Defensive Passer Rating will once again doom this team

[Idgit]

I think the corners and safeties would be more than fine if we had elite front four play

I do, too, actually. Now. The players we had before wouldn't have gotten it done. Well, we could have kept Jenkins and drafted Mo, and not signed Carr. That'd have saved us a bit of overhead.

I also think the DL would be a different story with Crawford and Spencer and Bass. No matter what, though, we needed to address S. Wilcox is in the process of developing and looks like a keeper, to me. Heath's shown potential, too. This coming offseason was the season we'd planned to churn the DL, which we'll have to do. We just ran out of steam a year too early for the plan, and it's bitten us.

 

[85Cowboy85]

Passer rating differential is a pretty good predictor of success and I'm glad more people are starting to catch on.

The national media will talk about Tony Romo playing being clutch/not clutch Demarco Murray being healthy the offensive line ect. While in my opinion very little attention has been paid to the elephant in the room. The media barely even acknowledges pass defense exists.

Here's a great listing if people want to play with the numbers: http://www.teamrankings.com/nfl/stat/opponent-average-team-passer-rating

One thing I notice off hand is the home field advantage. Check out the differential between home and away passer ratings this year.

 

[Afigueroa22]

Seattle: 69.5 (1st)
New England: 76.7 (5th)
Denver: 85.9 (17th)
SF: 72.8 (3rd)
Carolina: 77.4 (6th)
Eagles: 83.6 (14th)

Surprise, surprise.

 

[big dog cowboy]

2013: Offensive Passer Rating: 6th
2012: Offensive Passer Rating: 9th
2011: Offensive Passer Rating: 4th

So it's not Tony's fault? Imagine that.

 

[Idgit]

So it's not Tony's fault? Imagine that.

Or the play calling. Or offensive glance. Or the OG play.

Go figure.

 

[elcowboi]

Being on the plus side of turnovers has been able to help overcome the terrible numbers but the defense does need to come up with some better games against the pass down the stretch.

It's about points given up. If they hold teams to three points and the Boys can score TD's that's all that matters in the long run.

 

[Teague31]

More.
Pass.
Rush.

 

[jterrell]

Telling stat for sure.
Dallas had the best safeties in the league with Woody and RW31 before they stopped letting Roy hit people.

The drop off at safety has been almost unimaginably steep. It is by far the worst position on our football team and makes our CBs looks much worse than they are.
At some point we'll address this position with more than Brodney Pool or Will Allen.

And no, elite level DL play won't help enough. Our sacks total the past 5 years has averaged in the top 5/6 but our coverage metrics are SOLIDLY bottom 10.

Seattle has a similar level of CB to us but has the best FS in football and a darn good SS. Because all 4 of those guys are good they make each other look better.

There is hope Church, Wilcox and Heath can grow into solid safeties. Just like Tyron Smith at one point they are really young and making too many mistakes but have potential.

 

[jterrell]

More.
Pass.
Rush.

The problem with this thinking is teams can go to 3 step drops and a quick passing game that negates all pass rush efforts.
At some point you have to just cover people.

 

[SDCowboy]

If we miss the playoffs again, it's obviously Tony Romo's fault. I mean, instead of having the 6th ranked passer rating, why couldn't he actually be good and have like top 2? If he did that then we'd probably be a playoff contender, he's obviously one of the problems that's causing this team to be mediocre. Cut him.

In all seriousness, your post will most likely fall on deaf ears. Everyone here knows the reason we're mediocre is due to our passing defense, but some will still stick to their schtick that Romo is a problem as well, when is reality he's one of our few strengths. Nice post.

This season is exactly why I said If I was Romo, I wouldn't have resigned with this team. It's going to be the same story as always. The team is completely decimated with injury and, this season, we have absolutely zero defense. We very easily could lose 2-3 of the next 4 and it will be put on Romo regardless of the fact that he's the main reason December matters.

 

[Nirvana]

I'd like to know how much of the defensive passing yardage allowed was from passes to RBs and TEs in short passing plays, in comparison with other teams. My hunch is we are in the back of the pack on that stat. Point being the LBers and safeties have been exposed quite a bit this year. That and the pass rush are the big factors, not the CB quality so much.

 

[jterrell]

This season is exactly why I said If I was Romo, I wouldn't have resigned with this team. It's going to be the same story as always. The team is completely decimated with injury and, this season, we have absolutely zero defense. We very easily could lose 2-3 of the next 4 and it will be put on Romo regardless of the fact that he's the main reason December matters.

No easy way to say this but if you were Romo and didn't sign the deal offered you'd be stupid.
No one turns down that kind of sure money.

Romo could have played out this year and then what??

Enter free agency and looking at a team like the Texans or Browns?

For the most part ALL of these teams are mediocre. The few who are really good fairly consistently also tend to have QBs in place.
And a good team like the Texans was last year is as susceptible to injuries as Dallas is.
No one is guaranteed to win anything.

Romo got paid top 5 QB money. The only way he was going to get more on the open market was going somewhere like Jacksonville that is desperate for a franchise face.

Romo is sitting 2 games over .500 and playing in front of national audiences every week. And he has a bank account now that creates a family fortune.
No one should blame Romo for this team being mediocre but no one should feel sorry for Tony either.

 

[Risen Star]

Normally I would agree with you , but this team has had an army of players at ILB and safety who can't cover... Just one lousy cover guy after another.

I agree, Mike.

What this team needs to focus on is trying to out cover opponents. Get by up front with stiffs and really build the back end with coverage players. Spend your resources there.

We should try that. What could possibly go wrong?

 

[jterrell]

I'd like to know how much of the defensive passing yardage allowed was from passes to RBs and TEs in short passing plays, in comparison with other teams. My hunch is we are in the back of the pack on that stat. Point being the LBers and safeties have been exposed quite a bit this year. That and the pass rush are the big factors, not the CB quality so much.

Given the stats Scandrick and Carr have for defensive passer rating you are clearly on to something. Mo had a couple rough games but has been better than people like to admit at actually covering people.
The safeties and LBs have been torched repeatedly.
A few times like with the sad non-tackle by Carter/Heath they've been torched together.

Carr has given up some deep crossing patterns and some slants.
Those are plays a plus safety takes away.

 

[jterrell]

I agree, Mike.

What this team needs to focus on is trying to out cover opponents. Get by up front with stiffs and really build the back end with coverage players. Spend your resources there.

We should try that. What could possibly go wrong?

Probably about same thing that could go wrong by having the highest paid DL in the game and investing multiple 1st round picks along the OL.

I certainly see all the emperical evidence to suggest your 1980s model works. I mean the Browns and Vikings have been killing it with those healthy run games.

 

[burmafrd]

Probably about same thing that could go wrong by having the highest paid DL in the game and investing multiple 1st round picks along the OL.

I certainly see all the emperical evidence to suggest your 1980s model works. I mean the Browns and Vikings have been killing it with those healthy run games.

You will do better putting your money into pass rush then just into the secondary. The Giants won a SB basically because of their pass rush in 2007. Meanwhile I have not seen a top secondary with poor front 7 win a SB. Have you?

However the reality is that you need some kind of balance between front 7 and the Secondary if you want consistent results.

In the end though you can build good O lines and D lines cheaper than filling up skill positions or secondary positions. And they last longer on average. So if you are building a team from scratch you START on the lines.

 

[DFWJC]

Maybe there is something to this..
1) Seattle in playoffs
3) SF in playoffs
4) Cincinnati in playoffs
5) NE in playoffs
6) Carolina in playoffs
8) KC in playoffs

But then again, maybe there is not..
12) NO in playoffs
17) Denver in playoffs
18) Baltimore in playoffs
20) Indy in playoffs
21) Detroit in playoffs
22) Dallas in playoffs

Will have to wait to see come week 17.

Look at the differencials

 

[Idgit]

Probably about same thing that could go wrong by having the highest paid DL in the game and investing multiple 1st round picks along the OL.

I certainly see all the emperical evidence to suggest your 1980s model works. I mean the Browns and Vikings have been killing it with those healthy run games.

Lol.

 

[jterrell]

You will do better putting your money into pass rush then just into the secondary. The Giants won a SB basically because of their pass rush in 2007. Meanwhile I have not seen a top secondary with poor front 7 win a SB. Have you?

However the reality is that you need some kind of balance between front 7 and the Secondary if you want consistent results.

In the end though you can build good O lines and D lines cheaper than filling up skill positions or secondary positions. And they last longer on average. So if you are building a team from scratch you START on the lines.

The 2007 Giants had zero 1st round picks along the DL (kiwanuka was playing LB) and it's 2007 rookie 1st rounder started at CB.
The Giants spend HEAVY resources on DL and coverage guys.

I value DL quite highly myself but we absolutely blasted the Giants to open last season by picking on bad coverage guys. It was just too easy.

It absolutely requires a mix because even the best pass rushers can be minimized if the coverage unit doesn't do it's job for a few seconds every play.

As to what it takes to build lines I disagree. It is not easy to fill those spots. Dallas has been VERY lucky with DT but it used R1 picks on Ware and Spencer.
Hatcher was a R3 pick that needed years to develop to where he is now.
We've also got Crawford in as a high pick recently.

On the OL we've used R1 picks for Smith and Frederick. We've sunk big money into Free.
We TRIED to be cheapo at OG and found we sucked there.

Trying to get by with scrubs at OG and Safety have been our biggest issue the past 5 years.
You need NFL caliber players everywhere.
Starting rookie undrafted free agents at Safety is a good way to get yourselves murdered.

Starting DL have real value but they are also largely rotational players.
You can get by with less that superstars there is you have legit depth.
It doesn't work that way for coverage.
Carr isn't coming out for a few plays to rest.

 

[Idgit]

You will do better putting your money into pass rush then just into the secondary. The Giants won a SB basically because of their pass rush in 2007. Meanwhile I have not seen a top secondary with poor front 7 win a SB. Have you?

However the reality is that you need some kind of balance between front 7 and the Secondary if you want consistent results.

In the end though you can build good O lines and D lines cheaper than filling up skill positions or secondary positions. And they last longer on average. So if you are building a team from scratch you START on the lines.

The thing about defense is, offenses will find and attack whatever weakness you do have. It doesn't matter where it is. It's not like on offense, where you can slide protection or roll away from pressure or just not run the ball, or just put the ball up to a playmaker and watch him go. On offense, you're taking the most favorable matchup you can exploit. On defense, you need to eliminate every favorable match up, or you're going to lose on the play. So, good defenses have both pressure and coverage. It's a least-common denominator thing. We've got average pressure and poor coverage, and we need to upgrade in both areas if we want to get better.

I'm actually with most of the 'upgrade the trenches' guys when it comes to the DL. We need to add another high pick and at least one impact player via FA there. At the same time, our S play has to improve, and our coverage LBs have to improve. It's not an either-or situation.

That said, if we had our planned DL on the field right now, I think we'd be a better-than-average coverage team. This defense, though, is built around DL pressure, and addressing that is the best way to get a quick impact. I'd love to see an impact S available to us in the draft, but don't think one will be there where we're drafting. Short of that, Wilcox is actually adjusting well to the NFL, and I think his natural trajectory will get us some improvement. I'm torn about spending more resources at the S position. We've neglected it forever, but I actually do like Church and Wilcox, and I think both Heath and Matt Johnson both show some potential. I'm tempted to roll the dice there, again, knowing we need help elsewhere. At the same time, our pass defense is killing us against good teams and it absolutely has to be fixed.