3 and outs made our defense look bad?

JKool · 02-22-2005, 08:06 PM

Good point. Extreme exception noted.

How long it takes for the D to get the ball matters just as much as how often they can get the ball in the context of this argument.

LKelley67 · 02-22-2005, 08:23 PM

okay, we were last in total d and in most every category. ya know how well they played for those last 4 weeks? that is, as good as that was for a quarter of a season it still was not good enough to get to even 31st in the league. that is really bad. there is a correlation though, either one good will help the other. it is a team game not fantasy baseball.
last 4 years-
defense offense
19 8
28 18
18 10
32 16
sum total is that even with a 32-32 record for 4 years the overall performance on both sides of the ball is weakening.

saintswhodi · 02-22-2005, 08:35 PM

How long it takes for the D to get the ball matters just as much as how often they can get the ball in the context of this argument.

Huh? You lost me on this one Kool. Isn\'t getting the ball back to the offense most of what you were saying? The D did just that better than 22 other teams, AND better than 7 playoff teams and one of them with the number one D in the league and another went to the Superbowl. How can you ask for more of them? Ask any fan in the league if they wanted a D top 10 in takeaways, they would say hell yeah. The D gave our O more opportunities than 22 other teams, that stat eclipses any TOP stat. Our O\'s inability to do ANYTHING with those turnovers was the killer. Imagine you have a company with two main departments, R & D(offense) and client acqusition(defense). Client acquisition is struggling, bad. Their numbers are low industry wide, but they are pretty good at call volume. R & D on the other hand, is more reactionary than proactive. Client acqusition gives them feedback on what potential customers say they want, but R & D is slow at putting these plans into tests and then action. Meanwhile because of the lack of support from R & D, acqusitions numbers stay down. Now if YOU were CEO, basically you would say, Acqusition is terrible, disregard the whole picture, and hire new people for acqusition. Meanwhile you are keeping R&D, and explaining away their culpability. So new folks in CA, same old same old from R&D. How long will it take for the same numbers to come in again?

RDOX · 02-22-2005, 08:49 PM

How long it takes for the D to get the ball matters just as much as how often they can get the ball in the context of this argument.

Huh? You lost me on this one Kool. Isn\'t getting the ball back to the offense most of what you were saying? The D did just that better than 22 other teams, AND better than 7 playoff teams and one of them with the number one D in the league and another went to the Superbowl. How can you ask for more of them? Ask any fan in the league if they wanted a D top 10 in takeaways, they would say hell yeah. The D gave our O more opportunities than 22 other teams, that stat eclipses any TOP stat. Our O\'s inability to do ANYTHING with those turnovers was the killer. Imagine you have a company with two main departments, R & D(offense) and client acqusition(defense). Client acquisition is struggling, bad. Their numbers are low industry wide, but they are pretty good at call volume. R & D on the other hand, is more reactionary than proactive. Client acqusition gives them feedback on what potential customers say they want, but R & D is slow at putting these plans into tests and then action. Meanwhile because of the lack of support from R & D, acqusitions numbers stay down. Now if YOU were CEO, basically you would say, Acqusition is terrible, disregard the whole picture, and hire new people for acqusition. Meanwhile you are keeping R&D, and explaining away their culpability. So new folks in CA, same old same old from R&D. How long will it take for the same numbers to come in again?

Whodi!! There you go again making Leon look bad. Remember that Leon is wonderful. He had NOTHING to do with the bad offense or the poor showing of the offense in the first quarter of any game. Remember that he is a TOP 5 QB in this league. We went 8-8 because of the fact that he had to carry this team on his slim shoulders. The fact that he dropped the ball on the one inch line a time or two didn\'t have any effect on things.

Lesson #1: Stop trying to inflict logic on BC and Kool. You and I are wrong because we look at things from a light that is detrimental to Leon. Period. I\'ve stopped posting intelligent things cause there\'s little intelligent thought where Leon is concerned. You can\'t open a closed mind.

Saint_LB · 02-22-2005, 09:03 PM

Whodi!! There you go again making Leon look bad. Remember that Leon is wonderful. He had NOTHING to do with the bad offense or the poor showing of the offense in the first quarter of any game. Remember that he is a TOP 5 QB in this league. We went 8-8 because of the fact that he had to carry this team on his slim shoulders. The fact that he dropped the ball on the one inch line a time or two didn\'t have any effect on things.

Lesson #1: Stop trying to inflict logic on BC and Kool. You and I are wrong because we look at things from a light that is detrimental to Leon. Period. I\'ve stopped posting intelligent things cause there\'s little intelligent thought where Leon is concerned. You can\'t open a closed mind. [/quote:7c3e21d794]

I don\'t know, RDOX, seems pretty intellilgent to me.

LKelley67 · 02-22-2005, 09:06 PM

RDOX for offensive coordinator lol

Saint_LB · 02-22-2005, 09:13 PM

Remember the Bobby Hebert/Carl Smith offense? How many 3 and outs did they have?

I\'m pretty sure that during these days our offense was notorious for ball control and time of possession...that was Mora\'s style of football. I haven\'t looked it up, but I\'m pretty sure that we stayed close in a lot of games during those days because we controlled the ball so well.

xan · 02-23-2005, 01:32 AM

JKool quote:
_______________________________________________________
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In each game the Saints lost, it was the Offense\'s inability to stay on the field and score in the 1st half that made most of the difference.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

While your analysis is both excellent and helpful, there is no way to draw this conclusion from your data. You have no analysis of three and outs or time of possession by wins and losses (and certainly no non-team specific averages) - thus, your conclusion goes way beyond the evidence you presented.
________________________________________________________

I will endeavor to clarify:

Because the 1st half was where, in the glare of examination, all the games were lost, I\'ve limited the study to where the Coaching staff made a strategy and the players practiced specific plays and sequences for their opponent.

My difference in # of 3&Outs in the 1st quarter is my counting 2 drives where the punt occured as the 1st play of the 2nd quarter. Thus 50 drives

1st Quarter
50 Drives (5 End of Quarter that didn\'t result in punt 1st play)
40% of all drives were 3&Out.
48% were 3 plays or less and only 2 of these involved scores
70% of all drives had a TOP of less than 2:30
The three longest drives accounted for ***20%*** of total possesion and resulted in 1 fumble, 1 INT and one FG (both by LEON)
Three possessions incurred turnovers which resulted in defensive scores, where the Saints D wasn\'t on the field.
1st Drives:
16 Starting on the NO25, 13 punts, 11 3&O, 2 Fumbles 1 TOOD. Avg TOP - 2:27
2nd Drives
16 Starting on the NO27, 10 punts, 9 3&O, 1 TD, 1 FG, 1 INT 2 TOOD. Avg TOP - 1:32

In games we lost, the first three drives started on the 25, averaged 4 plays and lasted 1:33 seconds. We punted 16 out of 24 times, with 4 Fumbles, 2 INT, a TD and a FG.

Even I was amazed at this set of statistics.

2nd Quarter
61 drives, 7 End of Half
9 drives (17%) were 3&O punts
70% of all drives less than 2:30 TOP
(67% net of kneeldowns at the end of half)
3 drives were carry-over where the score was the 1st or 2nd play of the quarter.
4 drives resulted in three play turnovers
3 drives resulted in three play scores

In Losses (after the 1st 3 drives), the next 25 drives showed improvement, however averaging a mere 1:49 TOP, with 11 punts, 6 TDs, 4 FG, 2 INTs and 2 Fum.

Again, how stunning to see how the offense failed to show up.

In absolute terms, these statistics do not qualify the Saints as having an offense. I now completely understand Grant\'s outrage at Brooks. What an utter joke.

JKool · 02-23-2005, 02:11 AM

Xan, nice work. I\'ll think on this. I will not be responding though due to my decreasing ability to put up with insults and poor behavior - I do commend you for your intelligent analysis.

Either way, I\'m not coming here any more. People who like to label others and call them close minded are not interesting to me. I\'m tired of getting accused of things merely because I think something is worth thinking about.

I\'ve enjoyed my time here, but in the last two weeks I\'ve been insulted and accused of being ignorant and/or irrational more often than any other time in my life. That isn\'t fun or interesting to me anymore.

It seems to me that many people here are happier to insult others than respond to ideas. I\'m done.

I\'ll miss guys like Whodi, BMG, Scotty, Billy and WhoDat. If you guys want to chat, you can try and get my email address. As for the rest of you, good luck turning the board into a place where discussion is useless and being a rhah rhah guys is cool.

JOESAM2002 · 02-23-2005, 08:27 AM

JKool, I hope you\'re not serious about leaving. We need good members like yourself to maintain the balance of the board. I will ask you, Please don\'t let something like this make one of our better members leave.

02-22-2005, 08:06 PM	#21
JKool 1000 Posts + Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Madison, WI Posts: 2,423	3 and outs made our defense look bad? Good point. Extreme exception noted. How long it takes for the D to get the ball matters just as much as how often they can get the ball in the context of this argument.

02-22-2005, 08:23 PM	#22
LKelley67 1000 Posts + Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: baton rouge Posts: 2,540	3 and outs made our defense look bad? okay, we were last in total d and in most every category. ya know how well they played for those last 4 weeks? that is, as good as that was for a quarter of a season it still was not good enough to get to even 31st in the league. that is really bad. there is a correlation though, either one good will help the other. it is a team game not fantasy baseball. last 4 years- defense offense 19 8 28 18 18 10 32 16 sum total is that even with a 32-32 record for 4 years the overall performance on both sides of the ball is weakening.

02-22-2005, 08:35 PM	#23
saintswhodi 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: San Antonio, TX Posts: 6,941	3 and outs made our defense look bad? How long it takes for the D to get the ball matters just as much as how often they can get the ball in the context of this argument. Huh? You lost me on this one Kool. Isn\'t getting the ball back to the offense most of what you were saying? The D did just that better than 22 other teams, AND better than 7 playoff teams and one of them with the number one D in the league and another went to the Superbowl. How can you ask for more of them? Ask any fan in the league if they wanted a D top 10 in takeaways, they would say hell yeah. The D gave our O more opportunities than 22 other teams, that stat eclipses any TOP stat. Our O\'s inability to do ANYTHING with those turnovers was the killer. Imagine you have a company with two main departments, R & D(offense) and client acqusition(defense). Client acquisition is struggling, bad. Their numbers are low industry wide, but they are pretty good at call volume. R & D on the other hand, is more reactionary than proactive. Client acqusition gives them feedback on what potential customers say they want, but R & D is slow at putting these plans into tests and then action. Meanwhile because of the lack of support from R & D, acqusitions numbers stay down. Now if YOU were CEO, basically you would say, Acqusition is terrible, disregard the whole picture, and hire new people for acqusition. Meanwhile you are keeping R&D, and explaining away their culpability. So new folks in CA, same old same old from R&D. How long will it take for the same numbers to come in again?

02-22-2005, 08:49 PM	#24
RDOX 100th Post Join Date: Oct 2004 Posts: 264	3 and outs made our defense look bad? How long it takes for the D to get the ball matters just as much as how often they can get the ball in the context of this argument. Huh? You lost me on this one Kool. Isn\'t getting the ball back to the offense most of what you were saying? The D did just that better than 22 other teams, AND better than 7 playoff teams and one of them with the number one D in the league and another went to the Superbowl. How can you ask for more of them? Ask any fan in the league if they wanted a D top 10 in takeaways, they would say hell yeah. The D gave our O more opportunities than 22 other teams, that stat eclipses any TOP stat. Our O\'s inability to do ANYTHING with those turnovers was the killer. Imagine you have a company with two main departments, R & D(offense) and client acqusition(defense). Client acquisition is struggling, bad. Their numbers are low industry wide, but they are pretty good at call volume. R & D on the other hand, is more reactionary than proactive. Client acqusition gives them feedback on what potential customers say they want, but R & D is slow at putting these plans into tests and then action. Meanwhile because of the lack of support from R & D, acqusitions numbers stay down. Now if YOU were CEO, basically you would say, Acqusition is terrible, disregard the whole picture, and hire new people for acqusition. Meanwhile you are keeping R&D, and explaining away their culpability. So new folks in CA, same old same old from R&D. How long will it take for the same numbers to come in again? Whodi!! There you go again making Leon look bad. Remember that Leon is wonderful. He had NOTHING to do with the bad offense or the poor showing of the offense in the first quarter of any game. Remember that he is a TOP 5 QB in this league. We went 8-8 because of the fact that he had to carry this team on his slim shoulders. The fact that he dropped the ball on the one inch line a time or two didn\'t have any effect on things. Lesson #1: Stop trying to inflict logic on BC and Kool. You and I are wrong because we look at things from a light that is detrimental to Leon. Period. I\'ve stopped posting intelligent things cause there\'s little intelligent thought where Leon is concerned. You can\'t open a closed mind.
RDOX 100th Post Join Date: Oct 2004 Posts: 264

02-22-2005, 09:03 PM	#25
Saint_LB Deuce Join Date: Sep 2004 Posts: 2,894	3 and outs made our defense look bad? Whodi!! There you go again making Leon look bad. Remember that Leon is wonderful. He had NOTHING to do with the bad offense or the poor showing of the offense in the first quarter of any game. Remember that he is a TOP 5 QB in this league. We went 8-8 because of the fact that he had to carry this team on his slim shoulders. The fact that he dropped the ball on the one inch line a time or two didn\'t have any effect on things. Lesson #1: Stop trying to inflict logic on BC and Kool. You and I are wrong because we look at things from a light that is detrimental to Leon. Period. I\'ve stopped posting intelligent things cause there\'s little intelligent thought where Leon is concerned. You can\'t open a closed mind. [/quote:7c3e21d794] I don\'t know, RDOX, seems pretty intellilgent to me.
Saint_LB Deuce Join Date: Sep 2004 Posts: 2,894	Whether you think you can or think you can't...you're right!

Latest Blogs
2023 New Orleans Saints: Training Camp Last Blog: 08-01-2023 By: MarchingOn Puck the Fro Browl! Last Blog: 02-05-2023 By: neugey CFP: "Just Keep Doing What You're Doing" Last Blog: 12-08-2022 By: neugey

02-22-2005, 09:06 PM	#26
LKelley67 1000 Posts + Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: baton rouge Posts: 2,540	3 and outs made our defense look bad? RDOX for offensive coordinator lol

02-22-2005, 09:13 PM	#27
Saint_LB Deuce Join Date: Sep 2004 Posts: 2,894	3 and outs made our defense look bad? Remember the Bobby Hebert/Carl Smith offense? How many 3 and outs did they have? I\'m pretty sure that during these days our offense was notorious for ball control and time of possession...that was Mora\'s style of football. I haven\'t looked it up, but I\'m pretty sure that we stayed close in a lot of games during those days because we controlled the ball so well.
Saint_LB Deuce Join Date: Sep 2004 Posts: 2,894

02-23-2005, 01:32 AM	#28
xan Professor Crab and Site Donor 2014 Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Princeton Posts: 3,368 Blog Entries: 34	3 and outs made our defense look bad? JKool quote: _______________________________________________________ quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- In each game the Saints lost, it was the Offense\'s inability to stay on the field and score in the 1st half that made most of the difference. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- While your analysis is both excellent and helpful, there is no way to draw this conclusion from your data. You have no analysis of three and outs or time of possession by wins and losses (and certainly no non-team specific averages) - thus, your conclusion goes way beyond the evidence you presented. ________________________________________________________ I will endeavor to clarify: Because the 1st half was where, in the glare of examination, all the games were lost, I\'ve limited the study to where the Coaching staff made a strategy and the players practiced specific plays and sequences for their opponent. My difference in # of 3&Outs in the 1st quarter is my counting 2 drives where the punt occured as the 1st play of the 2nd quarter. Thus 50 drives 1st Quarter 50 Drives (5 End of Quarter that didn\'t result in punt 1st play) 40% of all drives were 3&Out. 48% were 3 plays or less and only 2 of these involved scores 70% of all drives had a TOP of less than 2:30 The three longest drives accounted for *20%* of total possesion and resulted in 1 fumble, 1 INT and one FG (both by LEON) Three possessions incurred turnovers which resulted in defensive scores, where the Saints D wasn\'t on the field. 1st Drives: 16 Starting on the NO25, 13 punts, 11 3&O, 2 Fumbles 1 TOOD. Avg TOP - 2:27 2nd Drives 16 Starting on the NO27, 10 punts, 9 3&O, 1 TD, 1 FG, 1 INT 2 TOOD. Avg TOP - 1:32 In games we lost, the first three drives started on the 25, averaged 4 plays and lasted 1:33 seconds. We punted 16 out of 24 times, with 4 Fumbles, 2 INT, a TD and a FG. Even I was amazed at this set of statistics. 2nd Quarter 61 drives, 7 End of Half 9 drives (17%) were 3&O punts 70% of all drives less than 2:30 TOP (67% net of kneeldowns at the end of half) 3 drives were carry-over where the score was the 1st or 2nd play of the quarter. 4 drives resulted in three play turnovers 3 drives resulted in three play scores In Losses (after the 1st 3 drives), the next 25 drives showed improvement, however averaging a mere 1:49 TOP, with 11 punts, 6 TDs, 4 FG, 2 INTs and 2 Fum. Again, how stunning to see how the offense failed to show up. In absolute terms, these statistics do not qualify the Saints as having an offense. I now completely understand Grant\'s outrage at Brooks. What an utter joke.
	Calvin: "I wish I was a Tiger." Hobbes: "Common lament."

02-23-2005, 02:11 AM	#29
JKool 1000 Posts + Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Madison, WI Posts: 2,423	3 and outs made our defense look bad? Xan, nice work. I\'ll think on this. I will not be responding though due to my decreasing ability to put up with insults and poor behavior - I do commend you for your intelligent analysis. Either way, I\'m not coming here any more. People who like to label others and call them close minded are not interesting to me. I\'m tired of getting accused of things merely because I think something is worth thinking about. I\'ve enjoyed my time here, but in the last two weeks I\'ve been insulted and accused of being ignorant and/or irrational more often than any other time in my life. That isn\'t fun or interesting to me anymore. It seems to me that many people here are happier to insult others than respond to ideas. I\'m done. I\'ll miss guys like Whodi, BMG, Scotty, Billy and WhoDat. If you guys want to chat, you can try and get my email address. As for the rest of you, good luck turning the board into a place where discussion is useless and being a rhah rhah guys is cool.
	"... I was beating them with my eyes the whole game..." - Aaron Brooks

02-23-2005, 08:27 AM	#30
JOESAM2002 1000 Posts + Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: CRYSTAL BEACH TEXAS Posts: 4,100	3 and outs made our defense look bad? JKool, I hope you\'re not serious about leaving. We need good members like yourself to maintain the balance of the board. I will ask you, Please don\'t let something like this make one of our better members leave.