Cowboyz Posted June 23, 2011 Author Share Posted June 23, 2011 This is what I mean BIGBLUE, he has no argument. His argument is actually supporting mine... that the defense was the only thing that kept us in a lot of the games we lost, and we won in spite of the offense a lot of times, too. He's like, well, you guys scored 14 points yourself off of what... oh yeah, YOUR DEFENSE. The game winning play, a special teams screw up that was only allowed to happen because the Giants couldn't get a first down was... was....IRRELEVANT??? LMAO. haha. youre running in circles jimmy. so your defense held after some turnovers, that doesn't dispute my point at all. it still fell on your defense to stop offensive drives. now it was all specials right? granted they did suck balls, but come on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allstarjim Posted June 23, 2011 Share Posted June 23, 2011 what is fallacious about turnovers not being the cause of your losses in those games you mentioned? you never commented on those numbers, and all you've got is 'I win". those numbers show the turnovers only netted 2, -4, and 3 pts in those games for your opponents. i think your emotions are gettin the best of you jimmy I think not, you have your facts wrong. You are showing a NET.... basically proving my argument for me considering how many points were scored by the other team off of OUR team's turnovers. Let me help you out (again)... our defense led the NFL in Takeaways with 39... we still ended up with a -3 t/o differential for the season, despite a record number of turnovers by our offense. Basically saying, yeah, our defense got the ball back a lot for us supports the argument that the defense is what kept us in games. We wouldn't have won 6 games this year if we had the league average in Takeaways. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allstarjim Posted June 23, 2011 Share Posted June 23, 2011 If you can't understand how, in a football game, turnovers have an opportunity cost in terms of scoring opportunities, in addition to giving scoring opportunities to the other team, then no one here can help you. And yes, our Specials directly led to points in games this year, to a sickening extent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowboyz Posted June 23, 2011 Author Share Posted June 23, 2011 I think not, you have your facts wrong. You are showing a NET.... basically proving my argument for me considering how many points were scored by the other team off of OUR team's turnovers. Let me help you out (again)... our defense led the NFL in Takeaways with 39... we still ended up with a -3 t/o differential for the season, despite a record number of turnovers by our offense. Basically saying, yeah, our defense got the ball back a lot for us supports the argument that the defense is what kept us in games. We wouldn't have won 6 games this year if we had the league average in Takeaways. jimmy, if philly scores 9 points off of turnovers, and the giants score 7 off of turnovers. that's a net gain of 2 points off of turnovers for philly. they won by 10. do the math. fewell has always been good at creating turnovers vs lousy/mediocre qbs. that's what the tampa 2 does. look at the qb's you faced. it's certainly a unique list, and i doubt anyone in the league faced an easier group of qb's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allstarjim Posted June 23, 2011 Share Posted June 23, 2011 No dude, you are right, a defense that leads the NFL in takeaways, top 5 in sacks (two off of the the NFL leader), 7th in Yards.... yeah man, our defense sucks. You know our defense really sucked when we held the NFL's leading rusher to 25 yards on 11 carries. It sucked when we were knocking out QB's left and right and sacked Cutler 9 times in one half. Yeah man, you win. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allstarjim Posted June 23, 2011 Share Posted June 23, 2011 jimmy, if philly scores 9 points off of turnovers, and the giants score 7 off of turnovers. that's a net gain of 2 points off of turnovers for philly. they won by 10. do the math. fewell has always been good at creating turnovers vs lousy/mediocre qbs. that's what the tampa 2 does. look at the qb's you faced. it's certainly a unique list, and i doubt anyone in the league faced an easier group of qb's. Cowboyz... just as a reminder, you are arguing our defense sucked. You are not arguing turnover differentials. You're seriously arguing with me about a game where the offense gave the ball away FIVE times that the defense cost us the game? Hmmmm? You do understand opportunity cost, correct? Last time... if Eli puts his team at the opponent's 5 yard line and throws a 101 yard interception return for a TD by Brian McCann, is that a 7 point swing or a 14 point swing? Opportunity cost, now, think real hard like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowboyz Posted June 23, 2011 Author Share Posted June 23, 2011 No dude, you are right, a defense that leads the NFL in takeaways, top 5 in sacks (two off of the the NFL leader), 7th in Yards.... yeah man, our defense sucks. You know our defense really sucked when we held the NFL's leading rusher to 25 yards on 11 carries. It sucked when we were knocking out QB's left and right and sacked Cutler 9 times in one half. Yeah man, you win. remember the turnovers was your excuse for losing. i showed you, it's not the reason you lost in those games. the notion that those takeaways, most of which were fumbles, makes you a good defense is easily dismissed. instead of citing yards, sacks, and other meaningless numbers, where did you stand on scoring? middle of the road. even a dog's ass gets a little sunshine jim. especially vs the mediocre. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowboyz Posted June 23, 2011 Author Share Posted June 23, 2011 Cowboyz... just as a reminder, you are arguing our defense sucked. You are not arguing turnover differentials. You're seriously arguing with me about a game where the offense gave the ball away FIVE times that the defense cost us the game? Hmmmm? You do understand opportunity cost, correct? Last time... if Eli puts his team at the opponent's 5 yard line and throws a 101 yard interception return for a TD by Brian McCann, is that a 7 point swing or a 14 point swing? Opportunity cost, now, think real hard like. it doesn't matter if you turn the ball over 15 times if it doesn't equate to points on the board. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allstarjim Posted June 23, 2011 Share Posted June 23, 2011 remember the turnovers was your excuse for losing. i showed you, it's not the reason you lost in those games. the notion that those takeaways, most of which were fumbles, makes you a good defense is easily dismissed. instead of citing yards, sacks, and other meaningless numbers, where did you stand on scoring? middle of the road. even a dog's ass gets a little sunshine jim. especially vs the mediocre. Again, you ignore the cost that a turnover has on a game other than turnover differential. Now, tell me how good any team would do in scoring average if their offense and special teams consistently gives the opponent field position on their half of the field? The '85 Bears wouldn't have stopped offenses from scoring 20+ points per game if McMahon turned the ball over 42 times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allstarjim Posted June 23, 2011 Share Posted June 23, 2011 it doesn't matter if you turn the ball over 15 times if it doesn't equate to points on the board. That's an asinine statement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowboyz Posted June 24, 2011 Author Share Posted June 24, 2011 That's an asinine statement. yes in a world where the scoreboard doesn't matter, and ypg, most sacks, and fumbles wins a game. since 2000 alone 3 teams have won games with a -5 turnover differential. the point stands. if you don't convert those turnovers into points, it doesn't equate to a victory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrazedDogs Posted June 28, 2011 Share Posted June 28, 2011 rob hasn't been in the nfl long, but he has significantly improved the defenses he has coached. ypg, ypg, ypg. so you're sign of a good coordinator is one who is top ten in yards allowed, but 16th in scoring defense (rob's defense was 9th btw) and this vs meager competition. how did perry do vs winning teams? million dollar question. 1-4 vs winners. 9-2 vs losers. combined record of teams beaten by the gints 52-86. and that includes an 11-5 chicago team that was still learning a new offense. The Giants poor scoring defense in '10 had more to do with a turnover prone offense putting the defense up against a short field. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BIGBLUE01 Posted June 28, 2011 Share Posted June 28, 2011 The Giants poor scoring defense in '10 had more to do with a turnover prone offense putting the defense up against a short field. BINGO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now