Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

Week 11 GDT: Baltimore Ravens (5-4) @ Dallas Cowboys (8-1)
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Baltimore Ravens
View previous topic :: View next topic  

Cowboys Rushing Yards
Over 100
53%
 53%  [ 7 ]
Under 100
38%
 38%  [ 5 ]
Do negative offensive rushing yards go to the opponent?
7%
 7%  [ 1 ]
Total Votes : 13

Author Message
sp6488


Joined: 14 Mar 2005
Posts: 11762
Location: MD
PostPosted: Tue Nov 22, 2016 10:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Eh, I know its pretty commonplace/accepted to be negative toward our D, but they've been pretty good this year. You can dismiss it by saying, "look who they've played," but the numbers are pretty impressive considering where this D was a few years ago or since 2012.

Tied for 5th in points against, 1 point behind #4
#7 in total passing yards against, #6 in net yards/attempt, #3 in INT
#1 in total rushing yards against, #1 in rushing yards/attempt. #1 in TD against
#1 in opposing drives resulting in scores (24.6%)
#2 in opponent 3rd down conversion (33.8%)

There's really no convincing way to argue that this isn't a good defense at the very least.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
Danand


Joined: 12 Nov 2015
Posts: 991
PostPosted: Wed Nov 23, 2016 5:39 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

sp6488 wrote:
Eh, I know its pretty commonplace/accepted to be negative toward our D, but they've been pretty good this year. You can dismiss it by saying, "look who they've played," but the numbers are pretty impressive considering where this D was a few years ago or since 2012.

Tied for 5th in points against, 1 point behind #4
#7 in total passing yards against, #6 in net yards/attempt, #3 in INT
#1 in total rushing yards against, #1 in rushing yards/attempt. #1 in TD against
#1 in opposing drives resulting in scores (24.6%)
#2 in opponent 3rd down conversion (33.8%)

There's really no convincing way to argue that this isn't a good defense at the very least.


We are a very good defense, unless we miss a key player or we face a better than average offense.
_________________
2017 draft: I LOVE LAMP!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
wackywabbit


Joined: 20 Dec 2009
Posts: 11881
PostPosted: Wed Nov 23, 2016 1:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Danand wrote:
We are a very good defense, unless we miss a key player or we face a better than average offense.


Except for those times we played better than average offenses and played well. Pittsburgh, Buffalo, Washington...

I assume you are zeroed in on the Dallas and Oakland games because those fit your conclusion the best. The Dallas game was average or maybe a little worse than average; no unit is great every time against great competition. The Oakland game was a box score lie. The one thing the defense did poorly was cover the WR in the red zone. But they forced so many short drives and 3 and outs. Oakland's offense really only had 2 good drives the entire game. Twice they were given the ball in plus territory. The defense gave the offense plenty of chances to build up a lead. Both defenses gifted their offense field position inside the 10.

It's not just anecdotal evidence. The numbers don't back your opinion either.
We are 4th in defensive DVOA, which does account for opponents.

It's not like I am a Pees fan, now, even for this season. He's being carried by having good players on every level and isn't scheming to hide/improve any weakness that we have week to week. It just seems silly to complain about the defense so much, when they are clearly good. The offense is terrible, if you want to complain about the team 95% of it should be directed there.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Danand


Joined: 12 Nov 2015
Posts: 991
PostPosted: Wed Nov 23, 2016 5:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

wackywabbit wrote:
Danand wrote:
We are a very good defense, unless we miss a key player or we face a better than average offense.


Except for those times we played better than average offenses and played well. Pittsburgh, Buffalo, Washington...

I assume you are zeroed in on the Dallas and Oakland games because those fit your conclusion the best. The Dallas game was average or maybe a little worse than average; no unit is great every time against great competition. The Oakland game was a box score lie. The one thing the defense did poorly was cover the WR in the red zone. But they forced so many short drives and 3 and outs. Oakland's offense really only had 2 good drives the entire game. Twice they were given the ball in plus territory. The defense gave the offense plenty of chances to build up a lead. Both defenses gifted their offense field position inside the 10.

It's not just anecdotal evidence. The numbers don't back your opinion either.
We are 4th in defensive DVOA, which does account for opponents.

It's not like I am a Pees fan, now, even for this season. He's being carried by having good players on every level and isn't scheming to hide/improve any weakness that we have week to week. It just seems silly to complain about the defense so much, when they are clearly good. The offense is terrible, if you want to complain about the team 95% of it should be directed there.


You are just going of straight numbers and statistic - to back your opinion.

Mentioning the steelers game when everybody who saw the game could see how limited big ben was after surgery, just proves my point, that statistics rarely show the broader picture.

Those statistics probably take into consideration an offenses performance, but a QB with a clear pocket who just have a bad day won't show up in the statistics and then you/we are fooled to believe our defense are better than it is.

The bills offense was horrible when we faced it, and it also led to their coordinator getting canned. We had a really hard time closing games like the one against Oakland, and once we lost Jimmy Smith - again 1 player, we were torn apart by the Giants.

I haven't said we have a bad defense, but it irks me when people talk it up to something it isn't.

And in my mind, there will always be some statistic which can be used to prove a point. Like we have the best defense, when we have zero injuries and we line up in nickel formation on 3 and 7 exactly and blitz using stunts against an offense ranked no higher than 10 overall and the wind is slightly behind us and the stars are aligned a certain way
_________________
2017 draft: I LOVE LAMP!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
wackywabbit


Joined: 20 Dec 2009
Posts: 11881
PostPosted: Fri Nov 25, 2016 2:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Danand wrote:
Mentioning the steelers game when everybody who saw the game could see how limited big ben was after surgery, just proves my point, that statistics rarely show the broader picture.


I sense hypocrisy here. It is not OK to present missing Jimmy Smith as a mitigating factor for why our pass defense looked bad against the Cowboys (and second half against the Giants). But is is ok to talk about how a "limited"* Ben discredits what they did against the Steelers.

*IMO, it didn't seem like anything knee related held Ben back in that game. He had a couple errant throws, possibly from rust of not practicing much, but I don't know how you attribute that to a knee. He was clearly able to run around fine, scramble for a TD, and held the ball in the pocket fine, even almost body slamming a DB who was trying to sack him.

But, the good thing about stats is that they are objective and can average these things out. Factoring in playing without Jimmy as well as "limited" Ben, it's still hard to make a statistical argument that this isn't a good defense. Comparing to other teams who also face good and bad breaks of their own. If there are stats lets see them?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Danand


Joined: 12 Nov 2015
Posts: 991
PostPosted: Sat Nov 26, 2016 3:58 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

wackywabbit wrote:
Danand wrote:
Mentioning the steelers game when everybody who saw the game could see how limited big ben was after surgery, just proves my point, that statistics rarely show the broader picture.


I sense hypocrisy here. It is not OK to present missing Jimmy Smith as a mitigating factor for why our pass defense looked bad against the Cowboys (and second half against the Giants). But is is ok to talk about how a "limited"* Ben discredits what they did against the Steelers.

*IMO, it didn't seem like anything knee related held Ben back in that game. He had a couple errant throws, possibly from rust of not practicing much, but I don't know how you attribute that to a knee. He was clearly able to run around fine, scramble for a TD, and held the ball in the pocket fine, even almost body slamming a DB who was trying to sack him.

But, the good thing about stats is that they are objective and can average these things out. Factoring in playing without Jimmy as well as "limited" Ben, it's still hard to make a statistical argument that this isn't a good defense. Comparing to other teams who also face good and bad breaks of their own. If there are stats lets see them?


You just compared a cornerback to a QB to support your claim... Lets see if Patriots fans believe the same, if we go to Foxborough and wins when Brady sits out because of [inappropriate/removed] and we say "yeah, you didn't have Brady, but we didn't have our starting cornerback, so that equals it out".

The entire gameplan from the Steelers was designed to ease him in after surgery. Everyone who doesn't believe that is cheating themselves. Yes he put points on the board, when we completely backed off on defense. Most QB's could do that.

I am not saying anything against the fact, that this is a statistically good defense. I don't even dispute it is a good defense, but the fact people calling it elite or top 5 in the league - that is was I dispute. Every time we have been challenged, we have given up yards, long drives, points and have neither been clutch nor able to get off the field.

I don't know why this is suddenly such a controversial claim. For weeks we all agreed, that our tackling at times where poor, that we couldn't cover and we had a real hard time getting to the quarterback.

No one disputed, that we played weaker teams in the first half of the season.

We lost games this year mostly because our offense can not stay on the field or put points on the board, but its not like we are losing games solely because our offense sucks.
_________________
2017 draft: I LOVE LAMP!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
RavensDefense3


Joined: 21 Apr 2011
Posts: 2313
Location: Baltimore
PostPosted: Sat Nov 26, 2016 1:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Danand wrote:
wackywabbit wrote:
Danand wrote:
Mentioning the steelers game when everybody who saw the game could see how limited big ben was after surgery, just proves my point, that statistics rarely show the broader picture.


I sense hypocrisy here. It is not OK to present missing Jimmy Smith as a mitigating factor for why our pass defense looked bad against the Cowboys (and second half against the Giants). But is is ok to talk about how a "limited"* Ben discredits what they did against the Steelers.

*IMO, it didn't seem like anything knee related held Ben back in that game. He had a couple errant throws, possibly from rust of not practicing much, but I don't know how you attribute that to a knee. He was clearly able to run around fine, scramble for a TD, and held the ball in the pocket fine, even almost body slamming a DB who was trying to sack him.

But, the good thing about stats is that they are objective and can average these things out. Factoring in playing without Jimmy as well as "limited" Ben, it's still hard to make a statistical argument that this isn't a good defense. Comparing to other teams who also face good and bad breaks of their own. If there are stats lets see them?


You just compared a cornerback to a QB to support your claim... Lets see if Patriots fans believe the same, if we go to Foxborough and wins when Brady sits out because of [inappropriate/removed] and we say "yeah, you didn't have Brady, but we didn't have our starting cornerback, so that equals it out".

The entire gameplan from the Steelers was designed to ease him in after surgery. Everyone who doesn't believe that is cheating themselves. Yes he put points on the board, when we completely backed off on defense. Most QB's could do that.

I am not saying anything against the fact, that this is a statistically good defense. I don't even dispute it is a good defense, but the fact people calling it elite or top 5 in the league - that is was I dispute. Every time we have been challenged, we have given up yards, long drives, points and have neither been clutch nor able to get off the field.

I don't know why this is suddenly such a controversial claim. For weeks we all agreed, that our tackling at times where poor, that we couldn't cover and we had a real hard time getting to the quarterback.

No one disputed, that we played weaker teams in the first half of the season.

We lost games this year mostly because our offense can not stay on the field or put points on the board, but its not like we are losing games solely because our offense sucks.


Yes.. yes we are.

Against the Raiders we turned the ball over, and put the defense in bad situations.(Punt return and Bruce Irvin FF, and this is against a top offense you can't expect the defense to win every time)

Against the Redskins we managed to squeek out 10 points. (Defense did it's job, allowed 10 points to a top offense)

Against the Giants our defense couldn't hold up without Jimmy. Offense couldn't step up when the defense needed them.

Against the Jets the defense played good enough to win(without Suggs,Mosley). Flacco threw a pick-almost 6 to seal the win for the Jets.

Against the Cowboys is the same thing as with the Giants.

The defense has played great in all games besides the Giants and Cowboys. Coincidentally those are the games when we didn't have Jimmy. If the offense could show even a below average performance against the Redskins and Jets, we would be 7-3 right now. I think you're expecting a little too much from the defense.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Baltimore Ravens All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
Page 6 of 6

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group