Our opponents' playcalling

[AdamJT13]

What about per game?

Per possession is a much more relevant statistic.

But after yesterday's game, we're No. 12 in defensive points allowed per game (no return TDs or defensive points included for any team).

 

[Crown Royal]

You know what scares me Crown is that this team seems like the Buffalo Bills of the early 90's... great offense with some talent on defense, but never dominant enough on D to capture the SB.

I really feel now different about this defense than I have all year, or in a few years, to be honest. Lots of shock on the board today and yesterday. I've always been somewhere between the high and low. I think it's a decent defense with some talent, that can stop some teams, but is not, has not been, and is not showing signs of ever being, a dominant defense.

We have a nice DL, Canty is probably the best player right now, with Ratliff behind and spears a distant third, but not one of them are dominant. Ware and, to an extent, Ellis, are the closest we have to dominant in the front seven, but that's two players. James does some things very very well, some things not well at all, and Ayodele is a body who makes no mistakes but no plays either. That leads us to a pretty good front 7, but Ware and Ellis are probably the two that we will still remember after a decade.

In the secondary, Roy Williams' legend is all but deteriorated to a pretty good player with limitations that have increased during his time in the league. I think we all know what he is. Newman is the closest thing we have to dominant out there, and he may very well be. But he doesn't produce so many plays either - which brings us to the rest of our secondary, which is nice, but just lacks dominance.

I think our defense is designed to beat up on the weak and average offenses, but that if you have the right players to scheme it, we have enough weakness that you can beat it.

The question is whether it is just nice enough to garner a championship, or whether it is just not good enough to let us down.




In a nutshell - is our defense the Super Bowl Brad Johnson, or the Super Bowl Drew Bledsoe.

I don't know.

 

[Crown Royal]

Per possession is a much more relevant statistic.

But after yesterday's game, we're No. 12 in defensive points allowed per game (no return TDs or defensive points included for any team).

Depends on how many posessions are allowed.

 

[Crown Royal]

Also - if we are 9th on points per posession, who is ahead of us?

 

[Hostile]

I was looking at our defensive stats compared to recent seasons, and one thing really jumped out at me --

Our opponents have thrown 481 passes already. That's almost as many attempts as our opponents had in any of the past four full seasons -- 511 last year, 495 in 2005, 502 in 2004 and 492 in 2003.

They've also run the ball only 303 times -- 110 fewer times than the fewest attempts in any of the past four seasons (429 last year, 414 in 2005, 425 in 2004 and 413 in 2003).

Including sacks (and not accounting for scrambles), our opponents are passing the ball 63.0 percent of the time this season, compared to 56.0 percent last year, 56.4 percent in 2005, 55.7 percent in 2004 and 55.9 percent of the time in 2003.

In any of the past four seasons, our opponents would have run the ball about 57 more times and passed it 57 fewer times so far. But they've been passing much more often this season, mostly because we've usually been ahead.

On a per-play basis, our pass defense has been significantly better than in any season since we had the No. 1 defense in 2003 -- we're allowing a lower yards per attempt (gross and net), yards per completion (by more than a yard per catch) and passer rating than we did in any of the past three years. We're not quite at the level of the 2003 pass defense, although we're better in yards allowed per catch (10.97 this year, 11.80 in 2003). But this year's interception rate is significantly higher than it was that year (3.74, compared to 2.64 -- an increase of 42 percent) and is higher than any of the past three years, as well (3.52, 3.03 and 2.59).

That's the key right there.

 

[AdamJT13]

Depends on how many posessions are allowed.

Everything does. Possession pace is the most underutilized statistic in football. If you allow 23 points on 14 possessions in a game, that's better than allowing 17 points on 10 possessions. But hardly anyone ever looks at the number of possessions each team gets.

Of course, you can get even more in-depth and look at points per possession adjusted for field position (such as Field Position Maximization/Minimization Rating), but that's a lot more complicated to figure out.

 

[Crown Royal]

Everything does. Possession pace is the most underutilized statistic in football. If you allow 23 points on 14 possessions in a game, that's better than allowing 17 points on 10 possessions. But hardly anyone ever looks at the number of possessions each team gets.

Of course, you can get even more in-depth and look at points per possession adjusted for field position (such as Field Position Maximization/Minimization Rating), but that's a lot more complicated to figure out.

I think you have to weigh that, don't you? You have to look to see what is causing 14 posessions allowed - ie - are you allowing more posessions because your offense can't stay on the field or because they are running up the score?

I think there are a lot of factors that go into that - you can't completely split offense from defense.

It's one of the reasons I'll never be a true stats guy (note - I work in statistics for my job). I think you can get a good picture of some things, but sometimes its also a matter of what you are seeing.

 

[AdamJT13]

Also - if we are 9th on points per posession, who is ahead of us?

Pittsburgh, Seattle, Tampa Bay, Indianapolis, Kansas City, New England, San Diego and Minnesota.

Offensively, we're No. 2 behind New England. And in net points per possession, we're No. 3 behind New England and Indianapolis. Everytime we exchange possessions with our opponents, we gain an average of 1.18 net points. That would have led the league in any of the past seven years.

 

[AdamJT13]

I think you have to weigh that, don't you? You have to look to see what is causing 14 posessions allowed - ie - are you allowing more posessions because your offense can't stay on the field or because they are running up the score?

Or is it because your defense forces three-and-outs or turnovers right away? Or is it because your defense gets torched for touchdowns within a few plays? Or is it a little of everything?

With respect to points per possession, it doesn't really matter.

 

[percyhoward]

If you allow 23 points on 14 possessions in a game, that's better than allowing 17 points on 10 possessions

Under what carefully constructed set of hypothetical circumstances could that possibly be true?

 

[Paniolo22]

Under what carefully constructed set of hypothetical circumstances could that possibly be true?

Logically speaking, that would mean we would generally have to have had somewhere between 13 and 15 possesions themselves on offense. We usually score more than the other team.

 

[percyhoward]

Logically speaking, that would mean we would generally have to have had somewhere between 13 and 15 possesions themselves on offense. We usually score more than the other team.

More possessions don't mean more points. If you're starting a lot of new possessions in a game, it means you're giving the ball up quickly. That could mean you're scoring quickly, but usually means you're punting or turning it over.

In fact, pick any 10 games at random, and you'll probably find that the games with the most points scored were the games with the lower number of possessions for each team. Longer drives mean greater chance of scoring, and fewer possessions.

 

[kmd24]

Under what carefully constructed set of hypothetical circumstances could that possibly be true?

Presumably the one that states that 1.64 < 1.70

Just a guess, though.

 

[mr.jameswoods]

The perception is that our safeties can't cover. You see teams attack our safeties when given a chance.

 

[Clove]

I really do appreciate the stats, but my eyes don't lie to me, and my eyes see teams passing the ball at will. I'm very uneasy with this, however, I will say one thing.

When it comes to big games and great teams, the Cowboys usually turn up their level of play to elite status.

 

[zeroburrito]

we get a big lead and they are forced to pass. makes sense.

 

[LittleBoyBlue]

Logically speaking, that would mean we would generally have to have had somewhere between 13 and 15 possesions themselves on offense. We usually score more than the other team.

We have 12 out of 13 times this year....

 

[AdamJT13]

Under what carefully constructed set of hypothetical circumstances could that possibly be true?

Because your offense typically would have four more possessions, but would need to score only six more points.

More possessions don't mean more points.

It means more CHANCES to score points. How would the Detroit game have ended if we'd have gotten eight offensive possesions instead of nine? How would the Buffalo game have ended if we'd have gotten 13 possessions instead of 14? One more possession in those games meant more points -- points that happened to win the game.

If you're starting a lot of new possessions in a game, it means you're giving the ball up quickly.

Not necessarily. It could mean you're getting the ball back quickly. Your offense could keep the ball for exactly three minutes every single time it has the ball, and you could -- theoretically -- have anywhere from two to 19 possessions in the game, depending on whether your defense gets the ball back quickly or not.

That could mean you're scoring quickly, but usually means you're punting or turning it over.

No, it doesn't. A lot of possessions in a game could be for a lot of different reasons -- you or your opponent score quickly, you or your opponent turn the ball over quickly, you or your opponent have special teams or defensive touchdowns, you or your opponent go three-and-out a lot, or any combination of all of those. It could be because of you, or it could be because of your opponent.

In fact, pick any 10 games at random, and you'll probably find that the games with the most points scored were the games with the lower number of possessions for each team. Longer drives mean greater chance of scoring, and fewer possessions.

Nope, there's no inverse correlation at all. Our opponents have had between nine and 13 posessions (not counting the short-time possessions at the end of halves) in each game this season. When they've had nine or 10 possessions (seven times), they've scored 13.9 offensive points per game. When they've had 11 or more possessions (six times), they've scored 24.2 points per game. So obviously, fewer possessions did NOT mean more points, and vice-versa.

The number of possessions you and your opponents get doesn't really have much to do with how good you are. Miami (0-13) and New England (13-0) have played at almost the same pace this season, about 10.2 possessions per team per game, one of the slowest paces in the league. So have Seattle (9-4) and San Francisco (3-10), about 12.4 possessions per team per game, almost the highest pace in the league. So it doesn't matter whether you play slow-paced games or fast-paced games, it only matters what you do with the possessions you get, no matter how you get them.

 

[silverbear]

Adam, as usual you've done a great job. But that amount of points we're giving up is still bothersome. Right now we're what? 17th in the NFL in points against. That's just not a pretty stat.

It looks a little better when you look at the points differential... the Cowboys are currently boasting the third best points differential in the NFL (three guess who's number one)...

Ultimately, when it comes to scoring stats, that one's the most important... in fact, it's likely that the Cowboys are giving up so many points because they're SCORING so many points...

 

[silverbear]

One other stat that has to do with our defense being designed to take away big plays --

2007 = 5 completions allowed of 40-plus yards gained (not necessarily thrown that far downfield)

2006 = 14 of 40-plus

2005 = 9 of 40-plus

2004 = 12 of 40-plus

2003 = 9 of 40-plus


And if we include all catches of 20-plus yards gained, it's 31 this season, compared to 43 last year, 41 in each of 2005 and 2004 and 40 in 2003.

Proving once again that the weakness of the defense is the inability to defend the SHORT pass... the Boys are actually pretty good against the medium to deep passes...