense scoring more points than they did in 2015 will help the defense, then the player most responsible for that is not Elliott, but rather Tony Romo. He's the single biggest factor in how effective this offense will be.

So pretty much however you want to slice it, Elliott isn't this magic elixir to making the defense all that effective in 2016. That's the point people are trying to make.

 

[Sydla]

1. Field position.
That was easy

LOL.

 

[CowboyRoy]

1. Field position.
That was easy

Cmon, you have to be kidding me. That is a hell of a stretch.

 

[percyhoward]

Depends on what your definition of Especially effective is.
Show me what play action %'s were for Romo because of the threat of Murray and the running game.
Show me How much 1 on 1 coverage the WR's and TE's received because of the threat of run.

That's a completely different point than "if you can't run effectively when it counts you will lose." If by that, you mean that making defenses play honest opens up opportunities for your passing game, I agree.

 

[bsheeern]

I don't think anybody's saying Elliott doesn't give us options that we currently lack, so if that's the debate, I'm not disagreeing with you. I think he's a tremendous player.

We don't have to agree on your idea that execution comes from places that stats can never show, then, I hope? The whole point of statistics is to attempt to measure the right things consistently and carefully and in such a way as you can use the information for comparison purposes. It's an imperfect science, for sure, but that doesn't mean it can be useful in measuring execution.

I think the OP is an argument that Zeke doesn't make the defense better. But clearly he can affect the situations the defense is setup to go against right? IE field position So could that in turn give you a more effective defense? Effective is better right?

 

[bsheeern]

That's a completely different point than "if you can't run effectively when it counts you will lose." If by that, you mean that making defenses play honest opens up opportunities for your passing game, I agree.

Well that is what Effective running games do. 3.6 on first down and 3.6 on second down gives you 3rd and a little less than 3 to go. Now show me how effective teams are passing on 3rd and 3 vs 3rd and 7 or more.

 

[percyhoward]

3.6 plus 3.6 plus 3.6 is more than 10 isnt it?

By that logic, all you'd need to average is 2.5 actually.

 

[CowboyRoy]

By that logic, all you'd need to average is 2.5 actually.

Yah, Im not a big Murray fan so I am not going to stick up for him. But the run game I applaud heavily. Now I agree it helps out the defense and the passing game and Romo, but it doesnt make the defense better. It just better helps you hide them and keeps them fresh.

 

[CowboyRoy]

By that logic, all you'd need to average is 2.5 actually.

And FYI......no one is running on 4th and 2.5

 

[CowboyRoy]

I think the OP is an argument that Zeke doesn't make the defense better. But clearly he can affect the situations the defense is setup to go against right? IE field position So could that in turn give you a more effective defense? Effective is better right?

Yes and yes. He definitely affects it no question. It can help the D, but it doesnt make it better.

 

[percyhoward]

Well that is what Effective running games do. 3.6 on first down and 3.6 on second down gives you 3rd and a little less than 3 to go. Now show me how effective teams are passing on 3rd and 3 vs 3rd and 7 or more.

Not that it has anything to do with "running effectively when it counts," but there were 26 teams that averaged at least 3.6 YPC on both 1st and 2nd down last year.

 

[jnday]

You can't measure how much effect one has on the other with a stat especially across the league as a whole. Different players, different schemes & tons of variables. Ask That guy in New England. Efficiency comes from execution. Execution comes from places that stats can never show.

Bottom line on this whole thread is that Elliott gives this team options that we lack. Those options SHOULD make this ENTIRE team better. Offense, Defense and Special teams. Same can be said for any player drafted so the premise of the OP is pretty much saying there is no cause-effect relationship between either side of the ball.


Urban Meyer said that Elliott is "The Greatest player I Have EVER coached without the ball in his hands". No coach just says that.

Good post .

 

[percyhoward]

And FYI......no one is running on 4th and 2.5

Ain't too many people running on 3rd and 3 either.

 

[CowboyRoy]

Ain't too many people running on 3rd and 3 either.

Ain't too many people running on 3rd and 3 either.

Agreed, but at least its 3rd and 3.

 

[bsheeern]

Not that it has anything to do with "running effectively when it counts," but there were 26 teams that averaged at least 3.6 YPC on both 1st and 2nd down last year.

Well as you can see there's way more to the equation that just what the stats show.

 

[bsheeern]

Yah, Im not a big Murray fan so I am not going to stick up for him. But the run game I applaud heavily. Now I agree it helps out the defense and the passing game and Romo, but it doesnt make the defense better. It just better helps you hide them and keeps them fresh.[/quote]

LOL that's the whole point of your thread. If it helps them out then odds are they are going to be better at what they do.

 

[percyhoward]

Agreed, but at least its 3rd and 3.

To sum up, 3.6 may not be that great, but it sure beats 2.5.

 

[bsheeern]

Yes and yes. He definitely affects it no question. It can help the D, but it doesnt make it better.

This post right here is what most people will disagree with. If it helps them give up less points because of all the variables previously measured, then ultimately they are better in the results department.

 

[CowboyRoy]

LOL that's the whole point of your thread. If it helps them out then odds are they are going to be better at what they do.

I started the thread buddy. Its not the point at all. You are missing it. The point is that it helps, but doesnt make it better. When they line up, there is no better talent and no better ability to stop the opponent.
At some point, the only way to improve the defense is to draft blue chip players to play on defense. A great offense can certainly help circumstances for the D, but it wont make them better by any stretch.

 

[CowboyRoy]

This post right here is what most people will disagree with. If it helps them give up less points because of all the variables previously measured, then ultimately they are better in the results department.

Results department it will help. But nothing because of what the D did. Less time on the field will make for less points scored which will make the D look better. But it really isnt. Being up on the opponent can make their offense one dimensional and help the D to T off on the pass. But it doesnt make them better. When you are in the playoffs against great teams and you need a stop to win the game you will be left wanting. Zeke will not help that D in that situation sitting on the bench.