fire3fighter4 Posted January 2, 2009 Share Posted January 2, 2009 That doesn't mean they're accurate and reliable. Good point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KDawg Posted January 2, 2009 Share Posted January 2, 2009 Forget drops to an extent. Edwards drops over 16% of his passes. Moss and ARE are separated by less than 3%. Who has more costly drops? This is an argument that can be construed either way with different sets of stats. One that I don't really care to engage in too much. I understand what you're saying, fire. And for the most part, I agree with you. I just don't think the idea that El may be a bit better than Moss in certain situations is absurd. The question is, which situational type of player is more important to us. And the answer, for right now, is Santana Moss. He's our only home run threat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GroundNPound Posted January 2, 2009 Share Posted January 2, 2009 I agree and disagree with the OP. - Offense was a little underated... in the first half of the season. We ran the ball on some potent defenses. With that working, our pass game worked decently. Once teams adjusted to Zorn's playcalling a little better, and injuries took a toll on the O-line and Portis, our run game slowed down, thus the pass game suffered. We had little ball control in the second half of the season because we couldn't sustain drives. - Defense was a little overated... I agree. The best compliment to any offense is a defense that creates good field position. This is done by 3-and-outs and turnovers. Our defense was good this year, but due to our inefficient offense and a lack of turnovers, they remained on the field too long in the second half of the season. In quite a few games they were worn down more in the 4th quarter than they needed to be. HOWEVER. I don't beleive this is due to a "lack of aggressiveness". Blache "brought the house" more than almost any team in the league this year. He sent Washington, Rocky, and Horton on blitzes constantly. He had to in order to compensate for the lack of pressure generated by the front 4. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fire3fighter4 Posted January 2, 2009 Share Posted January 2, 2009 They are compiled on a far more intelligent basis ranking than the NFL yardage rankings. According to who? You?.. Or the guys that state on their own website that the stats aren't reliable, and that the system they use has flaws? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pounds Posted January 2, 2009 Share Posted January 2, 2009 The only people who agree with that statement don't understand statistics. You're probably right. I just don't put too much stock into them. And don't get me wrong, I thought your original post was a very good one; I just don't agree with the emphasis you place on stats. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fire3fighter4 Posted January 2, 2009 Share Posted January 2, 2009 Who has more costly drops? This is an argument that can be construed either way with different sets of stats. One that I don't really care to engage in too much. I understand what you're saying, fire. And for the most part, I agree with you. I just don't think the idea that El may be a bit better than Moss in certain situations is absurd. The question is, which situational type of player is more important to us. And the answer, for right now, is Santana Moss. He's our only home run threat. We're not talking about 'certain situations', we're talking about over all talent and skill. Who brings more to the table? I'm sorry but ARE isn't even close to Moss. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fire3fighter4 Posted January 2, 2009 Share Posted January 2, 2009 I'm done with this...I'm sorry, but system that puts Adrian Peterson as not even a top 15 back is ridiculous. The DVOA is a joke, in my opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pounds Posted January 2, 2009 Share Posted January 2, 2009 Whoever says Blanche didn't blitz enough must not have watched many games this year. Absolutely. Blache's frequent and ill-conceived blitzes cost us a few games, in my estimation. Namely the Giants game at FedEx. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oldfan Posted January 2, 2009 Author Share Posted January 2, 2009 I agree with what you have to say, but realize that statistics are numbers that can be skewed to prove just about any point. I believe what Blache was trying to say, is that you can only go so far with statistics, but cannot solely rely on them. Like you said, using them to help confirm or deny you opinion is important, but the ability to backup and look at the contributing factors are also essential. Statistics can be deceptive, but the quality of football stats is improving and their use in the NFL is growing. Teams that fly by the seat of their pants will be losers in the long pull. Overall, always have liked your posts and tend to agree with a lot of them. Sound opinions based off of more than just shear emotion are always worth reading and listening to. Thanks Oldfan. Thank YOU for the kind words. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oldfan Posted January 2, 2009 Author Share Posted January 2, 2009 According to who? You?.. Yes, according to me. I stated my opinion. Or the guys that state on their own website that the stats aren't reliable, and that the system they use has flaws? Their candor with regard to their stats is part of the evidence I considered in arriving at my judgment that their stats are the product of intelligent minds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oldfan Posted January 2, 2009 Author Share Posted January 2, 2009 It's nice to see some intelligent discussion in here. Along the same lines, I think many fans tend to misdirect the blame for the lack of sacks on the DE position. Generally, our DE are asked to hold up the OT to allow the LB to make the plays. I think the injuries to MW and McIntosh and the lack of a true FS to allow LL in the box really limited our pass rush. Although ultimately, our scheme is the limiting factor in our pass rush, not our personnel. Greg Blache, like Gregg Williams, will play to stop the run first. After a sudden rash of sacks in the 2005 stretch run, Philip Daniels explained that he had been released to take an outside rush rather than to line up more inside to play the run first. We certainly could use more talent, but scheme has a helluva lot to do with the results we're getting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
me_grimlock Posted January 2, 2009 Share Posted January 2, 2009 special teams doesn't get any love Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bikie Posted January 2, 2009 Share Posted January 2, 2009 Quoted for the truth. It was a good original post, but reeks of over-analyzation. Our offense, on average scored 16.6 points per game, while our defense allowed, on average 18.5 points per game. 'Nuff said, the aforementioned is simply all that matters.One of the most poignant quotes Greg Blache gave this season was that stats are indeed, for losers; they belie and convolute the truth. If you know enough about the game of football, you should know enough to trust you own eyes, rather than falling back on someone else's statistics, whether they come from NFL.com, football outsiders, or whatever. I'd much rather ponder the scheme that created these realities, than the statistics that befell us. agree with everything said above... there's no analysis needed when the O scores an average of 16.6 points a game, 265 for the season... there's nothing else to be said... that is a pathetic offense by any standard... I doubt there's a team that scored under 300 points for the season that made the playoffs, much less had a winning year... and if there is, they are an anomaly with an elite D.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ddub52 Posted January 2, 2009 Share Posted January 2, 2009 Yes, our defense didnt give up 25 points all season long, until the last game VERY overrated Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCsportsfan53 Posted January 2, 2009 Share Posted January 2, 2009 Ummmm.....sorry but our offense scored 3 less points than the Detroit Lions offense. We were 8-8, they were 0-16. Same offensive outputs, very different records. Where was the 8 game difference? Yeah, exactly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oldfan Posted January 2, 2009 Author Share Posted January 2, 2009 Yes, our defense didnt give up 25 points all season long, until the last gameVERY overrated Yes, I think the defense has been overrated; and, when those who disagree can only debate by cherry-picking one stat, it makes me even more certain of my position. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oldfan Posted January 2, 2009 Author Share Posted January 2, 2009 Ummmm.....sorry but our offense scored 3 less points than the Detroit Lions offense. We were 8-8, they were 0-16. Same offensive outputs, very different records. Where was the 8 game difference? Yeah, exactly. I missed something. Are you claiming the the defense was the entire difference between the Lions and the Skins? If you are, could you give your reasoning? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lombardi's_kid_brother Posted January 2, 2009 Share Posted January 2, 2009 The one thing I absolutely agree with is that we have abysmal special teams. Aside from Rock, who is our real "Special Teams Ace?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulldog Posted January 2, 2009 Share Posted January 2, 2009 the offense scored a field goal less over 16 games than the winless Lions. the starting quarterback threw only 13 touchdowns in those games. That's less than 1 per contest. the offensive line yielded 40 sacks in 2008, a very high number for an experience line with highly paid performers on it. the 'big play' TE only scored ONE touchdown in 16 games. and the offense was underrated? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KDawg Posted January 2, 2009 Share Posted January 2, 2009 The one thing I absolutely agree with is that we have abysmal special teams. Aside from Rock' date=' who is our real "Special Teams Ace?"[/quote']Yup. As I stated, I think STeams were a HUGE reason why we didn't win. Offense being the other. the offense scored a field goal less over 16 games than the winless Lions. the starting quarterback threw only 13 touchdowns in those games. That's less than 1 per contest. the offensive line yielded 40 sacks in 2008, a very high number for an experience line with highly paid performers on it. the 'big play' TE only scored ONE touchdown in 16 games. and the offense was underrated? Our offense was good at TOP early in the season. But really, there's not much else that impressed me offensively. I agree with bulldog here. Definitely not underrated in the least. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExoDus84 Posted January 2, 2009 Share Posted January 2, 2009 this thread is a joke. Our defense is the only reason this team isnt 3-13, and you want to sit there and call them overrated? They didnt give up more than 26 points in a game all season long up until the last meaningless game, and they did this while playing some of the best offenses in the NFL, and being in the 1st or 2nd most difficult division in football. hey did very well and kept us in every game, even when our atrocious offense kept trying to give games away. Our O was horrible. Underrated? Is that a joke? Did you actually watch any of the games, where we were amassing an amazing 11 pts per game over the last several weeks? What a ridiculous thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brandymac27 Posted January 2, 2009 Share Posted January 2, 2009 the offense scored a field goal less over 16 games than the winless Lions. the starting quarterback threw only 13 touchdowns in those games. That's less than 1 per contest. the offensive line yielded 40 sacks in 2008, a very high number for an experience line with highly paid performers on it. the 'big play' TE only scored ONE touchdown in 16 games. and the offense was underrated? I'm with you on this one. I don't see how, stat's and all, that our offense was underrated. If anything, it was overrated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ddub52 Posted January 2, 2009 Share Posted January 2, 2009 Yes, I think the defense has been overrated; and, when those who disagree can only debate by cherry-picking one stat, it makes me even more certain of my position. Yes, you over-analyzed the whole situation. When those who disagree look at so many stats that they can spin anything to be negative it makes me even more certain on my position. You could be a spin doctor Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ddub52 Posted January 2, 2009 Share Posted January 2, 2009 the offense scored a field goal less over 16 games than the winless lions. The starting quarterback threw only 13 touchdowns in those games. That's less than 1 per contest. The offensive line yielded 40 sacks in 2008, a very high number for an experience line with highly paid performers on it. The 'big play' te only scored one touchdown in 16 games. And the offense was underrated? qft Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fire3fighter4 Posted January 2, 2009 Share Posted January 2, 2009 Yes, I think the defense has been overrated; and, when those who disagree can only debate by cherry-picking one stat, it makes me even more certain of my position. Last time I checked in the end, points forced and allowed is the only thing that matters.:2cents: Points allowed, we're in the top 7(6th). Points forced, we're 28th. When you look at ability to continue/stop drives(3rd down %) Offense: 26th Defense: 7th Our offense was given pretty good field position throughout the season due to our defense not allowing a lot of yards, and failed to do much with it. Our Defense certainly isn't the best in the league, but it's easily a top 5 D. Without our stout D this year we'd probably be 2-14. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.