Fire Joe Barry -- Updated -- he's gone

[milani]

Say our offense scores 35 points on long drives, dominates the time of possession 40 to 20, and only gives the opponent 7 possessions to try and score.

And then say our offense scores 35 points on short drives, loses the time of possession 27 to 33, and gives the opponents 12 possessions to try and score.

Are both of those outcomes equally likely to lead to a win?

Turnovers and penalties can be the deciding factor at that point. Throw in FG and PAT accuracy.

 

[AKCheese]

Say our offense scores 35 points on long drives, dominates the time of possession 40 to 20, and only gives the opponent 7 possessions to try and score.

And then say our offense scores 35 points on short drives, loses the time of possession 27 to 33, and gives the opponents 12 possessions to try and score.

Are both of those outcomes equally likely to lead to a win?

Each team will have the same number of posession +/- 1. It all depends on how many points you put up on the board (in your posessions) The game goes to the team that scores most. There are no “style points” awarded for scoring quickly (or deductions for taking a long time). Thats where this whole points per posession thing loses steam. At least in my opinion.

 

[AKCheese]

Say our offense scores 35 points on long drives, dominates the time of possession 40 to 20, and only gives the opponent 7 possessions to try and score.

And then say our offense scores 35 points on short drives, loses the time of possession 27 to 33, and gives the opponents 12 possessions to try and score.

Are both of those outcomes equally likely to lead to a win?

If the defense holds them to 20-ish points (I believe thats our average points allowed?) It’s a lead pipe cinch LOL

 

[RRyder]

Im not rebutting anything. Games are decided by how many points the Packers score as opposed to how many points their opponent score. I think thats a pretty irrefutable fact. (If I’m wrong there feel free to rebut). Therefore I think how many points a defense allows its opponents to score is pretty key. If others think something else is important thats fine. I’ll take the defense that allows very few points - until they start keeping score a different way. LOL (sorry)

And there's your issue you are showing an inability to comprehend.

The defense IS allowing points at a higher rate. Our Defense is more likely to allow points on each and every drive during a game. You seem to be taking the stance that since it's taking the opponent longer to score that must mean "duh defense good"

To use a cross sport reference this is about as smart as saying "Well he's a 20 ppg scorer so he must be good at scoring". That is just...... Well..... I'll let you fill in the rest

I'd throw in an "lol" but you seem to wanna cap every post off with that allready.

 

[Magooch]

I guess someone should tell every team in the league they can save a few million dollars every year and quit employing all their scouts and analysts. After all - no point in scouting and analytics when they could just tell the coach to score more points than the other team. Simple as that, code cracked!

 

[Dantés]

Each team will have the same number of posession +/- 1. It all depends on how many points you put up on the board (in your posessions) The game goes to the team that scores most. There are no “style points” awarded for scoring quickly (or deductions for taking a long time). Thats where this whole points per posession thing loses steam. At least in my opinion.

There. You just made my point.

“It all depends on how many points you put in the board (in those possessions).”

Joe Barry’s defense allows a lot of points per possession.

 

[AKCheese]

There. You just made my point.

“It all depends on how many points you put in the board (in those possessions).”

Joe Barry’s defense allows a lot of points per possession.

Yet the game/win is awarded by points per 60 minutes. Not points per posession - at least that’s the way I always see W/L results. So - your world GB 35 Chi 20 but wait-wait-wait … Chi did better in points per drive LOL — okay - whatever floats your boat.

 

[AKCheese]

And there's your issue you are showing an inability to comprehend.

The defense IS allowing points at a higher rate. Our Defense is more likely to allow points on each and every drive during a game. You seem to be taking the stance that since it's taking the opponent longer to score that must mean "duh defense good"

To use a cross sport reference this is about as smart as saying "Well he's a 20 ppg scorer so he must be good at scoring". That is just...... Well..... I'll let you fill in the rest

I'd throw in an "lol" but you seem to wanna cap every post off with that allready.

I keep coming back to seeing results each week quantified by - points for OUR team - vs - points for THEIR team. Makes sense to me but I’m old school - you guys wanna keep score by points per drive or yards per posession or first downs per point or whatever - go for it. I think in my lifetime (I’m 67) the win will be awarded to the team that scores and prevents the other team from scoring. LOL (sorry you guys are funny)

 

[Schultz]

LOL. If both teams have the same amount of possessions on Sunday and the GB defense gives up more points per possession than the GB offense scores per possession than they will lose. LOL. On the other hand if the Dallas team scores more points than the GB team does they will win. LOL. LOL. In an entire season a defense that faces 100 possessions gives up 500 points (5 per) and a defense that gives up 600 points against 150 possessions (4 per) LOL then why did they cross the road? LOL.

 

[RRyder]

LOL. If both teams have the same amount of possessions on Sunday and the GB defense gives up more points per possession than the GB offense scores per possession than they will lose. LOL. On the other hand if the Dallas team scores more points than the GB team does they will win. LOL. LOL. In an entire season a defense that faces 100 possessions gives up 500 points (5 per) and a defense that gives up 600 points against 150 possessions (4 per) LOL then why did they cross the road? LOL.

That defense that gave up 600 in 150 possessions is a **** ton better then the one that gave up 500 in 100.

Seriously though. Why does every post here need an "lol"?

 

[Dantés]

Yet the game/win is awarded by points per 60 minutes. Not points per posession - at least that’s the way I always see W/L results. So - your world GB 35 Chi 20 but wait-wait-wait … Chi did better in points per drive LOL — okay - whatever floats your boat.

Points per 60 minutes is determined by points per possession times number of possessions.

There isn’t a world where GB wins 35-20 but CHI scored more points per drive. That’s literally impossible.

Let me know if I should keep trying. If you just don’t want to understand, that’s fine.

 

[Half Empty]

Is one of you CaptWIMM?

 

[AKCheese]

exactly ppp x p = ppg and green bay is #10 in the league - it’s simole math LOL

 

[AKCheese]

Points per 60 minutes is determined by points per possession times number of possessions.

There isn’t a world where GB wins 35-20 but CHI scored more points per drive. That’s literally impossible.

Let me know if I should keep trying. If you just don’t want to understand, that’s fine.

Dude you could have stopped trying midway through the second paragraph of your first post on this - that where I stopped reading LOL

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

LOL then why did they cross the road? LOL.

They were stapled to the chicken?

 

[Dantés]

Dude you could have stopped trying midway through the second paragraph of your first post on this - that where I stopped reading LOL

I can tell.

 

[games]

That defense that gave up 600 in 150 possessions is a **** ton better then the one that gave up 500 in 100.

Giving up 600 points is better than 500 points?

 

[AKCheese]

Giving up 600 points is better than 500 points?

New math LOL

 

[Dantés]

Giving up 600 points is better than 500 points?

It's possible that it could be depending on how the points were scored. If the defense gives up 500 points on drives that are really long on average and thus keeps the offense from having many chances to score, it could be worse than a defense that gives up 600 points in a different fashion.

Flip it around and think about it offensively:

Say the Packers offense has a game in which they have 14 legitimate possessions (i.e. they get the ball with at least 1:00 minute on the clock) and they score four touchdowns-- 28 points.

And then say in a different game, the drives are all longer so the Packers only end up with 8 legitimate possessions and they score three touchdowns-- 21 points.

In which game did the offense perform better? In the one where they scored on 29% of their opportunities or in the one where they scored on 38% of their opportunities? Or to put it another way, in the way where they scored 2.0 points per possession or the one where they scored 2.6?

 

[Dantés]

The piece that seems to be missing for some people is that possessions are always going to be roughly equal because possession switches after every score.

The Packers had 174 possessions on the season and faced 173. That's not a coincidence-- that's how football works (hence the Browns had 222 and faced 222; the Bucs had 183 and faced 183). The numbers aren't always going to be identical, but they will always be close. This is because in any given game, possessions are always going to be equal or within 1-2.

What this means is that a defense that limits scoring by facing fewer possessions because they allow long drives is only limiting scoring at the cost of limiting scoring opportunities for their own team.

Think about it-- in a game where an offense keeps going 3 and out and punting over and over again, we all say "man-- they're killing the defense" or "they're putting too much on the defense." Why do we say that? Because they're giving the opposing offense lots more shots to score and forcing the defense to get more stops. We all inherently recognize that it's much more difficult to limit scoring if the opposing team has more chances.

If you take a defense that faces 220 possessions on the season and gives up 330 points and compare it to a defense that faces 175 possessions and gives up 330 points and your conclusion is "they're the same quality because the points are the same" you're probably too slow to figure this out.

 

[games]

New math LOL

I was being a little unfair to @Dantés and @RRyder as I know what they're trying to get at.

But I would add that total points per game (fielded, allowed, net) and its related averages don't tell the whole story either.

 

[RRyder]

Giving up 600 points is better than 500 points?

When it takes a 50% increase in possessions for it to happen yes. That team now also increased their offensive possessions by 50% all because a defense got better.

 

[games]

It's possible that it could be depending on how the points were scored. If the defense gives up 500 points on drives that are really long on average and thus keeps the offense from having many chances to score, it could be worse than a defense that gives up 600 points in a different fashion.

Flip it around and think about it offensively:

Say the Packers offense has a game in which they have 14 legitimate possessions (i.e. they get the ball with at least 1:00 minute on the clock) and they score four touchdowns-- 28 points.

And then say in a different game, the drives are all longer so the Packers only end up with 8 legitimate possessions and they score three touchdowns-- 21 points.

In which game did the offense perform better? In the one where they scored on 29% of their opportunities or in the one where they scored on 38% of their opportunities? Or to put it another way, in the way where they scored 2.0 points per possession or the one where they scored 2.6?

Sorry, was just having a little fun. I know what you're getting at. By trade, I'm a financial analyst and auditor.

It goes back to whether the concept of "complementary football" is real.
Also, are there other points-related metrics (such as points / play (or drive or possession) get closer to the truth?
Or, can DVOA (which is technically not points-oriented) explain football performance?

 

[Dantés]

Sorry, was just having a little fun. I know what you're getting at. By trade, I'm a financial analyst and auditor.

It goes back to whether the concept of "complementary football" is real.
Also, are there other points-related metrics (such as points / play (or drive or possession) get closer to the truth?
Or, can DVOA (which is technically not points-oriented) explain football performance?

They all help add context. Some are more accurate than others (simplest example being that points allowed is a much more valuable stat than yards allowed). None of them completely capture it because football is too complex to be reduced to metrics, which is one reason why it's such a beautiful game.

 

[games]

When it takes a 50% increase in possessions for it to happen yes

Only if you believe in the concept of "complementary football." As you know, the dependent variable to make your statement true is the incremental point output of your offense.