The 2015 Dallas Cowboys and the Myth of DeMarco Murray

[FuzzyLumpkins]

It isn't as simple as both sides are trying to make it. While the offense ranked 2nd in TOP (and its 1st-half TOP led the league), the defense's TOP was very much improved over the previous three seasons. Opposing teams couldn't stay on the field in the first half against us.

TIME OF POSSESSION
Dallas Offense
1st half TOP per drive (NFL rank)
2011-13 2:48 (6th)
2014 3:18 (1st)

Dallas Opponent
1st half TOP per drive (NFL rank)
2011-13 2:44 (28th)
2014 2:30 (6th)

Did we win because we ran more, or did we run more because we were winning? Did the offense give the defense needed rest, or did the defense give itself this rest? The answer is yes, and yes.

Concepts like mutually exclusivity, concurrence, and to a lesser extent reciprocity are foreign to the masses. Simple deduction works in all forms no matter what to them.

 

[percyhoward]

And why couldn't they stay on the field? Because we got rest.

Again, I don't think the explanation is that one-sided. We ranked 6th in the first quarter, 6th in the 2nd quarter, 11th in the 3rd, and 10th in the 4th.

If our opponents' low TOP numbers were purely a result of our rested defense, you'd expect our defense's ranking to go up over the course of the game, not down. The rest of the league actually gained on us as the game went on.

 

[percyhoward]

Curious, please post the yards per play for those offenses. Defensive TOP is very misleading. If they give up huge chunks of yards in a hurry, TOP will be low. And we did just that last year on defense.

It's important that, just because we're talking about TOP, that doesn't mean TOP has a high correlation to wins in the NFL. It doesn't, in fact. And yards per play doesn't correlate to wins in the NFL any more than TOP does. Given the same starting field position of the opponent's 20-yard line, a defense that gives up an 80-yard bomb, then follows it with three 3-and-outs is giving up more yards per play than one that allows four touchdowns on four 10-play drives. The difference is that the "better" defense (according to yards per play) has given up 21 more points.

Sometimes drives are shorter because the opponent scores faster. But that's not what decides games anyway. If you want to get into the stats that lead to wins in the NFL, opponents had a harder time scoring in the first half against the Cowboys in 2014 than in the previous three years.

Dallas Defense
1st half points allowed per drive (NFL rank)
2011-13 1.98 (23rd)
2014 1.86 (15th)

 

[Sportsbabe]

Listening at Talking Eagles and they are dogging your Boy Marco for not practicing. "We talkin bout praktiss."

 

[erod]

1. You said our slinging it all over worked great. Not even close to the truth.
2. You blame our defense for all our issues, which is silly.
3. You downplay the run game by saying the passing game is the main key.

Except, without a solid run game, this team is 8-8.

Again, you don't make any sense.

1. No I didn't. I said Dallas was putting up points thanks to Romo's magic.
2. Yeah, it was historically the worst defense in NFL history. Romo was lighting it up.
3. Saying the passing game is key does not downplay the importance of the run game.

You are Captain Strawman, sir.

 

[erod]

This is funny. Because others will tell you it's a good defense or a good running game.

It's kinda like there is more than one way to win a Super Bowl. And whether you find passing to be the key doesn't matter, that's not our philosophy.

Wow.

Last year, Romo threw for the most TDs of his career, the highest completion % in the league, and the second highest QB rating....but passing is not our philosophy? Interesting deductive reasoning power.

The power teams in recent NFL history are New England, Green Bay, Denver, New Orleans, Indianapolis, Pittsburgh, New York, Baltimore, Atlanta, and Seattle. Dallas and Detroit are new to the party, and San Diego has been on the fringe. San Francisco was here and gone.

Do you see a trend with those teams? Outside of Seattle, it's about great quarterbacks and passing games.

Meanwhile, great running teams like Minnesota and Kansas City keep falling on their faces.

 

[erod]

Sorry I have to disagree. There is more than one ways to skin a cat. There is always many ways to win a superbowl. Each team has their formula for getting to the superbowl and winning it. Seattle with their defense and the Patriots and Broncos with their passing attack.

The best thing that the Cowboys could do is keep on doing whats working. Having a balanced attack is working. Why try and fix it? Its not broken. Fix the defense and we can become constant contenders like Seattle. We don't need to follow what other teams are doing. We just need to continue doing whats working.

For the last time, not once have I said that they shouldn't be balanced. Not once. I've been begging for balance for as long as I can remember.

But this team isn't going to the Super Bowl on the shoulders of Murray, Randle, or even Adrian Peterson. Tony Romo will get this there WITH THE HELP of a consistently productive running game, and an improved defense (pass rush).

 

[BlindFaith]

It's important that, just because we're talking about TOP, that doesn't mean TOP has a high correlation to wins in the NFL. It doesn't, in fact. And yards per play doesn't correlate to wins in the NFL any more than TOP does. Given the same starting field position of the opponent's 20-yard line, a defense that gives up an 80-yard bomb, then follows it with three 3-and-outs is giving up more yards per play than one that allows four touchdowns on four 10-play drives. The difference is that the "better" defense (according to yards per play) has given up 21 more points.

Sometimes drives are shorter because the opponent scores faster. But that's not what decides games anyway. If you want to get into the stats that lead to wins in the NFL, opponents had a harder time scoring in the first half against the Cowboys in 2014 than in the previous three years.

Dallas Defense
1st half points allowed per drive (NFL rank)
2011-13 1.98 (23rd)
2014 1.86 (15th)

Interesting that you conveniently did not post the stat I was requesting. I guess it doesn't back up your point about the defense being so good that it just got itself off the field.

 

[BlindFaith]

It's important that, just because we're talking about TOP, that doesn't mean TOP has a high correlation to wins in the NFL. It doesn't, in fact. And yards per play doesn't correlate to wins in the NFL any more than TOP does. Given the same starting field position of the opponent's 20-yard line, a defense that gives up an 80-yard bomb, then follows it with three 3-and-outs is giving up more yards per play than one that allows four touchdowns on four 10-play drives. The difference is that the "better" defense (according to yards per play) has given up 21 more points.

Sometimes drives are shorter because the opponent scores faster. But that's not what decides games anyway. If you want to get into the stats that lead to wins in the NFL, opponents had a harder time scoring in the first half against the Cowboys in 2014 than in the previous three years.

Dallas Defense
1st half points allowed per drive (NFL rank)
2011-13 1.98 (23rd)
2014 1.86 (15th)

And why not show the second half numbers?

 

[percyhoward]

Interesting that you conveniently did not post the stat I was requesting. I guess it doesn't back up your point about the defense being so good that it just got itself off the field.

Yeah, you kinda skipped a couple things there.

First, I told you that points per play has no correlation with wins in the NFL. Respond if you dispute this fact.

Second, I gave you a real word example of why points per play is a horrible stat. Respond if you find an error in the example.

 

[BlindFaith]

Yeah, you kinda skipped a couple things there.

First, I told you that points per play has no correlation with wins in the NFL. Respond if you dispute this fact.

Second, I gave you a real word example of why points per play is a horrible stat. Respond if you find an error in the example.

I never said anything about wanting to know points per play. I was asking for yards per play. And I'm not looking for a correlation to winning. Just trying to figure out why you think the defense was so good that it could get itself off of the field. When they actually weren't and the reason they got themselves off the field was because they gave up huge chunks of yards.

And the only reason why the defense wasn't worse than it's below averageness was because the offense ran the ball so well and controlled the TOP.

 

[percyhoward]

And why not show the second half numbers?

I was focused on the 1st half because I'd made the point that the 1st-half pass attempt figures reveal that there was no decrease in pass attempts between 2014 and the previous three seasons. But I don't think you're really interested in why I didn't show the 2nd-half numbers. I think you just want to see them, because you think they're going to show that the 2nd-half defense was just as bad as ever and I was trying to hide it.

Dallas Defense
1st half points allowed per drive (NFL rank)
2011-13 1.98 (23rd)
2014 1.86 (15th)

2nd half points allowed per drive (NFL rank)
2011-13 2.22 (25th)
2014 1.92 (19th)

The 2nd-half defensive improvement (.30 fewer points) was better than the 1st-half defensive improvement (.14 fewer points).

Dallas Defense
points allowed per drive (NFL rank)
full game
2011-13 2.10 (25th)
2014 1.89 (16th)

 

[JoeBoBBY]

Concepts like , and to a lesser extent reciprocity are foreign to the masses. Simple deduction works in all forms no matter what to them.

lol.... thats funny.

I get it. You probably spent a lot of time and money learning all the methods, and theories, and defined thought processes. Debated and examined and analyzed and questioned countless issues regarding a wide variety of subjects and people, to include responses and actions, etc etc etc...Its impressive.

But to use it as way to place yourself as some kind of authority or maybe superior to others, giving your insight and analysis more weight, is..............................., well I'm just going to say it. Condescending. We could probably analzye why you feel the need to place yourself in a superior position, while degrading everyone elses opinion, by using some terms and some education that you are undoubtedly just regurgitating.

Extremely insecure comes to mind, and to a lesser extent, the term douchebaggery lends itself to this particular case. Ohh yeah....we got a bad case of douchebaggery here fellas....

 

[JoeBoBBY]

For the last time, not once have I said that they shouldn't be balanced. Not once. I've been begging for balance for as long as I can remember.

But this team isn't going to the Super Bowl on the shoulders of Murray, Randle, or even Adrian Peterson. Tony Romo will get this there WITH THE HELP of a consistently productive running game, and an improved defense (pass rush).

or you could say, the Running Game will get Tony Romo his Super Bowl just as easily.

 

[erod]

or you could say, the Running Game will get Tony Romo his Super Bowl just as easily.

If Romo was in Seattle, he'd be going for his 3rd or 4th ring by now.

 

[percyhoward]

I never said anything about wanting to know points per play. I was asking for yards per play.

Sorry, that's yards per play. You requested that I post yards per play, and I told you that it doesn't correlate to wins. Neither does TOP for that matter, and you already know why. Because there are two ways a defense can get off the field fast -- force 3-and-outs, or give up big plays.

Take that same wariness of a stat and apply it to yards per play. There are two ways a defense can allow a lot of yards per play -- give up one big play, or give up several smaller ones. Go back and really read my example in post #323 if you don't get this. If you understand why TOP isn't a great stat, you're capable of understanding the same thing about yards per play.

Saying that a stat doesn't correlate to wins is just another way to say it's a bad stat. TOP per drive is worth looking at if you want to know which unit (offense or defense) is more responsible for the TOP for a game. That's what I was doing. But TOP per game can be a misleading stat, just as yards per play can be, for the reasons described above.

The reason they got themselves off the field was because they gave up huge chunks of yards.

We know that's not the main reason, otherwise points allowed per drive would have gone up, not down. The 2014 defense allowed fewer points per drive (ranked 16th) than it did from 2011-13 (ranked 25th). How do you explain this? Think about it, and see if you can.

Look at this list of defenses that allowed plays of 20+ yards in 2014. You don't judge a defense solely on how many big plays it allows.

Big Plays per drive, 2014.
Arizona .41
New England .36
Baltimore .34
Dallas .33

Was Dallas' defense better than those teams'? Of course not.

And the only reason why the defense wasn't worse than it's below averageness was because the offense ran the ball so well and controlled the TOP.

That's the point of looking at "per drive" numbers. You can separate the offense's portion of TOP from the defense's. And doing this, we know that the defense faced average drives that were of a shorter duration than the previous three seasons.

 

[JoeBoBBY]

If Romo was in Seattle, he'd be going for his 3rd or 4th ring by now.

or if Seattle's Defense was in Dallas.

But they aren't. Which is the whole point.

I would've loaded up at the RB position. And I would run the ball, every game, until their legs fell off.

With the offensive line? Let them boys attack instead of defend. I would be 3, 4 deep at RB with a Bell Cow.........Lets see Seattle stop that.

 

[JoeBoBBY]

Sorry, that's yards per play. You requested that I post yards per play, and I told you that it doesn't correlate to wins. Neither does TOP for that matter, and you already know why. Because there are two ways a defense can get off the field fast -- force 3-and-outs, or give up big plays.

Take that same wariness of a stat and apply it to yards per play. There are two ways a defense can allow a lot of yards per play -- give up one big play, or give up several smaller ones. Go back and really read my example in post #323 if you don't get this. If you understand why TOP isn't a great stat, you're capable of understanding the same thing about yards per play.

Saying that a stat doesn't correlate to wins is just another way to say it's a bad stat. TOP per drive is worth looking at if you want to know which unit (offense or defense) is more responsible for the TOP for a game. That's what I was doing. But TOP per game can be a misleading stat, just as yards per play can be, for the reasons described above.


We know that's not the main reason, otherwise points allowed per drive would have gone up, not down. The 2014 defense allowed fewer points per drive (ranked 16th) than it did from 2011-13 (ranked 25th). How do you explain this? Think about it, and see if you can.

Look at this list of defenses that allowed plays of 20+ yards in 2014. You don't judge a defense solely on how many big plays it allows.

Big Plays per drive, 2014.
Arizona .41
New England .36
Baltimore .34
Dallas .33

Was Dallas' defense better than those teams'? Of course not.


That's the point of looking at "per drive" numbers. You can separate the offense's portion of TOP from the defense's. And doing this, we know that the defense faced average drives that were of a shorter duration than the previous three seasons.

Would it be reasonable to think, an offense might change its play calling and overall strategy, due to an opposing offenses ability to keep the ball away from them and also due to the scoreboard not being in their favor? Consequently, putting more pressure on them to score, when they had the chance? Knowing, they might not see that ball again for awhile? I would think that would be an advantage to the team that can win TOP.

 

[percyhoward]

Would it be reasonable to think, an offense might change its play calling and overall strategy, due to an opposing offenses ability to keep the ball away from them and also due to the scoreboard not being in their favor? Consequently, putting more pressure on them to score, when they had the chance? Knowing, they might not see that ball again for awhile? I would think that would be an advantage to the team that can win TOP.

Or how about that your defense is getting off the field faster and allowing fewer points because it's playing better? And it also makes sense that an offense would be aware of that and adjust accordingly.

People are trying to take grey and insist that it either be black or white. For the heck of it. With no supporting evidence.

 

[Aven8]

Listening at Talking Eagles and they are dogging your Boy Marco for not practicing. "We talkin bout praktiss."

I think it has more to do with Mr Cutting Edge himself, drink a carrot shake, run to every drill, snap the ball in 2 seconds Kelly than anything else. Everybody that has left there has dogged on his crap since.