uffda udfa
9 years ago

So is it honestly your opinion that its better to have a defense ranked highly in yards allowed than one ranked highly in points allowed?

Originally Posted by: steveishere 



Again, the NFL has determined that defenses are ranked by yards given up...not points allowed. My honest opinion is not an opinion but rather a fact that that is how NFL defenses are measured.

I was remiss in not addressing your other point. Resources dropped into the D. How many 1st rounders on D do we have? We just jettisoned one of our failed 1st rounders in AJ Hawk.

1st Rounders over the last few seasons:
AJ
Clay
BJ
Datone
HaHa
Nick Perry

2nd
Mike Neal
Casey Hayward

3rd
Morgan Burnett

Julius Peppers is a former 1st rounder...we could potentially have 6 or 7 defensive starters this season as 1st round picks. (would include Julius and a potential 1st round pick this year...and had we kept AJ could've been as high as EIGHT 1st rounders)

I looked at the salary cap disparity heading into last year. It was well in favor of cap dollars being spent on the defensive side of the ball. I believe I posted here about it...I know I posted it somewhere.

Those are some MAJOR resources pumped into our highly underperforming D. You honestly disagree with that?

EDIT: How many 1st rounders on O? Aaron Rodgers and Bryan Bulaga who was close to going elsewhere. TWO players. TWO. Why only TWO? We have Aaron Rodgers to mask the need for more stars on O. Ted Thompson keeps drafting 1st rounders on D and they mostly fail. He's not very good at putting together a defense. You honestly disagree with that? How many years do you get? Tell me.
Ted Thompson has drafted 6 D and 4 O in the first round and it would be 6-5 if you counted Jordy as a 1st selection. He simply isn't all that good drafting up high. Way too many misses. His charm is late rounds and UDFA's which really covers for his major failings in the draft and I mean major.
UserPostedImage
Ted Thompson sits on his hands per former GM: "because they’ve had 25 fricking years of great quarterbacks. Of course it works. Try it without a special quarterback."


steveishere
9 years ago

Again, the NFL has determined that defenses are ranked by yards given up...not points allowed. My honest opinion is not an opinion but rather a fact that that is how NFL defenses are measured.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa 



So you won't answer the question then?
uffda udfa
9 years ago

So you won't answer the question then?

Originally Posted by: steveishere 



I never intimated that points were a better measure only that the NFL has developed a way to determine which defense is better than another and it isn't points.

Yards are more reflective of a defense's overall performance and that is why yards, not points are used. So, YES, I think yards are a much more accurate barometer of where your defense is at than points.
UserPostedImage
Ted Thompson sits on his hands per former GM: "because they’ve had 25 fricking years of great quarterbacks. Of course it works. Try it without a special quarterback."


DoddPower
9 years ago

I never intimated that points were a better measure only that the NFL has developed a way to determine which defense is better than another and it isn't points.

Yards are more reflective of a defense's overall performance and that is why yards, not points are used. So, YES, I think yards are a much more accurate barometer of where your defense is at than points.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa 



I think the two rankings should be averaged and used a metric of overall defensive effectiveness. Both are important, but obviously points allowed is the most important statistic there is, regardless of what's official for the NFL defense rankings. The scoreboard outranks everything.
steveishere
9 years ago

I never intimated that points were a better measure only that the NFL has developed a way to determine which defense is better than another and it isn't points.

Yards are more reflective of a defense's overall performance and that is why yards, not points are used. So, YES, I think yards are a much more accurate barometer of where your defense is at than points.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa 



how so?
uffda udfa
9 years ago

how so?

Originally Posted by: steveishere 



If we're playing Seattle and Russell Wilson fumbles twice inside their 20 yard line and we score 14 points on their D that is much more a function of having less than 20 yards to go than it is a reflection on how poor Seattle's D is for giving up 14 to us under those circumstances.

There are points and counterpoints to yards vs. points but overall averaged out over a season yards are a better reflection than points.

Our D might get driven on for 75 yard drives and give up FG's. Our D still isn't very good to give up long drives but in the points category giving up 3 doesn't look too bad. I can think of many times where I thought to myself... Gee, our D is freaking brutal but we end up giving up only 3 after being gashed up and down the field.

Obviously, points not yards determine wins and losses but it isn't fair to say points given up is a better indication of who has a better D.

EDIT: The Jets were a Top 10 defense based on yards and were over 3 points worse than us on the point scale. Jets are clearly a better D than ours but on points they would be well down the rankings.
UserPostedImage
Ted Thompson sits on his hands per former GM: "because they’ve had 25 fricking years of great quarterbacks. Of course it works. Try it without a special quarterback."


steveishere
9 years ago

If we're playing Seattle and Russell Wilson fumbles twice inside their 20 yard line and we score 14 points on their D that is much more a function of having less than 20 yards to go than it is a reflection on how poor Seattle's D is for giving up 14 to us under those circumstances.

There are points and counterpoints to yards vs. points but overall averaged out over a season yards are a better reflection than points.

Our D might get driven on for 75 yard drives and give up FG's. Our D still isn't very good to give up long drives but in the points category giving up 3 doesn't look too bad. I can think of many times where I thought to myself... Gee, our D is freaking brutal but we end up giving up only 3 after being gashed up and down the field.

Obviously, points not yards determine wins and losses but it isn't fair to say points given up is a better indication of who has a better D.

EDIT: The Jets were a Top 10 defense based on yards and were over 3 points worse than us on the point scale. Jets are clearly a better D than ours but on points they would be well down the rankings.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa 



You could what if all day either way that doesn't really prove anything. Our D might also give up two 75 yard drives and allow 3 points on one and 0 on the other or give up 1 75 yard drive for a TD and 50 yards with a stop on the next but the team is still worse off after allowing 7.

Arizona were a clearly better D than ours yet are way down on yards rankings. I don't think using a single statistic is really proves much either way because of so many variables being involved but if I have to go by just 1 then I only care about points. The team with the most yards doesn't win the game if they give up more points but the team with the most points still wins if they give up more yards.

This defense specifically I think was a bottom half of the league defense the first half of the season and close to top 10 the 2nd half/playoffs. Which is why I wanted to ditch Dom. Obviously we had the players to field a competitive defense like we did the 2nd half of the year. I want a coach who is going to play the right players from the start.
uffda udfa
9 years ago

You could what if all day either way that doesn't really prove anything. Our D might also give up two 75 yard drives and allow 3 points on one and 0 on the other or give up 1 75 yard drive for a TD and 50 yards with a stop on the next but the team is still worse off after allowing 7.

Arizona were a clearly better D than ours yet are way down on yards rankings. I don't think using a single statistic is really proves much either way because of so many variables being involved but if I have to go by just 1 then I only care about points. The team with the most yards doesn't win the game if they give up more points but the team with the most points still wins if they give up more yards.

This defense specifically I think was a bottom half of the league defense the first half of the season and close to top 10 the 2nd half/playoffs. Which is why I wanted to ditch Dom. Obviously we had the players to field a competitive defense like we did the 2nd half of the year. I want a coach who is going to play the right players from the start.

Originally Posted by: steveishere 



Yes, I know we could go back and forth all day and said as much. Funny you brought up Arizona. I had a similar first reaction when I saw where they were in the rankings. However, you must remember Arizona suffered multiple losses to that defense. They were not the same unit as they were after their losses. St. Louis was below us. I think I'd take the Rams D.

We didn't ditch Dom and I am with you that he should go. I do not believe he has the passion needed anymore at his age and where he is in his career. He seems like the kind of mail it in type I'm still getting a check I hope they don't find out I don't care guy.

To extend Mike McCarthy when he holds fast to Dom is something Ted Thompson could've remedied by moving on from MM. He didn't which is validation that he is fine with the direction of the defense.
UserPostedImage
Ted Thompson sits on his hands per former GM: "because they’ve had 25 fricking years of great quarterbacks. Of course it works. Try it without a special quarterback."


buckeyepackfan
9 years ago
I want to apologize to the long standing members of this forum.

It is the off season and there is mot much happening right now.

I needed a little laugh so I started this thread knowing uffda just wouldn't be able to resist another chance to hijack a thread and
Post his same old predictable thoughts on Ted Thompson.

Another chance to prove to us all just how much more intelligent he is.

Damn it worked even better than I thought it would.

The original article is based on the number of pro bowl players gm's have drafted.

NoTHING else.

I was betting uffda wouldn't read it and Damn I was right again.

Some people are just easy to fuck with.

Sorry again.

😄😄😄😄😄😄😄😄😄😄😄

No I'm not.

That was fun.

It's good to be the puppet master!
I was addicted to The Hokey Pokey, but I turned myself around!
DoddPower
9 years ago

I don't think using a single statistic is really proves much either way because of so many variables being involved but if I have to go by just 1 then I only care about points. The team with the most yards doesn't win the game if they give up more points but the team with the most points still wins if they give up more yards.

Originally Posted by: steveishere 



That's why I think I'm coming to like averaging the two together for a single ranking. For example, if a team is 16th in yards but 10th in points then [(16+10)/2]=13th "overall" defense. Conversely, if one felt that one factor was more important than the other, they could weight the two metrics accordingly. Obviously they are both important, so they both should be considered. I would probably weight points at 60% importance and yards at 40%, give or take 5-10%. So if a team was 16th in yards and 10th in points that would be [ (16*0.4)+(10*0.6) ] ~=12th "overall" defense.

The Packers were 18th in yards allowed and tied for 13th in points allowed. Using my weighted metric, that would make them the 15th "overall" defense (or 16th if both metrics are weighted equally). An average unit, which is just what they are and likely will be under Dom Capers.

Minor differences, but still interesting to me. It's a summary metric that I would like to see when evaluating a defense relative to the rest of the league. It'd be easy to just add another column in Excel along with the yards and points rankings to calculate "overall" defensive rankings.
+1
Similar Topics
Users browsing this topic
    Fan Shout
    Zero2Cool (14h) : QB coach Sean Mannion
    Zero2Cool (14h) : DL Coach DeMarcus Covington
    dfosterf (16h) : from ft Belvoir, Quantico and points south. Somber reminder of this tragedy at Reagan Nat Airport
    dfosterf (16h) : So eerily quiet here in Alexandria. I live in the flight path of commercial craft coming from the south and west, plus the military craft
    dfosterf (17h) : So eeri
    Mucky Tundra (20h) : Now that's a thought, maybe they're looking at the college ranks? Maybe not head coaches but DC/assistant DCs with league experience?
    beast (21h) : College Coaches wouldn't want that publicly, as it would hurt recruiting and they might not get the job.
    beast (21h) : I thought they were supposed to publicly announce them, at least the NFL ones. Hafley was from college, so I believe different rules.
    Mucky Tundra (21h) : Who knows who they're interviewing? I mean, nobody knew about Hafley and then out of nowhere he was hired
    beast (30-Jan) : I wonder what's taking so long with hiring a DL coach, 2 of the 3 known to interview have already been hired elsewhere.
    Zero2Cool (27-Jan) : Packers coach Matt LaFleur hires Luke Getsy as senior assistant, extends Rich Bisaccia's deal
    Zero2Cool (27-Jan) : Chiefs again huh? I guess another Super Bowl I'll be finding something else to do.
    Mucky Tundra (27-Jan) : Chiefs Eagles...again...sigh
    dfosterf (27-Jan) : Happy Birthday Dave!
    Mucky Tundra (27-Jan) : happy birthday dhazer
    TheKanataThrilla (26-Jan) : Exactly buck...Washington came up with the ball. It is just a shitty coincidence one week later
    buckeyepackfan (26-Jan) : I forgot, they corrected the call a week later. Lol btw HAPPY BIRTHDAY dhazer!
    buckeyepackfan (26-Jan) : That brings up the question, why wasn't Nixon down by contact? I think that was the point Kanata was making.
    buckeyepackfan (26-Jan) : Turnovers rule, win the turnover battle, win the game.
    packerfanoutwest (26-Jan) : well, he was
    TheKanataThrilla (26-Jan) : Eagles down by contact on the fumble....fuck you NFL
    Mucky Tundra (26-Jan) : I think this games over
    beast (26-Jan) : Eagles sure get a lot of fumbles on kickoffs
    Mucky Tundra (26-Jan) : This game looks too big for Washington
    packerfanoutwest (26-Jan) : that being said, The Ravens are the Browns
    packerfanoutwest (26-Jan) : Browns, Dolphins have longest AFC Championship droughts
    packerfanoutwest (26-Jan) : As of today, Cowboys have longest NFC Championship drought,
    beast (26-Jan) : Someone pointed out, with Raiders hiring Carroll, the division games between Carroll and Jim Harbaugh are back on (who can whine more games)
    beast (26-Jan) : I'm confused, Pete Carroll and Brian Schottenheimer? When Todd Monken, Joe Brady, Kellen Moore, Kliff Kingsbury and Zac Robinson are availab
    Zero2Cool (25-Jan) : Any reason I'm catching a shot here about my intelligence?
    Martha Careful (25-Jan) : thank you Mucky for sticking up for me
    Martha Careful (25-Jan) : some of those people are smarter than you zero. However Pete Carroll is not
    Mucky Tundra (24-Jan) : Rude!
    beast (24-Jan) : Martha? 😋
    Zero2Cool (24-Jan) : Raiders hired someone from the elderly home.
    dfosterf (24-Jan) : I'm going with a combination of the two.
    beast (24-Jan) : Either the Cowboys have no idea what they're doing, or they're targeting their former OC, currently the Eagles OC
    Zero2Cool (23-Jan) : Fake news. Cowboys say no
    Zero2Cool (23-Jan) : Mystery candidate in the Cowboys head coaching search believed to be Packers ST Coordinator Rich Bisaccia.
    beast (23-Jan) : Also why do both NYC teams have absolutely horrible OL for over a decade?
    beast (23-Jan) : I wonder why the Jets always hire defensive coaches to be head coach
    Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : Still HC positions available out there. I wonder if Hafley pops up for one
    Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : Trent Baalke is out as the Jaguars GM.
    dfosterf (22-Jan) : Jeff Hafley would have been a better choice, fortunately they don't know that. Someone will figure that out next off season
    Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : Aaron Glenn Planning To Take Jets HC Job
    dfosterf (22-Jan) : Martha- C'est mon boulot! 😁
    Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : Thank you
    wpr (22-Jan) : Z, glad you are feeling better.
    wpr (22-Jan) : My son and D-I-L work for UM. It's a way to pick on them.
    Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : Thank you. I rarely get sick, and even more rarely sick to the point I can't work.
    Please sign in to use Fan Shout
    2024 Packers Schedule
    Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM
    Eagles
    29 - 34
    Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM
    COLTS
    16 - 10
    Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM
    Titans
    30 - 14
    Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM
    VIKINGS
    29 - 31
    Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM
    Rams
    24 - 19
    Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM
    CARDINALS
    34 - 13
    Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM
    TEXANS
    24 - 22
    Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM
    Jaguars
    30 - 27
    Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM
    LIONS
    14 - 24
    Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM
    Bears
    20 - 19
    Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM
    49ERS
    38 - 10
    Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM
    DOLPHINS
    30 - 17
    Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM
    Lions
    31 - 34
    Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM
    Seahawks
    30 - 13
    Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM
    SAINTS
    34 - 0
    Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM
    Vikings
    25 - 27
    Sunday, Jan 5 @ 12:00 PM
    BEARS
    22 - 24
    Sunday, Jan 12 @ 3:30 PM
    Eagles
    10 - 22
    Recent Topics
    4h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

    14h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    30-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    29-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

    27-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / packerfanoutwest

    27-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    25-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    25-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

    25-Jan / Random Babble / Martha Careful

    20-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

    20-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

    20-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

    20-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    19-Jan / Random Babble / Martha Careful

    18-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

    Headlines
    Copyright © 2006 - 2025 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.