Zim has to go

[dbair1967]

When you have to run to the stat book instead of relying on your eyes, you know you're in trouble. This is a not a dominant defense. This is the 2003 defense all over again--effecient, but exposed by better teams. I didn't need "stats" to tell me the '85 Bears or '00 Ravens were of championship quality. Hell, stats might make you think Bled is a borderline HOFer. But our eyes know different.

yep...couldnt agree more

David

 

[ravidubey]

But it works.. and our D has had us in every game we have played this year, including the games where the O threw the games away.

The defense plays well enough to beat average teams, but rarely if ever can it take over games. Recognize that this defense is supposed to be good! Look at the following list of players and tell me we're supposed to have the same results that we've "always had"?

Ferguson - $$$
Henry - $$$
Ayodele - $$
Williams - 1st Round (8th pick)
Newman - 1st Round (6th pick)
Ware - 1st Round (11th pick)
Spears - 1st Round
Carp - 1st Round
Hatcher - 3rd Round
Canty - 4th Round (highly touted)
James - 4th Round; now $$
Watkins - 5th Round
Raitliff - 6th Round

Without counting Ellis who was the 8th pick overall this is a huge committment to defensive football so that side of the team must not only be "good" they should be able to dominate.

 

[superpunk]

spoken like a true spin doctor

I dont like Zimmer or his defense because its too passive...there are too many holes in the soft zones, and we compound the problem by never getting any sort of real rush on the QB...sacks arnt everything, the 93 Championship team we had managed only 30 sacks for the season, but they had a good pass rush that altered plays...this defense doesnt do that...we rarely knock a QB down, and thats my issue with them

David

So.....there are two sides. One points to stats - facts, if you will - and evidence of a defense continually put in terrible situations by their offense, while still performing at a top level in the leauge, and appreciates that fact. The other is upset because we rarely knock a QB down. We don't make it complicated.

Who's the real spin doctor, I wonder?

 

[ravidubey]

The other is upset because we rarely knock a QB down.

Laugh if you want, but we aren't even getting close to knocking him down and that's what wins games in the NFL. Stop the pass on defense and pass well on offense.

 

[superpunk]

Laugh if you want, but we aren't even getting close to knocking him down and that's what wins games in the NFL. Stop the pass on defense and pass well on offense.

Or run and stop the run.

If you have problems with our pass defense, how can you possibly look further than Pat Watkins, Keith Davis, and Marcus Coleman? The defense calls have been good - they've been in position to make plays, and failed.

You blame the coaching staff for their ineptitude? I can't rationalize that.

 

[Doomsday101]

Laugh if you want, but we aren't even getting close to knocking him down and that's what wins games in the NFL. Stop the pass on defense and pass well on offense.

And Dallas is 9th in pass defense out of 32 teams. Sacks are not the sole indicator of defense it is a glamor stat but not a sole indicator of defensive play.

 

[AdamJT13]

What are our defensive stats vs Philly, Jacksonville, New York, and Carolina?

Against those four teams, we've allowed 305.5 yards per game, which would be good for No. 9 in the league. We've forced 2.0 turnovers per game, which would be good for No. 4 in the league. And we've had nine sacks in 124 pass attempts, which would be No. 17 in the league. Our run defense (90.25 ypg) would be No. 6 in the league. So really, the stats aren't much different against good teams -- we're still a top-10 defense in most stats and average at sacking the quarterback. (Never mind that most highly ranked defenses fatten up on weaklings and post "average" stats against good teams.)

Our defense has allowed 24.0 points per game against those teams, but when you look at it, the OFFENSE is the reason it's that much. Against good teams, our offense has turned the ball over inside our territory, leading to easy points. The Jags scored 14 of their 24 points after two interceptions gave them the ball inside our 40. The Eagles scored 10 of their 31 after back-to-back fumbles gave them the ball inside our 14. The Giants scored 10 of their 17 after two interceptions gave them the ball inside our territory, including once inside our 14. Carolina scored seven of their 14 points after an interception gave them the ball at our 24. And none of that includes the safety allowed by our offense or the TWO interceptions returned for touchdowns in those games.

Here's a question -- which defense this season would you like to see us emulate on the field and in the stats?

 

[khiladi]

The real test is this Sunday.

And a question:

Are penalties taken into account when taking yard count total? For example, would a 50 yard pass interference against Roy Williams count for the offensive yard total by the opposing team?

BTW, if it weren't for a Keyshawn drop and a Steve Smith drop on the slant in the third quarter, one could add another 100 yards to the Carolina total.

 

[MaineBoy]

Well, there are Lies, Damn Lies, and STATISTICS....

I remember a couple of years ago we were ranked 1st in Defense and we've been rebuilding it ever since....

Let's not forget that some of those current stats come against Washington (twice), Houston, and Arizona.

The stat that matters the most is wins and losses and this Defense cannot rush the passer or cover deep passes....As a matter of fact, we usually force a 3rd and long and then give up the first down. Against quality teams, or in the playoffs, this will kill us.

 

[bbgun]

You can't hide your lyin' eyes, and your smile is a thin disguise.
I thought by now you'd realize there ain't no way to hide those lying eyes.

 

[BigWillie]

Laugh if you want, but we aren't even getting close to knocking him down and that's what wins games in the NFL. Stop the pass on defense and pass well on offense.

I could go back over these lists of stats again, but seeing as how it's in one ear - out the other with the GROZ crowd, I won't bother breaking it down like I did weeks ago.

In any case, for that assumption (and yes, it's solely and assumption) you made above is rather silly. You honestly believe that? I'm guessing you said this with a blind eye to the fact Oakland and Miami are two of the top pass defenses in the NFL.

Here are the top 10 (in order) NFL defenses in passing defense. Beside them are where they are ranked in sack.

Chicago - 9th
Indy - 30th
Oakland - 21st
Miami - 12th
Jacksonville - 16th
Cleveland - 24th
Saints - 7th
Philly - 4th
Dallas - 22nd
Rams - 14th

The average rank among the top 10 teams in total passing defense when it comes to sacks - 16th.

 

[khiladi]

1) The Iggles had 383 yards of offense, you kinda forgot to deduct the 3 sacks for -23 yards the Boys had in this game...

2) The Iggles average 390.2 yards per game, which means they've averaged 391.1 yards per game in their other 8 games... so the Boys held them 8 yards under their season's average against teams other than the Cowboys...

The Eagles have played some SH*TTY DEFENSIVE teams as well. Houston, the 49ers, Green Bay, Tampa Bay, and Washington. The only legitimate defense they played against was the Giants, and they played them early in the season when the Giants defense was playing like crap. Philly also played New Orleans, and they aren't that much of a powerhouse defensively.

Stats are definitely deceiving. Holding the Eagles to 8 yards less than their average isn't saying much.

3) They drove 12 yards for 1 TD, 5 yards for a FG... that's 10 cheap points on a short field, courtesy of the OFFENSE (beyond the 102 yard int return for a TD, that was also on the offense)...

The Dallas D clamps down in the red-zone because they are SOLID against the run, and the field is shortened so the weaknesses of a pass rush are not as evident. An interesting stat would be how many of the scorse against Dallas in the red-zone were a result of pass versus run. Nobody disputes that Dallas is a good defense in the red-zone.

But they gave up chunks of yards against the Commanders, with Cooley having a season performace. They also were without Santana Moss, who continually burns the Cowboys for BIG PLAYS. Much of that has to do with pass pressure. I've seen a couple times where Henry would have been burned if he did not hold his receiver.

1) They average 346.9 yards per game, which means they've averaged 349.7 yards per game in their other 8 games... so the Boys held them 25 yards under their season average against any opponent other than the Dallas Cowboys...

Again, same issue.. The Giants have not played any great defensive teams. The only legitimate defense they played was the Chicago Bears defense, and that defense clamped down in the second half of the game. The only other defense that I can see that is respectable is Seattle.

The Giants and Iggles have very, very good offenses, naturally they're likely to put up better numbers on our defense than those lesser offenses you mentioned... but again, taking a close look at their game stats, it becomes apparent that it was the offense, NOT the defense, that cost the team both of those games...

The Eagles are a QUICK STRIKE offense. They tend to gain the majority of their yardage on 3 or 4 plays. I remember one time McNabb hit one of his receivers in the chest, which have resulted in a massive gain, but the receiver dropped the pass. The Giants haven't played any great defensive teams as well.

Dallas average needs to be measured against the teams they are playing against. Keyshawn and Steve Smith dropping what would have been huge gains added to our 'statistics' as well. No doubt Dallas is a good defense, but they are over-rated. As I said, Indy will be the real test.

 

[dbair1967]

So.....there are two sides. One points to stats - facts, if you will - and evidence of a defense continually put in terrible situations by their offense, while still performing at a top level in the leauge, and appreciates that fact. The other is upset because we rarely knock a QB down. We don't make it complicated.

Who's the real spin doctor, I wonder?

yeah, the facts shown were only those of games when we play the bad to medicore teams though

the facts show something different when we play the better teams

and put in bad positions or not, a good defense steps up and make plays...instead of melting down and giving up tds so much, they could step up and shut a team down, holding them out of FG range or to a FG attempt

we give up big plays and blow leads at a pretty high rate...its almost always because we dont rush the passer and dont create enough negative plays of our own

David

 

[superpunk]

I could go back over these lists of stats again, but seeing as how it's in one ear - out the other with the GROZ crowd, I won't bother breaking it down like I did weeks ago.

In any case, for that assumption (and yes, it's solely and assumption) you made above is rather silly. You honestly believe that? I'm guessing you said this with a blind eye to the fact Oakland and Miami are two of the top pass defenses in the NFL.

Here are the top 10 (in order) NFL defenses in passing defense. Beside them are where they are ranked in sack.

Chicago - 9th
Indy - 30th
Oakland - 21st
Miami - 12th
Jacksonville - 16th
Cleveland - 24th
Saints - 7th
Philly - 4th
Dallas - 22nd
Rams - 14th

The average rank among the top 10 teams in total passing defense when it comes to sacks - 16th.

More fun.....rank in sacks given up by teams we've faced -

4. Washington
5. Tennessee
7. Jacksonville
12. Carolina
13. NY Giants
16. Philadelphia
21. Houston
24. Arizona

Average rank - 12th. Only two teams in the lower half of the league in sacks.

The San Diego defense? Which all GROZ humpers aspire to? They've faced St. Louis, Cleveland, Cincy, Oakland, and Pittsburgh. None of those teams are ranked higher than 23rd. The only teams ranked in the top half of the rankings that they've faced are Baltimore and Tennessee. Against those teams, they have an entire 2 sacks - both against Baltimore, the lower ranked of the teams.

Some defensive genius is sure running that team.

 

[superpunk]

OTOH, we have done this against offenses in the top half of the league in giving up sacks.

4. Washington - 7 sacks (in washington's other 7 games, they've surrendered only 5)
5. Tennessee - 0 sacks
7. Jacksonville - 1 sack
12. Carolina - 3 sacks
13. NY Giants - 2 sacks
16. Philadelphia - 3 sacks

That's 16 sacks against the 7 teams we've played in the top half of the league. We are not afttening up on creampuff teams. That's an average of over 2 sacks per game, all against teams that give up less than that per game.

 

[khiladi]

OTOH, we have done this against offenses in the top half of the league in giving up sacks.

4. Washington - 7 sacks (in washington's other 7 games, they've surrendered only 5)
7. Jacksonville - 1 sack
12. Carolina - 3 sacks
13. NY Giants - 2 sacks
16. Philadelphia - 3 sacks


That's 16 sacks against the 7 teams we've played in the top half of the league. We are not afttening up on creampuff teams. That's an average of over 2 sacks per game, all against teams that give up less than that per game.

Santana Moss wasn't playing, and Clinton Portis was out the first game. No Portis is crying for Brunell to beat you in the passing game. These factors definitely impacted the game. I'm sure our sacks were pretty much COVERAGE sacks. That is not a result of pass rush.

Also, what about sacks in GARBAGE time? If I remember correctly, two of the sacks against Delhomme were in the closing minutes.

You may be correct, but again, stats can be deceiving...

 

[BigWillie]

Santana Moss wasn't playing, and Clinton Portis was out the first game. That definitely impacted the game. I'm sure our sacks were pretty much attributed to COVERAGE sacks. What about sacks in GARBAGE time? If I remember correctly, two of the sacks against Carolina were in the closing minutes.

You may be correct, but again, stats can be deceiving..

If you want to go that route ... fine ... but how about garbage stats we have given up due to leads late in the game? Do we erase those too? Nah. That gives the GROZ crowd more ammunition.

 

[joseephuss]

Santana Moss wasn't playing, and Clinton Portis was out the first game. That definitely impacted the game. I'm sure our sacks were pretty much COVERAGE sacks. That is not a result of pass rush.

Also, what about sacks in GARBAGE time? If I remember correctly, two of the sacks against Delhomme were in the closing minutes.

You may be correct, but again, stats can be deceiving...

Dallas didn't need to sack Delhomme to shut down Carolina. The Panthers really did nothing against the Cowboys defense and that is without sacking Jake. Dallas did pressure him though and force several errant throws throughout the game.

 

[AdamJT13]

the facts show something different when we play the better teams

Actually, they don't. See my previous post.

and put in bad positions or not, a good defense steps up and make plays...instead of melting down and giving up tds so much

We forced Jacksonville to punt when they started at our 33. We forced Philadelphia to kick a field goal when they started at our 14. We forced the Giants to turn the ball over when they started at our 38.

 

[khiladi]

We forced Jacksonville to punt when they started at our 33.

Byron Leftwich also marched right down the field to score in the fourth quarter against our vaunted defense...

We forced Jacksonville to punt when they started at our 33. We forced Philadelphia to kick a field goal when they started at our 14. We forced the Giants to turn the ball over when they started at our 38.

Our red-zone defense is NOT the issue... The field shortens and PASSING becomes that much more difficult. It is what happens outside the red-zone that our weaknesses in pass rush become more evident.