# A statistical look at the Pats defines this year

1. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattC05. Show MattC05's posts

Re: A statistical look at the Pats defines this year

In response to TFB12's comment:
[QUOTE]
Maybe we aren't understanding each other.

Lets take the first 5 games:

Game 1 vs Bills : Pats TOP = 38 minutes, Bills TOP = 22 minutes

Game 2 vs Jets: Pats TOP = 26 minutes, Jets TOP = 34 minutes

Game 3 vs Bucs: Pats TOP = 33 minutes, Bucs TOP = 27 minutes

Game 4 vs Falcons: Pats TOP = 31 minutes, Falcons TOP = 29 minutes

Game 5 vs Bengals: Pats TOP = 26 minutes, Bengals TOP = 34 minutes

Total all 5 games Pats TOP = 154 minutes, Opponent TOP = 146 minutes

So the offense TOP (on the field) was 154 minutes, they would rank that compared to other offenses,  and the Defense TOP (on the field) 146 minutes and that would be ranked against other defenses.  These numbers are independent from each other.

[/QUOTE]

They are absolutely NOT independent from one another.  In 5 games, there are 300 minutes worth of possesion.  If an offense has 154 TOP, the defense HAS to have 146.  There is no other number of minutes of TOP the defense can have.  Any other team that has more than 154 minutes worth of offensive TOP over those 5 games HAS to have less than 146 minutes worth of defensive TOP.

Time of possesion is a TEAM stat.  It is neither offense specific nor defense specific.  It falls in the same category as turnover differential or point differential.

2. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattC05. Show MattC05's posts

Re: A statistical look at the Pats defines this year

In response to TrueChamp's comment:
[QUOTE]

If the pats offense ran the 2nd most plays in the entire league but were only 17th in T.O.P on offense then what does that tell you?

[/QUOTE]

Absolutely nothing, since the defense "allowed" the 3rd most plays.  Allowed is in quotes because that is not a function of the defense, but of the style of offense the Pats play; namely, pass-centric (leading to incompletions stopping the clock more often) and hurry up.

None of these stats prove what people in this thread want them to prove, namely that the offense or defense are good at staying on/getting off the field.  What you want for that is plays per drive.

The New England offense was 7th in the league in plays per drive at 5.66.  However, they were only 22nd in time of possesion per drive at 2:30  The defense was 25th (8th worst) in plays per drive at 5.97, but 18th (middle of the pack) in TOP per drive at 2:36.

As you can see, time of possesion actually has little to do with how well an offense or defense does in terms of, you know, possesing the ball.  Too many variables go into when the clock stops.

3. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

Re: A statistical look at the Pats defines this year

Generally, Matt is right.  Since games are 60 minutes, defensive and offensive average TOP/per game have to add up to 60 minutes.  If you are high on offensive TOP you have to be low on defensive TOP.  This year's stats, however, are thrown off because the Pats played two overtime games.

TOP per game, however, is a stat that depends on both offensive and defensive play.  TOP per drive is more useful if you want to see whether the offense is mounting long drives or the defense giving up long drives.  Even with that stat, though, averages sometimes are misleading.  A distribution showing drive length in percentiles might be better, but who has all that data?

4. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsEng. Show PatsEng's posts

Re: A statistical look at the Pats defines this year

The ToP is truely the scary stat. Points per game is highly dependant on ToP. Though not linear, if opponents are taking long time consuming drives there are less possessions in the game which leads to lower scores in the end. So, while the Pats might have been better than average points wise if they were the 8th worst in ToP on D then the PPG could be a misleading stat. Overall this D was worse than average and a bottom 1.3rd D for how many years in a row? It's disheartening to think we've been rebuilding it for 6 years and all the resources spent on the D and we are still in the bottom half of the league and having to rely on UDFA rooks to start. This should not be the case, esp now that a very large portion of the resources spent to rebuild the D won't even be on the D moving forward. It's hard to complete a rebuild when you have to continue to replace players that don't resign or get cut from the team every 3 years.

5. You have chosen to ignore posts from agcsbill. Show agcsbill's posts

Re: A statistical look at the Pats defines this year

[QUOTE]

In response to agcsbill's comment:
[QUOTE]

prolate... good post.  A couple thoughts to add:

#1 - lack of third down stops contributed to the higher number of plays run against the Pats D. Plus, add the fact many of these failed 3rd down stops occurred on 3rd and long situations.  How many times did we groan when the Pats had the opponent in a 3rd and 8 - 10+ yards and they got the first down?

#2 - Even though the passing D held the opponent to a respectable 57% completion rate, ( certainly surprising this was 4th BEST! ) it is the number of big plays they gave up.  There are a lot of 20+ yard pass plays given up in that 57% which added up to the 12.3 YPC rate.

#3 - Sack totals.  True, they got some sacks, ( again, surprising the count was 5th BEST )but, overall the pressure was not consistent.  Where was this "sack" machine in the AFCCG?

All in all... to finish with these stats with all the starters on IR.. can't wait to see what this D will do in a full season with most of the IR guys on the field instead of IR!

[/QUOTE]

Not surprising to those who do their homework and go by facts vs listen to Felgie and Mazz lie all day long over and over!

[/QUOTE]

I see that, Rusty.  Simply put, they gave up too many big plays and 3rd down conversions.  Imagine what just a couple more 3rd down stops each game may have meant to the season?

6. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsEng. Show PatsEng's posts

Re: A statistical look at the Pats defines this year

In response to agcsbill's comment:
[QUOTE]

[QUOTE]

In response to agcsbill's comment:
[QUOTE]

prolate... good post.  A couple thoughts to add:

#1 - lack of third down stops contributed to the higher number of plays run against the Pats D. Plus, add the fact many of these failed 3rd down stops occurred on 3rd and long situations.  How many times did we groan when the Pats had the opponent in a 3rd and 8 - 10+ yards and they got the first down?

#2 - Even though the passing D held the opponent to a respectable 57% completion rate, ( certainly surprising this was 4th BEST! ) it is the number of big plays they gave up.  There are a lot of 20+ yard pass plays given up in that 57% which added up to the 12.3 YPC rate.

#3 - Sack totals.  True, they got some sacks, ( again, surprising the count was 5th BEST )but, overall the pressure was not consistent.  Where was this "sack" machine in the AFCCG?

All in all... to finish with these stats with all the starters on IR.. can't wait to see what this D will do in a full season with most of the IR guys on the field instead of IR!

[/QUOTE]

Not surprising to those who do their homework and go by facts vs listen to Felgie and Mazz lie all day long over and over!

[/QUOTE]

I see that, Rusty.  Simply put, they gave up too many big plays and 3rd down conversions.  Imagine what just a couple more 3rd down stops each game may have meant to the season?

[/QUOTE]

The thing about the completion rating is just as you point out. If the % is 57% and you average a 12.3ypc, well there are 3 downs. That means on avearge if they pass twice they will get a 1st down on every new set of downs. Doesn't matter if you only give up 57% if on average you are allowing a first down on 1 of every 2 passing plays. That's something I think most miss.

7. You have chosen to ignore posts from agcsbill. Show agcsbill's posts

Re: A statistical look at the Pats defines this year

In response to PatsEng's comment:
[QUOTE]

In response to agcsbill's comment:
[QUOTE]

[QUOTE]

In response to agcsbill's comment:
[QUOTE]

prolate... good post.  A couple thoughts to add:

#1 - lack of third down stops contributed to the higher number of plays run against the Pats D. Plus, add the fact many of these failed 3rd down stops occurred on 3rd and long situations.  How many times did we groan when the Pats had the opponent in a 3rd and 8 - 10+ yards and they got the first down?

#2 - Even though the passing D held the opponent to a respectable 57% completion rate, ( certainly surprising this was 4th BEST! ) it is the number of big plays they gave up.  There are a lot of 20+ yard pass plays given up in that 57% which added up to the 12.3 YPC rate.

#3 - Sack totals.  True, they got some sacks, ( again, surprising the count was 5th BEST )but, overall the pressure was not consistent.  Where was this "sack" machine in the AFCCG?

All in all... to finish with these stats with all the starters on IR.. can't wait to see what this D will do in a full season with most of the IR guys on the field instead of IR!

[/QUOTE]

Not surprising to those who do their homework and go by facts vs listen to Felgie and Mazz lie all day long over and over!

[/QUOTE]

I see that, Rusty.  Simply put, they gave up too many big plays and 3rd down conversions.  Imagine what just a couple more 3rd down stops each game may have meant to the season?

[/QUOTE]

The thing about the completion rating is just as you point out. If the % is 57% and you average a 12.3ypc, well there are 3 downs. That means on avearge if they pass twice they will get a 1st down on every new set of downs. Doesn't matter if you only give up 57% if on average you are allowing a first down on 1 of every 2 passing plays. That's something I think most miss.

[/QUOTE]

... and Rusty will simply focus on that 57% completion rate and say the pass D was GREAT!  The actual fact is the opponent completed 57% of their passes for BIG gains, more first downs and more 3rd down conversions.  That ain't good pass D in my book.

8. You have chosen to ignore posts from TrueChamp. Show TrueChamp's posts

Re: A statistical look at the Pats defines this year

In response to MattC05's comment:
[QUOTE]

In response to TrueChamp's comment:
[QUOTE]

If the pats offense ran the 2nd most plays in the entire league but were only 17th in T.O.P on offense then what does that tell you?

[/QUOTE]

Absolutely nothing, since the defense "allowed" the 3rd most plays.  Allowed is in quotes because that is not a function of the defense, but of the style of offense the Pats play; namely, pass-centric (leading to incompletions stopping the clock more often) and hurry up.

None of these stats prove what people in this thread want them to prove, namely that the offense or defense are good at staying on/getting off the field.  What you want for that is plays per drive.

The New England offense was 7th in the league in plays per drive at 5.66.  However, they were only 22nd in time of possesion per drive at 2:30  The defense was 25th (8th worst) in plays per drive at 5.97, but 18th (middle of the pack) in TOP per drive at 2:36.

As you can see, time of possesion actually has little to do with how well an offense or defense does in terms of, you know, possesing the ball.  Too many variables go into when the clock stops.

[/QUOTE]

That was my point. The style of offense we have can hurt T.O.P as you show above. I understand your point that the 2 go hand in hand but at the same time, if the defense was better at getting off the field it would improve the offenses t.o.p...no? Conversely if the offense was better at sustaining longer drives and keeping the clock winding down it would improve its t.o.p....no? If the offense ran the 2nd most plays in the league but was 17th in t.o.p I think it clearly illustrates a point that our offense is not built for maintaing longer drives....as you said above.

9. This post has been removed.

10. This post has been removed.

11. You have chosen to ignore posts from agcsbill. Show agcsbill's posts

Re: A statistical look at the Pats defines this year

[QUOTE]

In response to agcsbill's comment:
[QUOTE]

[QUOTE]

In response to agcsbill's comment:
[QUOTE]

prolate... good post.  A couple thoughts to add:

#1 - lack of third down stops contributed to the higher number of plays run against the Pats D. Plus, add the fact many of these failed 3rd down stops occurred on 3rd and long situations.  How many times did we groan when the Pats had the opponent in a 3rd and 8 - 10+ yards and they got the first down?

#2 - Even though the passing D held the opponent to a respectable 57% completion rate, ( certainly surprising this was 4th BEST! ) it is the number of big plays they gave up.  There are a lot of 20+ yard pass plays given up in that 57% which added up to the 12.3 YPC rate.

#3 - Sack totals.  True, they got some sacks, ( again, surprising the count was 5th BEST )but, overall the pressure was not consistent.  Where was this "sack" machine in the AFCCG?

All in all... to finish with these stats with all the starters on IR.. can't wait to see what this D will do in a full season with most of the IR guys on the field instead of IR!

[/QUOTE]

Not surprising to those who do their homework and go by facts vs listen to Felgie and Mazz lie all day long over and over!

[/QUOTE]

I see that, Rusty.  Simply put, they gave up too many big plays and 3rd down conversions.  Imagine what just a couple more 3rd down stops each game may have meant to the season?

[/QUOTE]

Imagine what a better TOP would do for our D!??

Pats offense ran the 2nd most plays but were only 17th in TOP? That's flippin' awful! How can an offense run that many plays and not at least be in the top 10 of TOP?

This is the first year the D didn't lead the coference in turnovers created and gosh oh golly oh gee, it's because they had some many injuries!

My god, will you BBWs wake up, please?  Brady's efficiency in this offense just isn't very good.

[/QUOTE]

Both sides of the ball did not perform as we all would have liked, I do not blame one over the other.  Points can be made for both sides to blame.  In your mind, it is all Brady's fault while others focus it is the D's fault for not getting the other offense off the field more or BB's fault for not getting better players.  When all is said and done, the TEAM didn't do the job and that is how they look at it.

12. This post has been removed.

13. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bungalow-Bill. Show Bungalow-Bill's posts

Re: A statistical look at the Pats defines this year

[QUOTE]

Not surprising to those who do their homework and go by facts vs listen to Felgie and Mazz lie all day long over and over!

[/QUOTE]

So I take it you were very surprised?

14. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bungalow-Bill. Show Bungalow-Bill's posts

Re: A statistical look at the Pats defines this year

Oops, sorry, that picture isn't Rusty's surprised face, its what he does every time BB walks into a room.

15. You have chosen to ignore posts from pezz4pats. Show pezz4pats's posts

Re: A statistical look at the Pats defines this year

[QUOTE]

In response to agcsbill's comment:
[QUOTE]

[QUOTE]

In response to agcsbill's comment:
[QUOTE]

prolate... good post.  A couple thoughts to add:

#1 - lack of third down stops contributed to the higher number of plays run against the Pats D. Plus, add the fact many of these failed 3rd down stops occurred on 3rd and long situations.  How many times did we groan when the Pats had the opponent in a 3rd and 8 - 10+ yards and they got the first down?

#2 - Even though the passing D held the opponent to a respectable 57% completion rate, ( certainly surprising this was 4th BEST! ) it is the number of big plays they gave up.  There are a lot of 20+ yard pass plays given up in that 57% which added up to the 12.3 YPC rate.

#3 - Sack totals.  True, they got some sacks, ( again, surprising the count was 5th BEST )but, overall the pressure was not consistent.  Where was this "sack" machine in the AFCCG?

All in all... to finish with these stats with all the starters on IR.. can't wait to see what this D will do in a full season with most of the IR guys on the field instead of IR!

[/QUOTE]

Not surprising to those who do their homework and go by facts vs listen to Felgie and Mazz lie all day long over and over!

[/QUOTE]

I see that, Rusty.  Simply put, they gave up too many big plays and 3rd down conversions.  Imagine what just a couple more 3rd down stops each game may have meant to the season?

[/QUOTE]

Imagine what a better TOP would do for our D!??

Pats offense ran the 2nd most plays but were only 17th in TOP? That's flippin' awful! How can an offense run that many plays and not at least be in the top 10 of TOP?

This is the first year the D didn't lead the coference in turnovers created and gosh oh golly oh gee, it's because they had some many injuries!

My god, will you BBWs wake up, please?  Brady's efficiency in this offense just isn't very good.

My  god will you wake up.  You have no idea of the relevance.  Dope.

One does NOT influence the other at all.  The only thing it would influence is NUMBER OF POSSESSIONS which is what year after year has hurt the Offense.

If the O spends an average of 2.5 minutes (average) on the field and the D spends an average of 5 minutes on the field, one has NOTHING to do with the other but what it does do is this:

1 total possession 2.5 for the O and  5 the D ='s a 7.5 minute possession. seven  minutes and 30 seconds.  That's 2 and a half minutes longer than a normal possession.

So the game is 60 minutes.

Divide that 60 by the average possession (in this case 7.5) and you get 8 possessions, not the normal 12.

This kills the O because less possessions means less plays means less scores.

The fact that they were 2nd in the amount of plays proves that they were EXTREMELY efficient in the number of plays they ran in the allotted time. (that means passing and efficient runs.)  That means more plays in a s hort amount of time.

It also means that the other O was diking around, using a lot of time and staying on the field FOREVER, because the pathetic D allowed them to.

The D, staying on the field FOREVER forces the O into a quicker (hopefully efficient) Move the freaken ball FAST offense.

If the D is wasting time, then the O cannot afford to.

Do you watch football?

16. This post has been removed.

17. This post has been removed.

18. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

Re: A statistical look at the Pats defines this year

[QUOTE]

In response to TrueChamp's comment:
[QUOTE]

In response to MattC05's comment:
[QUOTE]

In response to TrueChamp's comment:
[QUOTE]

If the pats offense ran the 2nd most plays in the entire league but were only 17th in T.O.P on offense then what does that tell you?

[/QUOTE]

Absolutely nothing, since the defense "allowed" the 3rd most plays.  Allowed is in quotes because that is not a function of the defense, but of the style of offense the Pats play; namely, pass-centric (leading to incompletions stopping the clock more often) and hurry up.

None of these stats prove what people in this thread want them to prove, namely that the offense or defense are good at staying on/getting off the field.  What you want for that is plays per drive.

The New England offense was 7th in the league in plays per drive at 5.66.  However, they were only 22nd in time of possesion per drive at 2:30  The defense was 25th (8th worst) in plays per drive at 5.97, but 18th (middle of the pack) in TOP per drive at 2:36.

As you can see, time of possesion actually has little to do with how well an offense or defense does in terms of, you know, possesing the ball.  Too many variables go into when the clock stops.

[/QUOTE]

That was my point. The style of offense we have can hurt T.O.P as you show above. I understand your point that the 2 go hand in hand but at the same time, if the defense was better at getting off the field it would improve the offenses t.o.p...no? Conversely if the offense was better at sustaining longer drives and keeping the clock winding down it would improve its t.o.p....no? If the offense ran the 2nd most plays in the league but was 17th in t.o.p I think it clearly illustrates a point that our offense is not built for maintaing longer drives....as you said above.

[/QUOTE]

WOW

17th in TOP but we ran the 2nd most plays? How is that even possible?   That is god awful.

No wonder why our offense continues to suck in the shotgun spread base obsession.

[/QUOTE]

TOP is the result of both how long the offense sustains its drives and how well the defense does  at preventing the other team from sustaining its drives.  You can lose the TOP battle because of the offense, the defense, or both.  Low TOP numbers can be the fault of the defense just as well as the offense.

19. You have chosen to ignore posts from pezz4pats. Show pezz4pats's posts

Re: A statistical look at the Pats defines this year

In response to pezz4pats' comment:
[QUOTE]

[QUOTE]

In response to agcsbill's comment:
[QUOTE]

[QUOTE]

In response to agcsbill's comment:
[QUOTE]

prolate... good post.  A couple thoughts to add:

#1 - lack of third down stops contributed to the higher number of plays run against the Pats D. Plus, add the fact many of these failed 3rd down stops occurred on 3rd and long situations.  How many times did we groan when the Pats had the opponent in a 3rd and 8 - 10+ yards and they got the first down?

#2 - Even though the passing D held the opponent to a respectable 57% completion rate, ( certainly surprising this was 4th BEST! ) it is the number of big plays they gave up.  There are a lot of 20+ yard pass plays given up in that 57% which added up to the 12.3 YPC rate.

#3 - Sack totals.  True, they got some sacks, ( again, surprising the count was 5th BEST )but, overall the pressure was not consistent.  Where was this "sack" machine in the AFCCG?

All in all... to finish with these stats with all the starters on IR.. can't wait to see what this D will do in a full season with most of the IR guys on the field instead of IR!

Not surprising to those who do their homework and go by facts vs listen to Felgie and Mazz lie all day long over and over!

[/QUOTE]

I see that, Rusty.  Simply put, they gave up too many big plays and 3rd down conversions.  Imagine what just a couple more 3rd down stops each game may have meant to the season?

[/QUOTE]

Imagine what a better TOP would do for our D!??

Pats offense ran the 2nd most plays but were only 17th in TOP? That's flippin' awful! How can an offense run that many plays and not at least be in the top 10 of TOP?

This is the first year the D didn't lead the coference in turnovers created and gosh oh golly oh gee, it's because they had some many injuries!

My god, will you BBWs wake up, please?  Brady's efficiency in this offense just isn't very good.

My  god will you wake up.  You have no idea of the relevance.  Dope.

One does NOT influence the other at all.  The only thing it would influence is NUMBER OF POSSESSIONS which is what year after year has hurt the Offense.

If the O spends an average of 2.5 minutes (average) on the field and the D spends an average of 5 minutes on the field, one has NOTHING to do with the other but what it does do is this:

1 total possession 2.5 for the O and  5 the D ='s a 7.5 minute possession. seven  minutes and 30 seconds.  That's 2 and a half minutes longer than a normal possession.

So the game is 60 minutes.

Divide that 60 by the average possession (in this case 7.5) and you get 8 possessions, not the normal 12.

This kills the O because less possessions means less plays means less scores.

The fact that they were 2nd in the amount of plays proves that they were EXTREMELY efficient in the number of plays they ran in the allotted time. (that means passing and efficient runs.)  That means more plays in a s hort amount of time.

It also means that the other O was diking around, using a lot of time and staying on the field FOREVER, because the pathetic D allowed them to.

The D, staying on the field FOREVER forces the O into a quicker (hopefully efficient) Move the freaken ball FAST offense.

If the D is wasting time, then the O cannot afford to.

Do you watch football?

[/QUOTE]

"If the O spends an average of 2.5 minutes (average) on the field and the D spends an average of 5 minutes on the field, one has NOTHING to do with the other."

So, constant 3 and outs by the offense and inconsistency has no affect on the D? LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Did you just ask if I watch football?? bawhaha abwaaahah!

Go look up the term "complementary football" and get back to the board.

It's a Rogie Goodell offensive era where all rules favor the offfense and somehow this moron, Pezzy, thinks it's the responsibilty of the offense to pich in during games and an average of a 2.5 minute drive is strong.

LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Cannot be made up!

[/QUOTE]

All teams have 3 and outs, stupido.    Well, accept for the teams the Pats play.  They had 2 last week.  I wouldn't consider that constant.  In a 12 possession game that would be nothing, unfortunately with 7 possessions, that hurts.   Which is the DAMN reason you need more possessions.  How many 3 & outs did Manning and Eli have.  ZERO.  That abnormal, not the 2 that the Pats had.   ZERO NEVER HAPPENS UNLESS YOUR D SUCKS!

2.5 minutes for O and D is average.  That includes long drives and s hort drives.

The only thing keeping the D on the field is that they suck.

Proof

1st possession, SB 42 the D was on the field 10 freaken minutes.

1st possession, SB 46, the D was on the field 6 freaken minutes.

What were they tired from, the coin toss?   Bwahahaha

Last week the O averaged 3+ minutes and the D, 5+ minutes, which resulted in 7 whole possessions.   The O was better than the average of 2.5, The D was twice as bad as the Average of 2.5.  One was better than average one was twice as bad.  The O only had one freaken possession (right out of half time)  because the D allowed payton to stay on the field FOREVER.  They didn't even get their second possession until 5 minutes into the 4th.

What were they tired from right after half time?  Getting their azzes reamed by bb?

Get it?  DUH

If the D is tired, they need to get their azzes off the field.

I could show you a study that proves the offensive time per possession, does not effect the D's time on the field but it includes a lot of mathematical equations and graphs.

Way over your head, so I won't bother.

Too dumb to understand the most basic concept.

20. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

Re: A statistical look at the Pats defines this year

Given that there are 60 minutes in a game and in most games teams have about 11 drives each, the average drive length is roughly 60:00 / 22 = 2:44.

21. You have chosen to ignore posts from Low-FB-IQ. Show Low-FB-IQ's posts

Re: A statistical look at the Pats defines this year

In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

Given that there are 60 minutes in a game and in most games teams have about 11 drives each, the average drive length is roughly 60:00 / 22 = 2:44.

Stats with out context are meaningless, imo. ...AND I mean context for every single down and distance, time on the clock, qtr, weather, playing home or away, if you are playing from in front or behind/momentum, if you have timeouts in hand, etc.

...and lets not forget the systems the Patriots play both on Offense and defense.

As a gross generalization, the Pats are COACHED/Instructed to play bend don't break, keep everything in front of you, play the odds, smart and conservative to force teams to "consistently" execute long sustained drives at a higher efficiency than what they think Brady and their offense can accomplish. Relying on other teams to make as many eventual mistakes to stop themselves as the Patriots make defensive plays to stop them. That window of possible successful execution for the other teams offense shrinks as the field shrinks as well.

Which is why the yards, 3rd down conv. numbers are never great but the points against generally are good. You know, the column at the end of the row that actually matters and determines the winner of the game. Points! Not top, not # of possessions, etc...

Additionally, as a generalization, the Pats offense has been largely predicated on timing and YAC. The QB can have a OK game with decent completion numbers and no turnovers making the stats look good or better than he actually played. If the majority of completions are off the mark on that day causing a receiver to go out of bounds upon catching the pass, or having to do a jump ball with himself because the throw is way up over head even though he's wide open, or leave his feet in a dive to make the catch, or catch a ball behind him slowing him down instead of in stride when he has a couple steps on the defender then your offense will generate very little YAC, few long sustained drives, minimal points, and keep putting the defense back on the field. That's not good when you play that particular style of defense that the Patriots play.

The two units have to compliment each other.

The idea that the defense will morph on the fly into something they are not necessarily coached to do in an effort to cover for an offense that is not being successful in doing what they typically do and are built/coached to do has never made any sense to me. Not on the fly for a single particular game because that is NOT an in game adjustment. That's a philosophy change.

I've always felt looking at end of season stats as a whole is virtually meaningless.

Whenever I had gone back and looked at stats from games early in a season or even seasons past, while coaching, it always gave me a very different picture until I read my detailed notes on the game that I had written down in the aftermath. The stats alone will most often be very misleading without the detailed notes on how a game unfolded. (Were there linchpin physical or mental mistakes in the game? Did I lose key personnel during the course of the game? Was I already depleted going into the game, either from injuries or team wide illness? Were there 1 or more BIG PLAYS in the game for either side that significantly skewed the stats for that particular game? Were points scored or given up(yards also) at the end that were virtually meaningless to the outcome of the game? Etc. etc.)

22. You have chosen to ignore posts from TFB12. Show TFB12's posts

Re: A statistical look at the Pats defines this year

[QUOTE]

I tried to warn you and others that TFB12, Pezzy and that group are so far gone with their Brady man lust, that they now are rejecting the concept of complementary football.

This is how far they want to go. Sick, isn't it?

One reason why NE leads the NFL every year in plays run is because the defense is leading the conference every year in turnovers created. They may not have this year, but they would have if everyone was healthy.

It's certainly not due to a runnin game and nice long drives that go for 5+ minutes, that's for sure. We're lucky to see ONE of those per game. Sad.

THis is why intelligent fans like you always made the mistake of hitching your wagon to theirs. They're too far gone.  You and others will not listen.

TFB12 is new to the game, as well. He started playing fantasy football last decade, so all of his analysis is tied to fantasy football stats.

Any football fan who knows anything knows about complementary football and how vital it is. Of course they're reciprocal. Of course.

The D is expected to carry Brady and the offense sputtering everry AFC Title game or SB nowadays, which is the problem.  Even in a game when Talib goes down they still want to hammer away.

If they don't get 3 or 4 turnovers, they deflect from whatever Brady and the offense ended up doing on their own.

[/QUOTE]

I don't even know where to begin with this one,

Haha!

Bogus!

23. You have chosen to ignore posts from TFB12. Show TFB12's posts

Re: A statistical look at the Pats defines this year

In response to pezz4pats' comment:
[QUOTE]

All teams have 3 and outs, stupido.    Well, accept for the teams the Pats play.  They had 2 last week.  I wouldn't consider that constant.  In a 12 possession game that would be nothing, unfortunately with 7 possessions, that hurts.   Which is the DAMN reason you need more possessions.  How many 3 & outs did Manning and Eli have.  ZERO.  That abnormal, not the 2 that the Pats had.   ZERO NEVER HAPPENS UNLESS YOUR D SUCKS!

2.5 minutes for O and D is average.  That includes long drives and s hort drives.

The only thing keeping the D on the field is that they suck.

Proof

1st possession, SB 42 the D was on the field 10 freaken minutes.

1st possession, SB 46, the D was on the field 6 freaken minutes.

What were they tired from, the coin toss?   Bwahahaha

Last week the O averaged 3+ minutes and the D, 5+ minutes, which resulted in 7 whole possessions.   The O was better than the average of 2.5, The D was twice as bad as the Average of 2.5.  One was better than average one was twice as bad.  The O only had one freaken possession (right out of half time)  because the D allowed payton to stay on the field FOREVER.  They didn't even get their second possession until 5 minutes into the 4th.

What were they tired from right after half time?  Getting their azzes reamed by bb?

Get it?  DUH

If the D is tired, they need to get their azzes off the field.

I could show you a study that proves the offensive time per possession, does not effect the D's time on the field but it includes a lot of mathematical equations and graphs.

Way over your head, so I won't bother.

Too dumb to understand the most basic concept.

[/QUOTE]

Good work Pezz. It's a concept that isn't going to get get grasped, certainly not over a forum.

Conference call anyone? LOL!

24. You have chosen to ignore posts from auchhhhhhhhhhh. Show auchhhhhhhhhhh's posts

Re: A statistical look at the Pats defines this year

i hope we keep drafting 1st and 2nd rounders on D

25. You have chosen to ignore posts from agcsbill. Show agcsbill's posts

Re: A statistical look at the Pats defines this year