Go Back   New Orleans Saints - blackandgold.com > Main > Saints
Shop Horizontal

Another look at some numbers

this is a discussion within the Saints Community Forum; TR, first my apologies if you thought the veiled insult was meant for you. It wasn't. It was directed at Euphoria's earlier remark about numbers and baseball. Still can't figure that one out. Regarding your comments, I agree for the ...

Like Tree5Likes

Closed Thread
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-10-2012, 04:07 PM   #11
500th Post
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: SW Ohio
Posts: 820
TR, first my apologies if you thought the veiled insult was meant for you. It wasn't. It was directed at Euphoria's earlier remark about numbers and baseball. Still can't figure that one out.

Regarding your comments, I agree for the most part. That said, Alex Smith's work product is pretty bad. No matter if you look at QB rating, yardage, TD's, picks, etc. Game to game numbers are usually of little value. Results against common opponents are a bit better, but not much. Conversely, season statistics including QB ratings do carry weight. The best teams in the NFL have the best QB's, be it Brees, Roger, Brady, or Manning (2x) who in turn put up the best numbers of the course of the season. Early in the season when the O-line was struggling Brees' numbers were good but not great. Since the O-line has gelled Bress' has been climbing and records have been falling.

A QB and team lives and dies with the O-line. Everyone tends to focus on QB's and star receivers but a good passing game boils down to protection. If an average QB has enough time average receivers will get open. Period. Conversely, poor protection can make a great QB look pretty bad. We need only look back to the Rams game. Brees is great because the Saints have the whole package. Great QB, great O-line, very good but not super star receivers, running backs who can catch and protect and play calling that puts it all together. This combination results in records and rings.

A similar issue holds with defenses. If you can pressure QBs the coverage doesn't have to be as tight and the picks go up. This year, most of SFs sacks came against weaker opponents with young or immobile QBs (aka Pittsburgh). This year I believe that the Saint's biggest weakness has been the inability to consistently pressure the QB. The corners and safeties have been taking a ton of crap for poor coverage but better pressure would help in solving that problem.

So, Saturday will probably be settled by our O-line vs. SF's D-line.
dam1953 is offline  
Old 01-10-2012, 07:06 PM   #12
In Doh We Trust
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 5,967
Blog Entries: 16
Hey I have an idea - screw the score!!

JUST WIN BABY!!
homerj07 is offline  
Old 01-10-2012, 07:10 PM   #13
Site Donor
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 11,078
Blog Entries: 5
Budsdrinker and pherein like this.
saintfan is offline  
Old 01-10-2012, 07:30 PM   #14
Site Donor
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Anchorage, AK
Posts: 2,163
Blog Entries: 2
Thumbs up

Originally Posted by dam1953 View Post

So, it looks more and more like SF’s 13-3 has to be chalked up to being lucky. Lucky that they play in the NFC West, the weakest division in the NFL. Lucky that their non-division games were mostly against weaker teams. Unfortunately, it looks like their luck is going to run out on Saturday.
This synopsis makes perfect sense to me. I don't understand how some don't get it.

Their QB's rating is shat, and yet they finished 13-3. I mean, how do you argue that? Have a look at the QB ratings of the other 13+ teams and it becomes obvious.

Friend request inbound, Blue Dog. You're okay in my book!!

Alaska
AlaskaSaints is online now  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:02 PM.


Copyright 1997 - 2013 - BlackandGold.com
no new posts