If Zombie used the official ranks it includes all scores because the NFL game book does not differentiate between an "offensive" and "defensive" score as any team in posession of the ball is defined as being the offense. This might be why many rankings are based on yards allowed/gained instead of points.
Edit: by that same token points allowed includes any int, fumbles, or returns for TDs or safeties taken AGAINST your team so it should even out.
"wpr" wrote:
I use points for very simple reasons. I think yards is all bull. A lot of yardage is deceptive - garbage yardage after they're down by 20 points and their opponent goes to prevent D.
The other thing, I've seen a lot of games where the QB throws for 300+ yards, the RB runs for 100+ yards, and they still lose because they're kicking field goals or turning the ball over but the other team is in the end zone.
Points are real. They're what win games. Yards do not win games. They just help your fantasy team.
"zombieslayer" wrote:
So many posts to reply to and so little time. Here goes...
All stats can be misleading. There have been plenty of teams that got their points come from their great defense. 85 Bears was just one example. If the offense only has to go 30-50 yards for a TD if really makes a big difference. We have all seen games that a team wins and all the points came from either defensive TDs or special teams returns.
There is no reason to assume just because your defense gets a lot of turnovers that your offense is going to give up a lot of turnovers as well. Those things do not "even out" over the course of a season. Take a look at the turnover +/-margins. The teams with the best records tend to win the turnover battle. Thus skewing the points scored for their team's offense.
It is funny to watch so many people chose option "C". That was not a choice. Who would not want the #1 ranked offense and Defense? Ok besides the Lions? It is like asking someone do you want incredible good looks or a boatload of cash and they say "Both." We already knew that. Now choose one of the options that is available. Don't wimp out. Make a real decision people.
It is not shocker that the teams that win the SB have balanced games. It would not matter if you had the #1 ranked offense OR defense if your team was also last on the other side of the ball &/or was extremely weak on special teams.
Those of us that have favored having a stud defense are saying that IF your offense is only an average offense and they (the defense limits the opponent to a lot of 3 and outs, your offense will have more opportunities to score. Your team will be in better field position. Your defense, come crunch time, will be more rested than the other teams defense who spent longer periods of time on the field. Case in point is to look at how many winning teams have better running games in the 4th Qtr. If your offense has been out there for most of the game so has the other guy's defense and those big boys are getting a bit tired. Winning teams can run the ball successfully even though the other team knows you are going to run the ball but they just can't stop you. (Packers teams from the 60's).
Other other side, if you have a high powered offense you may well score in 3-6 plays and then it is your defense that is right back out there again trying to stop the other teams offense. Some times it works other times it does not.
One thing that I do not think was mentioned in the post was that the rules in the NFL today are slanted to the offense. Every time the defenses get better the rules committee changes things a bit in order to juice the scoring back up. In reality and over the long haul, the high powered offense will find a way to beat the high powered defenses if for no other reason than the owners make it harder for the defense to do their job. I just find it more thrilling to watch a defense flex their muscles and smash the RB who is trying to get back to the line of scrimmage and get the QB running for his life.
"WhiskeySam" wrote: