NFL Offensive Rankings Without D/ST Scores

Top offenses don't punt nearly half the time. We are good on offense but too wildly inconsistent to be tips in the league.
 
The stats in the OP are off considerably. You cannot count just single plays that led to scores. Getting the ball at the 2-yard line off a turnover and scoring a touchdown is a credit to the defense, not the offense.

I can tell you that we've scored 14 points off special teams (one punt return for a TD and one 90 yard kickoff return that setup a 10 yard series that led to a TD) and 42 points off turnovers (Ware's interception on first play of the season set up a short series that led to a TD; fumble recovery at the 2 yard line that set up a TD; as well as touchdowns by Heath, Carr, Lee and Church).

And that's without actually going back game-by-game as I'm sure I missed some additional points that came from short fields due to other turnovers or special teams plays.

/reality
 
Reality said:
The stats in the OP are off considerably. You cannot count just single plays that led to scores. Getting the ball at the 2-yard line off a turnover and scoring a touchdown is a credit to the defense, not the offense.

I can tell you that we've scored 14 points off special teams (one punt return for a TD and one 90 yard kickoff return that setup a 10 yard series that led to a TD) and 42 points off turnovers (Ware's interception on first play of the season set up a short series that led to a TD; fumble recovery at the 2 yard line that set up a TD; as well as touchdowns by Heath, Carr, Lee and Church).

And that's without actually going back game-by-game as I'm sure I missed some additional points that came from short fields due to other turnovers or special teams plays.

/reality
Click to expand...

You don't think other teams have had short field positions as well?

I'm sure it's not a 100% accurate representation of the offense, but I guarantee you we're in the ball park of being the 7th ranked offense. Football Outsiders which uses a lot more complex system to judge offenses, has Dallas ranked 8th, and I'm sure they're a whole lot more qualified at this stuff than anyone here.

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/teamoff
 
dstovall5 said:
You don't think other teams have had short field positions as well?

I'm sure it's not a 100% accurate representation of the offense, but I guarantee you we're in the ball park of being the 7th ranked offense. Football Outsiders which uses a lot more complex system to judge offenses, has Dallas ranked 8th, and I'm sure they're a whole lot more qualified at this stuff than anyone here.

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/teamoff
Click to expand...

lol dude, youre beating a dead horse. You try to gather some information about the team or a specific player that actually might show some degree of success and a dozen "fans" race in to cherry pick (or make up) their own stats to drive home their opinion on how bad this team sucks. lol
 
dstovall5 said:
You don't think other teams have had short field positions as well?

I'm sure it's not a 100% accurate representation of the offense, but I guarantee you we're in the ball park of being the 7th ranked offense. Football Outsiders which uses a lot more complex system to judge offenses, has Dallas ranked 8th, and I'm sure they're a whole lot more qualified at this stuff then anyone here.
Click to expand...

If we had last year's defense that provided few turnovers for the offense, we wouldn't even be in the top 15 teams on offense this season. If you take out the Denver game where the coaches actually were aggressive and scored 48 points, the number drops even more.

You can spin stats toward any argument, but this team only scores a lot when we get turnovers or we play the Broncos and the coaches know if we don't play aggressive, we have no chance.

/reality
 
Reality said:
If we had last year's defense that provided few turnovers for the offense, we wouldn't even be in the top 15 teams on offense this season. If you take out the Denver game where the coaches actually were aggressive and scored 48 points, the number drops even more.

You can spin stats toward any argument, but this team only scores a lot when we get turnovers or we play the Broncos and the coaches know if we don't play aggressive, we have no chance.

/reality
Click to expand...

So if we subtract points we will have less points? You got a point.
 
TTexasTT said:
So if we subtract points we will have less points? You got a point.
Click to expand...
The OP made a post using incorrect stats to say this team's offense is the 7th best in the league. I realize you have your homer/hater (whatever side you're on) agenda you're pushing, but I'm not on a side. The stats show this team is average at best on offense and is only ranked 7th because of a lot of points directly and indirectly due to field position from turnovers and special teams.

/reality
 
Reality said:
Found a site that has the stats ...
http://www.sportingcharts.com/nfl/stats/team-net-turnover-points-statistics/2013/

So far in 2013, Dallas has gained 85 points off turnovers. That's an average of 6.5 points per game which is over twice what the OP stat had. That's not including the 14 points directly from special teams as well. If you add those in, we're talking 7.6 points per game on average.

/reality
Click to expand...

IMO that stat is just as silly. Just because the ball was given to the offense via turnover you cant automatically subtract a offensive possession. Im aware that not all of them would result in points on the board but many of them would.
 
If we could get back the aggressiveness and playcalling on offense from last year and combine that with our special teams play and defensive turnovers we have gotten this season, we would be having a much better season. Instead, we've switched to an extremely conservative offensive scheme that relies and requires special teams and defense to help them win games.
 
Reality said:
The OP made a post using incorrect stats to say this team's offense is the 7th best in the league. I realize you have your homer/hater (whatever side you're on) agenda you're pushing, but I'm not on a side. The stats show this team is average at best on offense and is only ranked 7th because of a lot of points directly and indirectly due to field position from turnovers and special teams.

/reality
Click to expand...

I didn't use incorrect stats at all, the site I used has accounted Dallas for 3.2 PPG from D/ST, and I'm obviously not spinning anything because I've even posted the sources. One of the biggest reasons this team is ranked a top 10 offense is because of their RZE, they score TDs 70% of the time in the RZ.

Also, by factoring in those "net points" you posted, we're still a top 10 offense lol.
 
Simple matter of fact is that the offense appears to be an all-or-nothing effort. They either do a time consuming drive or a very short series. Seems to be very few mediocre drives.......this is eyeball test.

The redzone efficiency is a lot better than last season and we do get better field position due to turnovers and punt/kick returns than years past. The Denver game is an outlier but after 13 games it doesn't deviate the stats much now.

Our offense could be better, needs to be better but I suspect if we had any kind of defense, it would be more than satisfactory to win the division and make a playoff push.

This is coming from a Garrett non-supporter. I want him gone and I think our offense could be more potent and something is holding it back(not related to the efense).

The offense is good enough to compete, the defense takes that away and then some. It makes our offense look worse than it is.
 
TTexasTT said:
IMO that stat is just as silly. Just because the ball was given to the offense via turnover you cant automatically subtract a offensive possession. Im aware that not all of them would result in points on the board but many of them would.
Click to expand...

I understand that stats are only silly when they don't prove your opinion, but even ignoring the stats I think most people with common sense can tell that our offense this year is not the 7th best in the league. It's not even close to that. We rarely convert third downs any more. We don't throw the ball to our best receiver enough. Our second/third receiver (Austin) has been out of or non-existent in several games. We run the ball successfully early, then abandon it the moment we have two short or no-gain plays in a series.

I'm just thankful that our horrible defense has at least helped the offense score some points, because we would talking about horrible defense AND offense if we had last year's turnover stats.
 
dstovall5 said:
I didn't use incorrect stats at all, the site I used has accounted Dallas for 3.2 PPG from D/ST, and I'm obviously not spinning anything because I've even posted the sources. One of the biggest reasons this team is ranked a top 10 offense is because of their RZE, they score TDs 70% of the time in the RZ.

Also, by factoring in those "net points" you posted, we're still a top 10 offense lol.
Click to expand...
Your stats are extremely incorrect. Not even remotely close. If you take those 7.6 points per game and subtract them from the 27.5 average, the Cowboys would have a net of 19.9 which would rank them #21 on your own chart. I hate that you spent a lot of time working with invalid stats, but that's exactly what you did.
 
Reality said:
I understand that stats are only silly when they don't prove your opinion, but even ignoring the stats I think most people with common sense can tell that our offense this year is not the 7th best in the league. It's not even close to that. We rarely convert third downs any more. We don't throw the ball to our best receiver enough. Our second/third receiver (Austin) has been out of or non-existent in several games. We run the ball successfully early, then abandon it the moment we have two short or no-gain plays in a series.

I'm just thankful that our horrible defense has at least helped the offense score some points, because we would talking about horrible defense AND offense if we had last year's turnover stats.
Click to expand...

No. Its "silly" because your assuming that Dallas never wouldve gotten the ball if that turnover hadnt happened. You cant just negate a whole possession just because it was aquired via turnover. Ill agree that given the ball on the 2 yard line if pretty much a score by the defense. If you were to go in so deep as to look at those turnovers. What down were they on? Where were they on the field? lol Im not that interested in it either. Im just pointing out that you are taking points and possessions away and then just assuming that the Cowboys would not have scored. Then you just let all the other teams slide on this theory. Im sorry but if you dont think this offense isnt among the top 3rd in the NFL youd be in the minority (not among the fans here, however) but offense is among the most dangerous in the NFL.
 
TTexasTT said:
lol dude, youre beating a dead horse. You try to gather some information about the team or a specific player that actually might show some degree of success and a dozen "fans" race in to cherry pick (or make up) their own stats to drive home their opinion on how bad this team sucks. lol
Click to expand...
Lol the stats he brought up are very skewed due to defensive and special teams scores and creating turnovers. 0-16 streak on third down conversions and 30th in punts per drive(punting nearly half the time) and 22nd total offense. The only thin we do right is RZ effeciency.

Top
dstovall5 said:
I didn't use incorrect stats at all, the site I used has accounted Dallas for 3.2 PPG from D/ST, and I'm obviously not spinning anything because I've even posted the sources. One of the biggest reasons this team is ranked a top 10 offense is because of their RZE, they score TDs 70% of the time in the RZ.

Also, by factoring in those "net points" you posted, we're still a top 10 offense lol.
Click to expand...
Top offenses don't punt half the time. We're good at times and sometimes were dreadful. Anybody can find a stat to support there own narrative. The eye test says were mediocre to good but too inconsistent to be tops in the league.
 
At the very least, we can be confident in proclaiming the Cowboys a good red zone offense. Ta-da!
 
I'm with Reality.

I've heard the arguments. I know the rationale: All the stats in which the Cowboys offense performs poorly are supposedly the least important while the all the stats in which the Cowboys offense performs well are supposedly the most important. Still, something here doesn't look right.
 
dstovall5 said:
I've heard constantly that if you take away our defensive scores, then our offense wouldn't be ranked anywhere near it is now (3rd in PPG). So I wondered if that had any truth to it, or if it was just a false inaccurate statement. Well this is what I came up with by taking out D/ST scores.

1 Denver 2.5 D/ST - 38.2 OFF = 35.7 PPG W/O D/ST
2 New Orleans 0.0 D/ST - 26.4 OFF = 26.4 PPG W/O D/ST
3 New England 0.5 D/ST - 26.8 OFF = 26.3 PPG W/O D/ST
4 Seattle 1.9 D/ST - 27.5 OFF = 25.4 PPG W/O D/ST
5 Chicago 3.2 D/ST - 28.3 OFF = 25.1 PPG W/O D/ST
6 Philadelphia 0.7 D/ST - 25.7 OFF = 25 PPG W/O D/ST
7 Dallas 3.2 D/ST - 27.5 OFF = 24.3 PPG W/O D/ST
7 Detroit 2.3 D/ST - 26.6 OFF = 24.3 PPG W/O D/ST
9 San Diego 0.5 D/ST - 24.5 OFF = 24 PPG W/O D/ST
10 Cincinnati 2.7 D/ST - 25.7 OFF = 23 PPG W/O D/ST
11 Indianapolis 1.2 D/ST - 24.1 OFF = 22.9 PPG W/O D/ST
12 Green Bay 1.6 D/ST - 24.3 OFF = 22.7 PPG W/O D/ST
13 San Francisco 1.8 D/ST - 24.3 OFF = 22.5 PPG W/O D/ST
14 Pittsburgh 1.2 D/ST - 22.4 = 22.2 PPG W/O D/ST
15 Minnesota 2.1 D/ST - 24.2 OFF = 22.1 PPG W/O D/ST
16 Carolina 1.1 D/ST - 22.9 OFF = 21.8 PPG W/O D/ST
17 Arizona 2.5 D/ST - 23.5 OFF = 21.5 PPG W/O D/ST
18 Kansas City 5.4 D/ST - 26.4 OFF = 21 PPG W/O D/ST
19 Tennessee 1.6 D/ST - 22.5 OFF = 20.9 PPG W/O D/ST
20 Miami 1.2 D/ST - 22.0 OFF = 20.8 PPG W/O D/ST
21 Atlanta 1.6 D/ST - 21.7 OFF = 20.1 PPG W/O D/ST
22 Baltimore 1.6 D/ST - 21.4 OFF = 19.8 PPG W/O D/ST
23 Buffalo 1.6 D/ST - 21.0 OFF = 19.4 PPG W/O D/ST
24 St Louis 3.3 D/ST - 22.2 OFF = 18.9 PPG W/O D/ST
25 Washington 2.7 D/ST - 21.5 OFF = 18.8 PPG W/O D/ST
26 Cleveland 1.6 D/ST - 19.9 OFF = 18.3 PPG W/O D/ST
26 NY Giants 1.0 D/ST - 19.3 OFF = 18.3 PPG W/O D/ST
28 Oakland 2.1 D/ST - 20.3 OFF = 18.2 PPG W/O D/ST
29 Houston 1.2 D/ST - 19.2 OFF = 18 PPG W/O D/ST
30 Tampa Bay 1.8 D/ST - 18.8 OFF = 17.0 PPG W/O D/ST
31 NY Jets 1.2 D/ST - 17.4 OFF = 16.2 PPG W/O D/ST
32 Jacksonville 1.5 D/ST - 15.5 OFF = 14 PPG W/O D/ST

By taking out D/ST scores it ended up dropping our PPG by 3.2, but we're still ranked 7th in PPG out of 32 teams. I wouldn't exactly call it a drastic change as some have indicated it would've been, we only dropped from 3rd to 7th. I know some like to point out that on offense we struggle moving the ball, and that's true to an extent, but the fact is we DO have one of the better offenses in the league. We may struggle moving the ball, but we make up for it with our RZ TD efficiency which is only 2nd to Denver.

Sources
1) http://www.teamrankings.com/nfl/stat/points-per-game
2) http://www.teamrankings.com/nfl/stat/defensive-points-per-game
3) http://www.teamrankings.com/nfl/stat/special-teams-points-per-game
Click to expand...

Numbers dont alway tell the story. Dallas scores most of its points at the end halfs and the end of games. If you doubt that check on it. You;; be suprised how little dallas scores after their first drive until the 4th quarter.

Most of them redzone tds have come on turnovers inside the redzone. Take away the redzone TDS the defense has given the offense and ur numbers will be lower.
 
LatinMind said:
Numbers dont alway tell the story. Dallas scores most of its points at the end halfs and the end of games. If you doubt that check on it. You;; be suprised how little dallas scores after their first drive until the 4th quarter.

Most of them redzone tds have come on turnovers inside the redzone. Take away the redzone TDS the defense has given the offense and ur numbers will be lower.
Click to expand...
Exactly numbers don't always tell the whole story. If you watch the games, you can tell something isn't right with the offense. Too inconsistent.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Staff online

Members online

... and 70 more.
Total: 4,049 (members: 170, guests: 3,879)

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
464,655
Messages
13,824,667
Members
23,781
Latest member
Vloh10
Back
Top