In response to Low-FB-IQ's comment:
In response to pezz4pats' comment:
In response to TrueChamp's comment:
In response to themightypatriots' comment:
In response to pezz4pats' comment:
Yes it is. Time relates to possessions. The amount of possessions are dictated by the time it takes to complete them.
1 drive of 8 minutes decreases possessions as 4 drives totaling 8 minutes increases possessions.
1 drive of 8 minutes means an ineffecient defense while 4 drives totaling 8 minutes indicates an ieffecient D. They would be on the field more times but are spending no more time than they would be for the one, 8 minute possession. (assuming those possessions are not quick strike scores for the other team)
Holding the ball ='s time lost='s possessions lost.
The only time a defense holding the ball would be a good thing (prevent) is at the end of the game, with a substantial lead. Then you are using time to kill possessions for the other team.
Feels like we're trying to teach the alphabet to kindergardners.
On average for a 16 game season...
Team A scores 35 ppg.
Team B scores 26 ppg
Team A allows 21 ppg
team B allows 25 ppg.
Which team is more likely to score more points while allowing leSS points in a 14 possession game? A 10 possession game? A 4 possession game.
Hint... Team A is the answer to all 3 questions.? The only factor that changes things is if one half of team A under performs.
As Bill Belichick just said in Prolates postabove points is the number one determining factor in the outcome of a game.
Class dismissed, you can go back to cheer leading now. Try not to drop anyone while executing the pyramid Formation.
Here's what you don't understand. Points per drive is a better indicator of an O's performance than points per game and possessions x's ppd ='s points.
A team will not score as many points with less possessions as a rule.
Decreased possessions means you HAVE to play mistake free.. Turn overs will hurt you more in an 8 possession game as opposed to a 12 possession game, because you have less opportunity to overcome them.
Just as a team with a higher ppd scores more with more possessions, they also LOSE them at a higher rate with decreased possessions.
Team A= 3pts per drive @ 12 drives ='s 36 points.
with 8 drives ='s 24 points.
Team B scores 2.75 points per drive with 12 possessions ='s 33 points
With 8 possessions ='s 22 points.
Team B closes the gap with less possessions and any mistake by team A can lose the game.
The difference in points with 8 possessions is 2 points. A fg will win the game. It would not with 12 possessions, as the difference is higher.
Simply put;
The Pats scored 17 points on 8 possessions.
The O lost 2 of those 8 possessions with the T/O's which gives them 6 possessions @ 3ppp or 18 points (Small margian of error) Which is basically what they scored. So the O lost 6 points by turning the ball over, twice.
However, the D lost 4 possessions with their inability to get off the field and lost a total of 12 points, 4x's 3, with the decreased possessions.
SO.......
17 points + the 6 pts the O lost with T/O's + 12 points the D lost by decreasing the possessions ='s 35 points,, in a 12 possession game (which is their point per game average)
The O would have had to play mistake free in order to win the game (because the gints O did) (NO t/o's and no 3 and outs, THANKS, AGAIN, D!) and there was a differential of only 2 points.
In a 12 possession game, not so much.
That is the most unbelievable reasoning I have ever heard and is EXACTLY why statisticians and computers do not coach the real thing as well as why the game is not played on paper.
You would fit right in with the BCS computer that still had Notre Dame ranked #1 AFTER they got their rear end whooped in the National Championship game.
Oh brother. So it's FACT the pats ONLY lost 6 points in the two turnovers huh? How do you factor in the ofense giving the other team 2 points to start with or quantify giving the other team 2 extra possessions and how that specifically affects the game plan and flow of the game right out of the shoot? Or more importantly how it affects your own defense putting them right back on the field after virtually ZERO rest. 1st offensive possession TOP = ZERO for Pats. How demoralizing is it to go out get a stop give the ball to the offense and then have to go right back on the field trailing by 2 points? How do the stats factor in momentum swings and shifts. Etc etc. Stats are BS.
Unfair or not every reasonable person expected the offense to play mistake free or near it because thats what they were and the expectation set through their own regular season consitency. The did not and under acheived. It happens and stinks for all of us.
It is moronic, no not calling you moronic, but moronic for a reasonable person to think the defense would play above its station/level it had set through it's consistently sub par regular season play. They were what we all knew them to be. Weak.
To top it all off. The Patriots were winning at the half and had more offensive possessions in the 2nd hald than the Giants (5-4) and did less than the Giants did with it. Someone will probably say oh but the last possesion was end of game no time blah blah and I would agree with them but that is exactly what everyone else on here tries to do when to roll out these crazt points per possesion stats when there is no context. It's complete BS.
The Pats had a 1 point lead at half. Take away the final possession they had in the game and it's still 4 possessions a piece in the 2nd half. All they had to do was tie in the 2nd half and they win. The offense could not match the Giants point for point with the same number of possessions and made it worse by giving one away to the Giants so they may have even had a 4 or 5 to 3 possesion advantage if they did not give one away and took some clock off in the process of getting at least three points out of the posession. Let's ignore all that logic and just look at some funny numbers though. That make more sense. Oh brother.
In simplest terms its funny how one unit goes into the game maligned and with a bad rep and plays to that reputation and the other unit goes into the game with all the accolades and best play in the game and under performs and yet some still want to blame the unit that had the bad rep to begin with and played to what they were. Will never understand that.
Why would anyone take into account how the defense or offense is expected to play. If I play a game of one on one against Michael Jordan and lose 20 to 2 than I am not a better basketball player based on the idea that I wasn't expected to score 2 points.
It's irrelevant how well you thought they would do and how you would grade their performance vs your expectations.
Each team had equal posessions, this will almost always be the case. The Giants scored more than the Patriots, therefore the Giants offense performed better. Therefore the question is did the Patriots offense perform worse than normal or better? Did the Giants?
So if the Patriots scored more points per drive than they average than they performed as well as usual but had fewer posessions. If the Giants scored more points per drive than they average than they performed as well as usual but had fewer posessions.
Since both the Patriots and Giants offense scored more points per drive than usual and the Patriots defense gave up more points per drive than usual than the defense performed worse than average and was the cause of the very few posessions. The minimal possessions were the cause of the low scoring game.
Wow why would you ever self scout and evaluate your own team and set realisictic expectations for yourself as a coach as to what your team is and or can't do well? Can you really be seriously? How exactly to do game plan without knowing your own weaknesses as well as your opponents? I am beginning to think I am am the only guy on the board with a lengthy coaching background. I know I am getting old but not senile yet. Almost don't know what to say to you after that comment. Maybe I just misunderstood your context but I can assure you that as a coach you have certain realistic expectations of exactly what you think your team and its individual units can accomplish going into a game.
As for you playing basketball against Michael jordan... well I don't think it matters who it is but if you play ball against player x and players of similar caliber a number of times and average scoring 30 points a game win or lose. Then go on to play in a championship match against the same similarly skilled player type but only score 17( or change the numbers to what ever you wish like always score 6 points and then only score 2 for example), then me as your friend or observer I would say to you that I do not necessarily think you are a worse basketball player but you definatley under achieved in that particular game based on what you have consistently shown me up to that point.
Just my opinion.
