Which NFC team improved the most

Aerolithe_Lion

Well-Known Member
Messages
10,786
Reaction score
11,698
Just a humble suggestion on my part but perhaps you should consider re-reading your reply to me, word-for-word, if you still have any lingering doubts.

It is re-read, and I further enforce my position on the matter. He made his comments in reply to me saying Dallas won’t make it with their defense, saying only passing offense defines potential implies he is belittling the value of defense as an NFC contender.

However Multiple teams in his oddly specific 5 year window have also made the top 4 without a great passing offense, making those statements also inaccurate. When there are enough exceptions, it no longer becomes a rule.

Balanced teams make it the furthest in the playoffs, but you can achieve success with an overly dominant asset that can compensate for a deficiency. Dallas’s 2020 defense was beyond the state of deficiency, and it will take more than this offseason to bring it to the level it needs to be to add to the likes of TB, LAR, GB, SEA.
 

Future

Intramural Legend
Messages
27,566
Reaction score
14,714
It is re-read, and I further enforce my position on the matter. He made his comments in reply to me saying Dallas won’t make it with their defense, saying only passing offense defines potential implies he is belittling the value of defense as an NFC contender.

However Multiple teams in his oddly specific 5 year window have also made the top 4 without a great passing offense, making those statements also inaccurate. When there are enough exceptions, it no longer becomes a rule.

Balanced teams make it the furthest in the playoffs, but you can achieve success with an overly dominant asset that can compensate for a deficiency. Dallas’s 2020 defense was beyond the state of deficiency, and it will take more than this offseason to bring it to the level it needs to be to add to the likes of TB, LAR, GB, SEA.
It's not oddly specific, 2016 is when they changed the emphasis on illegal contact and passing numbers exploded and turnovers plummeted. In 2020, league-wide completions per game, completion %, INT%, and passer rating were all the best they've ever been. The top 5 in just about all passing categories are from 2015 or later.
 

Aerolithe_Lion

Well-Known Member
Messages
10,786
Reaction score
11,698
It's not oddly specific, 2016 is when they changed the emphasis on illegal contact and passing numbers exploded and turnovers plummeted. In 2020, league-wide completions per game, completion %, INT%, and passer rating were all the best they've ever been. The top 5 in just about all passing categories are from 2015 or later.

I believe the 2020 stat was a direct result of the truncated training camp and lack of preseason games, as that impacts defense much more than offense (especially if you have one of THOSE QBs). But the 2016 point makes sense
 

charron

Well-Known Member
Messages
13,291
Reaction score
13,655
CowboysZone LOYAL Fan
All teams believe they have improved the best.

2019 we had our best passing numbers under Dak's tenure, amounted to a whopping 8-8. It just goes to prove that we need the defense to step up and help out and we have no clue just how good these bunch of really inexperienced guys can be in a new system.
 

Diehardblues

Well-Known Member
Messages
55,143
Reaction score
36,328
I don't really understand how you disagree. It is factual. The teams you specifically called out have no consistency. There is absolutely no correlation between recent or consistent playoff success and going to or winning a Super Bowl. So no, the Cowboys haven't been there, but that's not predictive of anything moving forward.
I didn’t say there was a correlation between recent success and going to the Super Bowl. I said the teams with more recent success would be the ones we’d more likely consider contenders.
 

Future

Intramural Legend
Messages
27,566
Reaction score
14,714
I didn’t say there was a correlation between recent success and going to the Super Bowl. I said the teams with more recent success would be the ones we’d more likely consider contenders.
Same difference. There's no reason to make that connection if there's no assumed correlation.
 

Diehardblues

Well-Known Member
Messages
55,143
Reaction score
36,328
Same difference. There's no reason to make that connection if there's no assumed correlation.
Maybe in your mind but not mine. A consistent contender doesn’t mean going to the Super Bowl.

Regardless based on recent history the Cowboys wouldn’t be in either mindset.
 

Future

Intramural Legend
Messages
27,566
Reaction score
14,714
Maybe in your mind but not mine. A consistent contender doesn’t mean going to the Super Bowl.

Regardless based on recent history the Cowboys wouldn’t be in either mindset.
I never said it does. But you referenced Tampa and Seattle as consistent contenders so I don't know what your qualifier can possibly be.
 

Diehardblues

Well-Known Member
Messages
55,143
Reaction score
36,328
I never said it does. But you referenced Tampa and Seattle as consistent contenders so I don't know what your qualifier can possibly be.
We’ve kinda taken a few turns weaving in and out here in this discussion so I don’t recall exactly .

But Tampa obviously wouldn’t be a consistent contender but rather a recent . Regardless they’d be one we’d consider a contender with recent history coming into this season. And Seattle’s recent history in playoffs would arguably place them in the mix IMO.

The bottomline in my examples is the Cowboys wouldn’t fall into any of these recent success categories to be considered a contender which was the overriding point.
 

Future

Intramural Legend
Messages
27,566
Reaction score
14,714
We’ve kinda taken a few turns weaving in and out here in this discussion so I don’t recall exactly .

But Tampa obviously wouldn’t be a consistent contender but rather a recent . Regardless they’d be one we’d consider a contender with recent history coming into this season. And Seattle’s recent history in playoffs would arguably place them in the mix IMO.

The bottomline in my examples is the Cowboys wouldn’t fall into any of these recent success categories to be considered a contender which was the overriding point.
Previous history does arguably count or we wouldn’t have potential .

We’d have to place Tampa, Green Bay and Seattle as the most consistent contenders returning in NFC. After that it’s pretty wide open and I’d put us up there with the best of the rest.
There's been nothing consistent about Seattle or Tampa, and GB has only kind of been.

Because of that, you can't use it as anything predictive relative to Dallas...
 

FuzzyLumpkins

The Boognish
Messages
35,685
Reaction score
27,237
Yes, you had that too in 2019 and finished 8-8. It takes a heck of a lot more than that to be one of the top teams. Your defense was abhorrent last year, and while you changed some names, actually improving them to the level of being “fixed” will take years

Why will it take years? Defense is much easier to implement.
 

DallasEast

Cowboys 24/7/365
Staff member
Messages
58,181
Reaction score
55,599
CowboysZone ULTIMATE Fan
It is re-read, and I further enforce my position on the matter. He made his comments in reply to me saying Dallas won’t make it with their defense, saying only passing offense defines potential implies he is belittling the value of defense as an NFC contender.

However Multiple teams in his oddly specific 5 year window have also made the top 4 without a great passing offense, making those statements also inaccurate. When there are enough exceptions, it no longer becomes a rule.

Balanced teams make it the furthest in the playoffs, but you can achieve success with an overly dominant asset that can compensate for a deficiency. Dallas’s 2020 defense was beyond the state of deficiency, and it will take more than this offseason to bring it to the level it needs to be to add to the likes of TB, LAR, GB, SEA.
I have been corrected since I signed off earlier. I owe you an apology. Sorry.
 

Rockport

AmberBeer
Messages
41,077
Reaction score
41,060
Yes, but the only way you do that is to score first and make the other team one dimensional, especially in a salary cap league.

There's not a defense in the league that can just line up and beat KC. If you get KC's A game, they are going to score 30 points every time. Even the Rams, good as they were last year, gave up 35 to Buffalo, 27 to Tampa and 32 to GB. Funny, those were all the in the top-10 of passing EPA. You just can not build a defense capable of defeating those offenses. It does not exist with the way the game is called.
Uh did you watch the Super Bowl?
 

Future

Intramural Legend
Messages
27,566
Reaction score
14,714
So a good defense stopped them. They made it to the SB with those injuries.
This is such a dumb point. Obviously, we're talking about healthy rosters. Do I really need to make that caveat in June?

EVEN STILL the bigger problem for the Chiefs was that they were trailing and had to get one dimensional...so it was more a product of their offense scoring, and the Chiefs dropping passes, than it was the defense being good.
 

Rockport

AmberBeer
Messages
41,077
Reaction score
41,060
This is such a dumb point. Obviously, we're talking about healthy rosters. Do I really need to make that caveat in June?

EVEN STILL the bigger problem for the Chiefs was that they were trailing and had to get one dimensional...so it was more a product of their offense scoring, and the Chiefs dropping passes, than it was the defense being good.
Too bad Dak didn’t get the same excuse early in the year before he was injured.
 
Top