Our opponents' playcalling

[AdamJT13]

Percy, answer this question --

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]

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

No crap.

 

[kmd24]

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 are you talking about? Defenses don't "allow" possessions. In fact, all other things being equal, a good defense will typically face more possessions than a bad one.

 

[kmd24]

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

So, let's say that your team enters the 4th quarter with a 17 point lead.

Assume two different scenarios:

In the first, your offense holds the ball for 7 minutes before missing a FG. The opposing team then gets the ball and scores a TD in 2 minutes. When your team gets the ball back, they start a long drive and run the clock out. You win by ten.

In the second scenario, you trade three-and-outs with your opponent twice, taking only six minutes off the clock in the process. After a third three-and-out, you punt the ball to your opponent, who manages a short drive for a FG. There are now 7 minutes on the clock. Another three-and-out, and your opponent gets the ball back with 5 minutes on the clock. They drive for a TD, and there's a minute left on the clock. They recover the onside kick, but your defense stops them for the third time in the quarter.

Assuming that the stats through three quarters are identical for each scenario, are you really saying that the first defense played better by virtue of allowing three fewer points?

 

[cowboyeric8]

Is anyone else as lost as I am in this thread?

 

[AdamJT13]

Is anyone else as lost as I am in this thread?

I'm pretty sure at least one other person is.

 

[TEK2000]

I'm pretty sure at least one other person is.

OOOOHHHH!!

 

[silverbear]

Detroit owned our Defense.


This means...we have problems.

Once again, Elmer is too obtuse to even recognize what really happened in that game...

Permit me to explain, Mr. Fudd-- the Cowboys came into that game CERTAIN that the Lions were going to throw the ball all over the field... they based that on the Lions ranking dead last in the league in rushing, and the Cowboys ranking really high in run defense...

It was a logical thing for the coaching staff to believe, and that was the thrust of their defensive gameplanning...

But then the Lions, reeling from a succession of losses and desperate to keep their playoff hopes alive, rolled the dice by doing exactly what NOBODY expected them to do-- run the football... it caught the Boys completely off-guard, and early on, worked like a charm...

This forced the Boys to adjust to the run (after which the running game really didn't hurt them), which hampered the pass rush, and made it possible for Kitna to find some success throwing the short pass...

So yeah, a desperate team went against their every tendency this season, and caught the Boys by surprise... but eventually, the Cowboys adjusted, and late in the game the defense did its job...

Here endeth the lesson, Elmer... so be vewwy, vewwy qwiet...

 

[Manster68]

Once again, Elmer is too obtuse to even recognize what really happened in that game...

Permit me to explain, Mr. Fudd-- the Cowboys came into that game CERTAIN that the Lions were going to throw the ball all over the field... they based that on the Lions ranking dead last in the league in rushing, and the Cowboys ranking really high in run defense...

It was a logical thing for the coaching staff to believe, and that was the thrust of their defensive gameplanning...

But then the Lions, reeling from a succession of losses and desperate to keep their playoff hopes alive, rolled the dice by doing exactly what NOBODY expected them to do-- run the football... it caught the Boys completely off-guard, and early on, worked like a charm...

This forced the Boys to adjust to the run (after which the running game really didn't hurt them), which hampered the pass rush, and made it possible for Kitna to find some success throwing the short pass...

So yeah, a desperate team went against their every tendency this season, and caught the Boys by surprise... but eventually, the Cowboys adjusted, and late in the game the defense did its job...

Here endeth the lesson, Elmer... so be vewwy, vewwy qwiet...

I believe it goes deeper than that SilverBear.

They also did not play with a lot of intensity.

 

[Biggems]

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

I'm not so sure why its hard to understand that LONGER drives means MORE TIME off the clock and LESS chances to score points. 14 possessions gives the offense an opportunity to score 98 points... 9 possessions allows only 63 points.

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.

actually 14 possessions allows the opportunity to score as many as 112 pts......14 x 8. Now, we know teams won't go for 2 every single time, but the possibility is there.

 

[Biggems]

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

percy your argument is absolutely and completely flawed....also, it seems like you are arguing for the sake of arguing...and you are bringing up absurd scenarios to back up your preposterous claims.

I must say that I have to stand by the arguments presented by Adam and TEK on this one.

what team only has 1 possession per game? NONE....so based on your scenario.....every 1 possession the team has, they score a TD...whereas the other team only scores 3 TDs every 4 possessions. If the average # of possessions is 12 per game, than the stat you are trying to use to define your argument would be scoring a whopping 84-96 pts.....whereas the stat you are trying to discredit, would be scoring only 63-72 pts.


think of it like this. If you take 10 shots in a basketball game, you have a much greater chance (200%) to score 10 pts, than if you take only 5 shots......with all shots being from the same location.

 

[Biggems]

Percy, answer this question --

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?

I would say that team X's offense was better in week 1 if Dallas was facing them.....30 pts allowed is a helluva lot better than 70.....hehehehe

 

[Biggems]

Percy, answer this question --

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?

just to throw a monkey wrench into the scenario if I may Adam.....what if in week 1, they played the best defense in the league.......but in week 2, they played the worst......would that make a difference? of course I know we are discussing defenses here, not offenses, but I was just curious.

 

[AdamJT13]

just to throw a monkey wrench into the scenario if I may Adam.....what if in week 1, they played the best defense in the league.......but in week 2, they played the worst......would that make a difference? of course I know we are discussing defenses here, not offenses, but I was just curious.

Yes, it could make a difference. I guess I should have added the "all other things being equal" caveat. Dang, too late to edit or delete it.

 

[AdamJT13]

Percy, updated question for you to answer --

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.

With all other factors being equal (including strength of opponents, game site, injuries, weather, lunar stages, etc.), are there ANY circumstances 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?

 

[TNCowboy]

The defense is giving up way too many points. Three of the last four games have been poor defensive efforts.

23 points to a struggling Washington offense.

27 points to a Packer offense, against its backup QB.

27 points to the Lions, when they were missing their best offensive player.

Excuses can be made, stats can be shown, but the bottom line is that every single team that would be in the playoffs right now - except for Cleveland - has given up fewer points than Dallas.

We're living off the offense, winning in spite of the defense. Spinning #s one way or the other doesn't change that, nor the fact that our defense isn't very good right now.

 

[CrazyCowboy]

great observation........your right