YR's My Meaningless Thoughts 9.8.11...

Yakuza Rich

Well-Known Member
Messages
18,043
Reaction score
12,385
- Obviously, I’m glad to see the season finally starting. It was a bit more of a difficult offseason this year due to the lockout. I became less interested in the offseason because we couldn’t see the players on the team progress and it was too difficult to debate aspects of the team while the lockout loomed over our heads. But, it’s back now and I’m glad to see it back. In another folder somebody asked how they should explain 9/11 to their children and I would just celebrate the lives and the bravery of the heroes that shined thru that day. There are too many heroes to count, which speaks volumes of how great this country is. I watched the ESPN piece on Welles Crowther, which can be found here.

http://search.espn.go.com/welles-crowther/videos/6

I would recommend watching that as well.

- As I was explaining to Emperor on the podcast (http://cowboyszone.com/forums/showthread.php?t=217587) the NFL is more or less a *system* of parity than anything else.

Meaning, when a team does well one year, they are more likely to get worse the next year and if a team does poorly one year, they are more likely to improve the next year. That doesn’t guarantee making the playoffs or missing the playoffs, but the odds of getting better or getting worse increase depending upon what the team did in the previous year.


- So, we have 12 playoff teams in the NFL each season (6 AFC, 6 NFC). Since 1999, only 48% of the division winners have *returned* to the playoffs the following season. Think about it, it’s saying that if you win the division, you are LESS LIKELY to MAKE the playoffs the following season than you are to return to the playoffs. The common trait of this? Starting QB gets injured. And typically, the starting QB that gets injured is one that has a previous injury history.


- We are also likely to see 4 of the playoff teams being teams who had losing records in 2010. The NFL averages about 4 playoff teams each season that had losing records in the previous year. The most common trait of those teams? A Quarterback who is a veteran who is at least ‘decent.’


- That leaves us with 4 more playoff teams to account for. On average, 3 of the 4 teams will be wildcard teams from the previous season. And on average, the last playoff team will be a team that went .500+, but didn’t make the playoffs.


- Unfortunately for Dallas, Peyton Manning’s injury doesn’t help our cause. That is probably going to take the Colts, a divisional winner last year, out of the playoffs. I also don’t like Cassel being injured. I also think Cutler gets injured (Martz’s QB have a high injury rate) and since Hasselbeck is no longer in Seattle, I don’t like their chances either.


- Thus, my playoffs teams for 2011 are as follows:

New England
Pittsburgh
Baltimore
Houston
San Diego
Denver

Philadelphia
Dallas
Green Bay
Atlanta
New Orleans
St. Louis

Thus…I have these division winners returning (NE, PIT, PHI and ATL), these teams with losing records in 2010 (DAL, DEN, STL and HOU), these wildcard teams returning (GB, NO and BAL) and this last team who was .500+, but didn’t make the playoffs in 2010 (SD).


- Yes, I do believe Dallas makes the playoffs because they are the prototypical team that has a losing record that makes the playoffs the following season. The question is ‘how?’ I think that this team will have a very explosive offense and a defense that will not be all that great in 2011, but the offense covers that up. In fact, they remind me a lot of the 2004 Chargers who went from 4-12 to 12-4 and had an offense that revolved around a lot of 2 TE formations and could run the ball really well with Tomlinson.


- It will be interesting for me to see who Revis matches up against because that will tell me that is the WR that the Jets fear more. Personally, I have never been that impressed with Cromartie, but he does make a lot of interceptions. He’ll likely be getting help over the top. My gut tells me that Dez matches up better with Revis than Miles does, mainly because of Dez’s unbelievable strength and ability to get the jump ball. But at this point, Austin is a more refined receiver. If anything, it is an interesting matchup.


- I’m still excited about the O-Line. I think they are much more versatile this year and I think I like the prospects of them come December where the old O-Line guys started to struggle a bit. I think they are a bunch of hard working fighters, even the rookie Tyron Smith (who I believe will play Sunday).


- I’m actually glad we kept 2 kickers. I still think Buehler will be a really good kicker one day. I also think if he’s an automatic on kickoffs (or close to automatic), that’s a huge advantage if a team can’t get past the 20 yard line. Especially with all of the touchbacks which will help prevent injuries.


- I think the surprise player this year will be Barry Church. I think he’s not too flashy, but he’s a ‘football player’ in every sense of the word, which is a good thing at the safety position.


- I think the key players for the Jets game will be Felix and Scandrick. I think the guy that worries me is Holmes. I don’t think Plaxico will be a huge factor. I think Keller is a guy Sanchez loves, but I think we can prevent him from going wild on us. But Holmes…a really good WR that scares me the most. Obviously, Scrandrick won’t have him the entire game, but I think that’s the main matchuup and we need a good game from him.


- The Jets have had a really good defense under Rex, but they don’t quite like defending the run. I think Felix can also provide some matchup issues on passes out of the backfield. I don’t think he has to be great, but he has to be somewhat effective to keep the chains moving early on and open things up downfield.

- I also think if Ware can be effective early on, that would be big as well. Mainly because the statistics I have put together are not all that impressed with D’Brickashaw Ferguson. To Ferguson’s credit, he was a good pass protector last year, but there are just games that Ware has where it doesn’t quite matter who you are, you’re going to get owned by him when he rushes the passer. If Ware shows the Jets early on that he’s going to be a handful, he will effectively ruin their night on the weakside and make them much more one dimensional. It’s a match (Ware vs. Ferguson) that I think favors us 8 out of 10 times.


- I know AdamJT13 showed some stats of Ware’s sacks from last season and how just about all of them came in one-on-one situations or double team situations and almost all of them came against offensive tackles. Conversely, guys like Clay Matthews, James Harrison, etc, got sacks that came against RB’s and tight ends or on plays where they went unblocked.

I think that is extremely telling between Wade’s defense and the other defenses. That being said, I have little issue if Ware continues to have to get his sacks that way. However, it should mean that things get opened up for guys like Ratliff, Butler, Spencer and the ILB’s.


- My prediction, Dallas loses a tough one here. Although if Garrett wants to make a tribute to Landry, he can start by winning the first game of the season as Landry was pretty darn good at doing that : ) I think we then go onto win our next 3 games. At least until I change my mind.





YR
 
Nice read...I have to disagree with your take on beuhler...I don't think he will ever be a good FG kicker in this league IMO
 
diehard2294;4093125 said:
Nice read...I have to disagree with your take on beuhler...I don't think he will ever be a good FG kicker in this league IMO

If you look at the history of the league and the best FG kickers typically struggle early on, but have big powerful legs. Eventually they figure out the accuracy thing and combined with their leg strength are great FG kickers. Then when they get past their prime, their leg strength dies down a bit, but is still good and they are still a very accurate kicker.

The guys like a Robbie Gould are more exceptions to the rule. While guys like Akers, Vinatieri, Lowery, Stenerud, Stover, Hanson, etc...all powerful legs early on. Many of those guys struggled early on and figure it out later on.





YR
 
We had our own, Rian Lindell, who couldn't cut it here, but went on to have a very lengthy career.


Yakuza Rich;4093153 said:
If you look at the history of the league and the best FG kickers typically struggle early on, but have big powerful legs. Eventually they figure out the accuracy thing and combined with their leg strength are great FG kickers. Then when they get past their prime, their leg strength dies down a bit, but is still good and they are still a very accurate kicker.

The guys like a Robbie Gould are more exceptions to the rule. While guys like Akers, Vinatieri, Lowery, Stenerud, Stover, Hanson, etc...all powerful legs early on. Many of those guys struggled early on and figure it out later on.





YR
 
Very good stuff, Yakuza Rich. I'm not certain how Peyton Manning's injury and effect on the Indianapolis Colts negatively impacts Dallas to a significant degree. It reduces the total number of new postseason teams if they miss the playoffs, but they are still an AFC component separate from the NFC. Wouldn't the absence of the Colts be more of a factor for potentially new AFC playoff teams?
 
DallasEast;4093173 said:
Very good stuff, Yakuza Rich. I'm not certain how Peyton Manning's injury and effect on the Indianapolis Colts negatively impacts Dallas to a significant degree. It reduces the total number of new postseason teams if they miss the playoffs, but they are still an AFC component separate from the NFC. Wouldn't the absence of the Colts be more of a factor for potentially new AFC playoff teams?

I agree with you on Peyton. Thus, it is still a work in progress.

The good news is that in the last 3 seasons, each year only 3 of the 8 division winners returned to the playoffs the following season (38%). And again, it was usually due to the QB getting injured.

The reason why I think 4 of the 8 will return this year is becasue of the amount of teams with losing records in 2010 (16). The higher the number, *typically* the more division winners will return.

Since 1999 though, only once have more than 50% of the division winners returned to the playoffs (2004...5/8 returned).

Winning a division, in reality, is not all that it is cracked up to be unless you have a great QB that rarely gets hurt.

Before Manning got hurt, when I looked at the division winners with QB's who get injured...Philly and Pittsburgh were easily on top of the list.

That could still be true and still happen. But, then I think either KC or Chicago or Seattle would have to return to the playoffs and I just don't see it...particuarly with Cassel banged up.

I think this season will be telling. Although if Peyton returns by week 2 or 3, the Colts could still easily make the playoffs.






YR
 
YR's meaningless is always full of meaning, and fun...

I enjoyed your perspective as usual. Thanks!!

But alas, in a good discussion, some additional perspectives must be added...I'll add to that.

The talk about DeMarcus Ware is an important element...and allow me to attempt to expand upon this.

This NFL thing has a very strong tendency at play...and that being the top teams teams attempt to 'spread 'em out.'

Philadelphia, New England, Indianapolis, Green Bay, and even the JETS are attempting to do this.

A team such as the Eagles, already has a step up on this tendency, with a whole group of 'All Pros' running around in their secondary.

To own up to their team potential this season, those same Cowboys will have to at the minimum, be stable in their own secondary. And this will bring some old fashioned accountability and challenge to that very area of play.

To compensate, somewhat, Rob Ryan will have to continually refer to his dial a sack computer along the sidelines. This is where Ware, Anthony Spencer, and hopefully some interior linebacker, defensive linemen, and secondary players will be adding heat elements to give something of a generalized shock effect to the defensive side of play.

The Dallas offense looks challenging to the league, but even here, there remains a question as to who it is who will be a 3rd receiver and push the ability to do some of their own spread 'em out.
 
Yakuza Rich;4093205 said:
I agree with you on Peyton. Thus, it is still a work in progress.

The good news is that in the last 3 seasons, each year only 3 of the 8 division winners returned to the playoffs the following season (38%). And again, it was usually due to the QB getting injured.

The reason why I think 4 of the 8 will return this year is becasue of the amount of teams with losing records in 2010 (16). The higher the number, *typically* the more division winners will return.

Since 1999 though, only once have more than 50% of the division winners returned to the playoffs (2004...5/8 returned).

Winning a division, in reality, is not all that it is cracked up to be unless you have a great QB that rarely gets hurt.

Before Manning got hurt, when I looked at the division winners with QB's who get injured...Philly and Pittsburgh were easily on top of the list.

That could still be true and still happen. But, then I think either KC or Chicago or Seattle would have to return to the playoffs and I just don't see it...particuarly with Cassel banged up.

I think this season will be telling. Although if Peyton returns by week 2 or 3, the Colts could still easily make the playoffs.






YR

Just a word of caution when predicting outcomes of war before battles shape up. We were stocked with very large supplies of atropine prior to Desert Storm, and except for localized consumption via pills, that need never really materialized...just saying on Manning being out a full season.
 
Last year I discussed this with Pat Kirwan on Sirius. He said that he was told by Aaron Rodgers, Matt Ryan and some other QB whose name I can't recall...that they all preferred the spread 'em out over extra blockers. Mainly because if your WR's can't get open, those extra blockers can only block guys for so long. I think it's a reason why we picked up Laurent Robinson (which I love that move).

That being said, I think Rob Ryan's schemes will guard against this a bit. On the flip side, I think we have personnel that can run or pass. And if defenses are gearing up for the spread 'em out and pass it, then Felix can have a field day.

Hey, I'm a statistician by trade. By far and away, this is a passing league and whoever wins the passing game battle will win the game.

BUT...

I believe the statisticians typically do not quite have a beat on how the running game works in the NFL and how it impacts the passing game.

What I mean is, I think a good running game and a good QB can do a lot more damage than a great QB with a mediocre running game. And that spreading them out does work quite often, but does not work as often as being able to run and throw quite often.

If the game was 'all about passing', Andy Reid would be the next Vince Lombardi. Instead, he's a guy that has made the Super Bowl once and has continually frustrated fans with his high level of passing the ball vs. running the ball. Of course, the pundits forget this and claim how he's the greatest thing since slice bread (which he probably ate anyway) come the following season.

And the reality is that the Pats haven't won a Super Bowl since they became so spread 'em out and pass heavy. When they could really run the ball and pass the ball, they were far more effective.

I also think it affects the defensive play as well.

More to it than meets the eye, IMO.




YR
 
CCBoy;4093222 said:
Just a word of caution when predicting outcomes of war before battles shape up. We were stocked with very large supplies of atropine prior to Desert Storm, and except for localized consumption via pills, that need never really materialized...just saying on Manning being out a full season.

I don't see the Colts going better than 6-10 without Manning and that may be a stretch.

As far as his legacy goes, this may be a good thing for Manning because if they go 4-12 without him, considering the Pats went 11-5 without Brady in 2008, it would show just how great Peyton is.





YR
 
Yakuza Rich;4093246 said:
Last year I discussed this with Pat Kirwan on Sirius. He said that he was told by Aaron Rodgers, Matt Ryan and some other QB whose name I can't recall...that they all preferred the spread 'em out over extra blockers. Mainly because if your WR's can't get open, those extra blockers can only block guys for so long. I think it's a reason why we picked up Laurent Robinson (which I love that move).

That being said, I think Rob Ryan's schemes will guard against this a bit. On the flip side, I think we have personnel that can run or pass. And if defenses are gearing up for the spread 'em out and pass it, then Felix can have a field day.

Hey, I'm a statistician by trade. By far and away, this is a passing league and whoever wins the passing game battle will win the game.

BUT...

I believe the statisticians typically do not quite have a beat on how the running game works in the NFL and how it impacts the passing game.

What I mean is, I think a good running game and a good QB can do a lot more damage than a great QB with a mediocre running game. And that spreading them out does work quite often, but does not work as often as being able to run and throw quite often.

If the game was 'all about passing', Andy Reid would be the next Vince Lombardi. Instead, he's a guy that has made the Super Bowl once and has continually frustrated fans with his high level of passing the ball vs. running the ball. Of course, the pundits forget this and claim how he's the greatest thing since slice bread (which he probably ate anyway) come the following season.

And the reality is that the Pats haven't won a Super Bowl since they became so spread 'em out and pass heavy. When they could really run the ball and pass the ball, they were far more effective.

I also think it affects the defensive play as well.

More to it than meets the eye, IMO.




YR

You are bringing sweet music to the ears of an ex-linebacker. AS keeping that part of the opposing team flat footed will go a long ways for the Cowboys...!
 
Yakuza Rich;4093256 said:
I don't see the Colts going better than 6-10 without Manning and that may be a stretch.

As far as his legacy goes, this may be a good thing for Manning because if they go 4-12 without him, considering the Pats went 11-5 without Brady in 2008, it would show just how great Peyton is.





YR

Collins could well maintain an even record...as their talent is pretty good overall.
 
CCBoy;4093259 said:
Collins could well maintain an even record...as their talent is pretty good overall.
Kerry Collins must elevate his game for the Colts' offense to succeed at any given degree. Very few offenses leaguewide are predicated on timing as Indianapolis' passing scheme.

Collins will not be able to duplicate Peyton Manning's quick dissection of defenses. Their offense will be depended more upon how well they adjust it to Collins' strengths as a passer. That is the x-factor because his teammates are not used to anyone, but Manning's decision making.

The Colts' coaching staff will be in the running for best in the league if they can both make the adjustments and garner success offensively if Manning is out for an extended period of time. And they will have earned it.
 
Yakuza Rich;4093246 said:
Last year I discussed this with Pat Kirwan on Sirius. He said that he was told by Aaron Rodgers, Matt Ryan and some other QB whose name I can't recall...that they all preferred the spread 'em out over extra blockers. Mainly because if your WR's can't get open, those extra blockers can only block guys for so long. I think it's a reason why we picked up Laurent Robinson (which I love that move).

Very interesting. I got pilloried for suggesting that Tony's inability to hook up predictably with Roy under pressure situations was a huge issue when we faced tougher defenses - and I think that the addition of a reliable 3rd WR like Robinson will help counter aggressive defenses to some degree.
 
Doomsay;4093292 said:
Very interesting. I got pilloried for suggesting that Tony's inability to hook up predictably with Roy under pressure situations was a huge issue when we faced tougher defenses - and I think that the addition of a reliable 3rd WR like Robinson will help counter aggressive defenses to some degree.

I like Laurent Robinson a lot. I think anybody who has seen him play when healthy can see the guy can play, it's just a question if he can avoid injury. I also like what I've seen out of Harris as well. I think Ogletree has potential, but is one of those players who should be a lot better than he actually is. I think Ogletree's problem is that he just has no consistency. Makes a good play, then makes a poor play. I think getting 3 WR's is something we need to figure out for next season. That way we can have Witten line up at TE or move out wide and create a 4-WR set more often.

Ideally, I would want us to be able to play well from many different formations and personnel and then have Garrett figure out which one works the best in the game and keep attacking teams with that one.






YR
 
CCBoy;4093257 said:
You are bringing sweet music to the ears of an ex-linebacker. AS keeping that part of the opposing team flat footed will go a long ways for the Cowboys...!

I believe the NFL, schematically, works in a cycle. It wasn't that long ago when every team used a 3-4. Then the 4-3 Cover 2 was all the rage. Now it's back to the 3-4 and exotic 3 down linemen.

I think it's a passing league and has been probably since the 80's. But, we basically went from a standard 50-50 run and pass to the run-n-shoot where it was predominantly pass and WCO's where it was predominantly pass...then went more to Zampese type offenses and WCO kinda became passe and Run-N-Shoot became extinct.

Then the WCO kinda adapted the Zampese principles and vice versa. And the Run-n-Shoot got tweaked (more shotgun, eliminate the rolling out of QB, insert a TE).

I think it's naive to assume that the running game will be elimiinated or greatly diminished for good. Teams who have success but diminish their running game are usually successful because teams have to figure out how to defend against that. That and they usually have a lot of talent, particularly at QB.

Once they do, their offense (or defense) now has to figure out how to counter that.

Essentially, there's not a scheme ever concocted that was not inherently flawed.







YR
 

Staff online

Forum statistics

Threads
474,003
Messages
14,505,691
Members
24,207
Latest member
TomGiantsfan
Back
Top