uffda udfa
10 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
10 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
10 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
10 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
10 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
10 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
10 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
10 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 MM 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
10 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
10 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
    dfosterf (17h) : I think it would be great to have someone like Tom Grossi or Andy Herman on the Board of Directors so he/they could inform us
    dfosterf (17h) : Fair enough, WPR. Thing is, I have been a long time advocate to at least have some inkling of the dynamics within the board.
    wpr (26-Jun) : 1st world owners/stockholders problems dfosterf.
    Martha Careful (25-Jun) : I would have otherwise admirably served
    dfosterf (25-Jun) : Also, no more provision for a write-in candidate, so Martha is off the table at least for this year
    dfosterf (25-Jun) : You do have to interpret the boring fine print, but all stockholders all see he is on the ballot
    dfosterf (25-Jun) : It also says he is subject to another ballot in 2028. I recall nothing of this nature with Murphy
    dfosterf (25-Jun) : Ed Policy is on my ballot subject to me penciling him in as a no.
    dfosterf (25-Jun) : I thought it used to be we voted for the whatever they called the 45, and then they voted for the seven, and then they voted for Mark Murphy
    dfosterf (25-Jun) : Because I was too lazy to change my address, I haven't voted fot years until this year
    dfosterf (25-Jun) : of the folks that run this team. I do not recall Mark Murphy being subject to our vote.
    dfosterf (25-Jun) : Ed Policy yay or nay is on the pre-approved ballot that we always approve because we are uninformed and lazy, along with all the rest
    dfosterf (25-Jun) : Weird question. Very esoteric. For stockholders. Also lengthy. Sorry. Offseason.
    Zero2Cool (25-Jun) : Maybe wicked wind chill made it worse?
    Mucky Tundra (25-Jun) : And then he signs with Cleveland in the offseason
    Mucky Tundra (25-Jun) : @SharpFootball WR Diontae Johnson just admitted he refused to enter a game in 41° weather last year in Baltimore because he felt “ice cold”
    Zero2Cool (24-Jun) : Yawn. Rodgers says he is "pretty sure" this be final season.
    Zero2Cool (23-Jun) : PFT claims Packers are having extension talks with Zach Tom, Quay Walker.
    Mucky Tundra (20-Jun) : GB-Minnesota 2004 Wild Card game popped up on my YouTube page....UGH
    beast (20-Jun) : Hmm 🤔 re-signing Walker before Tom? Sounds highly questionable to me.
    Mucky Tundra (19-Jun) : One person on Twitter=cannon law
    Zero2Cool (19-Jun) : Well, to ONE person on Tweeter
    Zero2Cool (19-Jun) : According to Tweeter
    Zero2Cool (19-Jun) : Packers are working on extension for LT Walker they hope to have done before camp
    dfosterf (18-Jun) : E4B landed at Andrews last night
    dfosterf (18-Jun) : 101 in a 60
    dfosterf (18-Jun) : FAFO
    Zero2Cool (18-Jun) : one year $4m with incentives to make it up to $6m
    dfosterf (18-Jun) : Or Lions
    dfosterf (18-Jun) : Beats the hell out of a Vikings signing
    Zero2Cool (18-Jun) : Baltimore Ravens now have signed former Packers CB Jaire Alexander.
    dfosterf (14-Jun) : TWO magnificent strikes for touchdowns. Lose the pennstate semigeezer non nfl backup
    dfosterf (14-Jun) : There was minicamp Thursday. My man Taylor Engersma threw
    dfosterf (11-Jun) : There will be a mini camp practice Thursday.
    Zero2Cool (11-Jun) : He's been sporting a ring for a while now. It's probably Madonna.
    Martha Careful (10-Jun) : We only do the tea before whoopee, it relaxes me.
    wpr (10-Jun) : That's awesome Martha.
    Mucky Tundra (10-Jun) : How's the ayahuasca tea he makes, Martha?
    Martha Careful (10-Jun) : Turns out he like older women
    Martha Careful (10-Jun) : I wasn't supposed to say anything, but yes the word is out and we are happy 😂😂😂
    Mucky Tundra (10-Jun) : I might be late on this but Aaron Rodgers is now married
    Mucky Tundra (10-Jun) : Well he can always ask his brother for pointers
    Zero2Cool (10-Jun) : Bo Melton taking some reps at CB as well as WR
    Zero2Cool (10-Jun) : key transactions coming today at 3pm that will consume more cap in 2025
    Zero2Cool (9-Jun) : Jaire played in just 34 of a possible 68 games since the start of the 2021 season
    Zero2Cool (9-Jun) : reported, but not expected to practice
    Zero2Cool (9-Jun) : Jenkins has REPORTED for mandatory camp
    Zero2Cool (9-Jun) : I really thought he'd play for Packers.
    buckeyepackfan (9-Jun) : Packers releasing Jaire Alexander.
    Mucky Tundra (8-Jun) : (Context: he wants his defense to create turnovers)
    Please sign in to use Fan Shout
    2025 Packers Schedule
    Sunday, Sep 7 @ 3:25 PM
    LIONS
    Thursday, Sep 11 @ 7:15 PM
    COMMANDERS
    Sunday, Sep 21 @ 12:00 PM
    Browns
    Sunday, Sep 28 @ 7:20 PM
    Cowboys
    Sunday, Oct 12 @ 3:25 PM
    BENGALS
    Sunday, Oct 19 @ 3:25 PM
    Cardinals
    Sunday, Oct 26 @ 7:20 PM
    Steelers
    Sunday, Nov 2 @ 12:00 PM
    PANTHERS
    Monday, Nov 10 @ 7:15 PM
    EAGLES
    Sunday, Nov 16 @ 12:00 PM
    Giants
    Sunday, Nov 23 @ 12:00 PM
    VIKINGS
    Thursday, Nov 27 @ 12:00 PM
    Lions
    Sunday, Dec 7 @ 12:00 PM
    BEARS
    Sunday, Dec 14 @ 3:25 PM
    Broncos
    Friday, Dec 19 @ 11:00 PM
    Bears
    Friday, Dec 26 @ 11:00 PM
    RAVENS
    Saturday, Jan 3 @ 11:00 PM
    Vikings
    Recent Topics
    25-Jun / Around The NFL / Martha Careful

    23-Jun / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

    20-Jun / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

    20-Jun / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    20-Jun / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    18-Jun / Random Babble / Zero2Cool

    16-Jun / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

    15-Jun / Random Babble / Martha Careful

    14-Jun / Around The NFL / beast

    14-Jun / Community Welcome! / dfosterf

    13-Jun / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

    13-Jun / Green Bay Packers Talk / Adam

    12-Jun / Random Babble / Martha Careful

    12-Jun / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

    12-Jun / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

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