Number 1 rank Defense

[pack4to84]

Who would have thought after 11 weeks the Packers changing from 4-3 to 3-4 would have the number one ranked defense? I sure didn't. I would have thought top ten, but number one no way.

[RashanGary]

Who would have thought after 11 weeks the Packers changing from 4-3 to 3-4 would have the number one ranked defense? I sure didn't. I would have thought top ten, but number one no way.

Capers has a long history of doing just this but it's still a surprise.

[Smidgeon]

Remember the articles that were put out earlier about how well Denver and New Orleans defense was doing and how GB's defense was still sputtering? I keep waiting for those articles to be updated with new progress reports, but nothing's happened yet...

[ThunderDan]

Remember the articles that were put out earlier about how well Denver and New Orleans defense was doing and how GB's defense was still sputtering? I keep waiting for those articles to be updated with new progress reports, but nothing's happened yet...

Apparently the writers that all came out with the Dom Capers was the wrong hire and we should have picked the Saints guy's pens have run dry.

[The Leaper]

I'll give Dom a lot of credit for improving this defense...but it certainly isn't elite yet. We've just played a ton of incredibly bad offenses (STL, CLE, DETx2, CHI) and got lucky to play Dallas and SF when they were a little nicked up on offense.

Top 10 defense...perhaps. Top 5...nope, regardless of what the stats say.

[KYPack]

No, this isn't the best D in the league, yet. But it is vastly improved.

The players are always in position to make plays and there is plenty of guys giving help at the proper time. We are in position to show blitz, but don't really use the blitz to get pressure.

Both Woodson and Harris were greatly aided by getting 'em off that island in press coverage and moving them where they could both give and get help.

We now have a lot of looks, but aren't a gimmick defense.

Dom is just a very solid D Coordinator.

[Cheesehead Craig]

YPG is not a true indicator of how good an offense/defense is and it's a joke that it's all people want to look at (not a slam on anyone here). It's far too easy to look at just the yards and nothing else.

Gotta include 3rd down conv %, penalties, ppg, turnovers, sacks, hurries...

I certainly disagree that the Packers have the #1 overall defense. Not nearly enough of a QB rush to count us as a league leading defense. Our run defense is outstanding, but with Harris out our pass defense will not be as good as it has been.

I'd personally put us in the top 10 category, likely around 7-8 with all things considered. JMO.

[MadScientist]

The stats are inflated because the other teams didn't need to rack up as many yards because they got so many long returns.

[get louder at lambeau]

YPG is not a true indicator of how good an offense/defense is and it's a joke that it's all people want to look at (not a slam on anyone here). It's far too easy to look at just the yards and nothing else.

Gotta include 3rd down conv %, penalties, ppg, turnovers, sacks, hurries...

I certainly disagree that the Packers have the #1 overall defense. Not nearly enough of a QB rush to count us as a league leading defense. Our run defense is outstanding, but with Harris out our pass defense will not be as good as it has been.

I'd personally put us in the top 10 category, likely around 7-8 with all things considered. JMO.

Football Outsiders put together about the most comprehensive rankings around, and they have us at #1 too, not just based on yardage-

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/teamdef

[gbgary]

YPG is not a true indicator of how good an offense/defense is and it's a joke that it's all people want to look at (not a slam on anyone here). It's far too easy to look at just the yards and nothing else.

Gotta include 3rd down conv %, penalties, ppg, turnovers, sacks, hurries...

I certainly disagree that the Packers have the #1 overall defense. Not nearly enough of a QB rush to count us as a league leading defense. Our run defense is outstanding, but with Harris out our pass defense will not be as good as it has been.

I'd personally put us in the top 10 category, likely around 7-8 with all things considered. JMO.

does anyone have a ranking based on all the other defensive stats combined? i hate the ypg stat...for both offense and defense.

[mngolf19]

YPG is not a true indicator of how good an offense/defense is and it's a joke that it's all people want to look at (not a slam on anyone here). It's far too easy to look at just the yards and nothing else.

Gotta include 3rd down conv %, penalties, ppg, turnovers, sacks, hurries...

I certainly disagree that the Packers have the #1 overall defense. Not nearly enough of a QB rush to count us as a league leading defense. Our run defense is outstanding, but with Harris out our pass defense will not be as good as it has been.

I'd personally put us in the top 10 category, likely around 7-8 with all things considered. JMO.

does anyone have a ranking based on all the other defensive stats combined? i hate the ypg stat...for both offense and defense.

Some defenses play a style that allows for yards as well but gives up few points. (see Vikes) If you have to use one stat for rating D, I'd go with points allowed.

[PlantPage55]

I'm not a big fan of yardage stats, but without a doubt, it is nice to see this.

[bobblehead]

I'll give Dom a lot of credit for improving this defense...but it certainly isn't elite yet. We've just played a ton of incredibly bad offenses (STL, CLE, DETx2, CHI) and got lucky to play Dallas and SF when they were a little nicked up on offense.

Top 10 defense...perhaps. Top 5...nope, regardless of what the stats say.

We also played the likely MVP and best RB in the game on the same team 2x....but that doesn't support your agrument. Not to mention a revived carson palmer and Cedric Benson before he got hurt.

[bobblehead]

YPG is not a true indicator of how good an offense/defense is and it's a joke that it's all people want to look at (not a slam on anyone here). It's far too easy to look at just the yards and nothing else.

Gotta include 3rd down conv %, penalties, ppg, turnovers, sacks, hurries...

I certainly disagree that the Packers have the #1 overall defense. Not nearly enough of a QB rush to count us as a league leading defense. Our run defense is outstanding, but with Harris out our pass defense will not be as good as it has been.

I'd personally put us in the top 10 category, likely around 7-8 with all things considered. JMO.

Who are the 6 better D's??

[Smidgeon]

YPG is not a true indicator of how good an offense/defense is and it's a joke that it's all people want to look at (not a slam on anyone here). It's far too easy to look at just the yards and nothing else.

Gotta include 3rd down conv %, penalties, ppg, turnovers, sacks, hurries...

I certainly disagree that the Packers have the #1 overall defense. Not nearly enough of a QB rush to count us as a league leading defense. Our run defense is outstanding, but with Harris out our pass defense will not be as good as it has been.

I'd personally put us in the top 10 category, likely around 7-8 with all things considered. JMO.

does anyone have a ranking based on all the other defensive stats combined? i hate the ypg stat...for both offense and defense.

Some defenses play a style that allows for yards as well but gives up few points. (see Vikes) If you have to use one stat for rating D, I'd go with points allowed.

I personally like to use a combination of yards and points. At the end of the day, the question becomes: can you move the ball on the defense (yards) and can you score on the defense (points). The Packers are #1 in the yards category and as of yesterday were #12 in the points category. I guess that would average out to #6.5 I guess...

@ Leaper: As for the argument about how the Packers defense doesn't deserve the ranking because of the cupcake games, give it a rest. Other teams get to play cupcake games too. Like with Tampa, even the dregs can put together a nice game against a better team. Anyone who says games don't count because of the opponent is just looking for an excuse to ignore stats that disagree with a predetermined opinion. Especially when you throw in the Cowboys (who were hot at the time) and San Francisco (who haven't had trouble putting up points with Alex Smith). That's simply blind justification.

[Cheesehead Craig]

YPG is not a true indicator of how good an offense/defense is and it's a joke that it's all people want to look at (not a slam on anyone here). It's far too easy to look at just the yards and nothing else.

Gotta include 3rd down conv %, penalties, ppg, turnovers, sacks, hurries...

I certainly disagree that the Packers have the #1 overall defense. Not nearly enough of a QB rush to count us as a league leading defense. Our run defense is outstanding, but with Harris out our pass defense will not be as good as it has been.

I'd personally put us in the top 10 category, likely around 7-8 with all things considered. JMO.

Who are the 6 better D's??

In no particular order:

MN
Pit
Bal
Den
NO
Cincy

With that said, I'm absolutely thrilled overall with how our defense has played this year. For supposedly not having the right personel to run the 3-4 they are sure doing a good impression of an outstanding defense. Other than a consistent pass rush, I'm not down on this D at all. I just don't think they are the best in the NFL, one of the best, just not THE best.

[bobblehead]

YPG is not a true indicator of how good an offense/defense is and it's a joke that it's all people want to look at (not a slam on anyone here). It's far too easy to look at just the yards and nothing else.

Gotta include 3rd down conv %, penalties, ppg, turnovers, sacks, hurries...

I certainly disagree that the Packers have the #1 overall defense. Not nearly enough of a QB rush to count us as a league leading defense. Our run defense is outstanding, but with Harris out our pass defense will not be as good as it has been.

I'd personally put us in the top 10 category, likely around 7-8 with all things considered. JMO.

Who are the 6 better D's??

In no particular order:

MN
Pit
Bal
Den
NO
Cincy

With that said, I'm absolutely thrilled overall with how our defense has played this year. For supposedly not having the right personel to run the 3-4 they are sure doing a good impression of an outstanding defense. Other than a consistent pass rush, I'm not down on this D at all. I just don't think they are the best in the NFL, one of the best, just not THE best.

In no particular order Baltimore just gave up 17 points to a guy who threw one NFL pass and was a third stringer.

NO gave up 23 to the rams and almost lost.

Cincy gave up YIKES 37 to the browns (doesnt' count...browns suck)

Minn gave up 20 to the browns (see above)

Anyway you get the point. On any given sunday and all, but the bottom line is that the GB defense has given up fewer yards than any other and a handful of the scores were set up by short fields and special teams gaffes.

In my gut I don't feel we are the best D in the league, but I can't clearly say who's is better either. That being the case I'll defer to our #1 ranking....plus we flat out punked dallas which makes me a believer.

[Fosco33]

Gotta look at yards/play, 3rd down %, sacks. turnovers, def points scored and obviously allowed. The yards/pass gained - allowed is pretty telling. That said GB is top 5-10 overall due to strength of schedule and inconsistencies.

[gex]

YPG is not a true indicator of how good an offense/defense is and it's a joke that it's all people want to look at (not a slam on anyone here). It's far too easy to look at just the yards and nothing else.

Gotta include 3rd down conv %, penalties, ppg, turnovers, sacks, hurries...

I certainly disagree that the Packers have the #1 overall defense. Not nearly enough of a QB rush to count us as a league leading defense. Our run defense is outstanding, but with Harris out our pass defense will not be as good as it has been.

I'd personally put us in the top 10 category, likely around 7-8 with all things considered. JMO.

Who are the 6 better D's??

In no particular order:

MN
Pit
Bal
Den
NO
Cincy

With that said, I'm absolutely thrilled overall with how our defense has played this year. For supposedly not having the right personel to run the 3-4 they are sure doing a good impression of an outstanding defense. Other than a consistent pass rush, I'm not down on this D at all. I just don't think they are the best in the NFL, one of the best, just not THE best.

In no particular order Baltimore just gave up 17 points to a guy who threw one NFL pass and was a third stringer.

NO gave up 23 to the rams and almost lost.

Cincy gave up YIKES 37 to the browns (doesnt' count...browns suck)

Minn gave up 20 to the browns (see above)

Anyway you get the point. On any given sunday and all, but the bottom line is that the GB defense has given up fewer yards than any other and a handful of the scores were set up by short fields and special teams gaffes.

In my gut I don't feel we are the best D in the league, but I can't clearly say who's is better either. That being the case I'll defer to our #1 ranking....plus we flat out punked dallas which makes me a believer.

Well said, I'll 2nd that.
Go ahead Packer Nation lets thump our chests and enjoy this sucsess.
Dom is a great coordinater and this is just the start :D

[Cheesehead Craig]

Anyway you get the point. On any given sunday and all...
Oh I agree. Any Sunday a great defense can look bad. We've had our share too. You and I both agree though that we have a very, very good defense here that we're overall pretty happy with. :glug:

[KYPack]

YPG is not a true indicator of how good an offense/defense is and it's a joke that it's all people want to look at (not a slam on anyone here). It's far too easy to look at just the yards and nothing else.

Gotta include 3rd down conv %, penalties, ppg, turnovers, sacks, hurries...

I certainly disagree that the Packers have the #1 overall defense. Not nearly enough of a QB rush to count us as a league leading defense. Our run defense is outstanding, but with Harris out our pass defense will not be as good as it has been.

I'd personally put us in the top 10 category, likely around 7-8 with all things considered. JMO.

Who are the 6 better D's??

In no particular order:

MN
Pit
Bal
Den
NO
Cincy

With that said, I'm absolutely thrilled overall with how our defense has played this year. For supposedly not having the right personel to run the 3-4 they are sure doing a good impression of an outstanding defense. Other than a consistent pass rush, I'm not down on this D at all. I just don't think they are the best in the NFL, one of the best, just not THE best.

In no particular order Baltimore just gave up 17 points to a guy who threw one NFL pass and was a third stringer.

NO gave up 23 to the rams and almost lost.

Cincy gave up YIKES 37 to the browns (doesnt' count...browns suck)

Minn gave up 20 to the browns (see above)

Anyway you get the point. On any given sunday and all, but the bottom line is that the GB defense has given up fewer yards than any other and a handful of the scores were set up by short fields and special teams gaffes.

In my gut I don't feel we are the best D in the league, but I can't clearly say who's is better either. That being the case I'll defer to our #1 ranking....plus we flat out punked dallas which makes me a believer.

Cincy gave up 27 points to the Browns in two games. They held 'em to 20 and 7. You must have looked at last year or something.

GB has a good defense. They've held the mark after losing two key guys. The Bengals have a solid defense, also. If we can play better D than the Bengals, we'll be in great shape.

[Brandon494]

In no particular order Baltimore just gave up 17 points to a guy who threw one NFL pass and was a third stringer.

NO gave up 23 to the rams and almost lost.

Cincy gave up YIKES 37 to the browns (doesnt' count...browns suck)

Minn gave up 20 to the browns (see above)

Anyway you get the point. On any given sunday and all, but the bottom line is that the GB defense has given up fewer yards than any other and a handful of the scores were set up by short fields and special teams gaffes.

In my gut I don't feel we are the best D in the league, but I can't clearly say who's is better either. That being the case I'll defer to our #1 ranking....plus we flat out punked dallas which makes me a believer.

If you are going to include those games you might want to include the game where TB scored 38 against us with their rookie QB.

[Smidgeon]

In no particular order Baltimore just gave up 17 points to a guy who threw one NFL pass and was a third stringer.

NO gave up 23 to the rams and almost lost.

Cincy gave up YIKES 37 to the browns (doesnt' count...browns suck)

Minn gave up 20 to the browns (see above)

Anyway you get the point. On any given sunday and all, but the bottom line is that the GB defense has given up fewer yards than any other and a handful of the scores were set up by short fields and special teams gaffes.

In my gut I don't feel we are the best D in the league, but I can't clearly say who's is better either. That being the case I'll defer to our #1 ranking....plus we flat out punked dallas which makes me a believer.

If you are going to include those games you might want to include the game where TB scored 38 against us with their rookie QB.

Which means all the teams have cupcake opponents and you can't correct for who plays whom.

[Packers4Ever]

Who would have thought after 11 weeks the Packers changing from 4-3 to 3-4 would have the number one ranked defense? I sure didn't. I would have thought top ten, but number one no way.


Hey 4to84, where did you read we were #1 ranked D ?
Or was it online or ? Just curious as I have friends who
will be asking and I didn't think we'd climbed quite that
high yet - soon, but not yet :wink:

[boiga]

JSO has it written up here: http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/sports/78159552.html

I'm also a big fan of Football Outsider's adjusted stats which include things like takeaways, 3rd down conversions, and opponent strength. They mark as 1st over all defense.

They mark us as 6th against the pass and 4th against the run.
However, when recent games are given higher priority, we're marked at a virtual tie with Pittsburgh. Baltimore, Phili, and Indy are all in the running.

The vikings are #1 against the run, which should be no surprise, but are actually below average against the pass. That could be partly because they've been up in so many games this season that teams always pass against them, but winfield's absence hurt too.

[RashanGary]

Rodgers threw three interceptions and the ST's gave up 7 points and put them at the Packers 20 on kick returns. Hard to fault the defense for that shit performance by Rodgers and the ST unit. They were put in bad spots all game long.

[Smidgeon]

Who would have thought after 11 weeks the Packers changing from 4-3 to 3-4 would have the number one ranked defense? I sure didn't. I would have thought top ten, but number one no way.


Hey 4to84, where did you read we were #1 ranked D ?
Or was it online or ? Just curious as I have friends who
will be asking and I didn't think we'd climbed quite that
high yet - soon, but not yet :wink:

If you go to NFL.com team stats, they have it there too under yards per game.

[Brandon494]

Rodgers threw three interceptions and the ST's gave up 7 points and put them at the Packers 20 on kick returns. Hard to fault the defense for that shit performance by Rodgers and the ST unit. They were put in bad spots all game long.

Yea AR threw 3 INTs but he also had 3 TDs that game. I don't really want to hear that they were put in bad spots all game when you blew a 11 point lead to a winless team in the 4th qtr. They had Josh Freeman looking like Steve McNair that game.

[bobblehead]

YPG is not a true indicator of how good an offense/defense is and it's a joke that it's all people want to look at (not a slam on anyone here). It's far too easy to look at just the yards and nothing else.

Gotta include 3rd down conv %, penalties, ppg, turnovers, sacks, hurries...

I certainly disagree that the Packers have the #1 overall defense. Not nearly enough of a QB rush to count us as a league leading defense. Our run defense is outstanding, but with Harris out our pass defense will not be as good as it has been.

I'd personally put us in the top 10 category, likely around 7-8 with all things considered. JMO.

Who are the 6 better D's??

In no particular order:

MN
Pit
Bal
Den
NO
Cincy

With that said, I'm absolutely thrilled overall with how our defense has played this year. For supposedly not having the right personel to run the 3-4 they are sure doing a good impression of an outstanding defense. Other than a consistent pass rush, I'm not down on this D at all. I just don't think they are the best in the NFL, one of the best, just not THE best.

In no particular order Baltimore just gave up 17 points to a guy who threw one NFL pass and was a third stringer.

NO gave up 23 to the rams and almost lost.

Cincy gave up YIKES 37 to the browns (doesnt' count...browns suck)

Minn gave up 20 to the browns (see above)

Anyway you get the point. On any given sunday and all, but the bottom line is that the GB defense has given up fewer yards than any other and a handful of the scores were set up by short fields and special teams gaffes.

In my gut I don't feel we are the best D in the league, but I can't clearly say who's is better either. That being the case I'll defer to our #1 ranking....plus we flat out punked dallas which makes me a believer.

Cincy gave up 27 points to the Browns in two games. They held 'em to 20 and 7. You must have looked at last year or something.

GB has a good defense. They've held the mark after losing two key guys. The Bengals have a solid defense, also. If we can play better D than the Bengals, we'll be in great shape.

You're right, I think I glanced at the cleveland/detroit score as I was looking it over, my bad.

[bobblehead]

In no particular order Baltimore just gave up 17 points to a guy who threw one NFL pass and was a third stringer.

NO gave up 23 to the rams and almost lost.

Cincy gave up YIKES 37 to the browns (doesnt' count...browns suck)

Minn gave up 20 to the browns (see above)

Anyway you get the point. On any given sunday and all, but the bottom line is that the GB defense has given up fewer yards than any other and a handful of the scores were set up by short fields and special teams gaffes.

In my gut I don't feel we are the best D in the league, but I can't clearly say who's is better either. That being the case I'll defer to our #1 ranking....plus we flat out punked dallas which makes me a believer.

If you are going to include those games you might want to include the game where TB scored 38 against us with their rookie QB.

But I am including that game....and we are ranked #1...INCLUDING that game.

[bobblehead]

Rodgers threw three interceptions and the ST's gave up 7 points and put them at the Packers 20 on kick returns. Hard to fault the defense for that shit performance by Rodgers and the ST unit. They were put in bad spots all game long.

Yea AR threw 3 INTs but he also had 3 TDs that game. I don't really want to hear that they were put in bad spots all game when you blew a 11 point lead to a winless team in the 4th qtr. They had Josh Freeman looking like Steve McNair that game.

Agreed, can't cherry pick one situation and forgive/add on to what the defense has done. Over 11 games we are ranked #1 and you are as good as it says you are....our D is looking studly and we should be greatful after last season.

[pack4to84]

Packer vs Steelers offense ranked team faced.
Chi 23-----Ten 14
Cin 17-----Chi 23
STL 24-----Cin 17
Min 5-------SD 15
Det 26-----Det 26
Clev 32----Clev 32
Min 5-------Min 5
TB 29------Den 18
Dal 4-------Cin 17
SF 28-------KC 30
Det 26------Balt 13
______Total______
219----------210
_____AVG________
19.9--------19.1

Looking at it the Packers and Steeler play nearly the same ranked offense this season so far.

[bobblehead]

Packer vs Steelers offense ranked team faced.
Chi 23-----Ten 14
Cin 17-----Chi 23
STL 24-----Cin 17
Min 5-------SD 15
Det 26-----Det 26
Clev 32----Clev 32
Min 5-------Min 5
TB 29------Den 18
Dal 4-------Cin 17
SF 28-------KC 30
Det 26------Balt 13
______Total______
219----------210
_____AVG________
19.9--------19.1

Looking at it the Packers and Steeler play nearly the same ranked offense this season so far.

but you can't count Detroit...they are really bad :)

[mraynrand]

but you can't count Detroit...they are really bad :)

Too soon to tell.

[Waldo]

There are no elite defenses this year. Just a bunch of above average ones. We are among the best of the above average teams.

[Smidgeon]

There are no elite defenses this year. Just a bunch of above average ones. We are among the best of the above average teams.

There are no historically elite defenses this year. But there are a couple seasonally elite defenses. Elite is a relativistic adjective that selects the best in a sample set. If our sample set is this year, then I disagree. If the sample set is the history of the NFL, it's hard to argue against you. In that case, hardly anything is elite anymore anyway. ;)

[Waldo]

The vikings are #1 against the run

I really don't see why. They are giving up fewer YPG, but the Pack has them beat at YPC, and is just as good at not allowing long runs or rushing TD's. And the Pack has faced better backs, Gore was healthy for our bout with SF, we've faced AD twice, not Grant, Dallas' rushing attack, and we've faced Benson, who they have yet to play. The only top back they've faced is Steven Jackson, who we've also played.

[Waldo]

There are no elite defenses this year. Just a bunch of above average ones. We are among the best of the above average teams.

There are no historically elite defenses this year. But there are a couple seasonally elite defenses. Elite is a relativistic adjective that selects the best in a sample set. If our sample set is this year, then I disagree. If the sample set is the history of the NFL, it's hard to argue against you. In that case, hardly anything is elite anymore anyway. ;)

A lot of the people going "we're not that good because of blah, blah", well, typically there will be defenses that don't have problems, that don't occasionally play inconsistent, but not this year. This year every defense struggles with something.

Mn can't stop the pass to save their life. If their pass rush fails, so does their pass D.

GB doesn't rush the passer that well.

Pit and Balt's CB play has been very subpar.

The Colts run D isn't very good.

The Pats are very inconsistent and can't rush

Denver can be had by running at them, their NT play has been terrible as of late.

SF's secondary hasn't been any good.

NO's has had CB issues, and has at times struggled to stop the run.

[Smidgeon]

There are no elite defenses this year. Just a bunch of above average ones. We are among the best of the above average teams.

There are no historically elite defenses this year. But there are a couple seasonally elite defenses. Elite is a relativistic adjective that selects the best in a sample set. If our sample set is this year, then I disagree. If the sample set is the history of the NFL, it's hard to argue against you. In that case, hardly anything is elite anymore anyway. ;)

A lot of the people going "we're not that good because of blah, blah", well, typically there will be defenses that don't have problems, that don't occasionally play inconsistent, but not this year. This year every defense struggles with something.

Mn can't stop the pass to save their life. If their pass rush fails, so does their pass D.

GB doesn't rush the passer that well.

Pit and Balt's CB play has been very subpar.

The Colts run D isn't very good.

The Pats are very inconsistent and can't rush

Denver can be had by running at them, their NT play has been terrible as of late.

SF's secondary hasn't been any good.

NO's has had CB issues, and has at times struggled to stop the run.

I don't disagree with you. I'm just saying that "elite" is a relative term and to defenses like Oakland's, Cleveland's, or Detroit's, all of the above are in elite territory this year. I was just giving grief over incomplete parameters in the first statement and not because I in any way disagree with the assessment.

[mngolf19]

The vikings are #1 against the run

I really don't see why. They are giving up fewer YPG, but the Pack has them beat at YPC, and is just as good at not allowing long runs or rushing TD's. And the Pack has faced better backs, Gore was healthy for our bout with SF, we've faced AD twice, not Grant, Dallas' rushing attack, and we've faced Benson, who they have yet to play. The only top back they've faced is Steven Jackson, who we've also played.

Because yardage stats don't mean much on their own. Combine that with say points allowed, it means much more.

[mngolf19]

There are no elite defenses this year. Just a bunch of above average ones. We are among the best of the above average teams.

There are no historically elite defenses this year. But there are a couple seasonally elite defenses. Elite is a relativistic adjective that selects the best in a sample set. If our sample set is this year, then I disagree. If the sample set is the history of the NFL, it's hard to argue against you. In that case, hardly anything is elite anymore anyway. ;)


Mn can't stop the pass to save their life. If their pass rush fails, so does their pass D.



Well that would be true for any defense not just MN. So how does that mean they can't stop the pass to save their life? The pass rush is part of their pass defense.

[Waldo]

There are no elite defenses this year. Just a bunch of above average ones. We are among the best of the above average teams.

There are no historically elite defenses this year. But there are a couple seasonally elite defenses. Elite is a relativistic adjective that selects the best in a sample set. If our sample set is this year, then I disagree. If the sample set is the history of the NFL, it's hard to argue against you. In that case, hardly anything is elite anymore anyway. ;)


Mn can't stop the pass to save their life. If their pass rush fails, so does their pass D.



Well that would be true for any defense not just MN. So how does that mean they can't stop the pass to save their life? The pass rush is part of their pass defense.

Teams with a good secondary can typically produce good pass defense despite a subpar pass rush.

When was the least time Mn had a "coverage sack" :lol:

[MadScientist]

The vikings are #1 against the run

I really don't see why. They are giving up fewer YPG, but the Pack has them beat at YPC, and is just as good at not allowing long runs or rushing TD's. And the Pack has faced better backs, Gore was healthy for our bout with SF, we've faced AD twice, not Grant, Dallas' rushing attack, and we've faced Benson, who they have yet to play. The only top back they've faced is Steven Jackson, who we've also played.

Because yardage stats don't mean much on their own. Combine that with say points allowed, it means much more.

Rushing yards allowed are also deceptive because teams need to pass against the Vikings because they are often behind.

[Waldo]

The vikings are #1 against the run

I really don't see why. They are giving up fewer YPG, but the Pack has them beat at YPC, and is just as good at not allowing long runs or rushing TD's. And the Pack has faced better backs, Gore was healthy for our bout with SF, we've faced AD twice, not Grant, Dallas' rushing attack, and we've faced Benson, who they have yet to play. The only top back they've faced is Steven Jackson, who we've also played.

Because yardage stats don't mean much on their own. Combine that with say points allowed, it means much more.

That's fine.

GB, like Mn, has given up 3 rushing TD's.

There have been less rushing attempts against Mn's D, which means that Mn gives up more TDs/attempt than GB. Mn also gives up more yards per rush than GB.

An opponent that runs the ball will on average gain more yards and score more often against Mn than they will against GB. And these stats are based on GB facing a better group of runners.

Why again is Mn that best run D?

It's Brett Favre. He's just like a kid out there. The other players like to actually have fun playing football when they are playing with Brett, therefore the bunch of guys having fun with Brett are better than everyone else, because they too are just like kids out there. Smiling and happy.

[mraynrand]

It's Brett Favre. He's just like a kid out there. The other players like to actually have fun playing football when they are playing with Brett, therefore the bunch of guys having fun with Brett are better than everyone else, because they too are just like kids out there. Smiling and happy.

Hey who let Jon Gruden in here? LOL. Good copy, Waldo.

[mngolf19]

The vikings are #1 against the run

I really don't see why. They are giving up fewer YPG, but the Pack has them beat at YPC, and is just as good at not allowing long runs or rushing TD's. And the Pack has faced better backs, Gore was healthy for our bout with SF, we've faced AD twice, not Grant, Dallas' rushing attack, and we've faced Benson, who they have yet to play. The only top back they've faced is Steven Jackson, who we've also played.

Because yardage stats don't mean much on their own. Combine that with say points allowed, it means much more.

That's fine.

GB, like Mn, has given up 3 rushing TD's.

There have been less rushing attempts against Mn's D, which means that Mn gives up more TDs/attempt than GB. Mn also gives up more yards per rush than GB.

An opponent that runs the ball will on average gain more yards and score more often against Mn than they will against GB. And these stats are based on GB facing a better group of runners.

Why again is Mn that best run D?

It's Brett Favre. He's just like a kid out there. The other players like to actually have fun playing football when they are playing with Brett, therefore the bunch of guys having fun with Brett are better than everyone else, because they too are just like kids out there. Smiling and happy.

MN has been the top Run D(based on yardage) for 3 years running. Nothing to do with Favre.

[mngolf19]

The vikings are #1 against the run

I really don't see why. They are giving up fewer YPG, but the Pack has them beat at YPC, and is just as good at not allowing long runs or rushing TD's. And the Pack has faced better backs, Gore was healthy for our bout with SF, we've faced AD twice, not Grant, Dallas' rushing attack, and we've faced Benson, who they have yet to play. The only top back they've faced is Steven Jackson, who we've also played.

Because yardage stats don't mean much on their own. Combine that with say points allowed, it means much more.

That's fine.

GB, like Mn, has given up 3 rushing TD's.

There have been less rushing attempts against Mn's D, which means that Mn gives up more TDs/attempt than GB. Mn also gives up more yards per rush than GB.

An opponent that runs the ball will on average gain more yards and score more often against Mn than they will against GB. And these stats are based on GB facing a better group of runners.

Why again is Mn that best run D?

It's Brett Favre. He's just like a kid out there. The other players like to actually have fun playing football when they are playing with Brett, therefore the bunch of guys having fun with Brett are better than everyone else, because they too are just like kids out there. Smiling and happy.

Also if I use this logic, then MN has a better pass D then Pack? As they likely have more passes against them with less TDs?

[sharpe1027]

MN has been the top Run D(based on yardage) for 3 years running. Nothing to do with Favre.

I think this is closer to the truth. They had a good run defense the last couple years so it must be good again this year. At least that is what you will hear from announcers and sports writers, as they tend to stick to a concept well past its usefulness.

Ignoring past years, what about this year puts them as #1?

[Waldo]

What does Mn's run D actually do better than GB? Be run against less? Am I missing something? GB's is tougher to gain yards on or score on. What are you hanging your hat on?

Yes, Mn has given up fewer passing TD's. GB blows them out of the water in completion % (53.4 to 63.9) and ints (18 to 9), giving GB a vastly superior PRA, 73.8 (4th) vs. 88.1 (22nd). Without their pass rush, Mn's secondary is quite Detroitian. Even with their pass rush, Mn's pass D still sucks.

[cheesner]

MN has been the top Run D(based on yardage) for 3 years running. Nothing to do with Favre.

I think this is closer to the truth. They had a good run defense the last couple years so it must be good again this year. At least that is what you will hear from announcers and sports writers, as they tend to stick to a concept well past its usefulness.

Ignoring past years, what about this year puts them as #1?

Well, its no longer running - THEY ARE CURRENTLY INFERIOR to GB. That doesn't mean they suck. They are very good, just that GB is at this point, better.

If we are just going to look at history, we can always point to our 3 SBs to Minnys 0 SB and just as easily conclude - GB is currently a much better team.

[Partial]

Mn's pass D still sucks.

I don't believe this to be accurate. Minne is almost always winning so teams are passing more. They're playing prevent, taking foot off gas, etc.

Statistics may not support it but I think Minne is solid is all-elements of the game.

[TennesseePackerBacker]

Mn's pass D still sucks.

I don't believe this to be accurate. Minne is almost always winning so teams are passing more. They're playing prevent, taking foot off gas, etc.

Statistics may not support it but I think Minne is solid is all-elements of the game.

You should just go ahead and finish the job Brentidict started. Become a Viking fan, and save us all a little head ache. It's blantantly obvious that Minne's biggest weakness is their secondary. Great front 7's just do a fine job of masking that weakness.

The Vikings are certainly beatable, and they aren't even the best team in the NFL. Bested by the 6-5 Steelers no less. You are what your record says, haven't you echoed that sentiment before Partial?

[mission]

Mn's pass D still sucks.

I don't believe this to be accurate. Minne is almost always winning so teams are passing more. They're playing prevent, taking foot off gas, etc.

Statistics may not support it but I think Minne is solid is all-elements of the game.

Weren't we leading big against Tampa Bay and San Francisco?

So by your logic we were just playing prevent defense and letting our foot off the gas right?

[mngolf19]

MN has been the top Run D(based on yardage) for 3 years running. Nothing to do with Favre.

I think this is closer to the truth. They had a good run defense the last couple years so it must be good again this year. At least that is what you will hear from announcers and sports writers, as they tend to stick to a concept well past its usefulness.

Ignoring past years, what about this year puts them as #1?

Not sure #1 this year, but it's due to Williams Wall and for this year more scoring from the offense therefore more passing done by opponents. And the latter can be attributed to multiple things(Favre, Rice, Harvin, better OL)

[mngolf19]

MN has been the top Run D(based on yardage) for 3 years running. Nothing to do with Favre.

I think this is closer to the truth. They had a good run defense the last couple years so it must be good again this year. At least that is what you will hear from announcers and sports writers, as they tend to stick to a concept well past its usefulness.

Ignoring past years, what about this year puts them as #1?

Well, its no longer running - THEY ARE CURRENTLY INFERIOR to GB. That doesn't mean they suck. They are very good, just that GB is at this point, better.

If we are just going to look at history, we can always point to our 3 SBs to Minnys 0 SB and just as easily conclude - GB is currently a much better team.

Chees, the point was that it doesn't have anything to do with Favre.

[mngolf19]

What does Mn's run D actually do better than GB? Be run against less? Am I missing something? GB's is tougher to gain yards on or score on. What are you hanging your hat on?

Yes, Mn has given up fewer passing TD's. GB blows them out of the water in completion % (53.4 to 63.9) and ints (18 to 9), giving GB a vastly superior PRA, 73.8 (4th) vs. 88.1 (22nd). Without their pass rush, Mn's secondary is quite Detroitian. Even with their pass rush, Mn's pass D still sucks.

So Waldo which would you rather have? A defense that is best against yards or a defense that is best against allowing points? There are lots of arguements you can make about yards not telling a whole story of how good/bad a team is. But if a team gives up few points...

[Waldo]

What does Mn's run D actually do better than GB? Be run against less? Am I missing something? GB's is tougher to gain yards on or score on. What are you hanging your hat on?

Yes, Mn has given up fewer passing TD's. GB blows them out of the water in completion % (53.4 to 63.9) and ints (18 to 9), giving GB a vastly superior PRA, 73.8 (4th) vs. 88.1 (22nd). Without their pass rush, Mn's secondary is quite Detroitian. Even with their pass rush, Mn's pass D still sucks.

So Waldo which would you rather have? A defense that is best against yards or a defense that is best against allowing points? There are lots of arguements you can make about yards not telling a whole story of how good/bad a team is. But if a team gives up few points...

GB's run D is better at both yards AND points. What on earth are you talking about? Mn's run D is better at preventing attempts. Which would you rather have?

[mngolf19]

What does Mn's run D actually do better than GB? Be run against less? Am I missing something? GB's is tougher to gain yards on or score on. What are you hanging your hat on?

Yes, Mn has given up fewer passing TD's. GB blows them out of the water in completion % (53.4 to 63.9) and ints (18 to 9), giving GB a vastly superior PRA, 73.8 (4th) vs. 88.1 (22nd). Without their pass rush, Mn's secondary is quite Detroitian. Even with their pass rush, Mn's pass D still sucks.

So Waldo which would you rather have? A defense that is best against yards or a defense that is best against allowing points? There are lots of arguements you can make about yards not telling a whole story of how good/bad a team is. But if a team gives up few points...

GB's run D is better at both yards AND points. What on earth are you talking about? Mn's run D is better at preventing attempts. Which would you rather have?

Allowing points period, doesn't matter whether by run or pass. Why would it matter with just run? MN is better at preventing points. That is the goal.

[Rastak]

There are no elite defenses this year. Just a bunch of above average ones. We are among the best of the above average teams.

There are no historically elite defenses this year. But there are a couple seasonally elite defenses. Elite is a relativistic adjective that selects the best in a sample set. If our sample set is this year, then I disagree. If the sample set is the history of the NFL, it's hard to argue against you. In that case, hardly anything is elite anymore anyway. ;)


Mn can't stop the pass to save their life. If their pass rush fails, so does their pass D.



Well that would be true for any defense not just MN. So how does that mean they can't stop the pass to save their life? The pass rush is part of their pass defense.

Teams with a good secondary can typically produce good pass defense despite a subpar pass rush.

When was the least time Mn had a "coverage sack" :lol:


Run the tape on MN vs Green Bay for one example my ill informed friend.


And yes, I laughed out loud.

[Rastak]

The vikings are #1 against the run

I really don't see why. They are giving up fewer YPG, but the Pack has them beat at YPC, and is just as good at not allowing long runs or rushing TD's. And the Pack has faced better backs, Gore was healthy for our bout with SF, we've faced AD twice, not Grant, Dallas' rushing attack, and we've faced Benson, who they have yet to play. The only top back they've faced is Steven Jackson, who we've also played.

Because yardage stats don't mean much on their own. Combine that with say points allowed, it means much more.

That's fine.

GB, like Mn, has given up 3 rushing TD's.

There have been less rushing attempts against Mn's D, which means that Mn gives up more TDs/attempt than GB. Mn also gives up more yards per rush than GB.

An opponent that runs the ball will on average gain more yards and score more often against Mn than they will against GB. And these stats are based on GB facing a better group of runners.

Why again is Mn that best run D?

It's Brett Favre. He's just like a kid out there. The other players like to actually have fun playing football when they are playing with Brett, therefore the bunch of guys having fun with Brett are better than everyone else, because they too are just like kids out there. Smiling and happy.


Ok Waldo, let's just cut to the chase....throw out all the bullshit and see where the rubber meets the road. How do the teams match up in Red Zone defense. THAT is the bottom line, I don't care how you spin it.

I can't answer the question but I'll google away and see if I can find it.

[sharpe1027]

Allowing points period, doesn't matter whether by run or pass. Why would it matter with just run? MN is better at preventing points. That is the goal.

Actually, the the best at Defense can do is to score points. Total points scored by Vikings = 8; Total points scored by Packers = 18

The second best thing is to get a turnover. Vikings = 19; GB=27

Specifically regarding the points given up, the fact that Packers have the worst special teams in the league would seem to be an unfair burden to how many points they give up. To be fair, it may also lead to less total yards given up.

[Partial]

how is forcing one turnover and giving up 27 points better than not forcing a turnover but pitching a shutout

[boiga]

What does Mn's run D actually do better than GB? Be run against less? Am I missing something? GB's is tougher to gain yards on or score on. What are you hanging your hat on?

According to FO, Minnesota has by far the best defensive line in "power" situations :
Power Success: Percentage of runs on third or fourth down, two yards or less to go, that achieved a first down or touchdown. Also includes runs on first-and-goal or second-and-goal from the two-yard line or closer.

Teams only succeed in those situations against Minnie 39% of the time. The next best is Washington, who give up a 50% success rate. GB gives up 68% in power situations and is ranked 23rd.

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/dl

Thats a huge strength of Minnie's D to which other teams can not compare.

However, GB, Minn, and Ariz are all more or less tied for 1st in the percentage of running plays that are stopped at or behind the line of scrimmage (26%)

In regards to the whether the Packers have a historically elite defense, well, according to FO, our current D would be ranked 6th last year, when Pitt, Balt, Phi, Tenn, and Minn all had stronger defenses than they do this year.

[ThunderDan]

how is forcing one turnover and giving up 27 points better than not forcing a turnover but pitching a shutout

But players on Ds have to force TO to have an impact; otherwise they are vanilla Hawks.

Now you are arguing that 11 assignment sure players are better than playmakers!

[Partial]

how is forcing one turnover and giving up 27 points better than not forcing a turnover but pitching a shutout

But players on Ds have to force TO to have an impact; otherwise they are vanilla Hawks.

Now you are arguing that 11 assignment sure players are better than playmakers!

I'm not at all. Are you kidding me? You need a team loaded with playmakers to pitch a shutout. I'm not implying turnovers are a bad thing; I'm proving that the poster made a short-sighted statement.

[ThunderDan]

how is forcing one turnover and giving up 27 points better than not forcing a turnover but pitching a shutout

Since you brought this up I want statistics on total shutouts verses shutouts with no turnovers. How often do shutouts occur without a turnover?

[Partial]

how is forcing one turnover and giving up 27 points better than not forcing a turnover but pitching a shutout

Since you brought this up I want statistics on total shutouts verses shutouts with no turnovers. How often do shutouts occur without a turnover?

Why are you baiting me? Who cares how often they are? Who knows. Surely not I in both cases. Both are absolutely irrelevant. If you're interested, look it up. It was a point that clearly went over your head.

[ThunderDan]

how is forcing one turnover and giving up 27 points better than not forcing a turnover but pitching a shutout

Since you brought this up I want statistics on total shutouts verses shutouts with no turnovers. How often do shutouts occur without a turnover?

Why are you baiting me? Who cares how often they are? Who knows. Surely not I in both cases. Both are absolutely irrelevant. If you're interested, look it up. It was a point that clearly went over your head.

But is that like saying would you rather win $50 or $20,000,000 but the odds of winning the $20M is 100,000,000 to 1; meaning it doesn't happen.

Who doesn't want to win $20M but I would guess I'll be dead before I win the lottery if I played every week and not just once.

I'll take the $50 please.

[ThunderDan]

In 2009 there have been 6 shutouts.

SEA vs STL (28-0) 1 turnover
NYG vs TB (24-0) 1 turnover
SEA vs JAC (41-0) 2 turnovers
GB vs DET (26-0) 3 turnovers
NYJ vs OAK (38-0) 4 turnovers
BAL vs CLE (16-0) 2 turnovers

So all 6 shutouts the Ds have created turnovers.

[ThunderDan]

how is forcing one turnover and giving up 27 points better than not forcing a turnover but pitching a shutout

Since you brought this up I want statistics on total shutouts verses shutouts with no turnovers. How often do shutouts occur without a turnover?

Why are you baiting me? Who cares how often they are? Who knows. Surely not I in both cases. Both are absolutely irrelevant. If you're interested, look it up. It was a point that clearly went over your head.

Is this a "new" trick for you? When I have made points in the past you have demanded statistics to backup my points. When I present the stats you say stats don't matter.

I am asking for you to do the same.

[Waldo]

The vikings are #1 against the run

I really don't see why. They are giving up fewer YPG, but the Pack has them beat at YPC, and is just as good at not allowing long runs or rushing TD's. And the Pack has faced better backs, Gore was healthy for our bout with SF, we've faced AD twice, not Grant, Dallas' rushing attack, and we've faced Benson, who they have yet to play. The only top back they've faced is Steven Jackson, who we've also played.

Because yardage stats don't mean much on their own. Combine that with say points allowed, it means much more.

That's fine.

GB, like Mn, has given up 3 rushing TD's.

There have been less rushing attempts against Mn's D, which means that Mn gives up more TDs/attempt than GB. Mn also gives up more yards per rush than GB.

An opponent that runs the ball will on average gain more yards and score more often against Mn than they will against GB. And these stats are based on GB facing a better group of runners.

Why again is Mn that best run D?

It's Brett Favre. He's just like a kid out there. The other players like to actually have fun playing football when they are playing with Brett, therefore the bunch of guys having fun with Brett are better than everyone else, because they too are just like kids out there. Smiling and happy.


Ok Waldo, let's just cut to the chase....throw out all the bullshit and see where the rubber meets the road. How do the teams match up in Red Zone defense. THAT is the bottom line, I don't care how you spin it.

I can't answer the question but I'll google away and see if I can find it.

Nice strawman argument.

I questioned Mn's #1 ranking at run D. Neither of you have been able to give any decent reason as to why Mn has a better run D. So....change the subject and the parameters of the argument, and argue something else.

[boiga]

Waldo, I just said why Minn's rush D is better.

They stop people on 3rd or 4th and short 29% more often than we do. Doesn't that qualify as a valid difference?

[mngolf19]

The vikings are #1 against the run

I really don't see why. They are giving up fewer YPG, but the Pack has them beat at YPC, and is just as good at not allowing long runs or rushing TD's. And the Pack has faced better backs, Gore was healthy for our bout with SF, we've faced AD twice, not Grant, Dallas' rushing attack, and we've faced Benson, who they have yet to play. The only top back they've faced is Steven Jackson, who we've also played.

Because yardage stats don't mean much on their own. Combine that with say points allowed, it means much more.

That's fine.

GB, like Mn, has given up 3 rushing TD's.

There have been less rushing attempts against Mn's D, which means that Mn gives up more TDs/attempt than GB. Mn also gives up more yards per rush than GB.

An opponent that runs the ball will on average gain more yards and score more often against Mn than they will against GB. And these stats are based on GB facing a better group of runners.

Why again is Mn that best run D?

It's Brett Favre. He's just like a kid out there. The other players like to actually have fun playing football when they are playing with Brett, therefore the bunch of guys having fun with Brett are better than everyone else, because they too are just like kids out there. Smiling and happy.


Ok Waldo, let's just cut to the chase....throw out all the bullshit and see where the rubber meets the road. How do the teams match up in Red Zone defense. THAT is the bottom line, I don't care how you spin it.

I can't answer the question but I'll google away and see if I can find it.

Nice strawman argument.

I questioned Mn's #1 ranking at run D. Neither of you have been able to give any decent reason as to why Mn has a better run D. So....change the subject and the parameters of the argument, and argue something else.

Change the subject? I'm quoting you and replying to it. What are you talking about? You made the statement that "without QB pressure the Vikes passing defense is terrible" I replied with the obvious DUH and said that would be the case for any defense. You state "An opponent that runs the ball will on average gain more yards and score more often against Mn than they will against GB." Well if that were true, then I guess GB would have given up less points on the season than MN. But they haven't.

Not changing subject. Replying to your posts. Why are you stuck on yardage? Points win games. Score more or give up less. Vikes have been doing both this year, hence the 10-1.

[Zool]

Wouldnt YPA and YPG be a better indicator than anything else?

GB is 4th(tied) at 3.6ypa
MN is 8th(tied) at 3.9ypa

GB is 6th(tied) at 271 rushes on the season
MN is 1st at 228 rushes on the season

GB is 4th at 980 total yards rushing allowed
MN is 2nd at 898 total yards rushing allowed

Both teams have given up 3td's. I guess I'd call it a close race.

[Partial]

Right, who cares? Both are very good at it. Vikes D is better imo. It's the pass rush that's the difference.

[pack4to84]

Right, who cares? Both are very good at it. Vikes D is better imo. It's the pass rush that's the difference.So you would rather have a Defense that get sacks and not turnovers? Would rather have a Defense that forces the QB to have a bad rating GB 71.1 vs MN 88.1?

[Fred's Slacks]

I agree that points should be the top consideration. However it doesn't tell the whole story. If MN's special teams were as atrocious as ours, they'd have given up a lot more points then they have. With that said, I still think their defense should get a slight edge only because they have more playmakers in their front 7.

My only beef with our D is that it seems to ALWAYS give up a TD when given the short field. I know they were put in a shitty situation but it would be nice if they held them to a FG once in a while (and not head butt anyone giving them another shot) when put in that situation.

I like our D and we are light years ahead of where we were last year. It's nice to have a very good D again.

[Smidgeon]

I still think their defense should get a slight edge only because they have more playmakers in their front 7.

I see your slight edge in Minn's front 7 and raise you GB's secondary...

[MichiganPackerFan]

Defense preventing points is important (Partials post is certainly valid)
Defense scoring points is a bonus
Defense creating turnovers takes the opponents opportunity to score and gives it to your offense. Thats a +2 opportunity to score swing.

Because it's a team game, its not a cookie cutter on which is the best way to go. If your offense cant score points (Im talking to you redskins) then your defense needs to score a couple and provide lots of opportunities. If your offense can score at will (saints) Simply limiting the opponent a bit is enough to win.

[sharpe1027]

how is forcing one turnover and giving up 27 points better than not forcing a turnover but pitching a shutout

How is forcing 100 turnovers and giving up 3 points not better than 0 turnovers and pitching a shutout?

[Partial]

how is forcing one turnover and giving up 27 points better than not forcing a turnover but pitching a shutout

How is forcing 100 turnovers and giving up 3 points not better than 0 turnovers and pitching a shutout?

Because if I force 100 turnovers and don't score 3 points, I lose. Worst case scenario if I give up 0 points I tie.

[3irty1]

I give credit to Dom Capers but I definitely believe that the defensive improvement is mostly addition by subtraction of Bob Sanders. Nobody in the NFL was doing less with more.

[sharpe1027]

how is forcing one turnover and giving up 27 points better than not forcing a turnover but pitching a shutout

How is forcing 100 turnovers and giving up 3 points not better than 0 turnovers and pitching a shutout?

Because if I force 100 turnovers and don't score 3 points, I lose. Worst case scenario if I give up 0 points I tie.

Yet, you ignore the absurdity of your hypothetical, which misses the point completely. No defense will shutout every team, even the best are lucky if it happens once a year. So you need to score points to win (or to tie...because that's a really common occurrence). Arguing that points given up is the only relevant stat is poor analysis.

On any given drive, the best thing a defense can do is score a touchdown or a safety. The second best thing a defense can do is to force a turnover. The third best thing is to force a punt. Fourth would probably be a field goal. The worst thing is giving up a TD.

[ThunderDan]

how is forcing one turnover and giving up 27 points better than not forcing a turnover but pitching a shutout

How is forcing 100 turnovers and giving up 3 points not better than 0 turnovers and pitching a shutout?

Because if I force 100 turnovers and don't score 3 points, I lose. Worst case scenario if I give up 0 points I tie.

Yet, you ignore the absurdity of your hypothetical, which misses the point completely. No defense will shutout every team, even the best are lucky if it happens once a year. So you need to score points to win (or to tie...because that's a really common occurrence). Arguing that points given up is the only relevant stat is poor analysis.

On any given drive, the best thing a defense can do is score a touchdown or a safety. The second best thing a defense can do is to force a turnover. The third best thing is to force a punt. Fourth would probably be a field goal. The worst thing is giving up a TD.

This is why I actual like the YPG number as a "pretty" good gauge of a defense.

If you only give up 280 ypg and the opponent starts on their own 20 yard line. They hypothetically will be able to score 3 touchdowns and a very long FG attempt. The reality is offenses get 8-10 drives a game. If my D gives up 280 yards a game that's 28-35 yards a drive. As long as I don't lose the field position game my D should be stout.

Now, the teams that win the turnover game and have excellent special teams can significantly change the field position game. A D can give up 38 yards and 21 points (TB game anyone) but it should never happen.

So back to above, the Packers ST suck. Now lets say the opponent starts on their own 40 yard line. 280 yards now gives up 4 TD and a midrange FG. Now my offense needs to score an additional TD a game also to keep even. If I am still starting on my 20 because the other teams ST is OK I need 370 yards of O to try and put up the same numbers.

280 yards for them vs 370 for us. That's 32% more offense needed. Hmmm... and just magically our D gives up 281 ypg and our O generates 382 ypg. No wonder why I have felt very unsecure during most Packer games this year.

[RashanGary]

ST's (all of them and no improvement has been shown so far)
Penalties (slight improvement lately but not nearly enough)
Red Zone Defense
Red Zone Offense


That's how I order our issues right now. The defense does need to get better in the redzone. 60% fail rate isn't too good.

[Smidgeon]

I think one part of the ST equation will correct itself depending on what they do with Blackman in the offseason. Doesn't he have (supposedly) elite stop, change direction, and start speeds? Granted, it doesn't solve even most of the equation, but having a punt returner who can do something certainly helps.

[MJZiggy]

how is forcing one turnover and giving up 27 points better than not forcing a turnover but pitching a shutout

How is forcing 100 turnovers and giving up 3 points not better than 0 turnovers and pitching a shutout?

Because if I force 100 turnovers and don't score 3 points, I lose. Worst case scenario if I give up 0 points I tie.

If you force 100 turnovers and your offense does not score more than 3 points, they need to be taken out back and shot...or at least fired or something.

[Partial]

how is forcing one turnover and giving up 27 points better than not forcing a turnover but pitching a shutout

How is forcing 100 turnovers and giving up 3 points not better than 0 turnovers and pitching a shutout?

Because if I force 100 turnovers and don't score 3 points, I lose. Worst case scenario if I give up 0 points I tie.

Yet, you ignore the absurdity of your hypothetical, which misses the point completely. No defense will shutout every team, even the best are lucky if it happens once a year. So you need to score points to win (or to tie...because that's a really common occurrence). Arguing that points given up is the only relevant stat is poor analysis.

On any given drive, the best thing a defense can do is score a touchdown or a safety. The second best thing a defense can do is to force a turnover. The third best thing is to force a punt. Fourth would probably be a field goal. The worst thing is giving up a TD.

Who is making a hypothetical? Surely not I. I called you on the outrageousness of your statement. Why not own up to it that you slipped up and let it go. No big thang.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

how is forcing one turnover and giving up 27 points better than not forcing a turnover but pitching a shutout

How is forcing 100 turnovers and giving up 3 points not better than 0 turnovers and pitching a shutout?

Because if I force 100 turnovers and don't score 3 points, I lose. Worst case scenario if I give up 0 points I tie.

Yet, you ignore the absurdity of your hypothetical, which misses the point completely. No defense will shutout every team, even the best are lucky if it happens once a year. So you need to score points to win (or to tie...because that's a really common occurrence). Arguing that points given up is the only relevant stat is poor analysis.

On any given drive, the best thing a defense can do is score a touchdown or a safety. The second best thing a defense can do is to force a turnover. The third best thing is to force a punt. Fourth would probably be a field goal. The worst thing is giving up a TD.

Who is making a hypothetical? Surely not I. I called you on the outrageousness of your statement. Why not own up to it that you slipped up and let it go. No big thang.

Irony alert!!!!

[ThunderDan]

Last year PITT had the top rated D in the NFL at 13.9 ppg and 237 ypg.

PITT only had 1 shutout the whole season. A 31-0 beating of CLE in the last game of the season. They forced 2 TOs that game.

[sharpe1027]

how is forcing one turnover and giving up 27 points better than not forcing a turnover but pitching a shutout

Who is making a hypothetical? Surely not I. I called you on the outrageousness of your statement. Why not own up to it that you slipped up and let it go. No big thang.

Actually, you were making a hypothetical, and a rather absurd one that missed the point. Now, why not own up to it that you slipped up and let it go. No big thang.

Nothing outrageous about my statement.

The best result for a defense is scoring a TD or a safety. Next best is a turnover. Next a punt. Then a field goal. Worst is giving up a TD.

Saying that points given up is the only important factor is bad analysis. Unfortunately you are more interested in trying to "catch" me in a slip up than discussing the substance of my point. I tired of your posts. Forgive me if I ignore you for awhile. Have a good day.

[Partial]

how is forcing one turnover and giving up 27 points better than not forcing a turnover but pitching a shutout

Who is making a hypothetical? Surely not I. I called you on the outrageousness of your statement. Why not own up to it that you slipped up and let it go. No big thang.

Actually, you were making a hypothetical, and a rather absurd one that missed the point. Now, why not own up to it that you slipped up and let it go. No big thang.

Nothing outrageous about my statement.

The best result for a defense is scoring a TD or a safety. Next best is a turnover. Next a punt. Then a field goal. Worst is giving up a TD.

Saying that points given up is the only important factor is bad analysis. Unfortunately you are more interested in trying to "catch" me in a slip up than discussing the substance of my point. I tired of your posts. Forgive me if I ignore you for awhile. Have a good day.

You're just wrong. Sorry. But you are. The point I argued and made a statement about was turnovers are the most important thing a defense can do. I said No, it's not, because you can still lose a game if you're getting turnovers. You're not going to lose a game if you don't give up any points.

I'm not correlating giving up points and getting turnovers. Obviously the two strongly coincide in my opinion.

There isn't anything outrageous about my post. It's factually correct. You will not lose if you do not give up any points. My other point that you can have turnovers, millions of them, and still could lose a game. Is it likely? No, but it is possible. There's nothing hypothetical about that. It's straight up factual.

There isn't anything to debate. I'm right and you're wrong in the simplest of terms. Your team could have 50 turnovers (your ideal) and mine could give up 0 points (my ideal) and my team will never lose. Not saying they will win, but they will never lose. That is the point, it's not worth debating, it was trying to make you aware of how short-sighted your statement was. I'm not interested in getting into hypothetical of "well, to pitch a shutout you need TOs" or "its rare to pitch a shutout". I'm aware of both things. It's a stupid debate imo, not worth my time, but you were factually incorrect and something needed to be said.

[sharpe1027]

You're just wrong. Sorry. But you are. The point I argued and made a statement about was turnovers are the most important thing a defense can do. I said No, it's not, because you can still lose a game if you're getting turnovers. You're not going to lose a game if you don't give up any points.


I do not believe that you are sorry, your pattern of posting says otherwise. The point you argued was never made by anyone. You are right, there is nothing to debate. Again, you show that you care more about being right than discussing the substance. How about this: I am wrong, you are right. Happy?

[Tyrone Bigguns]

comment removed - Admin.

Stop injecting yourself in other people's discussion. Your "words of wisdom" were inappropriate.