Is there really that much difference between (1 Viewer)

[David Yudkin]

All three of these teams have high octane offenses and far from great defenses. They each allow 3 TDs a game and average 30+ a game. Each could end up fielding a HOF QB.

NE

31.2 points for - 21.2 points against = +10.0 ppg

426.3 yards for - 414.4 points against = + 11.9 ypg

GB

34.3 points for - 21.2 points against = +13.1 ppg

397.8 yards for - 397.8 yards against = 0

NO

32.5 points for - 21.9 points against = +10.6 ppg

456.7 yards for - 366.1 yards aggainst = +90.6 ypg

The Saints do a little better in the net yardage category, but other than that is there a lot separating or differentiating these 3 teams (at least statistically)?

 

[Hipple Long Ware & Peete]

no. totally agree. Almost mirror images of each other with small wrinkles.

 

[shnikies]

I think you need to show splits to separate them. I'd take the Saints at home against anybody but anybody can beat them when they're on the road (See Bucs and Rams).

 

[Luke Skywalker]

tthe Saints defense has been playing noticeably better than the other two teams over the last month or so. Especially against the run. Have given up 59, 87, 105, 73 yards in the last four games. Take into account some severe garbage time passing stats in the Giants and Lions game and it's pretty clear the Saints have the best defense of these three teams. They also have by far the best running game.

 

[Mr. Know-It-All]

Of those teams I think the Saints are most complete when healthy - none of them have a dominant RB, all do have dominant TE (and in the case of NE multiple dominant TEs). I like GB offense the best (with a healthy Jennings)...but it really is a toss up between the 3. If Vilma gets healthy - I think NO has the best D. Bishop getting healthy puts the Packers close. Whatever happened to NE D..that is the question...is it injuries? Age?

 

[wiscstlatlmia]

Totally agree! Best case senario would be Packers vs. Saints NFC championship game, followed by the winner of that playing the Pats in the superbowl...that would be amazing

 

[thatguy]

Totally agree! Best case senario would be Packers vs. Saints NFC championship game, followed by the winner of that playing the Pats in the superbowl...that would be amazing

Completely agree. Posted this on my league message board, this year's playoffs are likely to be among the most entertaining in years. Assuming Denver doesn't collapse the final two weeks, we'll likely see Denver and Tebow face off against either Pitt or Balt. That will be incredibly fun to watch, and can you imagine the hysteria if Denver wins? If they did, we could see a Denver/NE (i.e. Tebow/Brady) rematch. Then, like you said, I think we'll probably see a Packers/Saints NFCCG, although the Niners could throw a wrench in that. Though frankly, if the Niners are able to pull off a win against either NO or GB, that will be a great story in and of itself.And then to top it off (I'll be surprised if NE doesn't represent the AFC in the Super Bowl) we could see either a Rodgers/Brady or Brees/Brady Super Bowl.Bottom line: I'm super stoked for this year's playoffs. More excited than I've been for the playoffs since Denver's late 90's dominance.

 

[shadyridr]

pats dont have a single playmaker on def. that separates them from gb or no

 

[Breesisdaman]

I think you need to show splits to separate them. I'd take the Saints at home against anybody but anybody can beat them when they're on the road (See Bucs and Rams).

Swing and miss! Saints are in the top 10 of the best road records in the NFL this yearhttp://2011-nfl-team.pikimal.com/top/10/2011-nfl-teams-for-road-record At 28 and 18 , the Saints are among the best road teams since 2006 when Sean Payton became head coach.http://www.nola.com/saints/index.ssf/2010/12/new_orleans_saints_among_the_t.html

 

[Fensalk]

Maybe I'm a contrarian, but this thread makes me think "watch, we'll end up with 49ers-Ravens."

 

[scrumptrulescent]

Offenses are 3 of the most explosive in the NFL. Defenses all give it up.

1 big difference I see from the regular season is turnovers. GB = +22. NE = +14. NO = -4. The Pack and Pats have taken care of the ball a little better, but have each created more than double the turnovers that the Saints D has.

 

[Brock Middlebrook]

copycat league

this is the Colts most years too

 

[Luke Skywalker]

Offenses are 3 of the most explosive in the NFL. Defenses all give it up.1 big difference I see from the regular season is turnovers. GB = +22. NE = +14. NO = -4. The Pack and Pats have taken care of the ball a little better, but have each created more than double the turnovers that the Saints D has.

Saints D gets more stops though. They allow a 34% success rate on third down. The Patriots and Packers are 43 and 44 percent. The Saints are also a top 10 run defense and a top 10 run offense as well. I don't think you can overstate the importance of that in postseason play.

 

[Pipes]

I think you need to show splits to separate them. I'd take the Saints at home against anybody but anybody can beat them when they're on the road (See Bucs and Rams).

Swing and miss! Saints are in the top 10 of the best road records in the NFL this yearhttp://2011-nfl-team.pikimal.com/top/10/2011-nfl-teams-for-road-record At 28 and 18 , the Saints are among the best road teams since 2006 when Sean Payton became head coach.http://www.nola.com/saints/index.ssf/2010/12/new_orleans_saints_among_the_t.html

But they did lose to the Rams so Shnikies is correct. He didn't say they were a bad road team just that anybody can beat them on the road. If you lose to the Rams you can lose to anybody.

 

[scott72]

Offenses are 3 of the most explosive in the NFL. Defenses all give it up.1 big difference I see from the regular season is turnovers. GB = +22. NE = +14. NO = -4. The Pack and Pats have taken care of the ball a little better, but have each created more than double the turnovers that the Saints D has.

Saints D gets more stops though. They allow a 34% success rate on third down. The Patriots and Packers are 43 and 44 percent. The Saints are also a top 10 run defense and a top 10 run offense as well. I don't think you can overstate the importance of that in postseason play.

Packers are +22 in takeaways, Saints -4..Packers D bends, but lots of time they don't break.

 

[Luke Skywalker]

Packers are +22 in takeaways, Saints -4..Packers D bends, but lots of time they don't break.

And the Saints make more 3rd down stops. Looks like it evens out, considering their scoring averages against are nearly identical. Although the Packers give up about 30 yards more per game.

 

[munchkin]

As a Pats fan I cannot defend their defense; I want to, I mean I really want to.

GB has been a great story this year but I am feeling the Saints in the NFC and Steelers in the AFC. Admittedly, some of the Steelers love is based on reputation. I can't buy into Flacco and Houston is too hobbled at QB.

 

[scott72]

As a Pats fan I cannot defend their defense; I want to, I mean I really want to.GB has been a great story this year but I am feeling the Saints in the NFC and Steelers in the AFC. Admittedly, some of the Steelers love is based on reputation. I can't buy into Flacco and Houston is too hobbled at QB.

I fear the 49er's more than the Saints just because they're built to play in bad weather. The Saints are really good, but they don't scare me nearly as bad in the cold and potentially poor weather as they do in the Superdome..

 

[wiscstlatlmia]

One of my buddies is a Pack fan and he always gets pissed when they talk about how bad they are on defense. He talks about how they give up so many crap points at the end of the games because of prevent and that stats are not a good indication of how the defense has really played this year. He said the secondary is weak, but certainly not as bad as the stats indicate. I think hes pretty dead on here, probably an average defense, but not horrible by any means.

 

[Fensalk]

Steelers led the AFC playoff teams in yards per point allowed in 2010 at 19.09 and won the conference. The Packers were even better than the Steelers at 20.60 in 2010 and beat them.

Patriots give up 19.25 yards per point.

Packers give up 18.90 yards per point.

Saints give up 17.37 yards per point.

Steelers give up 18.84 yards per point.

Ravens give up 17.14 yards per point.

49ers give up 22.88 yards per point.

The rest are garbage.

This stat nailed the Super Bowl a year ago. It picked both participants and even the outcome of the game.

This year it says 49ers over Patriots.

 

[wiscstlatlmia]

Steelers led the AFC playoff teams in yards per point allowed in 2010 at 19.09 and won the conference. The Packers were even better than the Steelers at 20.60 in 2010 and beat them.Patriots give up 19.25 yards per point.Packers give up 18.90 yards per point.Saints give up 17.37 yards per point.Steelers give up 18.84 yards per point.Ravens give up 17.14 yards per point.49ers give up 22.88 yards per point.The rest are garbage.This stat nailed the Super Bowl a year ago. It picked both participants and even the outcome of the game. This year it says 49ers over Patriots.

good stuff man, it would be cool if it holds up again this year... I would be pumped if someone would go back and do all the numbers for past year :nudge: ...but until then the stat started last year lol

 

[Fensalk]

Traditionally, its very rare for a super bowl champ to not be over 20 yards allowed per point. Last year, the only playoff team that was over 20 was the Packers. This year, the only playoff team over 20 is the 49ers. Make of that what you will.

 

[Luke Skywalker]

One of my buddies is a Pack fan and he always gets pissed when they talk about how bad they are on defense. He talks about how they give up so many crap points at the end of the games because of prevent and that stats are not a good indication of how the defense has really played this year. He said the secondary is weak, but certainly not as bad as the stats indicate. I think hes pretty dead on here, probably an average defense, but not horrible by any means.

I would maybe be more willing to buy that argument if they weren't so god-awful against the run lately. Gave up 140 to Chiefs, 200 to the Bears, 136 to the Lions, 117 to the Raiders...etc. Not something you want to see from a defense heading into the playoffs.

 

[David Yudkin]

Offenses are 3 of the most explosive in the NFL. Defenses all give it up.1 big difference I see from the regular season is turnovers. GB = +22. NE = +14. NO = -4. The Pack and Pats have taken care of the ball a little better, but have each created more than double the turnovers that the Saints D has.

Saints D gets more stops though. They allow a 34% success rate on third down. The Patriots and Packers are 43 and 44 percent. The Saints are also a top 10 run defense and a top 10 run offense as well. I don't think you can overstate the importance of that in postseason play.

It depends what you use to evaluate "best." Yes, the Saints rank in the Top 10 in rushing yards allowed . . . but they rank 28th in rushing yards per attempt. That to me does not scream "tough run defense."Not that the other teams are that great either. GB ranks 26th in rushing yards allowed per attempt at 4.7. The Pats are a smidge better at 4.6 ypc allowed (25th).One other thing to consider in evaluating these defenses is that the Pats run the no huddle so much on offense that that usually makes the defense play more plays each game. Total plays this season on defense NE 996, GB 973, NO 959. On a per play basis, NE 6.2 yards allowed, GB 6.2, NO 5.8.Updated ppg allowed: GB 21.1, NE 21.4, NO 21.5.IMO, still looking like the net results for these teams have been very similar, even if the way they got there might have a few different wrinkles here and there.

 

[dollarbill13]

Yards per point? More yards per point is better? So allowing 20 ppg on 400 yards is better than 20 ppg on 350 yards?

 

[MAC_32]

Green Bay has Charles Woodson and Clay Matthews.

That's the difference.

 

[Anonymous Internet User]

by these metrics, Carolina Panthers aren't far behind

 

[Fensalk]

Yards per point? More yards per point is better? So allowing 20 ppg on 400 yards is better than 20 ppg on 350 yards?

More yards allowed per point is better because it demonstrates that your defense is forcing the other team's offense to be inefficient. They are failing to max out the value of the yards they gain and convert those yards into points.When you look at the Patriots defense, they seem to give up a lot of yards. But when you look more closely, they are awesome at the field position game. They routinely pin opposing teams deep. That means they can give up a 50 yard drive which results in a punt, and most TD drives have to be of the 80 yard variety. On balance, the Patriots actually have the BEST defense in the AFC because they force other teams to be more inefficient with the football than anyone else in their conference.

 

[Eastwood]

by these metrics, Carolina Panthers aren't far behind

Panthers will be in the hunt for a championship next year IMO. That team is WAY better than their record.

 

[Fensalk]

The teams with a defensive ypp over 20 that fail usually are the ones that lack a high-powered offense. But even then, they can break through and win the super bowl anyway from time to time.

There has also never been a team with a defensive ypp over 20 that failed to make the playoffs.

We've recently gone on a string of Super Bowl tournaments where teams with a defensive ypp over 20 have failed to win the super bowl, until the stat reasserted itself last year. What separates the recent failures from the Packers success is that only the Packers had a franchise QB.

If the 49ers had a franchise QB, with that dypp of 22.88, I would make them a lock to win the Super Bowl. As it stands, it is iffy, but I give them good odds. Their offense is definitely better than any of the recent failures.

Back in the day, when dypp was a golden stat, you'd regularly see teams with a franchise QB paired with a defense with a 20+ dypp. For whatever reason, in the past 5 or so years, you don't see that pairing. All the strong defensive teams have lacked franchise QBs. Its thrown the stat into a dead zone where it doesn't pick the Super Bowl winner, until last year when the Packers had both.

 

[Tackling Dummies]

NE's defense is turrible and will be their downfall.

 

[scott72]

One of my buddies is a Pack fan and he always gets pissed when they talk about how bad they are on defense. He talks about how they give up so many crap points at the end of the games because of prevent and that stats are not a good indication of how the defense has really played this year. He said the secondary is weak, but certainly not as bad as the stats indicate. I think hes pretty dead on here, probably an average defense, but not horrible by any means.

I can't agree with him. The defense is poor, and it's not the secondary's fault. There's no pass rush at all, and the ROLB spot is a big weakness. The Chiefs and Bears gained major yardage all throughout the game, not just late. Not having Cullen Jenkins has been a monumental loss for this defensive unit..

 

[rizzler]

by these metrics, Carolina Panthers aren't far behind

Panthers will be in the hunt for a championship next year IMO. That team is WAY better than their record.

a CHAMPIONSHIP???im all for them being better than their record... theyre a playoff bound team soon..but championship, im not buying on that.

 

[David Yudkin]

NE's defense is turrible and will be their downfall.

Please unwrap this some. All 3 teams have allowed basically the same amount of points on the season. Why is NE's D that much worse than GB or NO?

 

[Eastwood]

by these metrics, Carolina Panthers aren't far behind

Panthers will be in the hunt for a championship next year IMO. That team is WAY better than their record.

a CHAMPIONSHIP???im all for them being better than their record... theyre a playoff bound team soon..but championship, im not buying on that.

Well be in the hunt means playoffs, I wasn't implying they would be better than the Packers or Saints from the NFC. But they are definitely a team on the rise.

 

[Ghost Rider]

One big difference is that the quarterbacks for the Packers and Saints are recent Super Bowl winners and MVPs, while the last time the Patriots QB won a Super Bowl, Mushin Muhammad was leading the league in receiving, Daunte Culpepper was lighting it up, and Rudi Johnson was the Bengals stud RB.

 

[Doug B]

Steelers led the AFC playoff teams in yards per point allowed in 2010 at 19.09 and won the conference. The Packers were even better than the Steelers at 20.60 in 2010 and beat them.

Patriots give up 19.25 yards per point.

Packers give up 18.90 yards per point.

Saints give up 17.37 yards per point.

Steelers give up 18.84 yards per point.

Ravens give up 17.14 yards per point.

49ers give up 22.88 yards per point.

The rest are garbage.

This stat nailed the Super Bowl a year ago. It picked both participants and even the outcome of the game.

This year it says 49ers over Patriots.

The 2011 Saints are about 0.6 dypp better than the 2009 Saints. Interesting.Does offensive yards per point tell us much? Or the difference between OYPP and DYPP?

 

[Go Pack]

One of my buddies is a Pack fan and he always gets pissed when they talk about how bad they are on defense. He talks about how they give up so many crap points at the end of the games because of prevent and that stats are not a good indication of how the defense has really played this year. He said the secondary is weak, but certainly not as bad as the stats indicate. I think hes pretty dead on here, probably an average defense, but not horrible by any means.

A month ago I may have believed this as they gave up big plays, but always got a stop when the game was on the line (never trailed in the 4th quarter). The last month they could not stop the Giants from tieing the game and then got run on by two bad offenses using backup players in the Chiefs and Bears. Now it seems if they don't get a turnover they are in trouble and when they are getting run on it's tough to get the picks they are so good at. I fear they are cooling at the wrong time just like they got hot at the right time last year. They miss Jenkins (huge mistake) and Collins but also several others ar enot playing at the level they were late last year either. If Rodgers and the offense does not get score nearly every possession I could see them getting upset. Especially with Finley's drops killing drives like he has been the case lately.The Saints are hot and can run the ball. They scare me even with the game in GB as it's not like the Packers are built to excel in the cold weather.

 

[munchkin]

One big difference is that the quarterbacks for the Packers and Saints are recent Super Bowl winners and MVPs, while the last time the Patriots QB won a Super Bowl, Mushin Muhammad was leading the league in receiving, Daunte Culpepper was lighting it up, and Rudi Johnson was the Bengals stud RB.

Come on now. You can do better than that. Who was the League MVP last year? Brady is still pretty good. His play is not the reason the Patriots won't win a SB. The 49ers will not be representing the NFC in Indianapolis. A nice story, yes. But defense alone will not get them there.

 

[Fensalk]

Steelers led the AFC playoff teams in yards per point allowed in 2010 at 19.09 and won the conference. The Packers were even better than the Steelers at 20.60 in 2010 and beat them.

Patriots give up 19.25 yards per point.

Packers give up 18.90 yards per point.

Saints give up 17.37 yards per point.

Steelers give up 18.84 yards per point.

Ravens give up 17.14 yards per point.

49ers give up 22.88 yards per point.

The rest are garbage.

This stat nailed the Super Bowl a year ago. It picked both participants and even the outcome of the game.

This year it says 49ers over Patriots.

The 2011 Saints are about 0.6 dypp better than the 2009 Saints. Interesting.Does offensive yards per point tell us much? Or the difference between OYPP and DYPP?

I started another thread in YPP. The current mix that I find very successful is pairing the best YAPP with a franchise QB. That seems to be a strong indicator. Current YAPP among NFC playoff teams or hopefuls:

sfo 22.88

gnb 18.90

nor 17.37

dal 15.99

det 15.59

atl 15.47

nyg 14.82

The 49ers are more of a longshot without a franchise QB. The Packers and Saints, being in the top 3 in YAPP and having a franchise QB, are both great candidates to win the conference. I am personally leaning towards Patriots over Saints in the Super Bowl given the numbers I am looking at.

 

[Tackling Dummies]

NE's defense is turrible and will be their downfall.

Please unwrap this some. All 3 teams have allowed basically the same amount of points on the season. Why is NE's D that much worse than GB or NO?

I am a Patriots fan, so it's not a bias thing and it's obvious watching every snap that they are more than vulnerable on D.NE ranks dead last vs the other team's #1 WR. 20th vs the #2 WR. 28th vs opposing TEs. Their Defense-adjusted Value Over Average is dead last and their weighed DVOA is 31st, a slim .4 ahead of TB. With Andre Carter out the rest of the season, it's not going to get better either.

 

[IHEARTFF]

Alex Smith, though. I just don't see how SF goes into NO and turns it into an ugly low scoring game. They are screwed in that game.

 

[IHEARTFF]

Alex Smith, though. I just don't see how SF goes into NO and turns it into an ugly low scoring game. They are screwed in that game.

Sorry thought NO had the tiebreak, I guess in SF that game could be good.

 

[shadyridr]

NE's defense is turrible and will be their downfall.

Please unwrap this some. All 3 teams have allowed basically the same amount of points on the season. Why is NE's D that much worse than GB or NO?

they just gave up 21 pts to the Bills in the 1st qtr. Post unwrapped

 

[Fensalk]

NE's defense is turrible and will be their downfall.

Please unwrap this some. All 3 teams have allowed basically the same amount of points on the season. Why is NE's D that much worse than GB or NO?

they just gave up 21 pts to the Bills in the 1st qtr. Post unwrapped

2 80 yard drives in there. Usually teams have a break down somewhere, kick a couple field goals, and its 13 not 21 points. Shut them out in the second quarter tho.

 

[Fensalk]

NE's defense is turrible and will be their downfall.

Please unwrap this some. All 3 teams have allowed basically the same amount of points on the season. Why is NE's D that much worse than GB or NO?

I am a Patriots fan, so it's not a bias thing and it's obvious watching every snap that they are more than vulnerable on D.NE ranks dead last vs the other team's #1 WR. 20th vs the #2 WR. 28th vs opposing TEs. Their Defense-adjusted Value Over Average is dead last and their weighed DVOA is 31st, a slim .4 ahead of TB. With Andre Carter out the rest of the season, it's not going to get better either.

The Patriots play excellent bend but don't break, which is reflected in the fact they are ranked #1 in yards allowed per play among AFC playoff teams, and their 12-3 record. Just focusing on yards is wrong. They make it harder for opponents to turn those yards into points than anyone else in the AFC playoffs. A big part of that is their awesome field position game. They pin other teams deep (at their 20 or worse) every single drive. No cheapies!

 

[shadyridr]

For some reason the Pats def always shows up in the 2nd half.

 

[Fensalk]

The Patriots once again pinning the opponents deep.

Starting position of Bills' offense today:

1Q

BUF 20

BUF 30

BUF 18

2Q

BUF 20 give up 28 yards, no points

BUF 16 give up 48 yards, no points

BUF 15 give up 58 yards, no points

3Q

BUF 15 give up 28 yards, no points

BUF 20

BUF 20 give up 41 yards, still driving...

I think that one drive where the Bills started at their own 30 is the best starting field position any team has had on the Patriots in the last month.

 

[Fensalk]

Despite giving up 3 TDs on the Bills first three drives, the Patriots defense ended up at 19.14 yards allowed per point for the game.

 

[cstu]

Maybe I'm a contrarian, but this thread makes me think "watch, we'll end up with 49ers-Ravens."