Only One Offense first NFL team Alive

[Deus Irae]

NFL Football Stats - NFL Team Opp Yards per Point on TeamRankings.com

#2 in the NFL.

Special teams defense #2. Special teams offense #9
FOOTBALL OUTSIDERS: Innovative Statistics, Intelligent Analysis | 2011 DRIVE STATS

Patriots offense:

NFL Football Stats - NFL Team Yards per Point on TeamRankings.com

#3


The other stat? In 14 games played this season the Patriots defense allowed less points than their opponents defense. You can get swayed all you want about your silly yards. But nothing tops those two.

They have, in reality, in real life, allowed less points than 3 other defenses they have faced. In 2 of those games that they allowed more points the offense turned over the ball 4 times. If you have any kind of football sense you will understand the importance of turnovers, and what a turnover does to a defense.

The only game this defense lost and got shown off, was Pittsburg. Aside from that this defense was the better defense all season long.

Nothing is more important than results. And if you want to predict, than you use the stat that does it best. And the stat that does it best is that I told you about: yard per point. If you don't like that, measure them against common opponents and winning teams.

You are still better off than looking at any kind of ******ed yard stat, or total stat, from NFL.com to try and judge the quality of your team's offense or defense. They are vacuum stats. Unlike those yards per point isn't one. Vacuum stats are useless in true comparisons or true rankings. They should only be used as a tool to get to the true evaluations for the teams.

Sorry, but any metric that puts the Patriots as the #2 or #3 defense in the NFL this season is worse than useless...

...and, AGAIN, I was just using a sentence as an excuse to put a Meatballs clip in the thread.

 

[Rob0729]

BTW, why do people give the Giants credit for getting healthy on defense and not the Pats. It seems pretty clear that adding Chung and Spikes back to the line up and moving McCourty to safety has done wonders for this defense. Since they made all three moves in the second quarter of the Bills' game, this defense has given up very few yards and points.

I don't know if the Pats' defense is worlds better than it was, but it is clearly better none the less.

 

[patsfaninpittsburgh]

Please stop. For one thing, you've posted a lot on this topic without offering links and verification, and your claims about the Patriots defense are simply unbelievable. Even more importantly, though, my post was just a way to get a Meatballs clip into the thread.

Translation

Please stop! I'm too dumb to comprehend.

 

[patsfaninpittsburgh]

Sorry, but any metric that puts the Patriots as the #2 or #3 defense in the NFL this season is worse than useless...

...and, AGAIN, I was just using a sentence as an excuse to put a Meatballs clip in the thread.

Translation

I said please!!! Really, I am that dumb, I can't comprehend.

 

[Fball]

BTW, why do people give the Giants credit for getting healthy on defense and not the Pats. It seems pretty clear that adding Chung and Spikes back to the line up and moving McCourty to safety has done wonders for this defense. Since they made all three moves in the second quarter of the Bills' game, this defense has given up very few yards and points.

I don't know if the Pats' defense is worlds better than it was, but it is clearly better none the less.

Slowing Green Bay & Atlanta down & slowing Denver down are 2 different things entirely.

I think the Pats D has been given some credit since the 1st playoff game, but more recognition is given to the Giants because of who they have faced.

 

[PatriotSeven]

Of the remaining teams, the point differentials are:

NE +171
SF +151
Bal + 112
NYG -6

I'd say those first three are more "balanced" than the last one.

Oh, and every team has injuries. The Pats were starting WR's at CB and Safety for Pete's sake!

Interestingly, the two top teams in Pt Diff (NO and GB) are out.

Still, you gotta play the games. Last time the NYG were in it they were +22 in Pt Differential and we were +1,576,346 and we still lost so maybe a pass rush is all that is needed. Any given Sunday, I guess.

NY Giants are ranked:
17th in defense efficiency
23rd in special teams
23rd in yards allowed
22nd in points allowed


Patriots defense are ranked
2nd in efficiency
2nd in special teams defense
11th in points allowed
31st in yards(most meaningless of all)


BUT...they had the hardest schedule of teams. When you face the best and most efficiency offenses in the league, and you still come out looking balanced, it means you're probably not as bad as you look. You may not be as good, but you are up there, and your stats are skewed. They're dangerous.

Their defense ranked more efficient in the past 2 games, but let's look at what happened against Atlanta:

NY Giants scoring allowed efficiency against Atlanta: 123.5 yards per point(6 X better the best NFL defense in the league)

Now you could say NY Giants defense is scary or you could use common sense.

The worst offensive efficiency the Rams, score at 23.5 yards per point.
The absolute best defense efficiency, SF 49ers, 20.7 yards per point.

So when you see a defense like the Giants prevent a team like Atlanta from scoring in that manner, and put up a 123.5 yard per point that says only one thing: Atlanta beat itself. No defense is 6 times as good as the 49ers defense. No top 14 offense is capable of only scoring 3 points on any NFL defense. Atlanta averaged over 25 points. Matty Ice chocked. Atlanta choked. And we all saw Aaron choke. 4 turnovers by a team who doesn't turn over the ball. If the NY Giants was great they would have done this against average offenses at least once this season. But they didn't.

The Giants defense allowed 49 points to New Orleans, 36 points to Seattle, 38 points to Green Bay, 37 to Dallas, 31 to Dallas(without Romo), and 29 to the Jets.

By comparison New England gave up more than 27 points once, against the Buffalo Bills once, and it took the offense giving up 4 turnovers for anyone to put 31 points on this defense.

Only a moron would try to convince me the Giants Defense is anywhere NEAR the quality of this team's defense with those real life results. Only mediots who look at yards. Giants defense stinks and they are all talk. Their offense is average. Except another repeat by the 49ers.

Atlanta made them look good and so did GB. They're a fraud. Patriots have proved they were better and proved they were not the 32nd worse defense all season long. Points matter more. Total defense efficiency matters most. They are #2 in the league overall. Period.

 

[IllegalContact]

the giants are the most balanced team....they give up as many point as they score

 

[The Brandon Five]

Slowing Green Bay & Atlanta down & slowing Denver down are 2 different things entirely.

I think the Pats D has been given some credit since the 1st playoff game, but more recognition is given to the Giants because of who they have faced.

I would give the Giants more credit if there weren't about a dozen unforced errors by the Packers in that game.

 

[IllegalContact]

people are gaggin on this history repeating crap......please stop

 

[Fball]

I would give the Giants more credit if there weren't about a dozen unforced errors by the Packers in that game.

That balanced out, imo, by the fact that the only 2 Packers TD's came as the result of 2 terrible officiating calls.

 

[ishmael]

It took me about a minute to figure out the meaning of the thread title.

Allow me:

"New England is the only offense-first team still alive."

 

[lamafist]

NFL Football Stats - NFL Team Opp Yards per Point on TeamRankings.com

#2 in the NFL.

Special teams defense #2. Special teams offense #9
FOOTBALL OUTSIDERS: Innovative Statistics, Intelligent Analysis | 2011 DRIVE STATS

Patriots offense:

NFL Football Stats - NFL Team Yards per Point on TeamRankings.com

#3


The other stat? In 14 games played this season the Patriots defense allowed less points than their opponents defense. You can get swayed all you want about your silly yards. But nothing tops those two.

They have, in reality, in real life, allowed less points than 3 other defenses they have faced. In 2 of those games that they allowed more points the offense turned over the ball 4 times. If you have any kind of football sense you will understand the importance of turnovers, and what a turnover does to a defense.

The only game this defense lost and got shown off, was Pittsburg. Aside from that this defense was the better defense all season long.

Nothing is more important than results. And if you want to predict, than you use the stat that does it best. And the stat that does it best is that I told you about: yard per point. If you don't like that, measure them against common opponents and winning teams.

You are still better off than looking at any kind of ******ed yard stat, or total stat, from NFL.com to try and judge the quality of your team's offense or defense. They are vacuum stats. Unlike those yards per point isn't one. Vacuum stats are useless in true comparisons or true rankings. They should only be used as a tool to get to the true evaluations for the teams.

A problem with yards per point:

Team A gives up X yards and Y points over a season.
Team B gives up X yards and Y + 50 points in the same season.

In defensive yards/point, team B would rank higher than team A -- thus, giving up more points supposedly means they have a better defense.

 

[mb6592]

BTW, why do people give the Giants credit for getting healthy on defense and not the Pats. It seems pretty clear that adding Chung and Spikes back to the line up and moving McCourty to safety has done wonders for this defense. Since they made all three moves in the second quarter of the Bills' game, this defense has given up very few yards and points.

I don't know if the Pats' defense is worlds better than it was, but it is clearly better none the less.

Because this Giants defense was instrumental in the Giants WINNING A SUPERBOWL (Jesus, do I have to remind you against who?).

 

[PatriotSeven]

A problem with yards per point:

Team A gives up X yards and Y points over a season.
Team B gives up X yards and Y + 50 points in the same season.

In defensive yards/point, team B would rank higher than team A -- thus, giving up more points supposedly means they have a better defense.

No. Team B would rank lower. Much lower. It's reversed. The higher the number on defense the better the defense. The lower the number on offense the better the offense. Teams who give up the most points get clobbered by yards per point. Teams who give up yards don't. Which makes sense. Defenses that give up yards and no points are rewarded fairly. There are defenses where it's part of their strategy to do this, or that have great special teams that push their opponents back that make them look bad in yards but don't actually have bad defense. Or they have very efficient offenses that don't turn over the ball.

And they're all really offensive measurements anyway. Defensive yards per point is really a measurement of all your opponents offensive inefficiency. It's damn near impossible to measure defenses in the NFL. All we know is that the combined opponents NE Patriots faced scored less points than the combined opponents Giants faced and had to put in more effort for each point. They had to travel further or needed multiple possessions to get the same points against the Patriots.

Yards per point implies the defense forces offenses to play inefficiently, but it's important to keep an eye on the value of the number. That's why when you see a number like 120 yards per point....that means the other offense screwed the pooch. If the other offense gave away 4 turnovers, the other offense messed up. You need to look at other things too and do a reality check. Make sure the stat matches the reality. Yards clearly do not match the reality of NE's or GB's defenses.

I look at both yards per point and turnovers. But a good defense doesn't need help to look good. NE's defense simply stuffed Denver. In fact the offense lost the turnover battle and the defense still looked good.

Giants defense needed Atlanta to shoot themselves in the foot(scored 3 points) and Aaron Rodgers to play incredibly bad and GB turn over the ball 4 times to "have a surging defense".

 

[Rob0729]

Because this Giants defense was instrumental in the Giants WINNING A SUPERBOWL (Jesus, do I have to remind you against who?).

If the Pats meet the Giants in the Super Bowl in three weeks, I don't know how Matt Light is going to shut down Michael Strahan. The guy has been a beast this year behind that Fox broadcast desk.

This Giants' defense has been instrumental in winning exactly ZERO SUPER BOWLS. The Giants haven't won a Super Bowl in four years and this defense is different than it was four years ago. In fact, during the season, the defense was worse than the Patriots for long stretches.

The following starters of the 2007 Giants Super Bowl defense who are no longer on the team are as follows:

Strahan
Sam Madison
Antonio Pierce
James Butler
Kawika Mitchell
Fred Robbins
Barry Coffied

The only starters who were on their 2007 team and this year's team are:

Justin Tuck
Osi Umenyoria
Mathais Kiwanuka
Aaron Ross
Gabril Wilson

That is five out of 11 starters.

And leave Jesus out of this because even he isn't buying your Hail Mary of an argument.

 

[mb6592]

If the Pats meet the Giants in the Super Bowl in three weeks, I don't know how Matt Light is going to shut down Michael Strahan. The guy has been a beast this year behind that Fox broadcast desk.


This Giants' defense has been instrumental in winning exactly ZERO SUPER BOWLS. The Giants haven't won a Super Bowl in four years and this defense is different than it was four years ago. In fact, during the season, the defense was worse than the Patriots for long stretches.

The following starters of the 2007 Giants Super Bowl defense who are no longer on the team are as follows:

Strahan
Sam Madison
Antonio Pierce
James Butler
Kawika Mitchell
Fred Robbins
Barry Coffied

The only starters who were on their 2007 team and this year's team are:

Justin Tuck
Osi Umenyoria
Mathais Kiwanuka
Aaron Ross
Gabril Wilson

That is five out of 11 starters.

And leave Jesus out of this because even he isn't buying your Hail Mary of an argument.

Man you've become a dolt - Justin Tuck (6 tackles, 5 solo, 2 sacks) and Osi Umenyoria (4 tackles, 3 solo) had monster games in that Superbowl win and as far as Strahan goes? Jason Pierre-Paul and his 16 1/2 sacks say hello.

You use to be a great poster, your stuff on the lockout is legendary. What happen to you man? You use to be beautiful.

 

[Rob0729]

Man you've become a dolt - Justin Tuck (6 tackles, 5 solo, 2 sacks) and Osi Umenyoria (4 tackles, 3 solo) had monster games in that Superbowl win and as far as Strahan goes? Jason Pierre-Paul and his 16 1/2 sacks say hello.

You use to be a great poster, your stuff on the lockout is legendary. What happen to you man? You use to be beautiful.

LOL! C'mon, you are selling the Giants defense too short. In the Super Bowl in the 2007 season, the Giants' defense totally shutdown Gronk, Hernandez, BJGE, and Woodhead. They did not have a single yard between any of them in that game. If we are going to live in a fantasy world where this Giants' defense played this Patriots offense in the Super Bowl in February of 2008, let's go all out.

Yes, the Giants' this year have a monster front four and they are similiar to the front four that played the Pats in that Super Bowl, BUT their LB corp is far worse than that LB corp. Their secondary is arguably not as good either. They are not the same team and the Giants' defense of the years in between that Super Bowl and their current playoff run have been up and down over the last four years.

It is silly to buy into the Giants defense because of what they did four years ago. Just like it is stupid when people argue that the Pats are going to lose Sunday because the Ravens beat the Pats in the 2009 playoffs. Different teams with a lot of different players.

 

[lamafist]

No. Team B would rank lower. Much lower. It's reversed. The higher the number on defense the better the defense. The lower the number on offense the better the offense. Teams who give up the most points get clobbered by yards per point. Teams who give up yards don't. Which makes sense. Defenses that give up yards and no points are rewarded fairly. There are defenses where it's part of their strategy to do this, or that have great special teams that push their opponents back that make them look bad in yards but don't actually have bad defense. Or they have very efficient offenses that don't turn over the ball.

And they're all really offensive measurements anyway. Defensive yards per point is really a measurement of all your opponents offensive inefficiency. It's damn near impossible to measure defenses in the NFL. All we know is that the combined opponents NE Patriots faced scored less points than the combined opponents Giants faced and had to put in more effort for each point. They had to travel further or needed multiple possessions to get the same points against the Patriots.

Yards per point implies the defense forces offenses to play inefficiently, but it's important to keep an eye on the value of the number. That's why when you see a number like 120 yards per point....that means the other offense screwed the pooch. If the other offense gave away 4 turnovers, the other offense messed up. You need to look at other things too and do a reality check. Make sure the stat matches the reality. Yards clearly do not match the reality of NE's or GB's defenses.

I look at both yards per point and turnovers. But a good defense doesn't need help to look good. NE's defense simply stuffed Denver. In fact the offense lost the turnover battle and the defense still looked good.

Giants defense needed Atlanta to shoot themselves in the foot(scored 3 points) and Aaron Rodgers to play incredibly bad and GB turn over the ball 4 times to "have a surging defense".

Ok, but the other way around is just as problematic:

Team A and B play 16 game seasons with 10 defensive possessions in each game. Team A gives up X points and Y yards; Team B gives up X points and Y+500 yards.

Team A would rank as the better defense in yards per point, despite the fact that Team B gave up the same number of points and more yards, either because opponents kicked shorter field goals on average, or because opponents had worse average starting field position. Either way, Team B is obviously a worse defense, but would rank better in yards-per-point.

The reason this can happen is that while yards-per-point has the look of true rate stat, like X per play or per game, it's not one. Plays, drives, games, carries, throws, etc. are all rational terms over which another stat can be accumulated -- they are the action or time period over or through which the stat is accumulated. Yards and points don't have any such relation; they vary independently and non-linearly with one another.

 

[Ring 6]

Another mediot.

San Francisco offensive efficiency #2
San Francisco defensive efficiency #1
San Francisco special teams defense #1

New England Patriots offensive efficiency #3
New Englant Patriots defensive efficiency #2
New England Special teams #2.

The reason why the 49ers have "the better defense" is only 5 interceptions from Alex.
Tom Brady has 12 interceptions.

Tom: 39 TD 12 INT or a 3.25 ratio.
Alex: 17TD 5 INT or a 3.4 ratio.
Brees: 46 TD 14 INT or a 3.28 ratio.

When you consider their running game that means if the 49ers get stretched they have by far the greater ability to outscore you.

Brees 4 TD - 2int
Smith 3TD - 0 int.

2 ints by Brees means the equivalent of 7 points. That's exactly what they got. They got 7 off his first pick. And they got a bunch more off of other turnovers. But they can also score with the rush and FG's.

People need to stop talking nonsense. Right now, by the numbers 49ers have the better offense, not just defense, with the more efficient quarterback. But he has not been tested.

The more efficient offense is 8-0 in the playoffs. Pats should be considered underdogs to the 49ers. In terms of efficiency Brady is an underdog this year to Smith. Experience wise that's their greatest advantage and so is their defense and coach.

We can see what happens to even the most efficient quarterback in the league, Aaron Rodgers. Smith is not careless, but he's not beyond pressure either.

It should be noted the Patriots are the only team to overcome a negative turnover margin and win in the playoffs and Tom Brady is the only quarterback to overcome an negative interception margin, and he's also the one that did it in the Super Bowl against the Panthers. But it was against the Broncos.

I wouldn't take that risk. Just cause a team doesn't have to score 40 points a game to win, or chooses not to, doesn't mean they don't have that ability if it comes down to it. And the 49ers are one of those teams, that not only can, but also have done it and outscored a top offense.

Broncos scored 38 points this year against the Raiders for crying out loud and put up 29 against the Steelers. When you have a less efficient offense and quarterback you make the other team a high scoring offense by default.

You are misusing statistics.

 

[mb6592]

LOL! C'mon, you are selling the Giants defense too short. In the Super Bowl in the 2007 season, the Giants' defense totally shutdown Gronk, Hernandez, BJGE, and Woodhead. They did not have a single yard between any of them in that game. If we are going to live in a fantasy world where this Giants' defense played this Patriots offense in the Super Bowl in February of 2008, let's go all out.

Hey, you're getting ahead of yourself. I never said that the Giants' defense could stop this offense. I say bring them on. I'm hoping we get to play them again. Truth be told I'm less worried about Brady & Co. going against their defense than I am that lucky bast--rd Manning having a big day. I'm hoping this defense, with the addition of a healthy Spikes, Chung and our new safety, has turned some kind of corner.