Perception, it ain't what it seems, some interesting NFL Fact (to me at least)

[TruthSeeker]

331
331
336
344
344

These are the final points against for 5 teams, some are perceived to be great defenses, some are perceived to be poor defenses, believe it or not, The GREAT Houston Defense, gave up 331 points this year, so did the Horrendous Pat's D (being sarcastic). The Great Baltimore D gave up 344, so did the Great NY Giants D. The Horrendous Green Bay Packers D gave up 336, which was less than Baltimore and the Giants, and ONLY 5 points more than the GREAT Texans D.

It's funny how some things are perceived in the NFL. Perception: The Pats and Packers can score a ton of points, but their defenses are so horrible they can't stop anyone. Yet the Texans and Ravens are the next Steel Curtains.

I just find it very interesting.

Perception: The Pat's Defense was WAY better in the 2nd half of the season. Truth, The Pats only gave up 9 more points in the first half of the season (170 points) as opposed to the second half (161 points). I will say this though, the first half of the season, the Pats only held opponents under 20 points 2 times, while in the second half of the season, they did it 5 times, including 5 out of the last 6 games, so I will agree with the perception that the Pat's D was better in the second half of the season.

Offensively, the Pats averaged 4 points more per game in the second half of the season (36.9 to 32.8). That's a neat fact. Step it up offensively, shut it down defensively, gives me a lot of hope.

Final note, a painful one, the Pats lost 4 games by a combined 11 points (2.75 per loss). Wow, a couple of field goals or TD's here and there away from 13-3, 14-2, 15-1 or 16-0.

 

[DocHoliday]

Points against is a terrible stat because it doesn't take into account the fact most teams go into desperation mode once our offense gets going.

It's a coping stat patsfans use. At the end of the day, on a final drive, I'll take Houston's D over ours.

It comes down to what your eyes tell you.

 

[Patstopia]

Points against is a terrible stat because it doesn't take into account the fact most teams go into desperation mode once our offense gets going.

It's a coping stat patsfans use. At the end of the day, on a final drive, I'll take Houston's D over ours.

It comes down to what your eyes tell you.

To my 'coping stat' eyes, I would rather use points than yards as I assume your 'eyes' do.
And by the way, isnt desperation mode the way every team play us? I am not sure how this applies to a lower point total, but I am sure it makes sense to you.

 

[Ive_Killed_People]

Points against is a terrible stat because it doesn't take into account the fact most teams go into desperation mode once our offense gets going.

It's a coping stat patsfans use. At the end of the day, on a final drive, I'll take Houston's D over ours.

It comes down to what your eyes tell you.

Some people use their brains instead but whatever works for you I guess

 

[JR4]

Points against is a terrible stat because it doesn't take into account the fact most teams go into desperation mode once our offense gets going.

It's a coping stat patsfans use. At the end of the day, on a final drive, I'll take Houston's D over ours.

It comes down to what your eyes tell you.

So Doc,
are you saying if Teams didn't go into "desperation mode" they
would have scored more points?
But isn't that the case with all teams not just the PATs?

 

[patsfaninpa]

Not only were we tied for 9th in points allowed. We were 2nd in forcing turnovers. Way more important than yardage.

 

[mayoclinic]

Points against is a terrible stat because it doesn't take into account the fact most teams go into desperation mode once our offense gets going.

It's a coping stat patsfans use. At the end of the day, on a final drive, I'll take Houston's D over ours.

It comes down to what your eyes tell you.

Yesterday, on the final drive, with the game on the line, Green Bay couldn't stop Minnesota from running it down their throats and driving to a chip shot field goal as time expired, costing them home field advantage. Yesterday, on the final drive, with home field for the playoffs on the line, Houston couldn't stop Indy from going on a 16 play drive chewing up the last 9:46 on the clock and preventing the Texans from getting a chance to come back, a drive on which Indy could easily have put points on the board if they hadn't just run out the clock.

If those teams are going to have to depend on their defenses making a stand at the end of the game, they're in trouble. IDK about the Pats, but I like our defenses' chances of making better than the two defenses from those teams that I saw yesterday. Just what my eyes tell me.

 

[Kontradiction]

Not only were we tied for 9th in points allowed. We were 2nd in forcing turnovers. Way more important than yardage.

Please don't succumb to that line of thinking. Both turnovers and yardage are important. When you can't get turnovers (something that happens in the postseason), you have to focus on limiting yardage in order to get the ball back in your high powered offense's hands. The inability to consistently execute one of those two facets on defense is one of the primary things that cost us the Super Bowl last year.

 

[makoute]

Please don't succumb to that line of thinking. Both turnovers and yardage are important. When you can't get turnovers (something that happens in the postseason), you have to focus on limiting yardage in order to get the ball back in your high powered offense's hands. The inability to consistently execute one of those two facets on defense is one of the primary things that cost us the Super Bowl last year.

The fact that they are in top 10 in points allowed is certainly encouraging.

 

[DocHoliday]

To my 'coping stat' eyes, I would rather use points than yards as I assume your 'eyes' do.
And by the way, isnt desperation mode the way every team play us? I am not sure how this applies to a lower point total, but I am sure it makes sense to you.

We are high scoring, therefore teams go into downfield passes play after play to catch up, allowing us turnovers. Teams routinely pass on fourth down on us and go for the TD instead of field goals to get back in the game. If our O wasn't good this wouldn't happen.

When teams are in control of our offense, they can run through our D like the 49ers did and score.

Frankly, we have an 06 colts like defense that lives and breathes on the O scoring points and forcing mistakes.

I don't think we have a good defense, merely an adequate one that complements the O.

Yardage is just as, if not more important in the playoffs. If you give up a lot of yards but little points in the regular season it usually means the other offense couldn't execute against our D. Except in the playoffs everyone is good and everyone can execute so relying on mistakes while giving up big yards isn't practical.

 

[ivanvamp]

We are high scoring, therefore teams go into downfield passes play after play to catch up, allowing us turnovers. Teams routinely pass on fourth down on us and go for the TD instead of field goals to get back in the game. If our O wasn't good this wouldn't happen.

When teams are in control of our offense, they can run through our D like the 49ers did and score.

Frankly, we have an 06 colts like defense that lives and breathes on the O scoring points and forcing mistakes.

I don't think we have a good defense, merely an adequate one that complements the O.

Yardage is just as, if not more important in the playoffs. If you give up a lot of yards but little points in the regular season it usually means the other offense couldn't execute against our D. Except in the playoffs everyone is good and everyone can execute so relying on mistakes while giving up big yards isn't practical.

Fortunately, recent times in the NFL have shown us that you can win a Super Bowl with a good offense and an adequate defense.

Year - SB Champ - Off (pts/yds) - Def (pts/yds)
2011 - NYG - 9/8 - 25/27
2010 - GB - 10/9 - 2/5
2009 - NO - 1/1 - 20/25
2008 - Pit - 20/22 - 1/1
2007 - NYG - 14/16 - 17/7
2006 - Ind - 2/3 - 23/21

So of the last 6 SB champs, only the Packers were both good and balanced. The Giants were balanced, but just average on either side of the ball, though they got hot at the right time (and got very lucky). The 2011 Giants, 2009 Saints, and 2006 Colts all were good on offense and pretty bad on defense, yet won the SB.

This year, the Pats are 1/1 - 9/25. That more than fits the profile of a recent SB winner.

 

[DocHoliday]

Fortunately, recent times in the NFL have shown us that you can win a Super Bowl with a good offense and an adequate defense.

Year - SB Champ - Off (pts/yds) - Def (pts/yds)
2011 - NYG - 9/8 - 25/27
2010 - GB - 10/9 - 2/5
2009 - NO - 1/1 - 20/25
2008 - Pit - 20/22 - 1/1
2007 - NYG - 14/16 - 17/7
2006 - Ind - 2/3 - 23/21

So of the last 6 SB champs, only the Packers were both good and balanced. The Giants were balanced, but just average on either side of the ball, though they got hot at the right time (and got very lucky). The 2011 Giants, 2009 Saints, and 2006 Colts all were good on offense and pretty bad on defense, yet won the SB.

This year, the Pats are 1/1 - 9/25. That more than fits the profile of a recent SB winner.

We just have to cross our fingers and hope our O doesn't get stifled.

 

[ivanvamp]

We just have to cross our fingers and hope our O doesn't get stifled.

The question is: Can the Patriots win a playoff game where the offense gets held in check? Let's call "in check" an average of 24 points or fewer. I use that figure because the Pats, year-in and year-out, average in the high 20's or more. So 24 would represent a low-scoring game, but not a game where NE's offense gets buried.

In the past 3 seasons, the Pats are 2-2 in the playoffs. Outside of their huge win against Denver last year, all 3 other games were games where they were held in check:

L, 28-21 vs. NYJ
W, 23-20 vs. Bal
L, 21-17 vs. NYG

In the past 2 regular seasons, here's the games where the offense has been held in check:

2011
W, 20-16 vs. Dal
L, 25-17 at Pit
L, 24-20 vs. NYG

2012
L, 20-18 vs. Ari
L, 24-23 at Sea
W, 23-16 at Mia
W, 23-16 at Jax

That's a 3-4 record. So in the past 2 years, starting with the Jets playoff game in Jan 2011, the Pats are 5-6 in games where their offense has been held in check.

So they're capable, potentially, of winning a low-scoring game. But it would require an A+ effort from the defense.

 

[ALP]

like other have said, the implication of the numbers posted is hazy, but i do find it quite interesting, that i def. agree on