Does having a good defense lead to not having to pass a lot

[PromoTheRobot]

There are certain statistical benchmarks people like to throw around as a sign of a team's skill and strength. The 300-yard passing game is one. The lack of those games in Bills history is often cited.

 

And it's true that not being able to throw the ball effectively makes you a bad team. But what if you're a team that has an incredible defense that limits scoring? Would you still want to throw for 300/game if you didn't have to keep scoring?

 

I think about Patrick Mahomes and the Chiefs, or DeShaun Watson and the Texans. It's electrifying to have a QB and receivers that put up those numbers. But in their cases they have to do that because their defenses can't stop good teams from scoring. They have to win games 35-31.

 

But if the Bills defense plays like it did against the Jets all year, and the Bills offense is able to win games with a balance of run and pass, but never crack the 300 yard passing mark, does that make them a flawed team?

Edited September 14, 2019 by PromoTheRobot

[Augie]

Just WIN, baby! 

 

If we can run the ball well, I see no need for frequent 300 yard passing games. It would be nice to know we CAN do it, though, when you do get into a shootout. The one thing we can NOT do is turn the ball over FOUR times. What a luxury to be able to do that and still have the defense bail you out. 

 

 

(Full disclosure, I have not yet seen the Jets game.) 

[Big Turk]

At the end of the day all that matters is that your team has one more point than the other team. Kind of like last week.

 

No style points for wins...at the end of the year the only thing people see is your record.

 

 

Edited September 14, 2019 by matter2003

[poblano]

You have to win with the best you have, at this moment this team's strongest part is the defense and they understand it. When(if) they can develop Allen maybe we can see Buffalo winning in other way

[Hapless Bills Fan]

16 minutes ago, PromoTheRobot said:

There are certain statistical benchmarks people like to throw around as a sign of a team's skill and strength. The 300-yard passing game is one. The lack of those games in Bills history is often cited.

 

And it's true that not being able to throw the ball effectively makes you a bad team. But what if you're a team that has an incredible defense that limits scoring? Would you still want to throw for 300/game if you didn't have to keep scoring?

 

I think about Patrick Mahomes and the Chiefs, or DeShaun Watson and the Texans. It's electrifying to have a QB and receivers that put up those numbers. But in their cases they have to do that because their defenses can't stop good teams from scoring. They have to win games 35-31.

 

But if the Bills defense plays like it did against the Jets all year, and the Bills offense is able to win games with a balance of run and pass, but never crack the 300 yard passing mark, does that make them a flawed team?

 

Maybe?

 

Sooner or later, we will encounter a team that our defense can not stop effectively.  Then we have to put up the points or lose. 

 

If we can't when we need to, that's a flaw.

[Buffalo Boy]

Question: How do you get to that 300 yards passing?

     If you dunk and dunk, which is becoming the new normal, then it is an extension of your running game. Singletary looks like he can do some serious damage catching short passes out of the backfield; a two yards pass showing up as 15-20 yards on the stat sheet.

    If you are constantly taking 5 or 7 yard drops at QB in order to let deeper routes develop you put JA in more potential danger. If this O line coalesces into a very good pass blocking unit and we get ourselves a Stud downfield compliment to Brown ( next year) then I’m down with that route also.

     They don’t seem to have the firepower in the receiving corps this year to consistently hit 300 IMO unless we are forced to do it.

[LOVEMESOMEBILLS]

8 out of the top 10 teams with the most rushing attempts made the playoffs last year. In contrast only 3 out of the top 10 teams with the most passing attempts made the playoffs. Passing has it's place in football, don't get me wrong, but it's not as high as others perceive. For what it worth the Pats*** only averaged 12 more yards passing per game(266) last year than what Josh(254) passed for last Sunday. Seattle made the playoffs last year averaging only 193.3 passing yards a game. Every team has a different combination of how well their, defense, passing & rushing are doing. If you have real talent, you just need to find what combination works best for your team.

 

 

https://www.espn.com/nfl/stats/team/_/view/offense/season/2018/seasontype/2/stat/rushing/table/rushing/sort/rushingAttempts/dir/desc

 

https://www.espn.com/nfl/stats/team/_/view/offense/season/2018/seasontype/2/stat/passing/table/passing/sort/passingAttempts/dir/desc

Edited September 14, 2019 by LOVEMESOMEBILLS

[Drunken Pygmy Goat]

Passing yards shouldn't be the measuring stick. Efficiency is what matters. 

 

I've been comparing this defense (and team in general) to the Seahawks in 2013 for a couple months, mainly based on scheme, style, roster, and strategy. Through one game, they certainly look prominent enough, but I'm not going to truly compare them to that defense until I see more. They were really good last year, but they were the most inconsistent defense in the league. Shore that up, and they'll be great.

 

Those Seahawks had a great defense, so there wasn't much necessity on offense to throw too much. They more often than not played with the lead. https://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/sea/2013.htm

Wilson threw for less than 3500 yards thst year, and while that's better than what we've been used to in Buffalo, it's far less than 300 ypg. A couple statistical categories that stuck out to me was yards per play for and against, and field position. Those numbers represent efficiency, and the Seahawks ran fewer plays than they defended that year. They were great against the pass, and while they were pretty good against the run, they gave up some yards there, including a couple 200+ yard games.

 

On Sunday, the Bills won the ypp battle, but (without looking at the stat) they lost the field position battle by turning the ball over, and getting pinned deep on a few punts. Granted those types of games won't be the norm (hopefully), but coming back and winning those games is a sign of a good team. Not great, still a long way to go, but good. How good remains to be seen. 

 

I don't think we'll hear many complaints if the Bills are winning and passing for 220 ypg. Thats classic football. Strength is the defense, lean on the run to control the tempo and kill clock, and pass efficiently enough when called upon to move the chains and create balance and keep the opponent on their toes. Comparing this team to the 2013 Seahawks is obviously pretty lofty, but if they can play anywhere close to that level this year, playoffs won't be a question. The question will be "how far in the playoffs can they go?". 

Edited September 14, 2019 by Drunken Pygmy Goat
Added link

[twist_to_open]

I would be OK with winning low scoring hard hitting defensive games, but I would be concerned because I think inevitably we would be in games where we would have to win in a shoot out and if we can't, may cost us a wild card bid.

[Elite Poster]

Generally a top 10 passing attack paired with above average defense will be the elite teams. 

[kenny3000]

48 minutes ago, PromoTheRobot said:

There are certain statistical benchmarks people like to throw around as a sign of a team's skill and strength. The 300-yard passing game is one. The lack of those games in Bills history is often cited.

 

And it's true that not being able to throw the ball effectively makes you a bad team. But what if you're a team that has an incredible defense that limits scoring? Would you still want to throw for 300/game if you didn't have to keep scoring?

 

I think about Patrick Mahomes and the Chiefs, or DeShaun Watson and the Texans. It's electrifying to have a QB and receivers that put up those numbers. But in their cases they have to do that because their defenses can't stop good teams from scoring. They have to win games 35-31.

 

But if the Bills defense plays like it did against the Jets all year, and the Bills offense is able to win games with a balance of run and pass, but never crack the 300 yard passing mark, does that make them a flawed team?

 

I think so.  Do we have the horses to play like that all year?  If Levi is hurt or another corner, or any of our other 10 of 11 returning starters are hurt?  I know our depth is just better across the board.  But we do not have studs on the bench yet, outside of maybe the D line.  So I think we do need our offense to take some strides closer to averaging 300 yards passing so if our D does get a little beat up we're a balanced team and the offense could actually carry the load when needed.  Our offense not being up to that task as of right now makes us a flawed team.  

[Orlando Tim]

If you watch Army football you realize that as long you can move the football consistently you can be effective. In my opinion the run game is what makes throwing less needed. A bad D just makes the offense need to move quicker.

[billsfan1959]

36 minutes ago, Drunken Pygmy Goat said:

Passing yards shouldn't be the measuring stick. Efficiency is what matters. 

 

I've been comparing this defense (and team in general) to the Seahawks in 2013 for a couple months, mainly based on scheme, style, roster, and strategy. Through one game, they certainly look prominent enough, but I'm not going to truly compare them to that defense until I see more. They were really good last year, but they were the most inconsistent defense in the league. Shore that up, and they'll be great.

 

Those Seahawks had a great defense, so there wasn't much necessity on offense to throw too much. They more often than not played with the lead. https://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/sea/2013.htm

Wilson threw for less than 3500 yards thst year, and while that's better than what we've been used to in Buffalo, it's far less than 300 ypg. A couple statistical categories that stuck out to me was yards per play for and against, and field position. Those numbers represent efficiency, and the Seahawks ran fewer plays than they defended that year. They were great against the pass, and while they were pretty good against the run, they gave up some yards there, including a couple 200+ yard games.

 

On Sunday, the Bills won the ypp battle, but (without looking at the stat) they lost the field position battle by turning the ball over, and getting pinned deep on a few punts. Granted those types of games won't be the norm (hopefully), but coming back and winning those games is a sign of a good team. Not great, still a long way to go, but good. How good remains to be seen. 

 

I don't think we'll hear many complaints if the Bills are winning and passing for 220 ypg. Thats classic football. Strength is the defense, lean on the run to control the tempo and kill clock, and pass efficiently enough when called upon to move the chains and create balance and keep the opponent on their toes. Comparing this team to the 2013 is obviously pretty lofty, but if they can play anywhere close to that level this year, playoffs won't be a question. The question will be "how far in the playoffs can they go?". 

I believe a team can be successful without a 300 yard per game passer if they have an ELITE defense and a strong running game.

 

Russell Wilson is a good example:

 

In Russell Wilson's first four seasons, he had an elite defense and strong running game. The defense finished 1st in pts against 4 times and 3rd once. 

During that period, Wilson played in 80 regular season games and passed for over 300 yards 7 times (8% of the games). He played in 12 post season games, including 2 Super Bowls and passed for over 300 yards twice(17% of the games) (both lossess).

 

In his last two seasons, the defense fell out of the top ten in points against and he didn't have as strong of a running game. During that time, he played in 32 games and passed for over 300 yards 4 times (12% of the games). He played in only one playoff game for those two years.

 

So, overall, Wilson has played in 125 NFL games and has passed for over 300 yds in 13 of them (10% of his games). When he had a top defense in points against, he was going deep in the playoffs (12 playoff games in 5 seasons). When the defense and running game slipped, 1 playoff game in two seasons.

Edited September 14, 2019 by billsfan1959

[CardinalScotts]

You have to play complimentary football - like the Saints have figured out. For 9 straight years the Saints threw it at least 625 times per season. Put up some points especially against the bad teams but hung the defense out to dry with short possessions/ turnovers. They didn't always have bad defense during the Drew Brees era, yes many years they ranked low 32-31-31-28-26 but also had 10-13-7-8-10-13 several of these years they could have helped the defense by playing complimentary football. The last two years they have stopped trying to set records and make the Super Bowl played smarter  pass attempts way way down 536 in 2017  489 in 2018 but everyone still thinks they air it out 50 times a game. Truth is they don't how does this relate to the Bills ? McDermott plays complimentary football he's trying to win the game

 

Fantasy football has replaced winning and losing quarterbacking, now we say well he had 320 yards passing can't blame him. (Stafford) Yes I can.  Brees 19 seasons 1 super bowl appearance not just win but 1 game with Brady in the other conference. First ballot hall of fame quarterback the wow numbers they put up drilling bad teams okay now beat the so called good teams the "playoff teams". Go out beat Jake Delhomme, Jared Goff, Rex Grossman,  Alex Smith, Case Keenum  nope. Maybe this year but it wont be because they throw it 50 times a game.

 

And neither should the Bills- Fantasy or reality...not trying to win a fantasy championship

 

 

Edited September 14, 2019 by CardinalScotts

[Houston's #1 Bills Fan]

I've always heard it said and truly believe that defense wins championships. High scoring offenses are great, but make sure you got that crushing defense first!! '85 Bears, '01 Ravens, 70's Steelers, etc....

Edited September 14, 2019 by Houston's #1 Bills Fan

[Rc2catch]

For me the games always seem to simplify down to 3rd down conversions on both sides of the ball. Stats don’t matter in a lot of areas (thank you fantasy football) 

Got to get those 3rd downs and defense has to stop them.

 

The 300 yard benchmark lets be honest here, is because we’ve had really pathetic offenses, and when we had an offense that put up those kinds of numbers our defense sucked. We see the saints and all these other teams with just lethal passing attacks and as buffalo fans we wonder why we can’t do that and we run non stop. 

Jealous ones envy really, we have been behind the change in the league. The league transformed into a passing league through talent and penalty changes and buffalo until recently has never adapted or modernized their offense to copycat some of the successful offenses 

[MAJBobby]

1 hour ago, PromoTheRobot said:

There are certain statistical benchmarks people like to throw around as a sign of a team's skill and strength. The 300-yard passing game is one. The lack of those games in Bills history is often cited.

 

And it's true that not being able to throw the ball effectively makes you a bad team. But what if you're a team that has an incredible defense that limits scoring? Would you still want to throw for 300/game if you didn't have to keep scoring?

 

I think about Patrick Mahomes and the Chiefs, or DeShaun Watson and the Texans. It's electrifying to have a QB and receivers that put up those numbers. But in their cases they have to do that because their defenses can't stop good teams from scoring. They have to win games 35-31.

 

But if the Bills defense plays like it did against the Jets all year, and the Bills offense is able to win games with a balance of run and pass, but never crack the 300 yard passing mark, does that make them a flawed team?

 

Can we pull off the win when the defense gets gashed?  Or do we get blown out like the past?  

 

If Our Offense can win games when defense is getting gashed then yes it is a good team. 

 

If the defense is getting gashed and the offense can not pass to keep up and a blowout occurs like has happened so often before than yes it is still a flawed football team. 

[PromoTheRobot]

22 minutes ago, MAJBobby said:

 

Can we pull off the win when the defense gets gashed?  Or do we get blown out like the past?  

 

If Our Offense can win games when defense is getting gashed then yes it is a good team. 

 

If the defense is getting gashed and the offense can not pass to keep up and a blowout occurs like has happened so often before than yes it is still a flawed football team. 

 

You are shifting my post from what I was saying. I wasn't claiming you don't need an offense. Just that if you have a good D, your good offense doesn't have to light things up. Of course if your defense is getting gashed the offense has to keep pace.

 

People say McDermott is conservative. I don't think he is necessarily. But I do think if he's got a 2 or 3 score lead and the defense is bottling things up, he's not going to air it out.

Edited September 14, 2019 by PromoTheRobot

[Buffalo Junction]

21 minutes ago, PromoTheRobot said:

 

You are shifting my post from what I was saying. I wasn't claiming you don't need an offense. Just that if you have a good D, your good offense doesn't have to light things up. Of course if your defense is getting gashed the offense has to keep pace.

 

People say McDermott is conservative. I don't think he is necessarily. But I do think if he's got a 2 or 3 score lead and the defense is bottling things up, he's not going to air it out.

It’s going to depend on how effective a teams running game is. IMO 260 is a better yardmarker than 300. I picked 260 because Brady, Big Ben, and Rodgers all have a career average of 260-262 yards per game. Brees is above 280 and Manning is above 270. That’s 5 Super Bowl winning HOF quarterbacks that averaged less that 300 yards/game.  Rodgers is interesting here because although GB didn’t always have reliably good D, they had a penchant for turnovers and splash plays. That lead to MCarthy pulling Rodgers in the third quarter in blowout games.... which is the type of conservative route I can see McD going. 

 

We have to remember that a good defense also leads to more possessions and shorter drives. An efficient offense will capitalize on those opportunities, especially in the first half. Every position group is going to have a bad Sunday or two during a season as well. This is why you need a passing attack capable of putting up 300, but the average can be lower. Particularly if a team has a good-great RB and line. Now, if a defense is historically good (86 Bears, 2000-1 Ravens, legion of boom, etc) an offense has a lot more leeway. Just ask Trent Dilfer. At this point the Bills defense isn’t on that level. 

[MAJBobby]

54 minutes ago, PromoTheRobot said:

 

You are shifting my post from what I was saying. I wasn't claiming you don't need an offense. Just that if you have a good D, your good offense doesn't have to light things up. Of course if your defense is getting gashed the offense has to keep pace.

 

People say McDermott is conservative. I don't think he is necessarily. But I do think if he's got a 2 or 3 score lead and the defense is bottling things up, he's not going to air it out.

 

So like most teams