Pats defense bashing/debate on NFL Countdown

[Patriots Nation NY]

that was probably the most unprofessional segments I have ever seen on TV .. Carter, and Jackson were like two 10 year olds .. Anywho ... fellaz, throw out all the stats n yardage all you want .. This "D" is awful .. Go pop in your 2003 and 2004 Pats DVD .. those are good defenses ..

 

[Jangles]

Yeah... I was 26 when that movie came out. Real old.

omg

That was nice of your kids to put you in a home with internet.

 

[Patjew]

omg

That was nice of your kids to put you in a home with internet.

They didn't. The Davenport's I came to for the early bird special has free wifi.

 

[Jangles]

They didn't. The Davenport's I came to for the early bird special has free wifi.

lmao

.....

 

[patsfan13]

The Patriots are 4th in the league in point differential. Behind GB, Det & Balt. That is far more important than yds allowed.

 

[PatsFan24]

Did anyone just see that?

I thought it was interesting. Key was making the point that they played about 318 snaps on defense this year and how many times have been behind during that time? zero snaps

He was saying yes they are giving up huge chunks of yardage but in the end they are still winning. He compared to the Raven's D saying they are only giving up about a TD more than them and there are considered the #1 defense. He said its about the points you give up and W and L's.

On the other hand you had guys like Jackson and Carter just simply yucking it up making fun of the Pats. Jackson says they are giving up the most yardage since the AFL merger. Carter keeps bringing up the fact that they switched from a 34 to 43 b/c they werent getting it down and now are last in the league playing the 43 and wishes he could ask BB is this the worst defense you've ever coached. (cue both him and Jackson start laughing again)

Either way I don't know where the truth lies (probably somewhere in the middle) but I'm just sick of every week all the pre game shows taking shots at our defense and we're still winning (other than Bills loss) and glad to see Key standing up for us and using context with the stats and not just following them blindly...

thoughts?

Don't care. ESPN sucks anyway.

 

[Fencer]

Two key factors in the yards-to-points relationship:

1. Red zone efficiency. (Duh.)
2. Starting field position.

Let's assume, with mild exaggeration, that the Pats are completely incapable of stopping any team before the red zone. If the other team never gets the ball past their own 20, they'll rack up more yards than if they sometimes get great field position due to turnovers or big kick returns. But points allowed are exactly the same either way.

Similarly, Welker and the Pats would have 20 fewer yards, but no different result in TDs scored, if the Pats had allowed a TD and gotten the ball on the kickoff at the 20 than if they made a goal-line stop right before his career-longest TD.

 

[Rob0729]

A few things:

1.) The Pats are 14th in points allowed per game which is better than Jets and Cowboys who both are considered to have good defenses.
2.) Cris Carter is horrible. He is NFL Network bad. How he stays on ESPN is beyond me. At least when Michael Irvin said something stupid, he at least said something worth talking about. Carter just brings nothing to the table.
3.) I wish someone would breakdown garbage time yards vs. real time yards. I know that the Raiders got 99 yards (all passing which made Campbell go from a average game to a great game) and a TD in garbage time and the Dolphins got even more. It sucks that the Pats do give up a lot of garbage time yards, but in reality the yards and points really meant nothing in terms of the outcome of the game.
4.) Where are the Pats ranked in the red zone? My guess they are in the top five or six.

 

[patriot lifer]

A few things:

1.) The Pats are 14th in points allowed per game which is better than Jets and Cowboys who both are considered to have good defenses.
2.) Cris Carter is horrible. He is NFL Network bad. How he stays on ESPN is beyond me. At least when Michael Irvin said something stupid, he at least said something worth talking about. Carter just brings nothing to the table.
3.) I wish someone would breakdown garbage time yards vs. real time yards. I know that the Raiders got 99 yards (all passing which made Campbell go from a average game to a great game) and a TD in garbage time and the Dolphins got even more. It sucks that the Pats do give up a lot of garbage time yards, but in reality the yards and points really meant nothing in terms of the outcome of the game.
4.) Where are the Pats ranked in the red zone? My guess they are in the top five or six.

Agree with you on items 1-3, although I thought Carter was decent on the old Inside the NFL when it was on HBO (I generally think that show was better on HBO). Regarding #4, going by the article I posted on page 2 of this thread (written on October 7), it stated that we are ranked 22 in redzone D. Factor in the previous week (not included in the analysis) in which we gave up 3 touchdowns, we're probably not ranked very highly in redzone defense.

Which makes it more of a wonder why we give up so many yards and not many points. Our time of possession isn't anything spectacular either. I think part of it comes down to our turnover ratio, which is very good if you take away the Buffalo loss. We usually don't turn the ball over and we get more-than-average interceptions. If you remove the Buffalo game, we are at +8, which would rank us at #3 behind Buffalo and San Francisco (+11 and +10). Otherwise we're tied at #6 with +3 without adjusting for that miserable performance.

Side note: In looking at the worst turnover ratios in the league, the two Pennsylvania teams are tied with -10. The third worst teams (San Diego, Kansas, Denver, and Miami) are tied with -5. 3/4 of a division in that mix!

 

[Rob0729]

Agree with you on items 1-3, although I thought Carter was decent on the old Inside the NFL when it was on HBO (I generally think that show was better on HBO). Regarding #4, going by the article I posted on page 2 of this thread (written on October 7), it stated that we are ranked 22 in redzone D. Factor in the previous week (not included in the analysis) in which we gave up 3 touchdowns, we're probably not ranked very highly in redzone defense.

Which makes it more of a wonder why we give up so many yards and not many points. Our time of possession isn't anything spectacular either. I think part of it comes down to our turnover ratio, which is very good if you take away the Buffalo loss. We usually don't turn the ball over and we get more-than-average interceptions. If you remove the Buffalo game, we are at +8, which would rank us at #3 behind Buffalo and San Francisco (+11 and +10). Otherwise we're tied at #6 with +3 without adjusting for that miserable performance.

Side note: In looking at the worst turnover ratios in the league, the two Pennsylvania teams are tied with -10. The third worst teams (San Diego, Kansas, Denver, and Miami) are tied with -5. 3/4 of a division in that mix!

I guess you are right about the red zone. I guess the last few weeks have killed their average. I thought they were really good the first few weeks though,

 

[PatsBoy12]

A few things:

1.) The Pats are 14th in points allowed per game which is better than Jets and Cowboys who both are considered to have good defenses.
2.) Cris Carter is horrible. He is NFL Network bad. How he stays on ESPN is beyond me. At least when Michael Irvin said something stupid, he at least said something worth talking about. Carter just brings nothing to the table.
3.) I wish someone would breakdown garbage time yards vs. real time yards. I know that the Raiders got 99 yards (all passing which made Campbell go from a average game to a great game) and a TD in garbage time and the Dolphins got even more. It sucks that the Pats do give up a lot of garbage time yards, but in reality the yards and points really meant nothing in terms of the outcome of the game.
4.) Where are the Pats ranked in the red zone? My guess they are in the top five or six.

Man, I do agree with this statement. I can't even count how many times I've heard one of his segments and walked away wondering what the heck he was talking about. He says a lot of words, but he never makes a point. How is that possible? It's like he's trying so hard to sound insightful and intellectual, but he just ends up confusing people.

I love Chris the player, but they can keep Chris the analyst. I don't know why they got rid of Irvin. They haven't found a suitable replacement since he left. Emmitt and now Chris . . . two babbling fools.

 

[Boston Boxer]

OK, so yards is the real world and winning or losing is phony? Yeah, right.

i thought the blue pill was for something else...but that would have been waaaaaay off topic.

 

[JJDChE]

It's not good to allow 400+ yds per game. Defending it on the basis of points allowed is putting lipstick on a pig. Besides, they are allowing 24 ppg, that's still not very good. If we were allowing 15 ppg, then may be you could make an argument.

 

[Off The Grid]

It's pretty amusing to watch Haters squeal about Yards.

As long as Points ~ not yards ~ are the measuring stick of Victory, your "argument" is ludicrous.