BTB: No way the Dallas Cowboys defense is a top 10 unit. Or is it?

[jday]

Conversations about the Cowboys defense tend to quickly devolve into a Miller Light-style back and forth (“Great taste” - “Less filling”) where a stat purportedly showing how good (or bad) the defense was is quickly countered by a stat pointing out the opposite.

“The Cowboys defense ranked fifth in points allowed!”

“But they ranked 27th in interceptions!”

Cherry-picking your stats to make your point about the Cowboys defense isn't hard. In fact, it's quite easy, because the Cowboys defense is ranked all over the place. Some examples:

The rest: https://www.bloggingtheboys.com/201...s-it-rod-marinelli-jaylon-smith-jourdan-lewis

My take: This is the most on point explanation of why the Cowboys defense doesn't look pretty on paper that I have read. Enjoy!

 

[AsthmaField]

So BTB is bullish on the Cowboys defense? Color me not-surprised.

Not directed at you J.

 

[CalPolyTechnique]

So BTB is bullish on the Cowboys defense? Color me not-surprised.

Not directed at you J.

x100

 

[AsthmaField]

x100

It is just too much.

What is funny is that I'm a positive, optimistic fan and I usually lean too much to the "too high hopes" side of things. But BTB is just 100% cheerleading and they're simply unrealistic with a lot of their stuff.

I don't know... maybe I'm being too hard on them. I just like objective writing though unless it is simply from fans (which of course is all BTB is).

 

[Pandora]

So BTB is bullish on the Cowboys defense? Color me not-surprised..

I'm not sure that's the point of the article, even if headline-only readers might come away with that impression.

The article argues that the Cowboys have been a "borderline top 10" defense against big plays not just recently, but for the last three years, and has the numbers to prove it. It then argues that a defense designed to stop the big play will necessarily give up a lot of short and intermediate yards, which is why the Cowboys defense may look bad on a stat sheet, but ultimately delivers in terms of points allowed.

Frankly, that feels well argued.

 

[big dog cowboy]

My answer is simple - it doesn't matter what it is now.

Fast forward to December and January when I expect it to be much better.

How good will the Cowboys defense be when it's crunch time. When it's playoff time.

Post season matters not July 20th, especially this year given the huge turnover in talent.

 

[AsthmaField]

I'm not sure that's the point of the article, even if headline-only readers might come away with that impression.

The article argues that the Cowboys have been a "borderline top 10" defense against big plays not just recently, but for the last three years, and has the numbers to prove it. It then argues that a defense designed to stop the big play will necessarily give up a lot of short and intermediate yards, which is why the Cowboys defense may look bad on a stat sheet, but ultimately delivers in terms of points allowed.

Frankly, that feels well argued.

There is no doubt that my opinion in this thread is colored by years of non-objective, cheerleading, overly homeristic fan views from that site... so you very well could have a point there.

Unfortunately, if it is an objective piece... it's like a four leaf clover for BTB.

 

[jday]

So BTB is bullish on the Cowboys defense? Color me not-surprised.

Not directed at you J.

I get it. BTB does have a tendency to be drunk on the silver & blue koolaid, which is why I take most things from there with a grain of salt. But this was on point and merely an expansion on what Marinelli has been saying for some time now. There are alot of stats that analyst abroad hang their hat on when comparing teams that just don't make sense when you consider the variety in schemes and what those schemes focus on. The Cowboys run a bend don't break defense, which essentially means they place a premium on keeping the ball in front of them at all times. On one hand, that means teams complete alot of passes against the Cowboys and amass alot of yards. However, in the stats that ultimately counts above everything else they are top 5: Points allowed.

Unfortunately, every time I point that out, someone absolutely has to bring up the Packers game; the outlier in this conversation. In the first half neither the Cowboys offense or defense looked anywhere close to the same team we saw in the regular season. So to suggest that the Cowboys passrush was finally exposed after 16 games is simply ridiculous to me. There are alot of explanations for the team we saw in the first half of that fateful game, but I don't think a lack of a passrush comes anywhere close to being the predominant reason.

 

[erod]

LOL

If you accidentally watch the game, it's pretty clear this defense sucks.

Statistics and rankings are for those who don't understand what they're looking at.

 

[Idgit]

I'm in this weird place where they were better than we had any right to expect them to be last season. I like the personnel we've got now slightly better than what we had last year overall, and I expect the defensive team to be better by the end of the season than we were last season.

But I still don't expect them to perform at a higher level than we did last year overall in terms of points, because it seems unreasonable. So I find myself I guess expecting we be better but perform worse somehow. And that makes no sense.

 

[jday]

It is just too much.

What is funny is that I'm a positive, optimistic fan and I usually lean too much to the "too high hopes" side of things. But BTB is just 100% cheerleading and they're simply unrealistic with a lot of their stuff.

I don't know... maybe I'm being too hard on them. I just like objective writing though unless it is simply from fans (which of course is all BTB is).

This really is one of their more subjective pieces, believe it or not. No sweeping proclamations or projections contained therein. He is simply pointing out what Marinelli has said he wants his defense to do and then the author proved Marinelli has been successful in doing what he set out to do.

 

[Trouty]

So BTB is bullish on the Cowboys defense? Color me not-surprised.

Not directed at you J.

I adore your displeasure with BtB, Asthma!

I, too, share the same exact feelings (and, like yourself, fall on the optimistic-spectrum of fandom).

I cringe when I go there. The responses/posts co-sign and enable their "editors", too. I so badly want to rain on their parade, but have already been "flagged" for questioning some longtime member there.

Gah!

 

[Idgit]

LOL

If you accidentally watch the game, it's pretty clear this defense sucks.

Statistics and rankings are for those who don't understand what they're looking at.

We actually didn't 'suck' though. We played sound football overall. Everybody was in position, they mostly took good angles and tackled well. No blown coverages. We just lack game changers on that side of the ball. We'd get beat by balls getting into small windows or QBs getting pressure buy being able to move in the pocket just enough to find time downfield. We had few turnovers. Those are the things that happen when your players know what to do and are well-coached, but just aren't physically talented enough.

 

[AsthmaField]

This really is one of their more subjective pieces, believe it or not. No sweeping proclamations or projections contained therein. He is simply pointing out what Marinelli has said he wants his defense to do and then the author proved Marinelli has been successful in doing what he set out to do.

I'll try reading it with an open, unbiased mind. Thanks man.

 

[jday]

I'm not sure that's the point of the article, even if headline-only readers might come away with that impression.

The article argues that the Cowboys have been a "borderline top 10" defense against big plays not just recently, but for the last three years, and has the numbers to prove it. It then argues that a defense designed to stop the big play will necessarily give up a lot of short and intermediate yards, which is why the Cowboys defense may look bad on a stat sheet, but ultimately delivers in terms of points allowed.

Frankly, that feels well argued.

Thank you. I was starting to wonder if anyone would actually bother reading it before jumping to conclusions based on the source.

 

[AsthmaField]

I adore your displeasure with BtB, Asthma!

I, too, share the same exact feelings (and, like yourself, fall on the optimistic-spectrum of fandom).

I cringe when I go there. The responses/posts co-sign and enable their "editors", too. I so badly want to rain on their parade, but have already been "flagged" for questioning some longtime member there.

Gah!

Yeah, that's pretty much my take on that place... and I hate that I feel that way. Wish is didn't. Maybe if I try to look at it as fan opinion instead of biased journalism?

I don't know.

Ultimately, they're fine without me reading their stuff, so I don't think they care what I think.

 

[erod]

We actually didn't 'suck' though. We played sound football overall. Everybody was in position, they mostly took good angles and tackled well. No blown coverages. We just lack game changers on that side of the ball. We'd get beat by balls getting into small windows or QBs getting pressure buy being able to move in the pocket just enough to find time downfield. We had few turnovers. Those are the things that happen when your players know what to do and are well-coached, but just aren't physically talented enough.

I agree, the coaching is good, the scheme is good, and the effort is good. But the defense sucks.

It's about pass rush, first and foremost, but that's a tough think to fix quickly, especially when we keep drafting and acquiring Cheech and Chong to do it for us.

 

[jday]

I'm in this weird place where they were better than we had any right to expect them to be last season. I like the personnel we've got now slightly better than what we had last year overall, and I expect the defensive team to be better by the end of the season than we were last season.

But I still don't expect them to perform at a higher level than we did last year overall in terms of points, because it seems unreasonable. So I find myself I guess expecting we be better but perform worse somehow. And that makes no sense.

For the upcoming season, it would probably be better to evaluate this defense every four games; divide the season in quarters. Because I expect they'll struggle early on; especially with all the new moving parts and rookies involved. However, as the season progresses, there could be a significant and clear turnaround as this defense starts to gel...and that is especially the case if Jaylon turns out to be an exact replica of the myth.
So they may take a step back in big plays allowed; rookie mistakes happen. But at the same time, I could also see them having a marked increase in both turnovers and sacks. Either way, I'm expecting good enough for playoff contention. From there, if we can catch some luck in the health department and this defense gels like I expect to by Thanksgiving, we could be setup for one hell of a run in the postseason.

 

[jday]

I adore your displeasure with BtB, Asthma!

I, too, share the same exact feelings (and, like yourself, fall on the optimistic-spectrum of fandom).

I cringe when I go there. The responses/posts co-sign and enable their "editors", too. I so badly want to rain on their parade, but have already been "flagged" for questioning some longtime member there.

Gah!

Like I said to Asthma, I completely get it. I share the same disdain for those rah rah subjective pieces they are known for. But this isn't that. You should check it out, Trouty. Nothing ground breaking, mind you. It just reinforces something I've been screaming for awhile now. It seems like everyone knows we run a bend don't break defense, but then these same people blast the Cowboys for allowing alot of yards, when by design that's exactly what happens when you have a bend don't break defense.

For that scheme, you look at really one thing: points allowed. The Cowboys were 5th in points allowed last year, so I'd say that scheme was a success.

The problem is, people have a tendency to point to the playoffs and say we were exposed there as a result of our defense when really the onus was on the entire team for the first half. The offense didn't play like we were used to seeing them play during the season and the defense followed suit allowing the Packers to hang 21 points on them in the first half. Outside of the last gimme game against the Commanders, that was the only time the Cowboys defense allowed that to happen all year.

 

[Trouty]

Like I said to Asthma, I completely get it. I share the same disdain for those rah rah subjective pieces they are known for. But this isn't that. You should check it out, Trouty. Nothing ground breaking, mind you. It just reinforces something I've been screaming for awhile now. It seems like everyone knows we run a bend don't break defense, but then these same people blast the Cowboys for allowing alot of yards, when by design that's exactly what happens when you have a bend don't break defense.

For that scheme, you look at really one thing: points allowed. The Cowboys were 5th in points allowed last year, so I'd say that scheme was a success.

The problem is, people have a tendency to point to the playoffs and say we were exposed there as a result of our defense when really the onus was on the entire team for the first half. The offense didn't play like we were used to seeing them play during the season and the defense followed suit allowing the Packers to hang 21 points on them in the first half. Outside of the last gimme game against the Commanders, that was the only time the Cowboys defense allowed that to happen all year.

Fair enough, J, I'll check it out. I read about 3 or 4 articles straight from their site a week. I'll read this one, brother