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

2004 Defensive Performance not as bad as you thinnk

this is a discussion within the Saints Community Forum; Here\'s one of those \"what ifs\" What if the defense didn\'t get all those turnovers. They would have been on the field longer and might have finished 33rd in total defense. Things that make you say hmmmmmmmmmm............

Closed Thread
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-25-2005, 08:18 PM   #91
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 2,616
2004 Defensive Performance not as bad as you thinnk

Here\'s one of those \"what ifs\"

What if the defense didn\'t get all those turnovers. They would have been on the field longer and might have finished 33rd in total defense.

Things that make you say hmmmmmmmmmm.........
GumboBC is offline  
Old 02-25-2005, 08:44 PM   #92
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 517
2004 Defensive Performance not as bad as you thinnk

Hahaha..that was pretty good...
shadowdrinker is offline  
Old 02-25-2005, 10:08 PM   #93
5000 POSTS! +
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 6,941
2004 Defensive Performance not as bad as you thinnk

Imagine how terrible the offense would be if the defense didn\'t give them 33 extra possessions to punt or turn the ball over?
saintswhodi is offline  
Old 02-26-2005, 01:35 AM   #94
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 517
2004 Defensive Performance not as bad as you thinnk

Turnovers, eh?

Hmmmmmmm.

What were we ranked? 10th?. Does that mean we were the 10th best defense in the NFL? Or does it mean we were the 32nd best defense in the NFL who ranked 10th in take-aways?

Think about that long and hard. Ooops. Careful now, I don\'t want nobody hurting dem selfs....
Oh my goodness. Thats pityful.
You mean we ranked 10th in takeaways and still finished DFL?
No way thats true. That just can\'t be right. We weren\'t that bad...were we?

I remember at one point late in the season we were on pace to break the record for the worst defense in the entire 40 year history of the NFL. How close did we come?
I\'m not sure...I just know ESPN was ragging on them most of the year...for having the average to easily attain said title..if it were to continue...so that means..not only did they suck...they sucked worse than any other team ever has...for most of the year...

But..Yes..We did rank 10th in takeaway\'s...and at the same time..ranked overall..Dead Last in the Defensive rankings...

Quite an accomplishment...Venturi is a Genius....
shadowdrinker is offline  
Old 02-26-2005, 01:43 AM   #95
xan
Professor Crab and
Site Donor 2014
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Princeton
Posts: 2,951
Blog Entries: 26
2004 Defensive Performance not as bad as you thinnk

Unlike those who throw up their hands and say \"worst ever, I quit\", I\'m trying to find where it was good, where it was bad and find solutions. I know that\'s a tough concept to master for the \"Mike Tyson\" type. (Unable to reason, pounds the same argument over and over, and calls anything contrary to his distorted view of reality \"ludicrous\".

Points allowed is the only measure by which one can truly say \"best\" or \"worst\" ever and the truly only meaningful category to compare across years, or even within a season. Since we weren\'t even close to the worst this year in that category (28th), assertions that this is the worst defense EVER is nonsense.

The Bengals from 1991-2003 and the Bucs in 76 were probably the worst of all time.

Someone is looking for rushing yards allowed in the 1st half.

---------------2004 Saints Defense Allowed
----------------Rushing---------------Passing
------------Wins-----Losses------Wins------Losses
Game-------121-------167----------237---------252
1st Half------70---------77----------112---------158
2nd Half-----51---------89----------125----------94

As you can see here, the defense was significantly better against the run in wins, however, this is skewed because teams playing from behind usually pass more (and gain more ground per average play). When we were getting spanked in 5 blowout losses, teams ran more in the 2nd half and passed less.

It seems that the real big problem is pass defense in the 1st half. That\'s where games seem to be decided early. Teams that beat us went downfield early and often. No matter how you slice it, pass defense was terrible. Was this due to bad schemes? was this due to inadequate pass rush? Was this due to deficient athletes?

As someone bemoaned above that the Cards ran all over us and that\'s why we lost, well, 59 yards in the 1st half vs 157 in the second half, 118 in the 4th quarter alone. This is the same game where there were 2 redzone turnovers and the offense gave up a touchdown in the first half, then proceeded to disappear in the second half. Show me how leaving the D in 99 degree heat for 21.5 minutes of the 2nd half while ammassing only 2 first downs is an example of how they suck? The D kept the team in the game until it was worn out by heat and futility. This game the offense lost.




Calvin: "I wish I was a Tiger."
Hobbes: "Common lament."
xan is offline  
Old 02-26-2005, 02:08 AM   #96
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 517
2004 Defensive Performance not as bad as you thinnk

\'\'As someone bemoaned above that the Cards ran all over us and that\'s why we lost, well, 59 yards in the 1st half vs 157 in the second half, 118 in the 4th quarter alone. \'\'

And that had absolutley nothing to do with it...right...it was the 2 turnovers and that alone that lost the game?...

When your Defense gives up yards..and points so easily...you are forced to throw it..and you will get more turnovers..it\'s just bound to happen...

How can a Defense that ranked near dead last...in nearly every single catagory...be given praise for \'\'Winning\'\'....or for even trying...

I can\'t agree with it...i just can\'t...you can try as you will..to single out specific drives...or whatever..but..the numbers don\'t change..and neihter does the end result...8-8..32nd ranked Defense...arguabley..the worst in N.O. history..and arguabley..one of the worst ever in NFL history...

15th ranked Offense...Here\'s the key word..DESPITE...a failure of a Defensive Unit.

They were on pace to break the record for the worst ever...EVER...how on Earth can you think they are not as bad as they looked?

If everything was infact..a 50/50 kinda thing...the D would have been ranked 15 too..or..the Offense would have been ranked Dead Last...Neither are true...

it\'s not as simple as...As the Offense goes..so goes the Defense..nor is it vice versa...each unit is responsible for thier OWN production..

The Offense did thier job...mind you..it wasn\'t a legendary effort..but..good enough...better than most...

Defense..Dead Last....an analysis ..or whatever...isn\'t going to change it...you said you showed me how the Defense could have been ranked top 10...if you take away like..6 games...haha...I bet most Defenses would look better...with a time machine...until that happens,,,Reality will continue to be defined by the moment...and..facts will continue to be defined by the past...
shadowdrinker is offline  
Old 02-26-2005, 09:16 AM   #97
5000 POSTS! +
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 6,941
2004 Defensive Performance not as bad as you thinnk

it\'s not as simple as...As the Offense goes..so goes the Defense..nor is it vice versa...each unit is responsible for thier OWN production
Spoken like someone who truly knows very little about football. This statement takes the cake. So if the offense has the ball on their 20, turns it over and the opposing D takes it to the 5, then the opposing O scores, that has NOTHING to do with the our O? That TD was independent of the mistake by our offense? Teams usually get the ball at the 5 I guess so all defenses should be used to it right? Did you ever play football? My bets will be hedged twoards a hell no. But the fact the you look at the TEAM as TWO seperate units shows you really don\'t understand football, but I got that impression a while ago. Even those who say the defense was atrocious admit the offense had some effect on that, but not you. That is just ridiculous.

The Offense did thier job...mind you..it wasn\'t a legendary effort..but..good enough...better than most...
You think the defense giving them 33 extra possessions helped that at all? You do know what happens when OUR D gets a turnover right? We give the ball to our O. You realize that? Go look at the Rams D. They had 15 takeaways, less than half what we had. Would you prefer that? They were only a couple spots from us in overall ranking. Would you rather have a defense that gives half the turnovers to the offense but gives up 20 less yards so you can say they weren\'t last?

If everything was infact..a 50/50 kinda thing...the D would have been ranked 15 too..or..the Offense would have been ranked Dead Last...Neither are true...
The ignorance of this statement defies the need to even respond.

When your Defense gives up yards..and points so easily...you are forced to throw it..and you will get more turnovers..it\'s just bound to happen...
But wait, if the two units are as seperate as you want them to be, what the defense does shouldn\'t effect the O right? That\'s what you said. Need me to remind you? I quoted it up top. Here it is.
it\'s not as simple as...As the Offense goes..so goes the Defense..nor is it vice versa...each unit is responsible for thier OWN production..
So by your own words, if the defense gave up a TD on every drive, it is the offenses responsibility to match that point for point cause each unit is responsible for their own production right? So if the offense didn\'t, since they are responsible for their own production, they failed right? Your words.
saintswhodi is offline  
Old 02-26-2005, 10:01 AM   #98
5000 POSTS! +
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 6,941
2004 Defensive Performance not as bad as you thinnk

Some people are just stubborn.

http://www.blackandgold.net/site/mod...id=7623&page=1

And I will take my own advice and jump out of trying to explain AGAIN.
saintswhodi is offline  
Old 02-26-2005, 12:09 PM   #99
Cold as Ice!
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Da Big Easy
Posts: 2,978
2004 Defensive Performance not as bad as you thinnk


What I think this means:
When the game is close, the defense is pretty good. In losses that weren\'t blowouts, the defense showed up. In losses where the offense doesn\'t show up, the defense looks even worse.



\'\'When the game is close\'\'...that pretty much equals the 1st quarter...

The D was HORRIBLE.....maybe one of the worst ever in the history of the NFL....I could care less about the final four games...It\'s like walking 3/4 of a mile in a race..then sprinitng the final lap..and expecting praise...

Venturi delivers the worst in players..and he always right on time...just enough to end our season..without any real threat of making the play offs...

Not to entirely blame the D...but..most of the blame for certain has to go to them...they were an embarrasment to the Franchise....
I have one comment........32nd rkd D....they suked, end of discussion!
FireVenturi is offline  
Old 02-26-2005, 12:11 PM   #100
Cold as Ice!
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Da Big Easy
Posts: 2,978
2004 Defensive Performance not as bad as you thinnk

Hey, cause you are close minded and have formed an opinion that you are unwilling to change, I guess ANYONE will lose against that. Did you read the title of the thread, or did you think you were in the DEFENSE SUCKS thread? Weren\'t you also the one arguing with me that WE WOULD NOT franchise Howard? Okay. Thanks. :P

[Edited on 25/2/2005 by saintswhodi]
THE DEFENSE SUKS>>>>>END OF DISCUSSION
FireVenturi is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:54 AM.


Copyright 1997 - 2013 - BlackandGold.com
no new posts