Cowboys defensive rankings during Super Bowl years

[Diehardblues]

Responding to anyone who thinks Dak is GOAT , etc is fools gold. Why bother. Let their thread fall off the front page. Otherwise it gives their thought legs and provides some validity.

 

[Diehardblues]

True. The only reason he keeps posting the garbage is because he wants to be an ace hole to members who don't worship at the Dak alter like he does. Although I wonder sometimes if he really isn't that big of a Dak fan, that he just likes being an ace hole to everyone.

He’s a cheerleader. Let him cheer. Who frikin cares.

Do we listen to cheerleaders for analysis ? Lol Hell no.

Cheerleaders don’t provide critical thinking.

 

[acr731]

Responding to anyone who thinks Dak is GOAT , etc is fools gold. Why bother. Let their thread fall off the front page. Otherwise it gives their thought legs and provides some validity.

It wouldn't bother me if Dak eventually made it into that conversation (the GOAT conversation) at some point in his career. It might mean the TEAM is tearing it up and pushing for #6. As it stands today making it to the super bowl is nothing but a dream.

 

[Brax]

What eye test? The vast majority of defensive stats showed that the 2016 and 2018 defenses were really good. Looking at points per game solely or yards per game solely hides the fact that the defense was protected by not being on the field. It's not that hard a concept to grasp. If your defense isn't on the field as much as other defenses, they likely are going to keep yardage and points totals down. So to confirm that, you look at stats per drive and when you do that you see those "good" 2016 and 2018 defenses were actually not so good because when you compare drive data to the league, the Cowboys were downright mediocre in points per drive, yards per drive, time on the field per drive, etc.

Take Dak out of this. Any person that thinks the 2016 and 2018 defenses were good is trying to spin a certain narrative.

Isn't that what complementary football is about? The offense had good supporting D's and did nothing with them why would it change now . The OP is implying Dak needs good D's yet when showing these D's based on NFL rankings where good now the stats mean nothing because they don't support a narrative . I guess you missed all those game the offense disappeared and the defense did their job so I don't agree with your spin. If you think top tier QBs wouldn't of excelled with those teams you are wrong which is why many don't believe Dak is a top tier QB because of the results. Dak is paid as top tier QB but I do not expect the results to change ..

 

[Diehardblues]

It wouldn't bother me if Dak eventually made it into that conversation (the GOAT conversation) at some point in his career. It might mean the TEAM is tearing it up and pushing for #6.

If there is any site this discussion might ever come up it would be a Cowboys fan site.

It’s really time for all of this foolishness to end. We waste too much time and too many threads . Most fans get it and we can have intelligent dialogue.

 

[Typhus]

Another fact that is often lost in discussions and comparison.
In 1994, the salary cap was introduced to the NFL because player salaries in 1993 reached the agreed upon 67 percent of team revenues. Set at $34.6 million for its initial season, the cap intended to serve as an equalizer in response to free agency.
https://frontofficenfl.com/2018/03/13/the-history-of-nfl-free-agency/

 

[kskboys]

Responding to anyone who thinks Dak is GOAT , etc is fools gold. Why bother. Let their thread fall off the front page. Otherwise it gives their thought legs and provides some validity.

That's where the other extremists come in. They have to repeat their rhetoric. Most Dak fans/detractors are not able to participate in any other discussion.

 

[kskboys]

If there is any site this discussion might ever come up it would be a Cowboys fan site.

It’s really time for all of this foolishness to end. We waste too much time and too many threads . Most fans get it and we can have intelligent dialogue.

Only way to do that is to create their own place to play, and then get strict w/ the rules on them elsewhere.

 

[Diehardblues]

Only way to do that is to create their own place to play, and then get strict w/ the rules on them elsewhere.

Yep

I think the time has come for Daks own playground for both sides. In order to save the forum from both extremes.

 

[TwoCentPlain]

1971 they were 7th
1977 they were 8th
1992 they were 5th
1993 they were 2nd
1995 they were 3rd

Hopefully this will shut the Dak haters up but it won't. Can't wait to see the excuses coming.

What criteria was used to rank the defenses? Points? Yards?

 

[RichmondFan]

I thought in '92 we had the #1 defense. I remember the buzz of the 92 NFCCG was the 49ers #1 offense going against the Cowboys #1 defense.

O well, that just kind of surprised me. But as Jimmy Johnson used to say, offense sells tickets and defense wins championships. 100% facts right there.

Yes, and I'm pretty sure they were #1 on both offense and defense in 1977. The only Super Bowl winning team to be #1 on both sides of the ball. Where are you getting your numbers from?

 

[GMO415]

1971 they were 7th
1977 they were 8th
1992 they were 5th
1993 they were 2nd
1995 they were 3rd

Hopefully this will shut the Dak haters up but it won't. Can't wait to see the excuses coming.

Both HCs were DEF coaches too.

 

[kskboys]

Yep

I think the time has come for Daks own playground for both sides. In order to save the forum from both extremes.

Someone would have to be willing to take the extreme heat to straighten it out.

 

[Diehardblues]

Someone would have to be willing to take the extreme heat to straighten it out.

I’ve never shied away from getting in the fire of the kitchen. But unfortunately it’s probably going to take someone with muscle.

What concerns me on this site which I think is much better ran is that many of the members on both sides of the extremes are contributing financially which we are encouraged to show appreciation for. Im wondering if they are more or less untouchable.

If that’s the case then I’ll probably make my charge and then either bow out or be booted off as it becomes an uneven playing field which wouldn’t interest me anymore.

 

[Sydla]

Isn't that what complementary football is about? The offense had good supporting D's and did nothing with them why would it change now . The OP is implying Dak needs good D's yet when showing these D's based on NFL rankings where good now the stats mean nothing because they don't support a narrative . I guess you missed all those game the offense disappeared and the defense did their job so I don't agree with your spin. If you think top tier QBs wouldn't of excelled with those teams you are wrong which is why many don't believe Dak is a top tier QB because of the results. Dak is paid as top tier QB but I do not expect the results to change ..

But they weren't good defenses. That's the point. When you look at the totality of the defensive stats for 2016, for example, that wasn't a good defense. It just wasn't. And that's my point. It's not an excuse for Dak nor do I think he's the greatest of all time or any of that other stuff.

But some of you are so hell bent on taking Dak's knees out from under him that you make silly comments like how he was paired with a really good defense in 2016. He was not. If you want to think Dak is overrated, have at it. But don't use this idea that he failed on teams with really good defenses as proof. It makes one look really silly.

 

[Rockport]

He’s a cheerleader. Let him cheer. Who frikin cares.

Do we listen to cheerleaders for analysis ? Lol Hell no.

Cheerleaders don’t provide critical thinking.

I know a thing or two about football. Dak haters obviously don’t.

 

[kskboys]

But they weren't good defenses. That's the point. When you look at the totality of the defensive stats for 2016, for example, that wasn't a good defense. It just wasn't. And that's my point. It's not an excuse for Dak nor do I think he's the greatest of all time or any of that other stuff.

But some of you are so hell bent on taking Dak's knees out from under him that you make silly comments like how he was paired with a really good defense in 2016. He was not. If you want to think Dak is overrated, have at it. But don't use this idea that he failed on teams with really good defenses as proof. It makes one look really silly.

We haven't had a decent D since 09, and that D was just decent. The #9 ranking in yards allowed is much more accurate than the #2 ranking in points allowed.

 

[Sydla]

To prove my point:

In 2016 the Cowboys were 5th in scoring defense. People point to that as proof it was a really good defense. But when you dig further you find:

- They were 14th in yard per game
- They were 27th in interceptions
- They were 16th in total turnovers forced
- They were 16th in TD passes allowed
- They were 31st in completion percentage allowed
- They were 24th in opposing QB rating
- They were 13th in sacks
- They were 23rd in yards allowed per drive
- They were 12th in points allowed per drive
- They were 20th in turnovers per drive
- They were 28th in plays per drive
- They were 14th in DVOA

That 2016 Cowboys defense wasn't "good". It was mediocre at best. The one thing they did well was be effective at stopping the run. Other than that, they pretty much were mediocre to bad.

 

[kskboys]

To prove my point:

In 2016 the Cowboys were 5th in scoring defense. People point to that as proof it was a really good defense. But when you dig further you find:

- They were 14th in yard per game
- They were 27th in interceptions
- They were 16th in total turnovers forced
- They were 16th in TD passes allowed
- They were 31st in completion percentage allowed
- They were 24th in opposing QB rating
- They were 13th in sacks
- They were 23rd in yards allowed per drive
- They were 12th in points allowed per drive
- They were 20th in turnovers per drive
- They were 28th in plays per drive
- They were 14th in DVOA

That 2016 Cowboys defense wasn't "good". It was mediocre at best. The one thing they did well was be effective at stopping the run. Other than that, they pretty much were mediocre to bad.

That 2016 D was one that couldn't get off the field. They were miserable in stopping 3rd down plays. Also absolutely abysmal in getting to the opposing QB. That was a bad D, propped up a bit due to our running the ball profusely. That D was the reason we flopped so badly on drafting a DE in the first w/ Taco. The need was so deep that we had to.

 

[CowboyRoy]

It is. There are many stats that must be evaluated to truly assess a D, or anything else for that matter. As a standalone stat, yards come the closest, which is why the NFL uses yards. The majority of fans are unable to comprehend complicated stats to truly assess. The fans on this board are mostly exceptions to that rule, as the fans that reside on here are way more into football than your everday run of the mill football fan.

You can use points allowed to assess how your team is doing, no doubt. However, if you are trying to assess just your D, yards is more accurate than points.

Not sure I agree on that one. We can argue over which one is a better assessment. I'll take points scored. They can run up and down the field all they want as long we stop them from scoring TD's. Teams might just be playing catch up to our offense and accumulating lots of passing yards.

And on the other side, the offense may just suck and the other team rarely has to score more than 20 points to beat you.