2011 Packers (15-1) had the worst defense

[xwalker]

The 2011 Packers team that went 15-1 had the 32nd ranked defense in the league.

I found that interesting because there have been some questions about how much the Cowboys offense could carry the team this year if the defense just improved a little.

Cowboys 2013 415.3 yards/game

Packers 2011 411.6 yards/game

What saved the Packers defense was that they were tied for 1st in total takeaways with 38.

In 2013, the Cowboys were tied for 13th with 28 total takeaways.

 

[jazzcat22]

can't wait to see the responses to this...

 

[guag]

I read somewhere that total yards given up by a defense isn't necessarily correlated with number of wins (that 1000 page Romo stats thread I think?)

 

[Fla Cowpoke]

That turnover number can be the real game changer.

 

[Apollo Creed]

Considering we lost so many games by one score or less, 10 extra turnovers/possessions for our offense on short fields - would've been the difference in being 8-8 and being 11-5.

 

[peplaw06]

They also gave up "only" 359 points, or 22.4 per game. We gave up 432, or 27 per game.

 

[Future]

There are a couple of big differences between that GB team and this Dallas team.

For one, their schedule was a joke that year...but more importantly, they were able to win the games where their defense gave up a lot of points. Dallas never did that. GB scored more than 35 points 8 times and won them all. Last year, the Cowboys only did it 3 times...losing 2 of them.

 

[xwalker]

I read somewhere that total yards given up by a defense isn't necessarily correlated with number of wins (that 1000 page Romo stats thread I think?)

Yes, it's odd that yardage is the measurement for ranking defenses. Obviously, each turnover offsets some amount of yardage given up.

I would rank defenses by some combination of points allowed and turnovers. I don't really care about yardage.

 

[Future]

Yes, it's odd that yardage is the measurement for ranking defenses. Obviously, each turnover offsets some amount of yardage given up.

I would rank defenses by some combination of points allowed and turnovers. I don't really care about yardage.

Yardage has to be included because it has such a huge impact on time of possession and just overall tempo control.

I think 3rd down % is pretty valuable as well.

 

[xwalker]

They also gave up "only" 359 points, or 22.4 per game. We gave up 432, or 27 per game.

Yes, points allowed and turnovers seem more important than yards allowed.

 

[JBS]

same recipe the saints used when they won the superbowl. not certain where they ranked in defensive standings...but they were very opportunistic and had a ton of takeaways

 

[Doomsday101]

One way to look at this is GB gave up 22 points a game that year while scoring a league high 35 points a game. Meantime 2013 Dallas scored 27 points a game that ranked 5th in the NFL but we also gave up 27 points a game which ranked 26th in the NFL and an 8-8 record.

 

[Doomsday101]

same recipe the saints used when they won the superbowl. not certain where they ranked in defensive standings...but they were very opportunistic and had a ton of takeaways

It is simular to the Pack. NO gave up 21 points a game but also scored 31 points a game.

 

[gimmesix]

The 2011 Packers team that went 15-1 had the 32nd ranked defense in the league.

I found that interesting because there have been some questions about how much the Cowboys offense could carry the team this year if the defense just improved a little.

Cowboys 2013 415.3 yards/game

Packers 2011 411.6 yards/game

What saved the Packers defense was that they were tied for 1st in total takeaways with 38.

In 2013, the Cowboys were tied for 13th with 28 total takeaways.

So if we lead the league in takeaways, we should win the Super Bowl?

That doesn't instill me with much confidence.

 

[Super_Kazuya]

It's fairly deceptive... that team hammered other teams on offense and I'm sure ended up playing a lot of prevent defense. You might look at the Chargers game where they gave up 460 yards and think it was a close game, but it wasn't a close game. It was garbage time. I'm sure there were several like that. Also their stats certainly weren't helped by giving up nearly 600 yards in that totally meaningless exhibition game at the end of the year that made Matt Flynn rich.

Obviously this wasn't a stellar defense, but it wasn't anywhere near as bad as ours. We were actually really trying to stop the other team, not just running out the clock after we had walloped the crap out of them for 3 quarters.

 

[xwalker]

So if we lead the league in takeaways, we should win the Super Bowl?

That doesn't instill me with much confidence.

Obviously not.

I'm sure that a defense ranked 8th that is also 8th in turnovers is better than a defense ranked 32nd that is 1st in turnovers.

I don't know what the formula would be, but obviously, ranking the 2011 Packers defense as 32nd base solely on yardage was probably not an accurate ranking of their actual effectiveness.

 

[Doomsday101]

So if we lead the league in takeaways, we should win the Super Bowl?

That doesn't instill me with much confidence.

Not really when it all is said and done it is about giving up points. Biggest stat by any defense and offense is points. No one won based on yardage you win because you put up more points and gave up less points. Turnovers clearly are a big help since it takes the ball away and gives your offense a chance to score but in the end it comes down to point

 

[gimmesix]

Obviously not.

I'm sure that a defense ranked 8th that is also 8th in turnovers is better than a defense ranked 32nd that is 1st in turnovers.

I don't know what the formula would be, but obviously, ranking the 2011 Packers defense as 32nd base solely on yardage was probably not an accurate ranking of their actual effectiveness.

I was just playing.

I think the likelihood of Dallas ending up No. 1 in turnovers isn't that high and I'm not even sure the likelihood that the defense will be better than last year is that high, but there could be some surprises on that side of the ball that allow the defense to do just enough to allow the offense to get another win or two out of the season, which likely would be enough to make the playoffs.

I'm not sure Dallas has a chance to do much in the playoffs, though, unless Dallas makes a big leap forward on defense (which is impossible to predict) or the offense proves virtually unstoppable (which it hasn't to this point).

 

[xwalker]

Yardage has to be included because it has such a huge impact on time of possession and just overall tempo control.

I think 3rd down % is pretty valuable as well.

Well some of that is reflected in scoring.

The advantage of time of possession is that it keeps your defense off the field. If your defense was top 10 in points allowed but 32nd in yards allowed, who cares about the yardage or time of possession? The bottom line is that if they're top 10 in scores allowed I don't care how long they were on the field.

It's similar with 3rd down percentage. If they're top 10 in scores allowed, then I don't care about the 3rd down percentage. Most likely the 3rd down percentage is good if the scores allowed was top 10.

 

[DFWJC]

The 2011 Packers team that went 15-1 had the 32nd ranked defense in the league.

I found that interesting because there have been some questions about how much the Cowboys offense could carry the team this year if the defense just improved a little.

Cowboys 2013 415.3 yards/game

Packers 2011 411.6 yards/game

What saved the Packers defense was that they were tied for 1st in total takeaways with 38.

In 2013, the Cowboys were tied for 13th with 28 total takeaways.

As long as your defense dominates in takeaways, you can cover up a lot of sins on yardage given up....but expecting to get turnovers is very dicey.
The same thing took place, somewhat, when the Saints won it all.

If anything, the OP shows how overwhelming the odds are against any team with a terrible defense. They basically need to lead the league in defensive turnovers AND have a totally dominant and efficient offense (like NO and GB did) to have a chance. That may happen once every 40 years.