1st in rushing, 1st in total defense (1 Viewer)

[Chase Stuart]

Someone PMed me to ask:

The 2009 Jets are ranked number one in defense yardage allowed and number one in rushing offense. Yet the Jets are 7-7. If the Jets were to finish 8-8 or worse would they be the first team in the history of the sport to do so being ranked #1 in these usually key categories. It still amazes me that this squad can't make the playoffs with the best O-Line in the sport and the best Corner Back in the league. I always see you come up with data, so if it isn't a problem , would love an answer to this question.

I'm not a fan of using total yards allowed to measures defenses (I prefer more complicated metrics), but to answer the actual question: yes, the Jets would be the worst team to lead the league in rushing yards and total yards allowed.The '01 Steelers were the last team to pull this rare double-double; they went 13-3.

The '87 49ers did so as well (and had a pretty good QB/WR combo), and went 13-2.

From '84 to '86, the Bears led the league in rushing yards and total yards allowed each season. They went 10-6, 15-1 and 14-2.

The '76 Steelers -- who famously shut out five opponents and allowed just 28 points in their final 9 games -- went 10-4.

The '72 Dolphins also pulled off this double-double.

In the pre-merger era, the '69 Super Bowl Chiefs did it, along with the '65 Chargers and '64 Bills. The Bills and Chargers would meet in the AFL title game in both seasons. The '64 Packers did it, and they went 8-5-1. They were a legitimately outstanding team, done in by the single worst kicking season of all-time. I did a podcast on Paul Hornung, and spent a bit of time detailing how many games he cost the '64 Packers. Finally, the '60 Cardinals went 6-5-1

If we open up the parameters a bit, we let in some more bad teams. Among teams that ranked in the top three in rushing yards and total yards allowed and still lost seven or more games, we get:

The '06 Jags

The '02 Dolphins (lost final two games on field goals as time expired)

The '80 Lions (Billy Sims edition)

'64 Chiefs

 

[JJP]

I think the Vikings in either 2007 or 2008 (possibly both) led the NFL in rushing offense and rushing defense, which is probably more reliable than using overall yards allowed.

 

[Kiddnets]

its the curse.....I swear its been the same ol Jet curse for years....cant wait until they knock that stadium down!

 

[Ministry of Pain]

Better QB play and you all likely win the division. Do you see Sanchez getting light years better the next year or two...I realize he is a rookie Jets94, but they seem like they have hitched their wagon to Sanchez. As a Phinsfan I hope they do not go out and sign a competent veteran.

 

[Sweet Love]

It is a really interesting post, Chase. I love my Jets, and was in HI to watch the first game of the year (pretty cool for an East Coaster setting the alarm at 5:45, shooting to a sports bar by 6 to watch the game...and get breakfast...lol). The thing I took away from that game is that if Sanchez could be a game manager, they would be set. We all know what happened nest (which does not necessarily make him a bad QB in the future, just not a fit for the '09 Jets). Clemens is no better, but if they had a Trent Dilfer (I won't screw it up, but won't win it for you either) kind of guy, you could be looking at a 10 win team with 2 games to go.

As a Jets fan, and I am guessing you would agree, in August I was just hoing for a 7-9, 8-8 type year, but the truth is, as good as The D is, I never thought they would be this good. Couple it with fact that I thought the running game would be average, and it seems like a wasted opportunity. Now if we had Leon and Kris Jenkins, we may have squeezed out one or two more wins, but that is all part of the game.

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

pretty much tells you if you dont got a decent QB doesnt matter how good you can run or play D, your gonna lose anyway

 

[The_Man]

This just shows that the NFL has basically turned into flag football in recent years, and that you're not much better than a .500 team no matter how well you defend or run, if you don't have a QB who can put up points.

 

[[icon]]

Are they first among teams with .500 records?

 

[stbugs]

pretty much tells you if you dont got a decent QB doesnt matter how good you can run or play D, your gonna lose anyway

True and I wonder how much the Jets being below average scoring wise/turnover prone has limited what opposing teams do offensively. Not saying they aren't a good defense (been real good lately). For instance, Sanchez himself has 23 turnovers, which leads to short fields and the Jets have given up 7 return TDs, which is just 1 and 2 below their passing/rushing TDs given up.I would be interested to see if the "bad" teams on your list had turnover/return TD issues like the Jets and see if that may have benefitted their numbers a bit.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Someone PMed me to ask:

The 2009 Jets are ranked number one in defense yardage allowed and number one in rushing offense. Yet the Jets are 7-7. If the Jets were to finish 8-8 or worse would they be the first team in the history of the sport to do so being ranked #1 in these usually key categories. It still amazes me that this squad can't make the playoffs with the best O-Line in the sport and the best Corner Back in the league. I always see you come up with data, so if it isn't a problem , would love an answer to this question.

I'm not a fan of using total yards allowed to measures defenses (I prefer more complicated metrics), but to answer the actual question: yes, the Jets would be the worst team to lead the league in rushing yards and total yards allowed.The '01 Steelers were the last team to pull this rare double-double; they went 13-3.

The '87 49ers did so as well (and had a pretty good QB/WR combo), and went 13-2.

From '84 to '86, the Bears led the league in rushing yards and total yards allowed each season. They went 10-6, 15-1 and 14-2.

The '76 Steelers -- who famously shut out five opponents and allowed just 28 points in their final 9 games -- went 10-4.

The '72 Dolphins also pulled off this double-double.

In the pre-merger era, the '69 Super Bowl Chiefs did it, along with the '65 Chargers and '64 Bills. The Bills and Chargers would meet in the AFL title game in both seasons. The '64 Packers did it, and they went 8-5-1. They were a legitimately outstanding team, done in by the single worst kicking season of all-time. I did a podcast on Paul Hornung, and spent a bit of time detailing how many games he cost the '64 Packers. Finally, the '60 Cardinals went 6-5-1

If we open up the parameters a bit, we let in some more bad teams. Among teams that ranked in the top three in rushing yards and total yards allowed and still lost seven or more games, we get:

The '06 Jags

The '02 Dolphins (lost final two games on field goals as time expired)

The '80 Lions (Billy Sims edition)

'64 Chiefs

Based on this, I think if I were a Jets fan I would be very happy with the job Ryan has done...............but would have to lay the blame for the mediocre season on Sanchez.

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

Someone PMed me to ask:

The 2009 Jets are ranked number one in defense yardage allowed and number one in rushing offense. Yet the Jets are 7-7. If the Jets were to finish 8-8 or worse would they be the first team in the history of the sport to do so being ranked #1 in these usually key categories. It still amazes me that this squad can't make the playoffs with the best O-Line in the sport and the best Corner Back in the league. I always see you come up with data, so if it isn't a problem , would love an answer to this question.

I'm not a fan of using total yards allowed to measures defenses (I prefer more complicated metrics), but to answer the actual question: yes, the Jets would be the worst team to lead the league in rushing yards and total yards allowed.The '01 Steelers were the last team to pull this rare double-double; they went 13-3.

The '87 49ers did so as well (and had a pretty good QB/WR combo), and went 13-2.

From '84 to '86, the Bears led the league in rushing yards and total yards allowed each season. They went 10-6, 15-1 and 14-2.

The '76 Steelers -- who famously shut out five opponents and allowed just 28 points in their final 9 games -- went 10-4.

The '72 Dolphins also pulled off this double-double.

In the pre-merger era, the '69 Super Bowl Chiefs did it, along with the '65 Chargers and '64 Bills. The Bills and Chargers would meet in the AFL title game in both seasons. The '64 Packers did it, and they went 8-5-1. They were a legitimately outstanding team, done in by the single worst kicking season of all-time. I did a podcast on Paul Hornung, and spent a bit of time detailing how many games he cost the '64 Packers. Finally, the '60 Cardinals went 6-5-1

If we open up the parameters a bit, we let in some more bad teams. Among teams that ranked in the top three in rushing yards and total yards allowed and still lost seven or more games, we get:

The '06 Jags

The '02 Dolphins (lost final two games on field goals as time expired)

The '80 Lions (Billy Sims edition)

'64 Chiefs

Based on this, I think if I were a Jets fan I would be very happy with the job Ryan has done...............but would have to lay the blame for the mediocre season on Sanchez.

Wait.... wasnt it Ryan's decision to go with Ryan. A QB who has very limited experience and you know would be on a learning curve?I mean you dont take the guy 5th overall and not play him, but if they went with a more veteran type and let Sanchez wait, maybe they'd take the division instead of being in 7-7 land

 

[fantasizing]

This just shows that the NFL has basically turned into flag football in recent years, and that you're not much better than a .500 team no matter how well you defend or run, if you don't have a QB who can put up points.

Case in point, the QB's of the 8 division leaders:BradyPalmerManningRiversMcNabbFavreBreesWarner

 

[Tanner9919]

It is a really interesting post, Chase. I love my Jets, and was in HI to watch the first game of the year (pretty cool for an East Coaster setting the alarm at 5:45, shooting to a sports bar by 6 to watch the game...and get breakfast...lol). The thing I took away from that game is that if Sanchez could be a game manager, they would be set. We all know what happened nest (which does not necessarily make him a bad QB in the future, just not a fit for the '09 Jets). Clemens is no better, but if they had a Trent Dilfer (I won't screw it up, but won't win it for you either) kind of guy, you could be looking at a 10 win team with 2 games to go.

As a Jets fan, and I am guessing you would agree, in August I was just hoing for a 7-9, 8-8 type year, but the truth is, as good as The D is, I never thought they would be this good. Couple it with fact that I thought the running game would be average, and it seems like a wasted opportunity. Now if we had Leon and Kris Jenkins, we may have squeezed out one or two more wins, but that is all part of the game.

bad defensive play execution, at critical times , has absolutely killed the Jets this season..I think for all of Sanchez' perceived shortfalls, the guy is going to be one heck of a good QB in the future...were Jets' fans really thinking playoffs during training camp? I highly doubt it..you're right on with your guess of 7-9, 8-8..but , stop for a minute to realize you've got a rookie QB with a first year, first time head coach ( both of whom are prone to making mistakes at critical times), and you know the Jets were headed for a rocky road in 2009..to be 7-7 with a shot at a post season berth is remarkable IMO..

Peyton Manning was 3-13 his first season

Aikman was 0-11 his first season in the NFL.

Elway was 4-6 his first season as an NFL QB..

Phil Simms was 14-20 as a starter thru his first 3 seasons.

Sanchez is not an Elway, or Aikman, just saying he's ahead of the curve! he's going to be a very good QB for years to come..

Rex needs to stop talking about stats and where they rank in certain NFL categories, and worry more about the only stat that matters: the W/L record.

and realize you're in a growing stage with regards to this team..probably still a year away from becoming a 'serious' SB contender..

but well on your way!

 

[Topes]

I'm not a fan of using total yards allowed to measures defenses (I prefer more complicated metrics), ...

Don't we all. Seriously, ranking defenses by yardage allowed is just silly, and the vaunted "defensive rankings" that are thrown around really ought to be disregarded on their face. Points Against would be just as simple as yards, and would have a good deal more merit. Never quite understood why there wasn't a better formula in place than yards against.

 

[rabidfireweasel]

Peyton Manning was 3-13 his first seasonAikman was 0-11 his first season in the NFL.Elway was 4-6 his first season as an NFL QB..Phil Simms was 14-20 as a starter thru his first 3 seasons.Sanchez is not an Elway, or Aikman, just saying he's ahead of the curve! he's going to be a very good QB for years to come..

But those guys went to bad teams. Sanchez went to a team that was 8-3 before thanksgiving last year. The Jets 9-7 finish was considered such a disappointment that Mangini was fired. There was no reason this needed to be a learning/rebuilding year.

 

[FreeBaGeL]

This just shows that the NFL has basically turned into flag football in recent years, and that you're not much better than a .500 team no matter how well you defend or run, if you don't have a QB who can put up points.

Case in point, the QB's of the 8 division leaders:BradyPalmerManningRiversMcNabbFavreBreesWarner

So wait, now we're just ignoring the fact that pretty much every Super Bowl winner this decade except Indy has had a great defense?

 

[Rovers]

Based on this, I think if I were a Jets fan I would be very happy with the job Ryan has done.....

..........but would have to lay the blame for the mediocre season on Sanchez.

Wait.... wasnt it Ryan's decision to go with Ryan. A QB who has very limited experience and you know would be on a learning curve?

I mean you dont take the guy 5th overall and not play him, but if they went with a more veteran type and let Sanchez wait, maybe they'd take the division instead of being in 7-7 land

Woody Johnson is a 'hands off" owner, with ONE big exception. He wants a star QB. See Favre last year. The trade up for Sanchez. The refusal to bench Sanchez even in a game he threw 5 INT's in.

Ryan knows... he has free reign, but Sanchez has to play. That is his handcuff, his top down directive.

Many fans in Jets forum love to talk about how so many great QB's were putrid in their rookie years. Not one of them had this sort of running game, offensive line or defense to work with.

I didn't like the Sanchez trade up. I don't much like the idea of any CA QB playing in the NE. I know Clemens is NOT an NFL caliber starting QB, BUT, if he were starting this year, the Jets would have already clinched a wild card. Would still be in the hunt for the division.

Honestly... when the Jets got the ball back, 3 point deficit with 1:37 left, the only question in my mind was how many attempts Sanchez would have before the inevitable INT. I was actually laughing about it. I bet a friend who was watching with me on the under/over. 2 or 3 attempts? I took the under. Everything about the Jets is playoff quality. Yes, the ST's have made mistakes, but otherwise... it's ALL on Sanchez. He has been historically awful, given the team he plays on.

A team like the Jets doesn't need a good QB. Just one that doesn't turn the ball over 23 times in 14 games.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Someone PMed me to ask:

The 2009 Jets are ranked number one in defense yardage allowed and number one in rushing offense. Yet the Jets are 7-7. If the Jets were to finish 8-8 or worse would they be the first team in the history of the sport to do so being ranked #1 in these usually key categories. It still amazes me that this squad can't make the playoffs with the best O-Line in the sport and the best Corner Back in the league. I always see you come up with data, so if it isn't a problem , would love an answer to this question.

I'm not a fan of using total yards allowed to measures defenses (I prefer more complicated metrics), but to answer the actual question: yes, the Jets would be the worst team to lead the league in rushing yards and total yards allowed.The '01 Steelers were the last team to pull this rare double-double; they went 13-3.

The '87 49ers did so as well (and had a pretty good QB/WR combo), and went 13-2.

From '84 to '86, the Bears led the league in rushing yards and total yards allowed each season. They went 10-6, 15-1 and 14-2.

The '76 Steelers -- who famously shut out five opponents and allowed just 28 points in their final 9 games -- went 10-4.

The '72 Dolphins also pulled off this double-double.

In the pre-merger era, the '69 Super Bowl Chiefs did it, along with the '65 Chargers and '64 Bills. The Bills and Chargers would meet in the AFL title game in both seasons. The '64 Packers did it, and they went 8-5-1. They were a legitimately outstanding team, done in by the single worst kicking season of all-time. I did a podcast on Paul Hornung, and spent a bit of time detailing how many games he cost the '64 Packers. Finally, the '60 Cardinals went 6-5-1

If we open up the parameters a bit, we let in some more bad teams. Among teams that ranked in the top three in rushing yards and total yards allowed and still lost seven or more games, we get:

The '06 Jags

The '02 Dolphins (lost final two games on field goals as time expired)

The '80 Lions (Billy Sims edition)

'64 Chiefs

Based on this, I think if I were a Jets fan I would be very happy with the job Ryan has done...............but would have to lay the blame for the mediocre season on Sanchez.

Wait.... wasnt it Ryan's decision to go with Ryan. A QB who has very limited experience and you know would be on a learning curve?I mean you dont take the guy 5th overall and not play him, but if they went with a more veteran type and let Sanchez wait, maybe they'd take the division instead of being in 7-7 land

Actually, I agree with your point.Maybe Ryan should be on the spot for that call. I had thought maybe it was a GM/front office decision though. But heck why not bring in a Garcia who still has plenty left and can help lead the rook into the NFL?

 

[JJP]

I'm not a fan of using total yards allowed to measures defenses (I prefer more complicated metrics), ...

Don't we all. Seriously, ranking defenses by yardage allowed is just silly, and the vaunted "defensive rankings" that are thrown around really ought to be disregarded on their face. Points Against would be just as simple as yards, and would have a good deal more merit. Never quite understood why there wasn't a better formula in place than yards against.

I don't know if there's any magical formula but there are a few metrics to be used in handicapping a defense. IMO, QB rating against and yards/attempt allowed are much better metrics to judge a pass defense than simply passing yardage allowed. Rushing yards allowed is pretty good but yards/carry must also be considered. One also cannot rule out penalty yardage. A couple weeks ago, Green Bay ranked # 1 in yardage allowed, then we saw them commit something like 100 yards in penalties against the Ravens. IMO, penalty yardage should be factored into the team rushing and or passing stats.

 

[PewterFan]

Props to the Jets for this interesting stat. Even if they don't make the playoffs it's something they can build on.

 

[The_Man]

I said it another Chase thread, these Jets remind me of the Boller-era Ravens. Maybe Sanchez turns out better than that -- he certainly seems less hyper. But I sat through an awful lot of Ravens games just like yesterday's Jets game -- very tight, low-scoring, with the opponent having the chance to make a play at the end of the game and steal a win.

Sanchez's completion percentage is about the same as Boller's in his first 2 years, and his yards per attpmet are a lot better. But his his TD/INT ratio is a lot worse.

When you don't score any points, your opponents are in every game -- no matter how good your D is.

 

[Chase Stuart]

I'm not a fan of using total yards allowed to measures defenses (I prefer more complicated metrics), ...

Don't we all. Seriously, ranking defenses by yardage allowed is just silly, and the vaunted "defensive rankings" that are thrown around really ought to be disregarded on their face. Points Against would be just as simple as yards, and would have a good deal more merit. Never quite understood why there wasn't a better formula in place than yards against.

Agreed. I like to do two sets of rankings.1) Grading the defense sort of rankings. These are my explanatory rankings; they explain what happened. I use adjusted net yards per attempt allowed to grade pass defense; that's (passing yards + 20*TD -45*INT - sackyardslost)/(attempts plus sacks). For rush defense, I'm constantly working with it, but I often fall back on YPC allowed with a TD bonus of 20 and a fumble lost penalty of 30.2) Predicting the future sort of rankings. These are more true strength rankings; they're predictive, and don't explain what happened but what will happen. I use simply net yards per pass attempts (passing yards minus sack yards lost)/(pass attempts plus sacks). For rushing, I just use YPC allowed.I don't really like to combine pass and rush defense, but if I do, I just figure out how many yards per play above/below average each team is in the pass and run game, and add them.

 

[Chase Stuart]

I said it another Chase thread, these Jets remind me of the Boller-era Ravens. Maybe Sanchez turns out better than that -- he certainly seems less hyper. But I sat through an awful lot of Ravens games just like yesterday's Jets game -- very tight, low-scoring, with the opponent having the chance to make a play at the end of the game and steal a win.Sanchez's completion percentage is about the same as Boller's in his first 2 years, and his yards per attpmet are a lot better. But his his TD/INT ratio is a lot worse.When you don't score any points, your opponents are in every game -- no matter how good your D is.

Agreed.

 

[Reaper]

I didn't like the Sanchez trade up. I don't much like the idea of any CA QB playing in the NE. I know Clemens is NOT an NFL caliber starting QB, BUT, if he were starting this year, the Jets would have already clinched a wild card. Would still be in the hunt for the division.

I agreed and also said in the Sanchez Starting thread to start the year that I thought he should be on the bench...We all know the lack of experience this guy has on any level... That said, the hope now is that he took his licks and will be that much better for it next year - we better hope and pray...But, I also think this Defense is just a glimmer of what it can be once Rex gets some more of "his guys", weeds out some dead wood, gets Jenkins back and adds a pass rusher.The OL is also overrated in pass protection and we have to bow down to the Steeler fans who said Faneca was a shell of himself - this guy happens to be the weak link. Jets at least need depth here.

 

[Chase Stuart]

Yes, the ST's have made mistakes, but otherwise... it's ALL on Sanchez. He has been historically awful, given the team he plays on. A team like the Jets doesn't need a good QB. Just one that doesn't turn the ball over 23 times in 14 games.

Totally agree. That said, the Miami game (2 KO TDs) and yesterday (3 missed field goals) can be blamed on the special teams. Feely also missed a 44-yarder to end the first half against Buffalo (although that game is squarely on Sanchez' shoulder) although he's mostly been good this year.Still, the Jets are a few plays away -- even with Sanchez stinking -- from 10 or 11 wins. Sanchez could have been as awful as he has been this year and the Jets could have easily won the AFC East. That said, there's no doubt that Sanchez has been very bad. He's been worse than everyone outside of the awfulness in Cleveland, Oakland, Detroit, Tampa, Carolina and Buffalo.

 

[Chase Stuart]

I didn't like the Sanchez trade up. I don't much like the idea of any CA QB playing in the NE. I know Clemens is NOT an NFL caliber starting QB, BUT, if he were starting this year, the Jets would have already clinched a wild card. Would still be in the hunt for the division.

Brady?

 

[Reaper]

Peyton Manning was 3-13 his first seasonAikman was 0-11 his first season in the NFL.Elway was 4-6 his first season as an NFL QB..Phil Simms was 14-20 as a starter thru his first 3 seasons.Sanchez is not an Elway, or Aikman, just saying he's ahead of the curve! he's going to be a very good QB for years to come..

But those guys went to bad teams. Sanchez went to a team that was 8-3 before thanksgiving last year. The Jets 9-7 finish was considered such a disappointment that Mangini was fired. There was no reason this needed to be a learning/rebuilding year.

With a rookie H/C and a rookie QB, it's tough to expect much.... The Defense was also getting revamped - I think it was logical to expect the defense to take more time than they did.In the Preseason Expectations thread I wanted to see the defense develop and have Sanchez prove he was an NFL QB.... I'm now sure of one of those.This was to be a learning rebuilding year all the way barring a miracle of Brady-esque proportions for year 1.Mangini was also fired IMO for the way HIS defense played down the stretch moreso than the offense.Not to mention Mangini doesn't give himself much benefit of doubt with his social skills.I'm expecting a Much better defense next year - This D put up numbers but, next year should be For REAL... And Sanchez needs to take a freaking baby step at least.

 

[Sweet Love]

I didn't like the Sanchez trade up. I don't much like the idea of any CA QB playing in the NE. I know Clemens is NOT an NFL caliber starting QB, BUT, if he were starting this year, the Jets would have already clinched a wild card. Would still be in the hunt for the division.

Brady?

Is Michigan on the Left Coast? I don't know, (maybe he is from CA), but four years at freakin' Michigan put ice in your vains. I do think the whole "climate he is from" thing is overrated...Favre is from the Bayou and ripped it up in Antartica.

 

[PhilLynott]

I didn't like the Sanchez trade up. I don't much like the idea of any CA QB playing in the NE. I know Clemens is NOT an NFL caliber starting QB, BUT, if he were starting this year, the Jets would have already clinched a wild card. Would still be in the hunt for the division.

Brady?

Is Michigan on the Left Coast? I don't know, (maybe he is from CA), but four years at freakin' Michigan put ice in your vains. I do think the whole "climate he is from" thing is overrated...Favre is from the Bayou and ripped it up in Antartica.

Too bad John Elway or Aaron Rodgers can't (or couldn't) play in bad weather. Stanford and Cal, respectively, just seems to spoil a guy. Just to add to the Favre thing, I think that one Terry Bradshaw grew up down on the Bayou.

 

[Captain Spaulding]

The Steelers last year proved that you can win the Superbowl with no offensive line at all or running game.

But to focus on your Jets, I think if Ryan would have shelfed Sanchez a few weeks ago and ride out the season with Clemens (isn't that the backup? sorry I forgot the shmuck) the Jets would be able to make the playoffs.

Sanchez is just making too many turnovers lately.

Aside from the scoreboard, turnover differential is probably the next most important stat that determines wins and losses...much more so than yardage gained or yardage defended (whether be it pass or run).

 

[Kiddnets]

As bad as Sanchez has played I would take him over Kellen Clemmens....that guy has no business being in the NFL after this year.

 

[Otis]

With Matt Stafford at the Helm this is a playoff team easily.

 

[Green and Gold]

Stats are for losers.

 

[PhilLynott]

With Matt Stafford at the Helm this is a playoff team easily.

With Peyton Manning at the helm this is a Super Bowl champ.