PDA

View Full Version : AFCW stats......


Ugly Duck
10-24-2005, 07:43 AM
Lookit how tightly our division is grouped on both offense and defense:

Offense
#9....... Chiefs
#10......Oakland
#13......Denver
#14......Sandy Eggo

Defense
#21......Sandy Eggo
#22......Denver
#23......Oakland
#27......Chiefs

Brock
10-24-2005, 07:49 AM
I'd say something, but I can't be seen talking to a cellar dweller.

the Talking Can
10-24-2005, 08:13 AM
thus proving the pointless-ness of yards as a measurement for defense...

the Talking Can
10-24-2005, 08:17 AM
ok, I take it back...we are still grouped pretty tight, with Denver out in front..

by points given up per game (nfl.com)

14. Denver 18.7
19. Sad Diego 20.9
21. Chiefs 22.0
23. Oakland 22.2

the Talking Can
10-24-2005, 08:20 AM
a little more spread here

offense, points scored:

2. Chargers 27.6
7. Chiefs 24.8
15. Denver 21.7
16. Oakland 21.3

the Talking Can
10-24-2005, 08:24 AM
3 AFC West teams are top 10 in rushing D:

2. Sad Diego 76.0
5. Denver 89.6
8. Kansas City 95.5
.
.
.
.
.
18. Oakland 111.8

the Talking Can
10-24-2005, 08:27 AM
Same 3 teams are top 10 rushing...that's a formula for a good season, usually:

2. Denver 158.7
6. Kansas City 137.0
9. Sad Diego 130.0
.
.
.
.
.
25. Oakland 85.8

Lzen
10-24-2005, 08:31 AM
Those last 2 demonstrate something. They demonstrate that Oakland still sucks because, like last year, they still cannot run the ball and they still cannot stop the run.

CupidStunt
10-24-2005, 08:33 AM
ok, I take it back...we are still grouped pretty tight, with Denver out in front..

by points given up per game (nfl.com)

14. Denver 18.7
19. Sad Diego 20.9
21. Chiefs 22.0
23. Oakland 22.2

Only thign that matters, PERIOD. And to be just a couple PPG ahead of the rest is pretty embarrassing for Denver. They're supposed to have a DOMINANT D and we're all supposed to suck.

They bent over for Eli Manning yesterday in the 4th quarter.

Yards are only used when it favors an argument. F*ck yards.

CupidStunt
10-24-2005, 08:34 AM
Those last 2 demonstrate something. They demonstrate that Oakland still sucks because, like last year, they still cannot run the ball and they still cannot stop the run.

And they can get a few yards by yolking it up to Moss every down, but they can't put it in the endzone consistently, which is embarrassing really.

Ugly Duck
10-24-2005, 11:13 PM
Those last 2 demonstrate something. They demonstrate that Oakland still sucks because, like last year, they still cannot run the ball and they still cannot stop the run.Hey.... I'll admit the obvious that KC is having a much better year than Oakland. You have two victories more than we do, and that is scoreboard.

But it kinda maybe also might be possible that your stellar run defense might sorta be a function of the fact that you aren't getting many run plays against you. Only the Bucs have had to defend fewer run plays than KC. Thats because the Bucs only allow 2.9 yards per play. In contrast, KC allows a whopping 4.2 yards per play. So if KC allows so much per play (24th in the league), why don't teams just run the ball at you? Cuz you guyz also have the 29th ranked pass defense, and thats an easier route to go. Oakland is 9th against the run in yards per play allowed. So your "Oakland cannot stop the run" theory might kinda also reflect on your team's run defense as well.

Rush Yards allowed per play:

#9 Oakland
#24 KC

Count Zarth
10-24-2005, 11:15 PM
The ypc is inflated big time due to Ronnie Brown's 65-yard TD run last week.

Our ypc average was in the top 10 last week.

Count Zarth
10-24-2005, 11:17 PM
Look at the Redskins game. Washington was trying to run all game long and didn't have much success. Portis had a grand total of 77 yards on 21 carries.

BTW, what's up with your offense? 21 points a game is decidely average.

Count Zarth
10-24-2005, 11:21 PM
You gonna sit here and tell me Denver and Dallas don't have good run defenses? Similar stats compared to KC.

We've only allowed 4 rushing TDs, and 2 of them came against Denver.

Dunit35
10-24-2005, 11:25 PM
Pretty tight group in every category...besides oakland

Ugly Duck
10-24-2005, 11:26 PM
BTW, what's up with your offense? 21 points a game is decidely average.True... we average 3 and a half points per game less than KC so far. Its... uh... our offense needs to gel - thats what it is! And maybe the fact that our offense loses 86 yards per game on penalties (2nd in the league). We'll be in the groove right about now....

RINGLEADER
10-25-2005, 12:44 AM
The ypc is inflated big time due to Ronnie Brown's 65-yard TD run last week.

Our ypc average was in the top 10 last week.

So true. Last year you could depend on 1-2 long runs per game. This year we still seem to give us the big play but it is less frequent. Take away the Brown run and we're back in the top ten.

Anyong Bluth
10-25-2005, 02:48 AM
this is a rather pointless argument- I'll be happy to have any team come play us and try rush the majority of time. PLEASE do it, PLEASE.

Breaking contain the few times- which has happened a few times too many on us seriously inflates the numbers.

You wanna look to D's dominance - Points per game is huge - but don't go blowing the Colts yet b/c they've yet to play jack teams and points have started to be put up on them. Look at the Rushing D b/c that will dictate 3rd downs and then look at the D's 3rd down and passing completion % - best indicator of a stout D. Turnovers help D's and teams win, but you can only effect that so much and is really more of an indicator of how well an opposing team does in protecting the ball / minimizing turnovers. SEE the denver bronco's this year as proof positive of that. Plummer threw up stupid numbers last year but his turnovers cost so much more it nullfied the "impact" plays vs the forced ones.

Count Zarth
10-25-2005, 03:02 AM
this is a rather pointless argument- I'll be happy to have any team come play us and try rush the majority of time. PLEASE do it, PLEASE.


Yep. The Chiefs have allowed 26 rushing first downs, good for FOURTH in the NFL. Only 4 runs over 20 yards.

tiptap
10-25-2005, 06:09 AM
What also is important in this assessment are the comments on the physicality (if that is a word) of our defense (and offense) by our opponets. There really is not a great deal of difference in NFL teams. I'm hoping the LB's will not be dropping so much to help the secondary but will start concentrating on stopping the short passing game.