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
    packerfanoutwest (13h) : Nick Collins and Morgan Burnett have signed with the PACK
    packerfanoutwest (13h) : he won't be wearing #12, maybe he will wear number two
    packerfanoutwest (13h) : He will fail this season, should have retired
    Mucky Tundra (14h) : Thus the cycle of Hall of Fame Packer QBs going to the Jets and then the Vikings is broken
    bboystyle (17h) : Rodgers to steelers on 1 year contract
    Zero2Cool (5-Jun) : It's the cycle of civilizations. Get lazier, lazier, softer, softer and vanish.
    Martha Careful (5-Jun) : great point. every aspect of society, including art, culture and sports has degraded.
    dfosterf (4-Jun) : Green Bay sweep meant something to society about stopping pure excellence. We have the tush push now
    dfosterf (4-Jun) : We old Martha.
    Martha Careful (4-Jun) : *front four
    Martha Careful (4-Jun) : Re frout four, I wish we had some Green "People Eaters" or a fearsome foursome
    dfosterf (4-Jun) : *directions*
    dfosterf (4-Jun) : Just don't ask him for driving direct
    dfosterf (4-Jun) : Jim Marshall was an all-time great DE for the Purple People Eaters. Didn't like him. That's a compliment. RIP
    Zero2Cool (3-Jun) : ooppppss
    Zero2Cool (3-Jun) : “Kenny Clark played all of last season hurt by the way and got surgery to fix it in January”
    Mucky Tundra (3-Jun) : @ByRyanWood How much did the injury affect him last fall? “A lot.”
    Mucky Tundra (3-Jun) : @ByRyanWood Kenny Clark said he had foot surgery in January. Injured his foot in opener against Eagles and played through it all year.
    Zero2Cool (3-Jun) : Golden is wearing guardian cap again. I bet he plays with it on too.
    Mucky Tundra (3-Jun) : All the stuff I'm reading from Lions fans are pointing at his toe; he more or less has permanent turf toe in one of his big toes
    dfosterf (3-Jun) : Kenny played through it, and a shame he gets little credit for that, imo
    dfosterf (3-Jun) : Big men. I hope it's not the undoing of Kenny Clark
    dfosterf (3-Jun) : Probably his toe. Pretty much a great center. Toe injuries are brutal to bigen
    Mucky Tundra (2-Jun) : Lions All-Pro C Frank Ragnow retires
    wpr (30-May) : It's all good.
    beast (30-May) : Yeah, and I enjoyed your comments and just attempted to add to it. Sorry if I did it incorrectly.
    wpr (30-May) : Beast I never said Henderson was the salt of the earth. Nor even that he was correct. Just quoting the guy.
    Zero2Cool (29-May) : What did you do??
    Zero2Cool (29-May) : Whoa
    beast (29-May) : OMG the website is now all white, even some white on white text
    beast (29-May) : Henderson, who admits to taking cocaine during the Super Bowl against the Steelers, might dislike Bradshaw as he lost two Superbowls to him
    wpr (28-May) : Hollywood Henderson said Bradshaw “is so dumb, he couldn't spell 'cat' if you spotted him the C and an A.”
    Mucky Tundra (28-May) : Cooper stock=BUY BUY BUY
    Mucky Tundra (28-May) : Also notes he’s playing with more confidence.
    Mucky Tundra (28-May) : @AndyHermanNFL MLF says there was a time last year where Cooper was at 220 pounds. Now he’s at 240 and still flying around.
    Mucky Tundra (28-May) : And don't even get me started on Frank Caliendos "impersonations"
    Mucky Tundra (28-May) : I got tired of them being circle jerks with them overlaughing at each others jokes.
    Zero2Cool (28-May) : It used to be must watch TV for me. now it's "meh" maybe to hear injury update
    Mucky Tundra (28-May) : I haven't watched the pregame shows in years and I don't feel like I've missed a thing
    Zero2Cool (28-May) : Love says knee affected him all season, groin injury didn't help matters.
    Zero2Cool (28-May) : I used to enjoy him on FOX Pregame. Now it's like a frat party of former Patriots.
    Zero2Cool (28-May) : LaFleur on Watson: “Christian is doing outstanding. I would say he’s ahead of schedule.”
    Martha Careful (28-May) : Bradshaw is a dumb ass cracker. I am so tired of his "aw shucks" diatribe. He should shrivel up and go away.
    buckeyepackfan (28-May) : He wad all butt hurt because Aaron duped the media saying he was immunized.
    buckeyepackfan (28-May) : Bradshaw needs to retire. He's been ripping on Rodgers ever since the covid crap. He was all hury
    Zero2Cool (28-May) : Terry Bradshaw doesn't want Rodgers in Pittsburgh lol wow
    Zero2Cool (27-May) : one day contract, which he also feels is pointless, but if Packers came to him, he would
    packerfanoutwest (27-May) : Aaron Rodgers talks possibility of retiring with Packers, just another rumor
    dfosterf (27-May) : Go watch 2001
    Zero2Cool (26-May) : 1984
    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
    1h / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

    8h / Green Bay Packers Talk / earthquake

    5-Jun / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    5-Jun / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    1-Jun / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    1-Jun / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

    29-May / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

    27-May / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

    27-May / Random Babble / Martha Careful

    24-May / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    23-May / Green Bay Packers Talk / greengold

    23-May / Green Bay Packers Talk / earthquake

    22-May / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    22-May / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

    21-May / Green Bay Packers Talk / greengold

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