Should Tebow success get under Cam's skin

[teeray]

The above says so. Just cause you keep repeating doesn't make it true.

45% red-zone scoring percentage, 20th in the league versus 6th in attempts means you suck at scoring and you are incredibly inefficient.

We are 6th in attempts and 14th in red zone TDs.

But none of that is about our defense.

[teeray]

Yes numbers do tell the story.

Carolina Defense:

Yards given up per drive: 30th

Punts forced per drive: 28th

Points given up per drive: 32nd

TDs allowed per drive: 30th

TOs given/forced per drive: 26th

Interceptions per drive: 26th

Fumbles recovered per drive: 14th

Staring field position for defense: 18th (so they haven't had unusually bad field position like you suggest. Just slightly below average so that argument doesn't work)

Drive Success Rate (three and outs): 29th

And lastly the website PFFL himself described as:

Has our offense ranked 8th and our defense ranked 31st.

http://www.advancednflstats.com/2011/11/team-rankings-week-eleven.html

But that was when he was looking at the wrong year that had our defense at 7 and our offense at 27th.

Once he figured out it was the wrong year he decided it was no longer credible. :rofl:

Should I keep going??

Rushing yards allowed per game: 28th

Rushing TDs allowed: 32nd

Rushing yards per attempt: 25th

Third down stops: 28th

First down allowed by rush: 27th

Defensive penalty yards: 20th

Defensive TDs: 0 tied for 32nd with only 6 teams

And the really sad thing is most of these numbers have been improving!!!

Most of these have nothing to do with our offense.

And advancednflstatistics has our defense rated 29th in EPA and 31st in their effeciency.

And they are:

the biggest, most credible and best advanced statistics football site on the internet. They actually do happen to rank actual true total offense and defense efficiency(even turnover margin adjusted as well as schedule) and they do it weekly. This takes into consideration everything. Including schedule.

According to you.

And our red zone stats. You like to mix up your stats to make it seem worse. You can just say we are 20th in red zone TD percentage. That is good enough to make your point and I have said as well we need to be more efficient in the red zone.

But we are 6th in attempts and 14th in red zone TDs.

[TrueDat]

We are 6th in attempts and 14th in red zone TDs.

But none of that is about our defense.

We are 45% percent dude. lol. What's so hard to understand about that?

That means we need MORE than 2 trips to the red-zone to score one touchdown. Sometimes it takes us 3 tries just to score one touchdown. It's pretty clear what 45% means.

50% is 1 out of two. It's also average:

15 Denver 50.00%

This is average points:

15 Cincinnati 23.6

So we are 6th in attempts, and 20th red-zone efficiency, and end up 19th in actual points.

19th 21.1

The difference between attempts and actual scores is what that whole "efficiency" thing measures. That's what that percent is. Efficiency.

We're nowhere near being as good as even Denver or Cincinnati in scoring efficiency. Think about that for a second. All these yards, hype and all the ESPN you watch has washed your brain beyond your ability to think straight anymore.

The sad part is even an average team who fails to score a touchdown every 2 trips at least gets a FG. We're 26th in that department too. Points per field goal.

[teeray]

We are 45% percent dude. lol. What's so hard to understand about that?

That means we need MORE than 2 trips to the red-zone to score one touchdown. Sometimes it takes us 3 tries just to score one touchdown. It's pretty clear what 45% means.

50% is 1 out of two. It's also average:

15 Denver 50.00%

This is average points:

15 Cincinnati 23.6

So we are 6th in attempts, and 20th red-zone efficiency, and end up 19th in actual points.

19th 21.1

The difference between attempts and actual scores is what that whole "efficiency" thing measures. That's what that percent is. Efficiency.

We're nowhere near being as good as even Denver or Cincinnati in scoring efficiency. Think about that for a second. All these yards, hype and all the ESPN you watch has washed your brain beyond your ability to think straight anymore.

The sad part is even an average team who fails to score a touchdown every 2 trips at least gets a FG. We're 26th in that department too. Points per field goal.

I said that?? I was just saying that we are 6th in attempts and 14th in red zone TDs. We are 20th in red zone percentage. I never said otherwise I was just giving the whole picture. Everyone has said we need to get better in red zone efficiency.

But being 14th in red zone TDs shows we are in the top half of the league in scoring TDs in the red zone despite having a below average TD percentage. And none of that has an effect on our defensive production.

That was my original point. There is no evidence whatsoever that our offense has any blame for our defensive performance. None.

Our offense can improve. Nobody has ever said they are perfect. But they have done enough to win more games. The same can't be said for our defense. Do I need to post our defense's stats again??

[DaCityKats]

:lol: all of you arguing against this baffoon...realize that you are arguing against a brick wall that believes that it's the offenses fault that teams score on the defense.

you can't fix this.

you can't correct it.

you can't make it better.

you can't make him smarter.

it just won't happen.

he is a finished product full of stupid with access to the internet and a lot of numbers that he twists and turns to these long nonsensical posts using a lot of words that i just can't believe you waste time reading and responding to.

you are seriously only wasting your time dealing with this clown.

find something better to do.

that was my 1st time responding to the guy, and i am wasting time til the game starts.and TD here you go:dita:

[teeray]

What is really a tribute to our offense is that we are 6th in the league in red zone attempts despite being 28th in the league in possessions and 23rd in the league in starting field position. :eek:

Just wait until we do increase our red zone TD percentage, have our defense get us a few more possessions or better field position, and decrease some of our turnovers. Wow.

That is why most intelligent people don't think our offense is elite right now, but we are right on the brink of being one of the best 2 or 3 best offenses in the NFL.

[TrueDat]

What is really a tribute to our offense is that we are 6th in the league in red zone attempts despite being 28th in the league in possessions and 23rd in the league in starting field position. :eek:

Just wait until we do increase our red zone TD percentage, have our defense get us a few more possessions or better field position, and decrease some of our turnovers. Wow.

That is why most intelligent people don't think our offense is elite right now, but we are right on the brink of being one of the best 2 or 3 best offenses in the NFL.

Yes I have heard you make that laughable comment before. You do realize our defense and the other teams we have faced also had almost the same amount of possessions against us, right?

:lol:

I almost spewed my drink all over the monitor the first time I heard that.

The only way one team's offense has more possessions than the other is simply either by having the ball last or if the special teams turns over the ball before the offense even has a chance to get it. Or if the other teams special teams scores. So your offense gets back to back possessions in a row.

It has nothing to do with the defense.

And the evidence is clear as day. Inefficient offenses lead to defenses that get scored on more. It's just the way the game works. And ours is no different. Roughly half the points they were scored on came off of turnovers. This happens to every defense in the league. Not just ours.

The reason we have so few possessions has more to do with the clock, and once again our offense has a lot more time on the field than our defense. So they are primarily the ones who decide how many possessions they get throughout a game. They control the clock. Not the defense. Their penalties and inefficiency is another result in having few possessions.

Most penalties don't stop the clock. They do stop the game though. So when you lead the league in penalties you're going to have the fewest possessions too because the time is mostly spent on the referees explaining poo.

[mav1234]

I attributed a decent amount of our red zone efficiency to the fact that we have one of the worst starting field positions in the league... so a 60 or 70 yard drive is rarely good enough for a TD on this team.

[TrueDat]

I attributed a decent amount of our red zone efficiency to the fact that we have one of the worst starting field positions in the league... so a 60 or 70 yard drive is rarely good enough for a TD on this team.

Uhmm...red-zone TD scoring efficiency has to do with how good you are at getting touchdowns ONCE you get there. What you are talking about has nothing to do with red-zone efficiency.

We have been to the red-zone more times than 26 other teams in the league. We're 6th in scoring attempts FROM the red-zone. But we only scored a TD 45% of the time.

That's just the thing, we GET there plenty of times. More than most teams ever do. We just don't score once we get there.

[mav1234]

No kidding we get there plenty of times, but because of bad starting field position, we had a longer drive to get there in the first place. Even with one of the league's better 3rd down conversion percentages, at some point the odds when out when you need >70 yards every single drive to get a TD.

In other words, a couple yards average starting field position difference can make a huge difference to the outcome of drives. We are still middle of the road in terms of things like points per drive (we were higher before last week's terrible showing).

Plus this is actually one area where most of us fans have said we want to see improvement, anyway - but if you watch the plays, it isn't all on Cam. We have had some really weird playcalls in the redzone, as well.

[TrueDat]

No kidding we get there plenty of times, but because of bad starting field position, we had a longer drive to get there in the first place. Even with one of the league's better 3rd down conversion percentages, at some point the odds when out when you need >70 yards every single drive to get a TD.

Nice backpedalling.;)

So you're saying when we get there it's because we are "tired" and not because Cam Newton is not very good in the red-zone or because we get penalties that also ruin our other part of our scoring inefficiency...FG percentage. It has nothing to do with our red-zone inefficiency it has to do with where we started the drive, right?

Oh ok...oh btw, did you ever take the time to really compare our starting field position compared to other teams?

The average starting field position is 27.59 yards. We get 26.74.

So what you're saying is the 10 inches extra we have to go is making our red-zone inefficiency 45% because we get tired?

LOL. Good one mav.

[BigSyke]

true dat u so funny...........and teeray u guys need to private message each other. u argue the same thing over and over in evey thread lol its clear u guys will never agree and stop, so just stop messing up threads.

not trying to sound mean but im new and dont even come on here that much and everytime i do u guys are doing the same thing..............

and everyone stop trying to link cam to The Golden Calf of Bristol personally, ive never even heard cam even say anything about him lol

[mav1234]

Nice backpedalling.;)

So you're saying when we get there it's because we are "tired" and not because Cam Newton is not very good in the red-zone or because we get penalties that also ruin our other part of our scoring inefficiency...FG percentage. It has nothing to do with our red-zone inefficiency it has to do with where we started the drive, right?

Oh ok...oh btw, did you ever take the time to really compare our starting field position compared to other teams?

The average starting field position is 27.59 yards. We get 26.74.

So what you're saying is the 10 inches extra we have to go is making our red-zone inefficiency 45% because we get tired?

LOL. Good one mav.

Do you know what "average" is? 10 inches wouldn't make a difference but that's not how that difference manifests itself. It manifests itself in multiple special teams/defensive plays that give the offense good field position some of the time. That happens to us much more rarely than it does to some other teams.

I don't think the offense "gets tired" but they do get stopped. Part of that is the offense itself - when your OC refuses to utilize your running backs all that much in the red zone, it hurts. It's also easier for the defense to cover the field. That, and the fact that when every drive you have to go 70+ yards to even have a shot at a TD. There are very few short fields for this team. But that is only a part of it... which is what I said. There are many "working parts" here. A lot goes into things like that, and it's simply too easy to point at any one of them and blame it.

I think this is one area where the offense is mediocre - but it also *seems* like they have gotten better here as the year has gone on (...at least until last week, blech!). Obviously I don't have any interest in going through every game to check, but that is how it felt.

I'm glad you are finally learning how red zone efficiency could be impacted by special teams though, even if you don't think it is with us. See, we're teaching you slowly but surely :)

[TrueDat]

Do you know what "average" is? 10 inches wouldn't make a difference but that's not how that difference manifests itself. It manifests itself in multiple special teams/defensive plays that give the offense good field position some of the time. That happens to us much more rarely than it does to some other teams.

I don't think the offense "gets tired" but they do get stopped. Part of that is the offense itself - when your OC refuses to utilize your running backs all that much in the red zone, it hurts. It's also easier for the defense to cover the field. That, and the fact that when every drive you have to go 70+ yards to even have a shot at a TD. There are very few short fields for this team.

I'm glad you are finally learning how red zone efficiency could be impacted by special teams though, even if you don't think it is with us. See, we're teaching you slowly but surely :)

Yeah...you guys sure are teaching me;)

But before you go and beat your special teams offense into the ground just keep in mind our offense's inefficiency is roughly 18 yards per point. That means they have to go an extra 3.7 yards per point compared to most teams that score touchdowns. Or in other words, an extra 26 yards per touchdown compared to the average offense, but our special teams is only 8 inches less than average.

So where's that inefficiency coming from again? You got it. They get stopped. You finally got it and it only took 3 weeks to come around! They turn over the ball by whatever means. And they don't score in the red-zone. That's what makes an offense inefficient. More than anything else. Red-zone inefficiency also has to do with the offense when it comes to the points side. And the lack of possessions have to do with penalties, or sacks.

And our defense's inefficiency can only be impacted by one thing: Our defense special teams and our our offense.

And guess what? Our kickoff specialist is 6th in the league. He gets more touchbacks than anyone. So I know it's not the special teams defense that's screwing over the defense which can only leave one culprit responsible for this whole mess.....

Can you guess who that might be Mav? Maybe it's Jimmy Clausen? He should stop playing Angry Birds. That's why we lose.