What Is An Acceptable Points Allowed Per Game For A Defensive

[dn4192]

Most believe the true indication of how good a defense is will be reflected by the points per game they give up. So, given that the Colts don't rate very well in that category, my question is what is the level or PPGA would we want to see from the Colts D to make them successful.

[JoKeR]

A lower points allowed average than points scored average.

That average will be screwed because of the N.O. "game"

[Ramblinwreck7]

15. Which is really good.

Edited November 1, 2011 by Ramblinwreck7

[dn4192]

A lower points allowed average than points scored average.

That average will be screwed because of the N.O. "game"

I haven't looked but over the past 8-9 seasons has our O scored more on average per game then our D gave up? If so why are people screaming that our D is horrible?

[Ramblinwreck7]

I haven't looked but over the past 8-9 seasons has our O scored more on average per game then our D gave up? If so why are people screaming that our D is horrible?

Our defense has been average overall, just it's usually horrible against the run.

We score more points because our offense has been extrememly good.

[doogansquest]

Whatever points total is low enough to allow the offense to win games. There is no definite answer, especially with all of the Pro-Offense rules implementations in the last 10 years.

[FireJimCaldwell]

I haven't looked but over the past 8-9 seasons has our O scored more on average per game then our D gave up? If so why are people screaming that our D is horrible?

Is this a serious question?

Put it this way in 2005, we allowed 247 points or 15.4 per game.

So far in 8 games we've allowed 252 points or 31.5 per game.

Edited November 1, 2011 by firejimcaldwell

[dn4192]

Is this a serious question?

Put it this way in 2005, we allowed 247 points or 15.4 per game.

So far in 8 games we've allowed 252 points or 31.5 per game.

Yes it's serious, if you are the HC of a NFL, what would be your expecation/acceptance of your Defenses PPGA? Or how do you know if your defense is good?

Also, of those 8 games this year we have given up 31.5, but what is the average if you throw out the Texans and Saints game?

[gspdx]

Actually I think there is more to this than defense. Frist take into consideration the time of possession. The longer the offense is on the field the fewer changes (time) the oppossing team has to score. You also need to look at the offensive turnovers and the situation we got into last week with the blocked punt. The offense failed to execute and put the punt team in a position where they got blocked for a TD. Plus there have been a few turnovers deep in our territory that might not happen with a more experienced QB.

So I think with Peyton on the field you would immediately bring down that numnber by about one score.

I would also discount the 62 point NO loss as an outlier at this point. If we continue to get beat with numbers like that then it would need to be included. But at this point I'm going with 190 points in 7 games which is about 27.1 points per game. If you then include the Peyton effect (in my opinion) we are about 20-21 points per game. All of the sudden we look competitive with a guy like Manning at the QB spot that can put up more than 20 points in most games.

Again this is just my guess, but to me it would suggest that with this team with P-Money at the helm we could be looking at another 10-12 win season.

[LUVTHESHOE]

Yes it's serious, if you are the HC of a NFL, what would be your expecation/acceptance of your Defenses PPGA? Or how do you know if your defense is good?

Also, of those 8 games this year we have given up 31.5, but what is the average if you throw out the Texans and Saints game?

Wow I now know how to become a pro golfer, every 8 holes I play, I will just throw out my two worst holes and not count those against my hanicap, Thanks, what a concept. Edited November 1, 2011 by LUVTHESHOE

[The Fish]

I'd like to see the other team have less here before long, that would be acceptable.

[tonychen]

Yes it's serious, if you are the HC of a NFL, what would be your expecation/acceptance of your Defenses PPGA? Or how do you know if your defense is good?

Also, of those 8 games this year we have given up 31.5, but what is the average if you throw out the Texans and Saints game?

Useless efforts. Each game we give up at least 23 pts and the NFL median is (Chargers 22.7 + Pats 22.9)/2=22.8.

We are that bad.

[tonychen]

Actually if Manning plays he would at least keep the opposing offense off the field for longer, and our short passing game should control the clock and reduce the number of possessions by the other team. Our scoring-D may end up in the lower middle of NFL and the team should be as competitive as the Pats and Chargers.

On the other hand, Pats may not be as good as people think they are. It is also a one-man team and the D is not much better than the Colts'. As a result of drafting low in an entire decade, both Pats and Colts franchises are having problem collecting talents, and it is a matter of time for both to come back to the middle or bottom of the league and rebuild from defense and the bottom up.

As a relatively more stable conference, worse AFC teams tend to stay around the middle of each year's ranking, and the good teams don't change. As a result teams don't get higher picks very often and the talent level is going down in recent years. While the NFC teams have more fluctuation, and many teams are congested at the bottom, which in recent years have resulted in a higher level of talents and stronger teams.

Edited November 1, 2011 by tonychen

[Buck Showalter]

. As a result of drafting low in an entire decade, both Pats and Colts franchises are having problem collecting talents, and it is a matter of time for both to come back to the middle or bottom of the league and rebuild from defense and the bottom up.

True but bellichick has stock piled draft picks the past copuple of years, thus giving the pats greater odds on hitting on later round talent... Where as Colts have whiffed & traded up to do so in cases like UGOH...

Did Colts trade up for Pollack, I forget???

[copperrattle]

Yes it's serious, if you are the HC of a NFL, what would be your expecation/acceptance of your Defenses PPGA? Or how do you know if your defense is good?

Also, of those 8 games this year we have given up 31.5, but what is the average if you throw out the Texans and Saints game?

26 points

[FireJimCaldwell]

Yes it's serious, if you are the HC of a NFL, what would be your expecation/acceptance of your Defenses PPGA? Or how do you know if your defense is good?

Also, of those 8 games this year we have given up 31.5, but what is the average if you throw out the Texans and Saints game?

This isn't 7th grade where you drop your two lowest grades.

The reason why I ask, is because it would be extremely odd that the team with the most wins in that time frame not to have a higher Points scored to Points allowed ratio. With our record it would be virtually impossible not to have scored more points on offense.

Anything under 15 a game should be in the top 5-10% in the NFL, that would be 240 points. We've only been relatively close to that twice since 2000.

Year Best D/League Average, Colts PPG

2011 SF 107* LA: 22.3 IC: 31.5

2010 Pitt 232 LA: 22.0 IC: 24.3

2009 Jets 236 LA:21.5 IC:19.2

2008 Pitt 223 LA: 22.0 IC: 18.6

2007 Indy 262 LA: 21.7 IC: 16.4

2006 BLT 201 LA: 20.7 IC :22.5

2005 CHI 202 LA: 20.5 IC: 15.5

2004 Pitt 251 LA: 21.5 IC: 21.9

2003 NE 238 LA: 20.8 IC: 21.0

2002 TB 196 LA:21.7 IC: 19.6

2001 CHI 203 LA:20.2 IC 30.4

2000 BLT 165 LA:21.5 IC 20.3

In that time frame the league average was 21.375 ppg. During that span we have averaged 21.336, so we are barely better than the league average.

So yes for the most part this defense has had issues.

To me, PPG is far more important than YPG. Having a low 3rd down conversion rate is also a key because that gets the opponents off the field and puts your offense back on the field, which is also why having a high % on 3rd downs is key on offense. It extends drives and keeps the defense on the sidelines.

[Douzer]

Elite <16

Good 17 to 20

Fair 21 to 24

Poor 25 to 28

P.U. 29+

[thetigerfox]

Well looking over the last several years stats of multiple teams with different defensive schemes, I'd say that magic number to be 1 less than the total our offense scores. :cool:

[Malakai432]

Hmmm for the Colts sheesh, hmmm, let me think here. I'll have to go out on a limb and say 62. That seems pretty feasible for the Colts, not so sure about other teams.

[doogansquest]

Most of those teams have had lousy offenses, while the Colts have been top 5 in that category like clockwork. Also keep in mind that NE and Pitt are the only teams to have actually had more overall success during that time span than us.

You guys are unrealistic to want more when we have so much offense (with Peyton). Our defense isn't anywhere near as bad this year as it seems. But when the offense is also sputtering, defensive issues will be amplified as opponents have more possessions.

[GoDeep]

I don't really understand the premise of throwing out the outliers in football stats. I hear this all the time. "We held Hillis to blah blah if you don't count the long scoring run he had". Yeah, don't count big plays and D's look better.

Likewise, you have to count the 62 points the Saints put on us. That was our D out there getting eaten alive.

D stats are fun, but watching the D is important too. We have trouble getting off the field on 3rd down, we run that Tampa 2 a lot and let a 5-7 yard gains eat us alive.

Honestly, if we are just trying to limit the big play with the Tampa 2, we are limiting our scoring opportunities by making the other teams eventual 7 points just take longer.

/ramble

[gspdx]

I don't really understand the premise of throwing out the outliers in football stats.

It's purely an analysis technique. If we had hundreds of data points I wouldn't throw it out. But it skews the data when we have a small sample. So - the New Orleans game was an outlier based on our other body of work. We would have lost that game. But by looking at the other data I have come to the conclusion that with Peyton on the field, accounting for one less score due to that fact and our scores in the 20s because of him we have a shot at winning these games. Assuming we would have lost the Texans game too then all of the sudden with Peyton we could be 6-2 right now.

This isn't like 7th grade throwing out the 2 lowest scores or throwing out your bad hole in golf. It's an analysis technique. Let's use golf for example. Let's say you want to decide where to improve your golf game the most. You break all of your shots for 18 holes down to drives, irons, and puts. So let's say on 17 holes you score a 4 or 5 and on one hole you score a 10 with 7 putts. By including the one hole in your analysis you might falsey conclude that you need more work on putting when this was an anomally in your normally consistent putting. Where you are really struggling is in shots with the driver.

Just a crude example in response to the witty responses from above. I hopes this helps a little bit.

Now in the real world you don't necessarily just ignore outliers. Let's say I run a factory and I have a day where we had lots of errors and that day the temperature was 100 degrees. I am able to determine that yes, the high temperatures caused variability in my process. Depending on the weather where my factory is I might want to put in some mitigating systems - air conditioning - or I might not need to. Maybe I can just shut down for the few days of 100 degree weather because my factory is in Fairbanks, Ak.

[rockywoj]

I say, less than 17 points.

[IndyD4U]

5

A safety and a field goal

B)

[chad72]

It depends on who you are playing. I am just being realistic as to how good our D can be. Since we are not talking Steelers or Ravens' D here, this is my take.

I'd say 20-24 pts is acceptable for a D in this passing league vs elite teams like the Steelers, Patriots, Packers, Saints etc., it has to be 14-17 pts vs bad teams like the Browns etc.

An offense HAS to put up 24-31 pts. in order to win games vs elite teams, about 20-23 pts. to beat bad teams like the Browns consistently.

I am still waiting on Curtis to put up his first 30 pts , it might take eternity for that to arrive

Edited November 2, 2011 by chad72

[HungarianColtsFan]

A lower points allowed average than points scored average.

They should keep opponents at least under 20.

[FireJimCaldwell]

Some comparison statistics

Entering this year Manning had started 65 more games than Brady, and 110 more than Roethlisberger. A difference of 4 years and a game with Brady and almost 7(6.8) years with Roethlisberger.

Some of you might ask what's the point. He should have played more games, entered the league earlier, hadn't missed a game up till this year, etc.

The point is that when it comes to scoring 10 points or less, Brady & Roethlisberger have had more games like this than Manning.

Brady 41-0

Roethlisberger 33-1

Manning 32-0

28.7% of Brady's games the team allowed 10 pts or less.

34.7% of Roethlisberger's games the team allowed 10 pts or less.

15.4% of Manning's games the team allowed 10 pts or less.

11-19 pts?

Manning is 50-3 or 25.5% of his games the team allowed 11-19 pts.

Brady is 35-3 or 26.6% of his games the team allowed 11-19 pts.

Roethlisberger is 11-7 or 18.4% of his games the team allowed 11-19pts.

So 19 pts or less

Manning's had 40% of his games.

Brady's had 55% of his games.

Roethlisberger's had 53% of his games.

On the offensive side:

Manning is 72-7 when scoring 30+ pts. & losses of this nature is outright embarassing

Brady is 55-1

Roethlisberger is 23-2

Each of the three are undefeated when scoring 40 at this point. 18(20-0), 12(15-0), & 7(4-0)

Wonder why they(Brady & Roethlisberger) have two of the highest winning % 's of all time and better than Manning.

[gspdx]

Some comparison statistics

Entering this year Manning had started 65 more games than Brady, and 110 more than Roethlisberger. A difference of 4 years and a game with Brady and almost 7(6.8) years with Roethlisberger.

Some of you might ask what's the point. He should have played more games, entered the league earlier, hadn't missed a game up till this year, etc.

The point is that when it comes to scoring 10 points or less, Brady & Roethlisberger have had more games like this than Manning.

Brady 41-0

Roethlisberger 33-1

Manning 32-0

28.7% of Brady's games the team allowed 10 pts or less.

34.7% of Roethlisberger's games the team allowed 10 pts or less.

15.4% of Manning's games the team allowed 10 pts or less.

11-19 pts?

Manning is 50-3 or 25.5% of his games the team allowed 11-19 pts.

Brady is 35-3 or 26.6% of his games the team allowed 11-19 pts.

Roethlisberger is 11-7 or 18.4% of his games the team allowed 11-19pts.

So 19 pts or less

Manning's had 40% of his games.

Brady's had 55% of his games.

Roethlisberger's had 53% of his games.

On the offensive side:

Manning is 72-7 when scoring 30+ pts. & losses of this nature is outright embarassing

Brady is 55-1

Roethlisberger is 23-2

Each of the three are undefeated when scoring 40 at this point. 18(20-0), 12(15-0), & 7(4-0)

Wonder why they(Brady & Roethlisberger) have two of the highest winning % 's of all time and better than Manning.

Good stuff. Based on these numbers the Colts under Manning are 83-2 when we hold oppenents to 19 pts per game.

With that in mind I would say for the Colts 19-20 pts per game for the opponent is the number I would shoot for. It would be great to hold teams to 15 but that is elite.

[FireJimCaldwell]

Good stuff. Based on these numbers the Colts under Manning are 83-2 when we hold oppenents to 19 pts per game.

With that in mind I would say for the Colts 19-20 pts per game for the opponent is the number I would shoot for. It would be great to hold teams to 15 but that is elite.

82-3 but we get the point. But we allow 20+ 60% of the time which is part of the problem. Brady & Roethlisberger face that 44.8 & 46.9 percent of the time respectively.