Re: Poll: Calvin Johnson or Darrelle Revis
posted at 7/11/2014 9:21 AM EDT
In response to cyncalpatfan's comment:
In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
Another way to make the argument (and maybe it's the start of a mathematical proof) is that if your defense is poor, the average score to win the game will be higher than if your defense is good. If you assume that the variance around the average is the same percentage in both scenarios, then the actual absolute variance in scoring needed is smaller in the first scenario than the last. (I know that's not very clearly written.)
Put simply--if your defense is good so that the winning score is usually about 20 points and the variance around the average is 50%, then your offense is almost certain to win if it scores 30 points (about one TD and one FG above the league average). If your defense is poor so that the winning score is usually around 28 points and the variance around the average is still 50%, then your offense isn't certain to win unless it scores 42 points i(which is three TDs above the league average, and pretty hard to do in games where teams typically only have 11 scoring chances)
But, isn't that obvious? I mean, if a team's D only gives up, say, 17 or 19 points, then all it needs on O is 18 or 20 points. Conversely, if the D gives up, say, 28 points, then the O needs to score 29 points.
The problem has been that even though the Patriots' D has held the opposition to less than 20 points in their last two Super Bowls, the O has not been able to score over 17 points. Seems to me, the way to go is to improve the D even further to try to limit teams to less than two TDs. Hard to do, but it might prove easier than getting this O to become more productive.
Not to nit pick, but the Giants scored 21 points in Super Bowl 46...which is different than "holding then to under 20 points", because if we had held them to under 20 points and not lost the time of possession (and field position) so badly, we may of actually won that low scoring game. The giants were built to win a game like that...win time of possession, pressure without blitzing, run when needed, pass when needed and win. We obviously weren't built for that - which some would argue is classic playoff football - having a defense that can get that last stop and not let an offense drive up and down the field at will on you.
People will say...oh we only lost by this much, or by this little play here or there, but that's big stuff in football. Huge. It's what separates a Super Bowl winning team form a Super Bowl losing team. I watched us win three Super Bowls like that - we were just a little bit better than that other team. And I watched us lose two Super Bowls like that - the other team was a little but better than us. It's not always cut and dry, but in these cases I think it was.