Defense Wins Championships?

[vince]

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



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.



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.