2008: Overrated Defense, Underrated Offense

[Oldfan]

Average Points for the O..............16.5

Average Points against the D .......18.5

Average Points per team in a game is 20. something?! (I think last year it was 20.3?)

So

Our D was holding offenses down BETTER than our O was at Overcoming D

Our D was BETTER THAN AVERAGE 18.5 < 20

Our O was WORSE THAN AVERAGE 16.5 < 20

D >>> O

So, are you claiming that the Skins offense did not do a good job of ball control, or is it that you don't understand that a ball control offense holds the score down for BOTH teams?

[Stormy]

So, are you claiming that the Skins offense did not do a good job of ball control, or is it that you don't understand that a ball control offense holds the score down for BOTH teams?

No, he's claiming that, in addition to an utter inability to put points on the board, the Redskins offense...

*Were one of the least efficient yardage producers in the game, averaging only 5.0 yards per play (25th in the league).

*Were wretched in "ball control" offense. Despite their '3 and out' defense assisting them in running more plays than all but 5 other NFL teams, they still only finished 19th in offensive yardage. Far more plays than most teams, and far less yardage. Lethal combination.

*Were incapable of sustaining their drives, as evidenced by their feeble 35% 3rd down conversion rate, which placed the stagnant Redskins at 26th in the NFL. No wonder they were among the league leaders in 3 and outs, and we all know nothing says great "ball control offense" like 3 and outs.

*Were completely futile in capitalizing on some of the best starting field position in football, due in large part to their defense and special teams play. Despite having the 9th best average starting field position in the game, the Redskins still had to punt more than all but a handful of teams (ranking 25th), and finshed 17th in yards per drive.

Those are dreadful numbers for an alleged "ball control offense" but of course, everyone already knew they were ineffectual in that regard. Compound all of these failings with the fact that a.) they managed to put the ball in the endzone less than almost anyone in the league, and b.) these already bad numbers got progressively worse rather than better (against both good and bad opponents) as the season evolved... and it's quite a bleak picture.

[Ghost of]

I've come to recognize Stormy as someone who brings the pain in these types of debates and that post teaches me to expect no different now or in the future.

Thanks again!

[Oldfan]

Stormy:

*Were one of the least efficient yardage producers in the game, averaging only 5.0 yards per play (25th in the league).

Ball control teams will usually have lower-than-average YPPs because they aim for consistency. If a team was able to get 5.0 yards on each and every down, they'd never be stopped.

Big play teams have higher YPPs but lack consistency. They don't help their defenses. The result is higher-scoring games and overrated offenses. This was a common charge against the Al Saunders offenses in Kansas City.

*Were wretched in "ball control" offense. Despite their '3 and out' defense assisting them in running more plays than all but 5 other NFL teams, they still only finished 19th in offensive yardage. Far more plays than most teams, and far less yardage. Lethal combination.

How exactly does a defense assist an offense in running more plays? Are we back to the phantom extra possession theory invented earlier in this thread? Explain this please.

As for finishing 19th (middle of the pack) in yardage despite running 1,047 plays, you are simply repeating your first point in different words (5.0 YPP).

*Were incapable of sustaining their drives...

You are arguing a point I granted in the OP.

No wonder they were among the league leaders in 3 and outs, and we all know nothing says great "ball control offense" like 3 and outs.

Show me the stat to support this claim. I haven't seen it and I don't believe that we were among the leaders in three and outs although I can imagine that we were above average. We didn't lose the ball on turnovers much, so obviously we punted more and had more three and outs by not turning it over on fumbles and interceptions.

.. best starting field position in football, due in large part to their defense and special teams play... Despite having the 9th best average starting field position in the game, the Redskins still had to punt more than all but a handful of teams (ranking 25th), and finshed 17th in yards per drive.

"Best starting point in all of football.." not true. Nevertheless, show me the stat to support your point. I don't believe that you have a stat isolating the defense and special teams from the offense when compiling a starting field position stat. Furthermore, your claim is unlikely to be true since we had a poor punting game and our defense played so passively with the corners playing soft and not creating a lot of turnovers.

...they managed to put the ball in the endzone less than almost anyone in the league, and... numbers got progressively worse ... as the season evolved...

Both points already granted in the OP.

Adding up your argument:

You made two points on the same deceptive stat (YPP)

You made two claims unsupported by stats and unlikely to be true

You made three points already granted in the OP

You made one mystery claim (defense helped offense run more plays)

[Oldfan]

I couldn't agree more. I don't have the stats on hand, but I think our offense was very good at not turning the ball over, and our defense very poor (again) at creating. And for my money, that's a pretty damn important stat (for both sides). I think the team that wins the turnover battle wins some enormous percentage of games. Can't blame our offense for that.

I've seen a couple of studies establishing the value of a turnover at four points. So, if the offense can eliminate ten turnovers, it saves 40 points on average for the defense. If the defense can create ten more turnovers, it adds 40 points for the offense.