Defensive Comparison, 2014 v 2015

[percyhoward]

Dallas Defense
Points Allowed Per Drive

2014
60.5% when leading 1.86
23.3% when trailing 2.10
16.2% when tied 1.75
avg points on all drives 1.89

2015
42.2% when leading 1.94
29.9% when trailing 2.17
27.9% when tied 1.67
avg points on all drives 1.93

The first number indicates the percentage of total drives represented by that subset of drives. For example, in 2014, 60.5% of our opponents' possessions happened when the Cowboys were leading in the game. This year, we've only had the lead during 42.2% of our opponents' drives.

The number at the end of each line is the opponents' average points scored on that subset of drives. For example, in 2014, when we were leading in the game, we gave up 1.86 points per drive. This year when we've been leading we've allowed 1.94 points per drive. That's a difference of only about a point every 12 drives, or a point per game when we're leading.

The bottom line is the average points allowed on any drive, regardless of the score. We've allowed slightly more points per drive in 2015 (1.93) than in 2014 (1.89). We've given up slightly fewer points per game this year (20.1) than last year (20.6), because we've faced fewer drives due to our offense leading the NFL in time of average possession.

The one number that really surprised me was that we've been trailing in the game on less than 30% of our opponents' possessions this year. It seems like we were playing from behind more often than that, but it turns out we weren't. The average score margin at the beginning of an opponent's drive was actually a .01-point lead for Dallas (a tie game, in other words).

All of the above comes from information available at Pro Football Reference. These numbers only count scores by the opposing offense. No return touchdowns of any kind. (If you're wondering, I did not count the Saints' FG after the defense had forced a punt and the 12-man penalty on ST put them in FG range.) Most of the following is straight from Football Outsiders, who say we had the league's 16th-most difficult schedule of offenses to face this year, after facing the 2nd-easiest in 2014.

Opponents' Average Drive
starting field position
2014 26.8 yd line (13th)
2015 27.7 yd line (20th)

drive success rate
(percentage of down series that resulted in a 1st down)
2014 .702 (24th)
2015 .704 (20th)

yards
2014 32.5 (27th)
2015 32.5 (20th)

points per red zone possession
2014 4.90 (22nd)
2015 4.72 (8th)

punts
2014 .385 (25th)
2015 .442 (11th)

3-and-outs
2014 .207 (20th)
2015 .231 (13th)

turnovers
2014 .172 (1st)
2015 .064 (32nd)

If there were no such thing as turnovers, this year's defense would be better than last year's. For whatever that's worth.

points (drive did NOT end in a turnover)
2014 2.29
2015 2.12

If we don't get a takeaway against the Skins, the Cowboys' 11 takeaways would equal the fewest ever in a season, and also tie the record for most games in a season with no takeaways (9).

Like last year's defense, this year's gave up a lot of yards, but not a lot of points. But the similarities end there. The 2014 defense was not good at all in the red zone, and depended on takeaways or keeping the opponent out of Dallas territory. The 2015 version has been more of a true bend-don't-break defense that starved for takeaways, and allowed the opponent into FG range more often, but then turned into one of the league's best in the red zone. This red zone success was aided by the fact that our opponents have been more conservative this year, running the ball on 55% of their plays as opposed to 42% last year in the red zone.

 

[Irvin88_4life]

It seems in most games this year, especially the GB game, teams tried to control the clock instead of passing as much, compared to last year

Don't have any numbers just from what I saw

 

[Idgit]

This is great. And other than the trailing % you mentioned (that shocks me, too), it's about what you'd expect having watched the games.
I've said it in a couple of threads, but the turnover thing bothers me because 1, it's such a dramatic reversal from the prior year and 2, because I believe we've really made a coordinated effort to address turnovers under Garrett. It's most of the reason (my opinion) we hired Marinelli in the first place. It's something they spend a lot of time on, and I know it's something they put a lot of emphasis on in camp and in practice, and because we upgraded the front 7 substantially and I was fairly optimistic that was going to help with turnovers even further, and it obviously did not. So now I'm a bit stumped as to how to really improve the problem. Sure, there are some players we might add, but the issue was bigger than that. I don't trust that it was just bad luck, for obvious reasons.

So basically, it's a glaring problem, and I'm not sure what to do about it short of blowing things up defensively, which I'm also unwilling to do. Frustrating.

 

[mattjames2010]

When you go through 4 QBs in a season and are ranked 32nd in turnovers, it hurts an already struggling offense.

What a strange year. I'm ready for 2016.

 

[percyhoward]

When you go through 4 QBs in a season and are ranked 32nd in turnovers, it hurts an already struggling offense.

Maybe you understood already, but the "32nd in turnovers" in the OP referred to opponents' turnovers (takeaways).

But yeah. Offensively, we're 31st.

 

[Sasquatch]

This is great. And other than the trailing % you mentioned (that shocks me, too), it's about what you'd expect having watched the games.
I've said it in a couple of threads, but the turnover thing bothers me because 1, it's such a dramatic reversal from the prior year and 2, because I believe we've really made a coordinated effort to address turnovers under Garrett. It's most of the reason (my opinion) we hired Marinelli in the first place. It's something they spend a lot of time on, and I know it's something they put a lot of emphasis on in camp and in practice, and because we upgraded the front 7 substantially and I was fairly optimistic that was going to help with turnovers even further, and it obviously did not. So now I'm a bit stumped as to how to really improve the problem. Sure, there are some players we might add, but the issue was bigger than that. I don't trust that it was just bad luck, for obvious reasons.

So basically, it's a glaring problem, and I'm not sure what to do about it short of blowing things up defensively, which I'm also unwilling to do. Frustrating.

Could it be that we miss Carter and Durant more than we expected?

 

[Idgit]

Could it be that we miss Carter and Durant more than we expected?

Are those two responsible for most of the net TO differential? Probably a good chunk of it, huh?

 

[AdamJT13]

Are those two responsible for most of the net TO differential? Probably a good chunk of it, huh?

They combined for seven takeaways. The rest of the team had 24.

This year, the entire team has 11 takeaways.

 

[percyhoward]

So basically, it's a glaring problem, and I'm not sure what to do about it short of blowing things up defensively, which I'm also unwilling to do. Frustrating.

The lack of takeaways sucks, but there's no reason to blow up your defense based on something that only happens on 6-19% of all plays league-wide, as takeaways do.

With an offensive performance equal to last year's (minus the scores after a takeaway), this year's defense would have been good enough to get the team into the top 6 in points per drive differential. That means we'd be about 11-4 right now, certainly no worse than 10-5. Defense wasn't the problem at all.

Keep this year's offense, add last year's takeaways, and this year's team would be 8-7 or 7-8. But 9 of our defense's 30 takeaways last year happened on the 164 plays when we led by more than one score in the 4th quarter. The 2015 team wouldn't have that many big leads late, even with the advantage of the other 21 takeaways. We'd probably be 6-9 right now and trying to stay ahead of the Lions for the 13th pick. .

Looking at it that way, the lack of takeaways is a blessing in disguise.

 

[CCBoy]

Our offense leading the NFL in time of average possession.

This is still surprising, and could be even more of a target for unit dominance this next season. I'm interested in what grows on that side of the ball.

Just by current players being another season within Marinelli's system for the third season, could provide a stark improvement along with healthy players there.

 

[VACowboy]

Great stuff, percy. My take away is: Better to improve the offense than the defense.

 

[percyhoward]

Great stuff, percy. My take away is: Better to improve the offense than the defense.

Thanks. We've got plenty of room for improvement in the back 7, as well as the skill positions on offense.

 

[CCBoy]

Thanks. We've got plenty of room for improvement in the back 7, as well as the skill positions on offense.

What then is your opinion on how good change should project if there is a departure of both Carr and Claiborne, as the variables.

 

[mahoneybill]

Could it be that we miss Carter and Durant more than we expected?

Carter though inconsistent I believe lead the team in interceptions last year

 

[Frosty]

Maybe you understood already, but the "32nd in turnovers" in the OP referred to opponents' turnovers (takeaways).

But yeah. Offensively, we're 31st.

Really good information but i find it hard to use any data from 2015 as it has been a mess of a year in all phases of the game.

IMO 2015 is an outlier year, but hard to ignore the data....

 

[percyhoward]

What then is your opinion on how good change should project if there is a departure of both Carr and Claiborne, as the variables.

There seems to be a decent crop of DB in free agency, so I think we'd be okay. A lot depends on the development of Gregory, and continued development of Lawrence.

 

[percyhoward]

Really good information but i find it hard to use any data from 2015 as it has been a mess of a year in all phases of the game.

Especially with regard to the offense. You can't judge the running game at all, really.

Defensively, we were so bad for so long that it's hard not to be skeptical when it seems like we've improved. There were two caveats that came with last year's defensive improvement -- we got a ton of takeaways and we faced a weak schedule of offenses. This year we faced an average schedule, so the caveat might be that offenses were conservative against us. They'd have taken more chances and scored more points, if our offense had given them a reason to do so. But taking more chances usually leads to more turnovers, also.

 

[jazzcat22]

Could it be that we miss Carter and Durant more than we expected?

When Durant went out last season, the defense did suffer some after that.
When Carter played well, all was better, when he disappeared in games, it wasn't as good.

so yes, a very good possibility. Plus they had a very good LB group and rotation in 2014. Not so much this year. Seemed like the only ones playing, when a few not injured were Lee, McClain, Hitchins, and at times the for ever lost Wilber. Gachkar was in there too, but was not an impact.
When Lee left games, the entire Defense went down even more.

Why this team likes Wilber, I have no idea. But he is on the team, so I want to see him perform well. I do not recall Wilson playing at all. Thought he was to be the next Hitchins type find in the 4th round.

 

[Biggems]

Our DL is pretty solid. We need better output from our LBs. I would like us to draft at least one stud LB this year. We need playmakers in the secondary. They don't even have to be top round picks either. Well one of them does, FS Thompson, from Boise St....we need to take him in the 2nd. We can then wait till the 4th and probably grab CBs Cyrus Jones of Alabama and Harlan Miller of SE Louisiana. If we can get a 5th round pick, we can use it to draft SS Kevin Byard of Middle Tennessee. That gives us 4 ballhawking, playmaking DBs to revitalize our D.

 

[dallasdave]

When you go through 4 QBs in a season and are ranked 32nd in turnovers, it hurts an already struggling offense.

What a strange year. I'm ready for 2016.

I second that motion