Defense Wins Championships?

[vince]

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/kerry_byrne/01/30/super-bowl-pass-defense/index.html

Pass defense wins championships, as Steelers, Packers proving

The NFL is all about the passing game. And it always has been, at least since the dawn of the T-formation in the 1940s, which made the quarterback the centerpiece of the offense.

Great offenses are those that pass effectively. And great defenses are those that make life hell on opposing quarterbacks. You can talk about "establishing the run" and "stopping the run" all you want, but history proves it's all about the passing game.

Super Bowl XLV provides plenty of evidence. You already know Green Bay and Pittsburgh boast great, efficient, productive passers. Aaron Rodgers is the highest-rated passer in NFL history (98.4). Ben Roethlisberger is far more prolific than anybody gives him credit for: he's No. 5 in career average per attempt (8.04) and No. 8 in career passer rating (92.5), just one spot ahead of -- gasp! -- Joe Montana (92.3) on the all-time list.

But more importantly, both teams dominate on pass defense, too -- especially when measured by what we call Defensive Passer Rating, perhaps the most important indicator in football. We simply apply the formula used to rate quarterbacks to pass defense. It has an incredibly high correlation to team success.

Throughout history, teams that dominate in Defensive Passer Rating dominate on the field. The Steelers and Packers continue the trend.

Pittsburgh was No. 1 this year this year in scoring defense (14.5). Green Bay was No. 2 (15.0 PPG).

Green Bay, meanwhile, was No. 1 in Defensive Passer Rating (67.2) -- in other words, quarterbacks combined to post a humble 67.2 passer rating against the Pack this year. Pittsburgh was No. 2 in Defensive Passer Rating (73.8)

Their effectiveness on run defense, meanwhile, varied widely. Pittsburgh surrendered just 3.01 yards per attempt on the ground this year. That effort was spectacular: the fifth-best run defense in the Super Bowl Era.

Green Bay against the run? The Packers, to steal one of this postseason's most famous lines, "couldn't stop a nose bleed." They surrendered 4.64 ypa on the ground this year. Only four defenses were worse against the run.

The common denominator between the league's two stingiest defenses was an ability to frustrate opposing quarterbacks. Just look at this year's final four: Green Bay No. 1 in Defensive Passer Rating; Pittsburgh No. 2; Chicago No. 3 (74.4); and N.Y. Jets No. 6 (77.1).

Notice a trend? By the way, only three defenses this year boasted more interceptions than touchdown passes allowed. Two of them are in the Super Bowl. The other was Chicago -- a team which, if it had a healthy quarterback, might be playing in Dallas instead of the Packers.

But here's the most compelling part: The dynastic histories of both the Packers and Steelers prove the importance of the passing game in general and Defensive Passer Rating in particular.

The 1960s Packers paired a consistently great pass defense with Bart Starr, the highest-rated passer in postseason history. The result of great passing offense and great passing defense was an unprecedented five NFL championships (and two Super Bowl victories) in seven years.

The Packers led the NFL in Defensive Passer Rating in 1962 (43.4), 1965 (48.2), 1966 (46.1) and 1967 (41.5). They won NFL titles all four seasons. They finished second in Defensive Passer Rating in 1961, their first championship year of the Lombardi Era.

The 1970s Steelers paired a consistently great pass defense with Terry Bradshaw, one of the great big-game gunslingers of all time. Bradshaw averaged a mind-boggling 11.1 ypa in the Super Bowl. The result was an unprecedented four Super Bowl victories in six years.

The Steelers led the NFL in Defensive Passer Rating in 1972 (47.0). It's no coincidence that the 1972 season was highlighted by the very first postseason victory in franchise history (the Immaculate Reception win over the Raiders).

The 1973 Steelers were even stingier, with a 33.1 Defensive Passer Rating -- the best pass defense in modern history.

Quarterbacks could do nothing against Mean Joe Greene & Co. that year: completing just 46 percent of their passes with 11 TDs and an incredible 37 interceptions. The 1973 Super Bowl champion Dolphins, by the way, were No. 2 in Defensive Passer Rating (39.9) and allowed just five touchdown passes all year (against 21 picks). Wow! Times have changed.

But Pittsburgh struggled to pass the ball well on offense in 1973 (Bradshaw played poorly) and the season ended with a playoff loss to the Raiders.

So the Steelers stocked up in the passing game in 1974 with the greatest draft class of all time. They added Hall of Fame receivers John Stallworth and Lynn Swann on offense, and Hall of Fame linebacker Jack Lambert on defense. Pittsburgh was off to the races, led by a Steel Curtain defense that consistently made life tough for quarterbacks.

The Steelers led the NFL in Defensive Passer Rating in 1974 (44.3) and 1979 (56.4) and were high among the league leaders in 1975 (42.8) and 1978 (51.8). They won Super Bowls all four years.

The 1960s Packers and 1970s Steelers, believe it or not, were not particularly stout against the run year to year. But they were always dominant on pass defense.

Now take a look at Bill Walsh's 49ers of the 1980s and 1990s. These teams are truly misunderstood. Walsh is remembered for popularizing the so-called West Coast offense and reinventing the modern passing game into the one of low risk/high efficiency that we know today. But Walsh's true genius is that he quietly created the longest-lasting defensive dynasty of all time -- a dynasty of pass defense that bookended the team's on-field dominance perfectly. And nobody knows it, because the defense was overshadowed by the offensive fireworks of Joe Montana, Roger Craig, Jerry Rice, Steve Young and company.

During a 17-season period of greatness from 1981 to 1997, the 49ers never surrendered 300 points in a single year. Not once.

The Steelers are the closest thing we have to a contemporary defensive dynasty. But they surrendered more than 300 points in 2006 (315) and again just last year (324). The 49ers went nearly two decades without allowing opponents to top 300. (Keep in mind that scoring, on average, was just as high in the 1980s and 1990s as it was in the 2000s).

And what did the 49ers consistently do well? That's right: they consistently frustrated opposing passers and consistently posted an incredible Defensive Passer Rating.

The 49ers were dead last in Defensive Passer Rating in 1980 (95.7, an abysmal number). They went 6-10 as a result in what was the second year for both Walsh and his young quarterback, Montana. Walsh saw the problem with the team and went all in on defensive backs in the 1981 draft. His 1981 team famously started three rookies in the secondary: Carlton Williamson, Eric Wright and the team's future Hall of Fame No. 1 draft pick, cornerback Ronnie Lott.

The results were immediate and dramatic: the 49ers improved by an incredible 35.5 points in Defensive Passer Rating in the space of a single season, from 95.7 in 1980 to 60.2 in 1981.

The result was a 13-3 record, San Francisco's first championship and the birth of a two-decade dynasty in which the 49ers consistently paired a productive quarterback with an elite pass defense. The dynasty officially ended in 1999 -- the year the team went 4-12 and surrendered a 99.8 Defensive Passer Rating. It was San Francisco's worst team since 1980. It was San Francisco's worst Defensive Passer Rating since 1980, too.

The Packers and the Steelers continue to prove the singular importance of pass defense today. In fact, no matter who wins Super Bowl XLV, we'll be able to use the new cliché, "Pass defense wins championships."

ColdHardFootballFacts.com is dedicated to cutting-edge analysis and to the "gridiron lifestyle" of beer, food and football. Follow them on Twitter and Facebook. E-mail comments to siwriters@simail.com

[Fritz]

ColdHardFootballFacts is a good site, I think. My friend turned me on to it.

[Smidgeon]

Thanks for sharing. I always enjoy ColdHardFootballFacts articles.

[Freak Out]

The Packer D must stop the run.....and then find a way to get Rapelisburger down. Not easy tasks....

[vince]

The big guys will get him down. I doubt you'll see many corner blitzes this game.

[superfan]

Interesting.


Green Bay against the run? The Packers, to steal one of this postseason's most famous lines, "couldn't stop a nose bleed." They surrendered 4.64 ypa on the ground this year. Only four defenses were worse against the run.


Normally I put a lot of faith in stats, but despite this stat, I have great confidence in the run defense this year. To say this defense "couldn't stop a nose bleed" is certainly misleading, the run defense has shown to be up to the task when needed. I like GB's chances to hold Pittsburgh under 120 total yards rushing and 4.2 ypa in this game. I hope Pittsburgh tries to run the ball down GB's throats, I think that is a winnable battle for the GB defense.

Combine that with the stellar pass D and pass rush, and this certainly looks like a very winnable game.

[Freak Out]

They definitely bend more than break so those stats really don't tell the whole story.

Do the Pittsburgh DBs play more zone? More press man? Can they play physical at the line and be successful? I have watched little Steeler action this year.

[mraynrand]

(http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/kerry_byrne/01/30/super-bowl-pass-defense/index.html) Walsh saw the problem with the team and went all in on defensive backs in the 1981 draft. His 1981 team famously started three rookies in the secondary: Carlton Williamson, Eric Wright and the team's future Hall of Fame No. 1 draft pick, cornerback Ronnie Lott.

The results were immediate and dramatic: the 49ers improved by an incredible 35.5 points in Defensive Passer Rating in the space of a single season, from 95.7 in 1980 to 60.2 in 1981.

Way to coach 'em up Ray!

[Bossman641]

I've got a question for those of you who have watched the Steelers quite a bit.

How do they normally line up in their nickel and dime defenses? Do they move Woodley and Harrison to the end spots?

[bobblehead]

Interesting stats. Let me ask a few questions.

Do these teams have a great rating because they made the other teams one dimensional either by stopping the run really well (chicago and Pitt) or because they put pressure on other teams to keep up with the offense (Green Bay).

How on earth did the Giants beat the Patriots with such a god awful secondary against the greatest season by a pocket passer ever?

Why did the packers play so badly early in the season when they were only calling 13 run plays a game and only improved so much when they committed to the run?

Are we really implying that the 60's packers were a pass first team?

This is just like the "Playmaker theory" in that it ignores so many other factors. I agree that teams that frustrate a QB tend to be good, but they MUST stop the run effectively. To say we couldn't stop a nosebleed ignores a lot of factors (like our 2nd ranked short yardage D). It ignores that we lined up in nickel all season and dared teams to beat us running it.

Here is the ugly truth. A team can not be inept on any front. They have to keep the offense balanced and then figure out how to make the other team one dimensional...which usually means forcing them to pass since you don't "force" a team to run. In Order:

1) Superior QB play and protecting him
2) Getting to the QB
3) Committing to the run to keep a D honest
4) Stopping the run
5) Special teams play

Show me all the stats you want, and if you can't stop the run you will be a bad defense...PERIOD. If you can't get to a QB you will be a bad D. Be a one demensional offense and you will be a bad offense. Do everything above average and one or two things great and you always are in the hunt. do one or two things very poorly and you will be hard pressed to ever make a superbowl.

[bobblehead]

I've got a question for those of you who have watched the Steelers quite a bit.

How do they normally line up in their nickel and dime defenses? Do they move Woodley and Harrison to the end spots?

they are like us...very unpredictable. Harrison will blitz one play and cover the next. Woodley will line up in a 3 point and drop into coverage. Capers learned under Lebeau from what I understand and it shows.

[RashanGary]

they are like us...very unpredictable. Harrison will blitz one play and cover the next. Woodley will line up in a 3 point and drop into coverage. Capers learned under Lebeau from what I understand and it shows.

By the time they got together both were fairly well accomplished and Dom was the DC with Lebeau his DB coach. Dom Capers had 20 years coaching experience with 12 in the NFL. Lebeau got a later start to coaching so while being 13 years older, he had the same amount of coaching experience except all 20 of his were in the NFL. Lebeau had a prior stint as DC with the Cincinnati Bengals. This was Dom's first opportunity as DC. Two years in, Dom was given his first head coaching opportunity. He was probably seen as a higher potential young coach where Lebeau was going to max out at DC. I don't know exactly who taught who there, but I suspect Dom more than held his own in the arena of ideas. Just observing from a distance, it appears Dom is plenty creative and innovative here. There is a good chance he came up with a lot of what Lebeau is using now. I've read articles where the Packers are seen as defensive innovators right now. The Steelers have kind of stayed the same but do what they do really well.

[gbgary]

The big guys will get him down. I doubt you'll see many corner blitzes this game.

don't see why it would be less than the bear game. if it's there i'd think they'd go for it. a chance for a sack or turnover. ben is hard to tackle if you hit him high. get him low and he goes down.

[Smidgeon]

By the time they got together both were fairly well accomplished and Dom was the DC with Lebeau his DB coach. Dom Capers had 20 years coaching experience with 12 in the NFL. Lebeau got a later start to coaching so while being 13 years older, he had the same amount of coaching experience except all 20 of his were in the NFL. Lebeau had a prior stint as DC with the Cincinnati Bengals. This was Dom's first opportunity as DC. Two years in, Dom was given his first head coaching opportunity. He was probably seen as a higher potential young coach where Lebeau was going to max out at DC. I don't know exactly who taught who there, but I suspect Dom more than held his own in the arena of ideas. Just observing from a distance, it appears Dom is plenty creative and innovative here. There is a good chance he came up with a lot of what Lebeau is using now. I've read articles where the Packers are seen as defensive innovators right now. The Steelers have kind of stayed the same but do what they do really well.

Good information. Have a link to some of those articles?

[HarveyWallbangers]

By the time they got together both were fairly well accomplished and Dom was the DC with Lebeau his DB coach. Dom Capers had 20 years coaching experience with 12 in the NFL. Lebeau got a later start to coaching so while being 13 years older, he had the same amount of coaching experience except all 20 of his were in the NFL. Lebeau had a prior stint as DC with the Cincinnati Bengals. This was Dom's first opportunity as DC. Two years in, Dom was given his first head coaching opportunity. He was probably seen as a higher potential young coach where Lebeau was going to max out at DC. I don't know exactly who taught who there, but I suspect Dom more than held his own in the arena of ideas. Just observing from a distance, it appears Dom is plenty creative and innovative here. There is a good chance he came up with a lot of what Lebeau is using now. I've read articles where the Packers are seen as defensive innovators right now. The Steelers have kind of stayed the same but do what they do really well.

It sounds like Capers learned a lot of zone blitz concepts from the coaches that were at Penn State in the early 1980s. Dom incorporated those in other gigs before landing the Pittsburgh DC job. LeBeau had experience with zone blitz concepts, as well. LeBeau was actually the DB coach for Green Bay in the late 1970s--under a DC who played a 4-3 with no zone blitz concepts. I think both guys actually learned from others, expanded on the concepts before getting to Pittsburgh, and were enamored with the scheme when they got to Pittsburgh. It sounds like they initially used more of Capers scheme when first getting to Pittsburgh, but Pittsburgh didn't have the personnel to run his scheme effectively, so they morphed his concepts with LeBeau's concepts.

Here's a good article on this very issue.

Super DCs at ground floor of zone-blitz revolution (http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/story/14625611/super-dcs-at-ground-floor-of-zoneblitz-revolution)

[bobblehead]

It sounds like Capers learned a lot of zone blitz concepts from the coaches that were at Penn State in the early 1980s. Dom incorporated those in other gigs before landing the Pittsburgh DC job. LeBeau had experience with zone blitz concepts, as well. LeBeau was actually the DB coach for Green Bay in the late 1970s--under a DC who played a 4-3 with no zone blitz concepts. I think both guys actually learned from others, expanded on the concepts before getting to Pittsburgh, and were enamored with the scheme when they got to Pittsburgh. It sounds like they initially used more of Capers scheme when first getting to Pittsburgh, but Pittsburgh didn't have the personnel to run his scheme effectively, so they morphed his concepts with LeBeau's concepts.

Here's a good article on this very issue.

Super DCs at ground floor of zone-blitz revolution (http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/story/14625611/super-dcs-at-ground-floor-of-zoneblitz-revolution)

That was a good one, read it earlier. I think I took the line about it being reported that Le Beau taught it to Capers and it stuck in my head. As with anything good, many contributed to it and the two masters are in the superbowl.

[vince]

More on the importance of passing D from CHFF.

http://www.coldhardfootballfacts.com/Articles/11_3673_The_mighty_pick-six_%28and_other_SB_notes%29.html

The magic of Passer Rating Differential

We introduced Passer Rating Differential as a way to statistically define and prove the all-encompassing importance of the passing game in pro football.

Anecdotal experience told us that Passer Rating Differential would be deadly accurate. But now we have a mounting body of evidence.

The Saints topped the indicator in 2009. They won the Super Bowl. The Packers topped the indicator in 2010. They won the Super Bowl, too.

That's two for two, for those of you keeping score at home.

Meanwhile, within a game, teams that posted the higher Passer Rating Differential won nearly 80 percent of all NFL games this year (203-53).

And as a predictor of playoff success, it was nearly flawless: the team with the higher Passer Rating Differential was 10-1. The ony game it failed to identify the winner was in Seattle's shocking wildcard win over New Orleans, an outcome that nobody but the biggest Seahawks rump swab could have anticipated.

The Packers were the perfect passing team this year: No. 1 in forcing Negative Pass Plays, No. 1 in Defensive Passer Rating and No. 1 in Passer Rating Differential. And now they’re Super Bowl champs.

[gbgary]

thanks for the update.


The big guys will get him down. I doubt you'll see many corner blitzes this game.

you were right. not many blitzes of any type. can only think of a few.

[RashanGary]

We have talent and the best DC in football IMO. No shock we're SB champs.

[Lurker64]

It surprises me how few of the "Packers run defense is poor" reports failed to note the fact that we line up in the nickel defense on 75% of plays. Stopping the run whenever it happens is much less important than stopping it when you need to (or just making sure the other team can't beat you by running the ball.)

[vince]

It surprises me how few of the "Packers run defense is poor" reports failed to note the fact that we line up in the nickel defense on 75% of plays.
They didn't notice.

[bobblehead]

More on the importance of passing D from CHFF.

http://www.coldhardfootballfacts.com/Articles/11_3673_The_mighty_pick-six_%28and_other_SB_notes%29.html

The magic of Passer Rating Differential

We introduced Passer Rating Differential as a way to statistically define and prove the all-encompassing importance of the passing game in pro football.

Anecdotal experience told us that Passer Rating Differential would be deadly accurate. But now we have a mounting body of evidence.

The Saints topped the indicator in 2009. They won the Super Bowl. The Packers topped the indicator in 2010. They won the Super Bowl, too.

That's two for two, for those of you keeping score at home.

Meanwhile, within a game, teams that posted the higher Passer Rating Differential won nearly 80 percent of all NFL games this year (203-53).

And as a predictor of playoff success, it was nearly flawless: the team with the higher Passer Rating Differential was 10-1. The ony game it failed to identify the winner was in Seattle's shocking wildcard win over New Orleans, an outcome that nobody but the biggest Seahawks rump swab could have anticipated.

The Packers were the perfect passing team this year: No. 1 in forcing Negative Pass Plays, No. 1 in Defensive Passer Rating and No. 1 in Passer Rating Differential. And now they’re Super Bowl champs.

that is a monster number. Where can i find this stat as a regular updated thing as I bet a ton of pro football and this seems like a powerful tool. One question I would have though. The 203-53....was that calculated based on final numbers after the season, or was it a running total based on the numbers at the time the game was played. Big difference. (yes, I make a living analyzing stats vs. damn lies.)

[woodbuck27]

It sounds like Capers learned a lot of zone blitz concepts from the coaches that were at Penn State in the early 1980s. Dom incorporated those in other gigs before landing the Pittsburgh DC job. LeBeau had experience with zone blitz concepts, as well. LeBeau was actually the DB coach for Green Bay in the late 1970s--under a DC who played a 4-3 with no zone blitz concepts. I think both guys actually learned from others, expanded on the concepts before getting to Pittsburgh, and were enamored with the scheme when they got to Pittsburgh. It sounds like they initially used more of Capers scheme when first getting to Pittsburgh, but Pittsburgh didn't have the personnel to run his scheme effectively, so they morphed his concepts with LeBeau's concepts.

Here's a good article on this very issue.

Super DCs at ground floor of zone-blitz revolution (http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/story/14625611/super-dcs-at-ground-floor-of-zoneblitz-revolution)

Thanks Harv.

[vince]

All the nickel the Packers played this year would indicates that Dom has this figured out too. Today's "Ask Vic" (http://www.packers.com/news-and-events/ask-vic/article-1/Overcoming-adversity-fact-of-life-in-NFL/d5fc87a6-3400-477d-9fb0-aba2b9e19105) column on Packers.com confirms it.


Jim from Yorkville, IL

Can we put the franchise tag on Dom Capers?

Vic: I have never covered an assistant coach who had a greater and more immediate impact on a defense than what coach Capers had in Pittsburgh and in Jacksonville. Now, of course, he has had that same impact on the Packers’ defense. One of the first people I wanted to see when I got to Green Bay was coach Capers, because we go back so far. We sat and talked recently and, of course, we talked about old times. His recall is amazing and I think it’s that recall that makes for a great coordinator because you gotta be quick upstairs to process information and make your next chess move. Here’s an example of coach Capers’ recall: I told him about how I remembered the final regular-season game of the 1994 season, when coach Capers had the number one defense in the league entering a meaningless finale. Well, Bill Cowher decided to ease up in the second half by playing reserves, etc., and it resulted in an avalanche of yards and points for the Chargers. I told Dom that I’ll always remember him sitting on the bus outside Jack Murphy Stadium (it was Christmas Eve), looking through the final stats and then saying, “Merry Christmas to me.” Coach Capers laughed when I said that and then he said, “We had a 166-yard edge over the Cowboys going into that game.” What? Are you kidding me? Sixteen years later he could still remember having a 166-yard edge over the Cowboys. It knocked me out that he could remember the exact yardage. Well, back then, coach Capers was all about turnover differential, but during our most recent chat he dropped a new one on me: quarterback passer rating differential. He explained that the Packers enjoyed a 40-some point advantage in passer rating differential during the postseason. I have no doubt that’s a coach Capers original. He’s an amazing coach.

[vince]

that is a monster number. Where can i find this stat as a regular updated thing as I bet a ton of pro football and this seems like a powerful tool. One question I would have though. The 203-53....was that calculated based on final numbers after the season, or was it a running total based on the numbers at the time the game was played. Big difference. (yes, I make a living analyzing stats vs. damn lies.)
Based on how it's stated, it appears to me that they're saying the QB with the higher QB rating for THAT GAME wins 80% of the time. I'm sure you can email the author though.

Also, they track the stat at CHFF. http://www.coldhardfootballfacts.com/Articles/2_2865_2009_Passer_Rating_Differential.html

[Guiness]

that is a monster number. Where can i find this stat as a regular updated thing as I bet a ton of pro football and this seems like a powerful tool. One question I would have though. The 203-53....was that calculated based on final numbers after the season, or was it a running total based on the numbers at the time the game was played. Big difference. (yes, I make a living analyzing stats vs. damn lies.)

I was thinking the same thing - a 4:1 predictor ratio would be a heck of a tool, you could play that sort of a line into some serious money.

Vince, I don't think it's a retrospective number, as in, 'the team with the higher passer rating won'. That's a 'well, duh' sort of statement. They say the team with the higher passer rating differential, which sounds like each team has a different number. If it was just for the one game, there would just be one number, not a matter of one being higher than the other. I think :)

[vince]

I was thinking the same thing - a 4:1 predictor ratio would be a heck of a tool, you could play that sort of a line into some serious money.

Vince, I don't think it's a retrospective number, as in, 'the team with the higher passer rating won'. That's a 'well, duh' sort of statement. They say the team with the higher passer rating differential, which sounds like each team has a different number. If it was just for the one game, there would just be one number, not a matter of one being higher than the other. I think :)
Here's the original quote again.

Meanwhile, within a game, teams that posted the higher Passer Rating Differential won nearly 80 percent of all NFL games this year (203-53).
Each team has a very different number within a game. One's positive and the other's negative. That's as different as you can get. When the author stated this, he was just proving how important the stat is to winning, not saying how it can be used (in this context) as a way to win money.

As Bobble pointed out earlier, there's a lot that goes into this stat. The bottom line though, is that it appears that the 2 biggest keys to success in this league are being able to pass the ball and defend the pass effectively. Not earthshattering news, but it's a pretty darn good piece of info to know as a certainty and a good way to break down teams and games as well as think about defensive strategy and even how the makeup of the roster will continue to evolve over time.

[Fritz]

Bo Schembecler is puking in his grave.

And that's why that guy could never win the Rose Bowl.

[get louder at lambeau]

Bo Schembecler is puking in his grave.

Don't worry, I'm sure the worms will clean it up.

[Fritz]

The worms go in, the worms go out.

[bobblehead]

Here's the original quote again.

Each team has a very different number within a game. One's positive and the other's negative. That's as different as you can get. When the author stated this, he was just proving how important the stat is to winning, not saying how it can be used (in this context) as a way to win money.

As Bobble pointed out earlier, there's a lot that goes into this stat. The bottom line though, is that it appears that the 2 biggest keys to success in this league are being able to pass the ball and defend the pass effectively. Not earthshattering news, but it's a pretty darn good piece of info to know as a certainty and a good way to break down teams and games as well as think about defensive strategy and even how the makeup of the roster will continue to evolve over time.

If this is accurate it really is a "duh" stat. Its almost as important as pointing out that the team that scores more points wins 100% of the time. Obviously the team that passes the ball better in THAT game is more likely to win. Show me THIS stat. At the start of the game team A has a passer rating differential (year to date) of 40 while team B has a rating of 20. Team A wins that game xx% of the time. That is a relevant stat, and if this is as important as they make it out to be, it should be a very high number.

[vince]

It's a "duh" stat if you are looking for a no-brain silver bullet to makinng money predicting winners. That doesn't exist. It's a very significant stat when you look at the unique strength of the correlation to winning. Dom Capers understands this correlation and is the first DC in history to play 75% nickel, and it's been a significant factor in their success. That's innovation.

[Fritz]

I wonder if Dom wears a hairpiece to cover up what surely must be a bulging head - one filled with an overabundance of gray matter. That's one cerebral dude.

[bobblehead]

OK, just did a big breakdown of this and internet crashed and lost it, let me summarize.

This stat is moderate at best. It went 8-3 in the playoffs based on regular season finishes.

A team with a negative score beat the 2nd best team in the NFL in the playoffs. The third and fifth overall teams in this category missed the playoffs.

Now if you look at the YPG rushing leaders the 1,2,3, and 7 teams played in the conferance championship games while 1 and 3 met in the superbowl. So what is the better predictor of success?

[vince]

And as a predictor of playoff success, it was nearly flawless: the team with the higher Passer Rating Differential was 10-1. The ony game it failed to identify the winner was in Seattle's shocking wildcard win over New Orleans, an outcome that nobody but the biggest Seahawks rump swab could have anticipated.

The Saints topped the indicator in 2009. They won the Super Bowl. The Packers topped the indicator in 2010. They won the Super Bowl, too.
The Saints finished 21st in Rushing Yds. per Game in 2009. They won the Super Bowl. The Packers finished 18th in Rushing Yds. per Game in 2010. They wo the Super Bowl.

Dom's sold.

Well, back then, coach Capers was all about turnover differential, but during our most recent chat he dropped a new one on me: quarterback passer rating differential. He explained that the Packers enjoyed a 40-some point advantage in passer rating differential during the postseason. I have no doubt that’s a coach Capers original. He’s an amazing coach.

[vince]

dp

[bobblehead]

My bad, looked at the playoff rankings, not the regular season ones. Again a duh stat...the teams that played better run D were in the conf. championships. All the stats regarding the passer diff. ratings are accurate though.

[vince]

Your continued position that average run D is an equal or better metric to correlate with winning suggests otherwise.

[KYPack]

OK, OK.

Everybody hold up.

This thread makes me feel like the dumb kid on College Jeopardy. I don't see how this statistical tool helps you predict shit. How can I predict that before a game?

How do you figure out which team will have the superior rating, Mr Wizard?

[vince]

I agree KY. I have no idea how it helps one predict anything. It strongly indicates what are the most important breakdown components to winning in the NFL. If you can predict who will produce the better passer rating differential, you're on to something, but the stat itself is just a measurement of past performance in this important area. Just like everything else in the world, that doesn't necessarily predict future performance.

What the stat has done is provide a guy like Dom Capers with some pretty darn good information to use in determining how to play defense and what to focus on and prioritize as a coach.

[KYPack]

Capers game plans in the play-offs were 24 carat gold. In the early series with Philly, Dom put in a blitz that sacked Vick and freaked him out for the whole game. Then he left that storm alone and ran other stuff to befuddle Vick.

Dom put in that "Psycho" package to screw up other teams' pre-snap protection reads. When he figured that other teams' had enough tape to counter it, he went to totally different coverage and blitz packages.

His game plan in the SB was another classic. He moved Claymat to Woodson's former spy role. He covered with Woodson, who was very effective in cover until hurt. When the injuries hit, he put in different stuff to compensate for the injured and missing players.

He is way ahead of the other team's OC's in making adjustments on the fly. I was hoping we'd get Greg Williams for our DC, but needless to say, hiring Dom was one of GB's best moves in the last few years.

[pbmax]

I don't think its predictive, its explanatory. It also seems to be one of Capers primary goals. I think there was a general sense that all the nickel was to eliminate the big pass plays from last year (also caused by communication difficulties). But if it really is the reason he played that much nickel, then he has turned conventional wisdom on its head.

I suspect this approach would only make sense when you have a pass oriented offense and it still helps to win the turnover battle. You benefit more with more drives in this approach and turnovers/field position is just as important, perhaps more on defense.

[pbmax]

Capers game plans in the play-offs were 24 carat gold. In the early series with Philly, Dom put in a blitz that sacked Vick and freaked him out for the whole game. Then he left that storm alone and ran other stuff to befuddle Vick.

Dom put in that "Psycho" package to screw up other teams' pre-snap protection reads. When he figured that other teams' had enough tape to counter it, he went to totally different coverage and blitz packages.

His game plan in the SB was another classic. He moved Claymat to Woodson's former spy role. He covered with Woodson, who was very effective in cover until hurt. When the injuries hit, he put in different stuff to compensate for the injured and missing players.

He is way ahead of the other team's OC's in making adjustments on the fly. I was hoping we'd get Greg Williams for our DC, but needless to say, hiring Dom was one of GB's best moves in the last few years.

He said they went much more zone after losing Shields and Wood.

[vince]

I don't think its predictive, its explanatory. It also seems to be one of Capers primary goals. I think there was a general sense that all the nickel was to eliminate the big pass plays from last year (also caused by communication difficulties). But if it really is the reason he played that much nickel, then he has turned conventional wisdom on its head.

I suspect this approach would only make sense when you have a pass oriented offense and it still helps to win the turnover battle. You benefit more with more drives in this approach and turnovers/field position is just as important, perhaps more on defense.
Thank you. That's better than I obviously have been able to describe.

Bobble is right to say though, that stopping the run is also important to winning football, but the relationship isn't as direct anymore as it used to be and as many might think. Stopping the run is important to making teams one dimensional, which makes it easier to stop the pass. It's stopping the pass which contributes most directly to winning.

The 2009 Packers led the league in run D but couldn't stop the pass and were limited to one and done in the playoffs. The 2010 Packers were 18th in run D but #1 in Passer rating D and won the Super Bowl. Same with the 2009 Saints.

The thing about the differential passer rating stat though is it's more holistic so it incorporates the offense, turnovers, etc. into the equation too like you said PB. If your own QB can be effective and get ahead in the game early and often, not turn the ball over, etc. that can also contribute to making a team one dimensional - making it easier to defend the pass. I'd say Dom's understanding of his own team's QB has also contributed to his innovative defensive approach this year.

[mraynrand]

"past performance is no indicator of future success" - where did I hear that last other than from my wife?

[bobblehead]

OK, OK.

Everybody hold up.

This thread makes me feel like the dumb kid on College Jeopardy. I don't see how this statistical tool helps you predict shit. How can I predict that before a game?

How do you figure out which team will have the superior rating, Mr Wizard?

That was kind of my point that I poorly worded as I stumbled through understanding that their "stat" applied to THAT game only. Again, duh. The team that played better in that game won.

[bobblehead]

"past performance is no indicator of future success" - where did I hear that last other than from my wife?

Goldline?

[mraynrand]

Goldline?


Goldline!

http://cdn.complex.com/blogs/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/Chad_Gold.jpg

[pbmax]

That was kind of my point that I poorly worded as I stumbled through understanding that their "stat" applied to THAT game only. Again, duh. The team that played better in that game won.

They aren't claiming it only covers "in game" numbers. That was just one point in demonstrating its explanatory power. The other article covers how they think it helps define several dynasties since the 1970s.

In answer to KYPack's earlier question about what it can tell you (and therefore help you) BEFORE a game, I suspect you would need to analyze whether increasing your pass D effectiveness is more likely to deliver wins than if you increase your Run D effectiveness. To do that, you would need a number for run game effectiveness and then calculate the differential, then regress that number and the passing eff. differential against scores and results from the recent past. And you might even run the numbers against the 1st and 3rd Quarters only to eliminate blowouts, kneeldowns, prevent defense and three straight dives to kill the clock.

My suspicion is that even though we know teams who win regularly pile on running yardage late in a game, that pass D contributes more to winning now than run D. This is not to say you can be terrible in either aspect. But if you were to make a move in a direction, the biggest benefit with the lowest cost for winning might be to play a metric ton of nickel and worry about the run game in short yardage and against the Jets.

[bobblehead]

They aren't claiming it only covers "in game" numbers. That was just one point in demonstrating its explanatory power. The other article covers how they think it helps define several dynasties since the 1970s.

In answer to KYPack's earlier question about what it can tell you (and therefore help you) BEFORE a game, I suspect you would need to analyze whether increasing your pass D effectiveness is more likely to deliver wins than if you increase your Run D effectiveness. To do that, you would need a number for run game effectiveness and then calculate the differential, then regress that number and the passing eff. differential against scores and results from the recent past. And you might even run the numbers against the 1st and 3rd Quarters only to eliminate blowouts, kneeldowns, prevent defense and three straight dives to kill the clock.

My suspicion is that even though we know teams who win regularly pile on running yardage late in a game, that pass D contributes more to winning now than run D. This is not to say you can be terrible in either aspect. But if you were to make a move in a direction, the biggest benefit with the lowest cost for winning might be to play a metric ton of nickel and worry about the run game in short yardage and against the Jets.

But my point regarding that is that the #3 and 5 teams in the NFL in that stat MISSED the playoffs and a team that was negative in that stat beat the #2 team and played in the AFC championship game....that alone makes this stat really hard to buy into in the data available so far. And again, I think you would be hard pressed to find anyone defining the earlier packers dynasty as a pass first, defend the pass first team despite what a "differential" equation might say. It would be akin to using a running backs 5.0 avg. per carry with 8 carries to prove he is superior to Walter Payton.

Again, I am not dismissing it as irrelevent completly, but it is just one part of what I have been saying. Great balance makes great teams.

[vince]

But my point regarding that is that the #3 and 5 teams in the NFL in that stat MISSED the playoffs and a team that was negative in that stat beat the #2 team and played in the AFC championship game....that alone makes this stat really hard to buy into in the data available so far.

And again, I think you would be hard pressed to find anyone defining the earlier packers dynasty as a pass first, defend the pass first team despite what a "differential" equation might say. It would be akin to using a running backs 5.0 avg. per carry with 8 carries to prove he is superior to Walter Payton.

Again, I am not dismissing it as irrelevent completly, but it is just one part of what I have been saying. Great balance makes great teams.
Bobble the facts are there and you're diminishing them because they don't fit your preconceived notion about winning football.

1. The game is way different than it was in the Taylor and Payton days. Few people would argue that the running game wasn't more important to winning then.

2. The game you cite as evidence of the irrelevance of the stat actually proves out the relevance of it. PAST PERFORMANCE DOES NOT GUARANTEE FUTURE SUCCESS. The Jets, a team with a worse passer rating differential for the year and a worse record than the Patriots, WON THE PASSER RATING DIFFERENTIAL THAT GAME AND THEY ALSO WON THE GAME.

3. Regarding the 3 and 5 teams missing the playoffs, of course the correlation isn't perfect, but it's extremely strong, as strong or stronger than any other stat CHFF and Dom Capers have seen. CHFF and The Dom are focusing on this stat because its correlation to winning is stronger than any rushing stat and any offensive or defensive balance stat. You can't ignore or diminish the overwhelming instances reinforcing the legitimacy of the stat and hand pick the two instances that support your argument and expect to be either persuasive or correct.

4. Not all great teams show great balance anymore. Go no further than this year's Packers to find a perfect case in point. The argument that great balance makes great teams has some validity, but there's a significant part of the truthism that you're continuing to leave out of today's game. Great balance MIGHT make a great team because being able to run the ball helps the passing game. The more real and relevant truth today is this: Great passing teams - and teams that can stop the pass - make great teams. Offensive balance might help you become a great passing team, but it's not necessarily required.

[Fritz]

Thee was a thread a few years ago in which a few Rats, myself included, went back and did some research that found that in fact the NFL was more of a passing league than we commonly believe it was back in the 60's. It was actually in the 70's that the game shifted for a time to more of a running game - and since that's when many of us grew up, that's what we remember.

With this new emphasis, it won't be long before teams are copycatting the use of the nickel as more of a standard formation. Which could mean an emphasis on more corners in the draft.

[swede]

I agree KY. I have no idea how it helps one predict anything. It strongly indicates what are the most important breakdown components to winning in the NFL. If you can predict who will produce the better passer rating differential, you're on to something, but the stat itself is just a measurement of past performance in this important area. Just like everything else in the world, that doesn't necessarily predict future performance.

What the stat has done is provide a guy like Dom Capers with some pretty darn good information to use in determining how to play defense and what to focus on and prioritize as a coach.

For example, you might play nickel D in 70% of your defensive snaps and let the three yards and a cloud of pelletized rubber boys win the battle for rushing yards while our team wins the war.

[pbmax]

For example, you might play nickel D in 70% of your defensive snaps and let the three yards and a cloud of pelletized rubber boys win the battle for rushing yards while our team wins the war.

And a new fantasy football team name is born. Good work.

I am torn between this and DD Grassmaster Flash

[ThunderDan]

With this new emphasis, it won't be long before teams are copycatting the use of the nickel as more of a standard formation. Which could mean an emphasis on more corners in the draft.

If teams do that you will see an increase in importance of TEs in the NFL.

I would put in my 12 package (1 RB, 2 TE) with Finley and Quarless. I would run at the D until they shift out of the nickle and then I am going to throw from that formation to Finley down the seam.

2 athletic TEs who can block can help neutralize using the nickle D in 1st and 2nd down situations.

[bobblehead]

2. The game you cite as evidence of the irrelevance of the stat actually proves out the relevance of it. PAST PERFORMANCE DOES NOT GUARANTEE FUTURE SUCCESS. The Jets, a team with a worse passer rating differential for the year and a worse record than the Patriots, WON THE PASSER RATING DIFFERENTIAL THAT GAME AND THEY ALSO WON THE GAME.



I just can't get behind that logic. Since it is VERY obvious that passing better and stopping the other team from passing better means you are playing the game better it stands to reason you have a better chance to win THAT game. If that is the only point you or the author is trying to make then I concede the argument. Its just like the turnover battle, the team that turns it over less in THAT game stands a MUCH better chance of winning. Same as protecting your QB, the team that isn't allowing their QB to get crushed is much more likely to win. This goes to any stat that shows effective play. Time of possession. Avg. yards on first down differential. Big plays allowed vs. created.

BUT....to say that this stat is any more relevent than any other stat showing good play is folly and the numbers don't back it up. As I said, SD played in a weak division and was the 3rd best in the entire NFL in this stat and missed the playoffs. If the Giants don't kick to whatshisname the Packers likely miss the playoffs and they led the league in it. Any stat worth its salt PREDICTS the winner ahead of time because they do it better on a regular basis. Yards per passing attempt seems to be a REALLY strong predictor. Any stat that can not PREDICT a damn thing is worthless (this is stats 101).

As far as my preconceived notion, I have come around as far as it being a pass FIRST league, but that does not mean you can suck running the ball (or anything else). How many times do I have to point out that MM's lack of commitment to running costs us games (and gets ARod hit). How many times does MM have to actually say we need to run the ball better. How many times do the best D coordinators in the NFL have to say "we must stop the run"? Because when you do that effectively a magical thing happens. The other team gets one dimensional and you magically effect their passer rating.

[mraynrand]

I did a Fisher's exact test on this thread and it says with 99% confidence that this thread blows.

[swede]

7:00 central
Packerrats Network (6789)

Top Ten Threads That Blow Curds

Cleft Crusty hosts the ongoing series.

http://www.howtomakegif.com/wp-content/uploads/animated%20gif%20vomit.jpg

[vince]

BUT....to say that this stat is any more relevent than any other stat showing good play is folly and the numbers don't back it up. As I said, SD played in a weak division and was the 3rd best in the entire NFL in this stat and missed the playoffs. If the Giants don't kick to whatshisname the Packers likely miss the playoffs and they led the league in it. Any stat worth its salt PREDICTS the winner ahead of time because they do it better on a regular basis. Yards per passing attempt seems to be a REALLY strong predictor. Any stat that can not PREDICT a damn thing is worthless (this is stats 101).
Wrong. Passer Rating Differential has a higher correlation to wins than any stat you've cited here. YPA has a relatively poor correlation to winning, worse than rushing defense.

Here are the stats ranked by team and how each correlates to wins by team. To the extent that any statistic of past performance can accurately predicts future wins, Passer Rating Differential will do a far better job than any other that has been mentioned here.


Wins PRD TO Diff Rush D YPA Forced TO Rush O
Green Bay 1 1 4 18 3 5 24
Pittsburgh 2 4 2 1 2 3 11
New England 3 2 1 11 4 12 9
New York Jets 4 14 6 3 24 9 4
Atlanta 5 9 3 10 22 6 12
Baltimore 6 6 9 5 7 15 14
Chicago 7 11 12 2 10 2 22
New Orleans 8 10 24 16 16 21 28
Philadelphia 9 8 5 15 6 4 5
Indianapolis 10 13 19 25 18 28 29
Kansas City 11 7 7 14 22 23 1
Tampa Bay 12 5 8 28 14 14 8
New York Giants 13 12 18 8 8 1 6
San Diego 14 3 23 4 1 24 15
Seattle 15 29 28 21 25 26 31
Oakland 16 21 17 29 15 22 2
Jacksonville 17 27 31 22 12 31 3
Miami 18 23 30 7 23 29 21
St. Louis 19 17 10 17 27 18 25
Detroit 20 20 11 24 26 11 23
Minnesota 21 30 29 9 24 20 10
Houston 22 22 13 13 5 30 7
Washington 23 26 21 26 17 16 30
Dallas 24 15 14 12 11 7 16
Tennessee 25 18 20 20 19 19 17
San Francisco 26 25 15 6 13 25 19
Cleveland 27 24 16 27 21 13 20
Arizona 28 31 22 30 31 8 32
Cincinnati 29 16 25 19 20 17 27
Buffalo 30 28 32 32 23 27 18
Denver 31 19 27 31 7 32 26
Carolina 32 32 26 23 32 10 13

Correlation 0.77 0.66 0.54 0.44 0.38 0.30

Not sure how to get the columns to line up properly, but Wins Rank is the first column, followed by Passer Rating Differential, Turnover Differential, etc. The first correlation calculation (.77) is the correlation of Passer Rating Differential to wins. The next is TO Diff. correlation, etc.

[packerbacker1234]

Bottom line: You can win with a run game and great defense all around. Ravens did it in the 2000's and the jets are sort of built on the same principal and are good enough to possibly win a SB in the next few years.

In addition to the pass first mentality of the entire league, one must remember that it was MM's commitment to the run game that helped make ALL THE DIFFERENCE in the playoffs. Just the willingness to give that one back 20+ carries changed how defenses approached us. We ahdn't really done that sort of commitment all year so it had to throw a big wrench in the initial game planning. There is a reason Starks had the most rushing yards in the playoffs - because rushing is still relevant - so stopping the run is still relevant.

However, it's clear pass defense is more important than naything else. It doesn't mean you can be bad at rush defense (aka, may be #1 pass, but if your 25+ in rush defense they'll just shoive down your throat all game). GB was not horrible at rush defense, but they weren't great either.They were about average, which is good. ALso the fact they lost so many LB's moist likely contributed to the rush defense rating being worse this season - while the stellar secondary play and the emergence of shields is clearly why the pass defense stepped up.

[vince]

Here's the table converted to an image to make it readable.

http://i30.photobucket.com/albums/c343/twernke/Packers/StatisticalCorrelationstoWinning.jpg

Pretty easy to see why Dom used to talk about Turnover Differential but now he talks about Passer Rating Differential.

[vince]

Bottom line: You can win with a run game and great defense all around. Ravens did it in the 2000's and the jets are sort of built on the same principal and are good enough to possibly win a SB in the next few years.

In addition to the pass first mentality of the entire league, one must remember that it was MM's commitment to the run game that helped make ALL THE DIFFERENCE in the playoffs. Just the willingness to give that one back 20+ carries changed how defenses approached us. We ahdn't really done that sort of commitment all year so it had to throw a big wrench in the initial game planning. There is a reason Starks had the most rushing yards in the playoffs - because rushing is still relevant - so stopping the run is still relevant.

However, it's clear pass defense is more important than naything else. It doesn't mean you can be bad at rush defense (aka, may be #1 pass, but if your 25+ in rush defense they'll just shoive down your throat all game). GB was not horrible at rush defense, but they weren't great either.They were about average, which is good. ALso the fact they lost so many LB's moist likely contributed to the rush defense rating being worse this season - while the stellar secondary play and the emergence of shields is clearly why the pass defense stepped up.
That's not the bottom line. That's way above the bottom line. Both the teams you cite were/are very good stopping the pass, and were/are efficient and effective enough passing the ball to win. The bottom line is that if you can't pass the ball and stop the pass you can't win.

The Packers basically abandoned the run in the Super Bowl and won the game by effectively passing. I like Starks as well as the next guy, but he basically had one good game - Philly. And even in that game, the Packers scored points and won by passing the ball effectively. One of their best games running the ball this year was Washington - a loss.

[bobblehead]

Here's the table converted to an image to make it readable.

http://i30.photobucket.com/albums/c343/twernke/Packers/StatisticalCorrelationstoWinning.jpg

Pretty easy to see why Dom used to talk about Turnover Differential but now he talks about Passer Rating Differential.

Except that when you use this stat and show it to me the top 10 OFFENSIVE passers in this chart are: Rodgers, Roethlesburger, Brady, Sanchez, Ryan, Flacco, Cutler, Brees, Vick and Manning. Egg, meet chicken. Take a look at the bottom 10 teams QB's. Misfits and castoffs. This doesn't affect the defensive rating one iota, but it affects the differential. Double affects it one might argue because the other team is likely playing from behind so your team gets the advantage of lining up in nickel, pinning back the ears etc. etc. I have said all along that superior QB play is stat #1 in winning.

I guess this would make sense that it in fact is a great predictor of winning from that perspective, but it doesn't necessarily mean that this stat is relevent from the standpoint that Defenses should stop playing the run first and pass second. You have actually convinced me that from a bettors standpoint I likely will chart this next season. I would think TO differential and PRD might prove powerful enough on their own to make my job easier next season. I might chart it out in the past season when I get bored to see if being superior in both (that means ranking 5 spots better in both categories) correlates to a really big number.

BUT, in realizing this, I am still far from convinced that this stat proves anything close to what you and the author are claiming. Stats also show that you should go for it on 4th down virtually every time. Won't ever happen. I will watch next season with interest as teams adjust to the Packers and in turn the packers adjust to them. This year we played nickel a ton and we had Rodgers so it worked very well. Next year we may see teams make more of an effort to run and keep ARod off the field.

[bobblehead]

That's not the bottom line. That's way above the bottom line. Both the teams you cite were/are very good stopping the pass, and were/are efficient and effective enough passing the ball to win. The bottom line is that if you can't pass the ball and stop the pass you can't win.

The Packers basically abandoned the run in the Super Bowl and won the game by effectively passing. I like Starks as well as the next guy, but he basically had one good game - Philly. And even in that game, the Packers scored points and won by passing the ball effectively. One of their best games running the ball this year was Washington - a loss.

The super bowl was an aberration. BEFORE the game I was all over this board saying we would and should pass it 40+ times. Pitt is absolutely DOMINANT against the run. Pitt also got lit up by every elite QB they played this season. The only reason they play the pass so well is because they hit the QB and make him throw early. They can't cover. They can't stop a good QB who isn't confused by them.

[vince]

This doesn't affect the defensive rating one iota, but it affects the differential. Double affects it one might argue because the other team is likely playing from behind so your team gets the advantage of lining up in nickel, pinning back the ears etc. etc. I have said all along that superior QB play is stat #1 in winning.

I guess this would make sense that it in fact is a great predictor of winning from that perspective, but it doesn't necessarily mean that this stat is relevent from the standpoint that Defenses should stop playing the run first and pass second.
...
This year we played nickel a ton and we had Rodgers so it worked very well. Next year we may see teams make more of an effort to run and keep ARod off the field.
It's an indisputable fact that stopping the pass and passing effectively contribute more to winning than anything else. It's not running the ball. It's not offensive balance. It's not stopping the run. That's the bottom line and it's not opinion. That may be becoming a "duh" statement, but it's misunderstood yet I'd say.

That fact says nothing about how to do it. Obviously you gotta have the horses. There are a host of viable opinions and strategies about that, and what works best will change over time as you said based on teams adjusting to be more effective at it and counter their opponents. The fact that Dom chose to stop the run as a secondary concern and play mostly nickel says a lot about his approach, regardless of his comments to the media about stopping the run. He can say whatever he wants. What he does is what counts. As you said, teams will try to control the ball to counter the up-tempo game Green Bay wants to play. Maybe it'll cycle back some day but the rulesmakers seem to intent on that not happening so we'll see.

[vince]

The super bowl was an aberration. BEFORE the game I was all over this board saying we would and should pass it 40+ times. Pitt is absolutely DOMINANT against the run. Pitt also got lit up by every elite QB they played this season. The only reason they play the pass so well is because they hit the QB and make him throw early. They can't cover. They can't stop a good QB who isn't confused by them.
I agree with everything you said, except that the Super Bowl was an aberration. It was an absolute man-law of a game. A perfect example of what you need to do to win. Pass the ball effectively and stop effective passing.

The first Bears game was an aberration. Without checking, I'll say the Packers dominated the Passer Rating Differential that game but lost because they couldn't over come the -150+ yard penalty differential.

[bobblehead]

I agree with everything you said, except that the Super Bowl was an aberration. It was an absolute man-law of a game. A perfect example of what you need to do to win. Pass the ball effectively and stop effective passing.

The first Bears game was an aberration. Without checking, I'll say the Packers dominated the Passer Rating Differential that game but lost because they couldn't over come the -150+ yard penalty differential.

Didn't the steelers beat us in everything except turnovers and score?

[vince]

Didn't the steelers beat us in everything except turnovers and score?
And Passer Rating Differential.

[bobblehead]

And Passer Rating Differential.

In large part because of two turnovers (interceptions).

[vince]

In large part because of two turnovers (interceptions).
Not sure what your point is Bobble. The stat measures the difference between offensive and defensive passer rating. Effective QB's don't turn the ball over. You also diminished the stat by stating that the top teams all have great QB's. Well ya.

If you win Passer Rating Differential, chances are very good you win the game. That's the point.

[bobblehead]

Not sure what your point is Bobble. The stat measures the difference between offensive and defensive passer rating. Effective QB's don't turn the ball over. You also diminished the stat by stating that the top teams all have great QB's. Well ya.

If you win Passer Rating Differential, chances are very good you win the game. That's the point.

My point is that the author is basically stating that defense wins championships by stopping the pass first, and as proof, he has this differential. Problem is that fully 50% of that equation is offensive stats, not defensive. I'm not fully discounting it for what it is. It has value, and I get that its a passing league now, and if you can't stop the pass you can't win. BUT...if you can't stop the run you can't win either. I still maintain that if you do anything poorly you will not be a championship team. In fairness I used to argue exactly this when everyone was declaring that the running game was king....I would state back then that if your QB couldn't convert 3rd and 6 you couldn't win as no matter how good you run the ball you will end up in those situations at times.

[pbmax]

My point is that the author is basically stating that defense wins championships by stopping the pass first, and as proof, he has this differential. Problem is that fully 50% of that equation is offensive stats, not defensive. I'm not fully discounting it for what it is. It has value, and I get that its a passing league now, and if you can't stop the pass you can't win. BUT...if you can't stop the run you can't win either. I still maintain that if you do anything poorly you will not be a championship team. In fairness I used to argue exactly this when everyone was declaring that the running game was king....I would state back then that if your QB couldn't convert 3rd and 6 you couldn't win as no matter how good you run the ball you will end up in those situations at times.

I didn't think either author said that. The headline for the SI piece did, but both articles take great pains to talk about the dominance of pass performance and the decline of importance of run game and run D.