Our opponents' playcalling

[percyhoward]

More possessions doesn't mean more chances to score points.

Uhhh what?

Yes it does ..... just like it means more chances to make mistakes.

Zrinkill, order a pizza, then cut each slice in half, and see how much more pizza you end up with.

 

[ScipioCowboy]

Zrinkill, order a pizza, then cut each slice in half, and see how much more pizza you end up with.

This analogy suggests a limitation on the amount of points that can be scored per game. There is no such limitation. Your pizza can be large as you want it; you simply need more dough and possessions represent your opportunities to get dough.

I'm not necessarily disagreeing with your point, however. In my opinion, the most relevant statistics are those that correlate most closely with winning.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

Zrinkill, order a pizza, then cut each slice in half, and see how much more pizza you end up with.

oh noes, not another analogy

 

[percyhoward]

You keep talking in terms of OFFENSE when the discussion is concerning DEFENSE.

The discussion has to be about both, doesn't it? It's impossible to play defense without an offense on the field.

More possessions DOES mean more chances to score points... that's why its a relevant stat for defenses. How many points does a defense give up compared to how many CHANCES the offense has to score.

Bottom line:
Points per Possession mean... Points allowed PER offensive opportunity.

Bottom line for me: You can allow fewer points per possession than your opponent and still lose the game. If you allow fewer total points, you can never lose the game. Which stat then, is more relevant? Maybe the opponent is scoring quickly. The higher number of possessions that could result from that is no reason to cut the defense any slack.

 

[zrinkill]

More possessions doesn't mean more chances to score points.

Zrinkill, order a pizza, then cut each slice in half, and see how much more pizza you end up with.

So you are saying that if you have the ball 4 times in a quarter you do not have the chance to score more points than if you had the ball one time in a quarter?


Wow .....

Sorry man .... but that just does not make any sense .... no matter how many pizzas you have.

 

[ScipioCowboy]

So you are saying that if you have the ball 4 times in a quarter you do not have the chance to score more points than if you had the ball one time in a quarter?


Wow .....

That not illogical thinking at all.

I have a question.

In this respect, would points per play be a more accurate indicator? It seems to me that a team is more likely to score on 1 drive of 10 plays than 4 drives of 10 plays.

Edit: Nevermind. We're addressing defenses. Not offenses.

 

[percyhoward]

So you are saying that if you have the ball 4 times in a quarter you do not have the chance to score more points than if you had the ball one time in a quarter?

The mere fact of starting four different possessions does not give you more chances to score points than having one possession does. How could it? You can have the ball four times in a quarter without ever crossing your own 30-yard line. You can have it one time in the quarter and cap off a ten minute drive with a TD.

I'd rather count the points than the possessions.

 

[percyhoward]

It seems to me that a team is more likely to score on 1 drive of 10 plays than 4 drives of 10 plays.

That's what I'm saying too. There's not really a cause/effect, just numbers to analyze after the fact. More possessions don't give you more chances to score, they just indicate that your (and/or your opponent's) possessions were shorter.

 

[ScipioCowboy]

That's what I'm saying too. There's not really a cause/effect, just numbers to analyze after the fact. More possessions don't give you more chances to score, they just indicate that your (and/or your opponent's) possessions were shorter.

We would be right if we were just discussing offenses. But we're actually defenses.

I think we missed that point somewhere along the way.

 

[AdamJT13]

The reason there is no way of knowing you would need to score 6 more points is, you wouldn't know how many points your own team would have scored in the shorter possessions.

Here's a little story problem. In the one example, you need to score 18 points to win. In the other, you need to score 24 points to win. So, how many more points do you need to score in the second example than in the first?

And again, you don't know that you have "shorter" possessions.

For the sake of the argument, I think you HAVE to assume that both yours and your opponent's possessions would be shorter. We can agree on that, at least.

No, we do not. As I've stated repeatedly, just because you have more possessions, it doesn't mean your possessions are shorter.

You don't need a new possession for that. You have that chance every time you run a play from scrimmage.

But once you score, you don't get another chance until you get another possession. Each possession, you have a maximum of seven points (or eight) that you can score. If you run 10 plays on a possession, you can't score 70 points, you can only score seven. If you run one play each on 10 possessions, you could score 70 points.

Well, why don't we go 3-and-out on purpose a couple of times, then, so we have more chances to score points?

Because, for the umpteenth time, it's not how many chances you have to score, it's what you do with those chances.

You understand that it doesn't matter how many possessions you get, and yet you think it does matter how many points you get per possession. Explain that one.

Because regardless of whether you get a lot of possessions or fewer possessions, the point is to maximuze each possession. Ideally, you want to score a touchdown every time you have the ball. The more points your offense scores per possession, the less effective your defense has to be to win the game, and vice versa.

You see, since it doesn't matter how many possessions you get, then you're basically saying "if you allow 23 points that's better than allowing 17 points."

That's not what I'm saying. I'm saying that if your opponent had 14 possessions and you allowed 23 points, your defense was better than if it had allowed 17 points on 10 possessions (all other things, such as field position, being equal).

Think of it this way -- Team X's offense gets the ball at its own 20-yard line for every possession in a game, runs the ball 10 times on each possession, holds the ball for exactly 6:00 on each of those possessions and kicks a field goal at the end of each possession. The next week, Team X's offense again gets the ball at its own 20-yard line for every possession, runs the ball 10 times on each possession, holds the ball for exactly 6:00 on each of those possessions and scores a touchdown at the end of each possession.

Is there ANY circumstance or ANY way that you would say Team X's offense was better in Week 1, when it settled for field goals, than it was in Week 2, when it scored touchdowns?

 

[TEK2000]

The discussion has to be about both, doesn't it? It's impossible to play defense without an offense on the field.

DUH. But we aren't talking about the OFFENSE... we are talking about the defense. Its a discussion about how efficient the defense is at stopping the opponents' offense... not about how good or bad your own offense is.

Bottom line for me: You can allow fewer points per possession than your opponent and still lose the game. If you allow fewer total points, you can never lose the game. Which stat then, is more relevant? Maybe the opponent is scoring quickly. The higher number of possessions that could result from that is no reason to cut the defense any slack.

The first one... allowing fewer total points is dependent upon your offense... the points per possession is looking at how efficient the defense is at preventing the opponent's offense from scoring per offensive chance.

How would the defense get any slack for allowing a lot of points on a lot of possessions? Its exactly the same as scoring a lot of points on a few possessions. Either way.. its a bad rating for the defense.

 

[TEK2000]

The mere fact of starting four different possessions does not give you more chances to score points than having one possession does. How could it? You can have the ball four times in a quarter without ever crossing your own 30-yard line. You can have it one time in the quarter and cap off a ten minute drive with a TD.

I'd rather count the points than the possessions.

So which defense is better?

The one that allowed 1 long drive for a TD... or the one that caused the offense to take 4 drives for 1 TD?

 

[percyhoward]

We would be right if we were just discussing offenses. But we're actually defenses.

I think we missed that point somewhere along the way.

I don't think so. I'm not prepared to give a defense credit for allowing more possessions. There are just too many variables that could result in more possessions allowed, and some of them don't reflect well on the defense itself.

 

[percyhoward]

So which defense is better?

The one that allowed 1 long drive for a TD... or the one that caused the offense to take 4 drives for 1 TD?

Here's another one: Which is the better defense--the one that allows 4 drives and 3 TD's or 1 drive and 1 TD?

 

[TEK2000]

I don't think so. I'm not prepared to give a defense credit for allowing more possessions. There are just too many variables that could result in more possessions allowed, and some of them don't reflect well on the defense itself.

What difference does it make? It still comes down to... how many points does the defense allow per offensive possession?

If the defense allows a lot of points on a few possessions.. they are bad.

If the defense allows only a few points on a lot of possessions they are good.

If they allow a few points on a few possessions... they are good.

If they allow a lot of points on a lot of possessions... they are bad.

 

[percyhoward]

How would the defense get any slack for allowing a lot of points on a lot of possessions?

Points per possesion. Post #26 of this thread.

 

[TEK2000]

Here's another one: Which is the better defense--the one that allows 4 drives and 3 TD's or 1 drive and 1 TD?

Both are bad.

The first one has a 25% success rate and the 2nd one has a 0% success rate.

Either way... they allowed a lot of points per possession.

 

[percyhoward]

The more points your offense scores per possession, the less effective your defense has to be to win the game, and vice versa.

Per possession, usually. Per game, always.

 

[percyhoward]

Both are bad.

The first one has a 25% success rate and the 2nd one has a 0% success rate.

Either way... they allowed a lot of points per possession.

I'd take the one that allowed the fewest points in the game every time.

 

[TEK2000]

Points per possesion. Post #26 of this thread.

You don't understand at all do you?

One defense allows 70 points on 10 possessions... another defense allows 105 points on 15 possessions.... its still the SAME RATING when you take POINTS and divide by POSSESSIONS.