The Almighty Quarterback Bandwagon Runs Out of Control

[Stadium-Armory]

Batch's passer rating today was a 90, which isn't too shabby.

[Oldfan]

I'm not really interested in being in this conversation, only reading it. But we've all seen at least two this year. The Whistle that let Carolina score, and the TD in Detroit on Thanksgiving. In both instances the refs scored a touchdown after the defense had stopped the ball carrier. It was the difference in the lions/texans game, and could have been the difference in the Skins/panthers game as well.

Pardon the drive by post.

I should have known better than to use the word "none." Using absolutes like none, all, always, or never will challenge some minds to look for exceptions. However, your exceptions don't alter the point I was trying to make.

[Mahons21]

Mahons and DogofWar:

Sorry for taking so longto respond, been loong weekend of some great football.

I fear the limitations of message board may in this instance prevent us from communicating with one another effectively enough to get our points across successfully. So my apologies in advance if I'm mis-interpreting your points.

Let's see if this explanation helps.

Let X = weight of all advantages and disadvantages for all offenses under the rules;
Then X is the same for all teams in the league
Thus, no team has an advantage under the rules
and the defense's challenge to stop the offenses given X is the same for all teams

Let X + 1 = a rule change favoring the offense
Then X + 1 is the same for all teams
Thus, no team has an advantage under the rules
and the defense's challenge to stop the offense given X + 1 is the same for all teams
Thus the rule change favoring the offense would simply result in higher scoring games

In the end, a football game amounts to:

Team A's offense v. Team B's defense
Team B's offense v. Team A's defense

...with all the rules, advantages, and disadvantages for offense and defense the same.

What all this says to me is that the opponents defense are your defense have equal opportunity to effect the game. However that doesn't change the point that both offenses will have more impact on the final outcome then either defense.

So, whatever advantage you can identify for the offense is the same for both teams and the challenge for both defenses is the same. Since offensive advantages are the same for both teams, they don't affect the game's outcome. They can only affect the scoring level of games.

You agreed a couple pages of back the outcome of a game can be affected by factors other than scoring, and this sentence in bold suggests you agree that the offense can affect the scoring level of games.

If you believe both of these to be true, how can you say the defense can have equal impact on the game?

[KDawg]

What all this says to me is that the opponents defense are your defense have equal opportunity to effect the game. However that doesn't change the point that both offenses will have more impact on the final outcome then either defense.

I'm not sure how you can come to the conclusion that both offenses will have more impact on a final outcome than either defense. Defenses do a lot during the course of the game. Ranging from holding an offense without points or creating a turnover opportunity to give the offense back the ball. Turnovers don't create an extra possession as many might believe they do, but they keep points off the board for the opposing team and give your offense the opportunity to score more points. Also, a turnover can most certainly be returned for a touchdown. So not only did they keep the opposing team from scoring on that drive, but they added points to their total as well. That's a huge swing.

[Oldfan]

...You agreed a couple pages of back the outcome of a game can be affected by factors other than scoring..

I agreed that winning or losing can be affected by factors other than scoring?

By "scoring level" I mean that rule changes resulting in offensive advantages result in higher scoring games with no advantage for either team in scoring --- while rule changes resulting in defensive advantages result in lower scoring games with no advantage for either team in scoring.

There is no effect at all on the 50/50 balance on offense/defense importance to winning.

Higher scoring games, for example, don't make the offense more important than the defense. Preventing a touchdown will always be as important to winning as scoring a touchdown.

[Mahons21]

I agreed that winning or losing can be affected by factors other than scoring?

I posed this question to you on page 16.

Wouldnt you agree that the ability to manage the clock in ones favor has an impact on the outcome of the game?

You replied

Of course, that's an advantage for both teams. And the defense's ability to foil the opponent's attempt to do that has an equal impact when successful.

I took that to mean that you agreed, working the clock in favor of your offensive strategy can change the outcome of the game.

Higher scoring games, for example, don't make the offense more important than the defense. Preventing a touchdown will always be as important to winning as scoring a touchdown.

I agree. In my opinion the point you are making is that, for every opportunity an offense has to either gain yards or score, the defense has an equal opportunity to defend such a play. I don't believe that is synonymous with the offense and defense having equal impact on the game.

Hypothetical, a high scoring offense sets out to pass the ball as much as possible. This will cause the game to be longer, more series etc.. as this will increase their odds of winning. Even if the defense stops them from gaining anything no yards/scores, that offense will still have altered the game in what they believe is their favor. There's nothing a defense can do to stop this.

---------- Post added December-3rd-2012 at 07:02 PM ----------

I'm not sure how you can come to the conclusion that both offenses will have more impact on a final outcome than either defense. Defenses do a lot during the course of the game. Ranging from holding an offense without points or creating a turnover opportunity to give the offense back the ball. Turnovers don't create an extra possession as many might believe they do, but they keep points off the board for the opposing team and give your offense the opportunity to score more points. Also, a turnover can most certainly be returned for a touchdown. So not only did they keep the opposing team from scoring on that drive, but they added points to their total as well. That's a huge swing.

Can a defense prevent an offense from using the clock in their favor?

What can a defense do when there's 1:30 left in the game there team is down and they have no timeouts? What can an offense do in that same situation?

---------- Post added December-3rd-2012 at 07:03 PM ----------

To be clear, I don't believe there's some huge discrepancy between offense and defenses impact on the outcome of a game.

---------- Post added December-3rd-2012 at 07:10 PM ----------

In the end where I believe we differ is that, you guys in my opinion believe that the defense having an equal opportunity to prevent the offense from scoring/gaining yards, is synoymous with the defense an offense having equal impact on the outcome of the game. I don't believe this to be true, because in my opinion, there are other factors that can play a roll on the outcome of the game, factors that the defense has no control over.

[Oldfan]

...Hypothetical, a high scoring offense sets out to pass the ball as much as possible. This will cause the game to be longer, more series etc.. as this will increase their odds of winning. Even if the defense stops them from gaining anything no yards/scores, that offense will still have altered the game in what they believe is their favor. There's nothing a defense can do to stop this...

A defense can't stop an offense from initiating any strategy it thinks will help win the game, but the defense can stop the offense from scoring. And, since it is the scoring, and not how many drives each team gets in a 60-minute game, that determines the outcome, the defense has an equal impact on the final score.

[Mahons21]

A defense can't stop an offense from initiating any strategy it thinks will help win the game, but the defense can stop the offense from scoring. And, since it is the scoring, and not how many drives each team gets in a 60-minute game, that determines the outcome, the defense has an equal impact on the final score.

Score determines the final score, however many factors have an impact on the final score, as you've agreed above.

[Oldfan]

Score determines the final score, however many factors have an impact on the final score, as you've agreed above.

On re-reading, I should have disagreed with this question:

Wouldnt you agree that the ability to manage the clock in ones favor has an impact on the outcome of the game?

But, I read it as if you were asking whether there was a potential impact on the scoring. So, my response was :

Of course, that's an advantage for both teams. And the defense's ability to foil the opponent's attempt to do that has an equal impact when successful.

You can't claim that an advantage for the offense has more impact on the final score than the defense's capability to negate the advantage.

[HaveFaith]

Reading thru this thread reminds me a a Hockey analogy:

In Hockey offense is 40% of the game, Defense is 40% of the game and Goal-tending is 20% of the game. Unless of course you don't have Goal-tending, then it becomes 100% of the game.

When you have "working pieces" all around then you can assign a relatively small value to each of them as part of the whole, but if you are missing any one of them (as the Redskins have for the past umpteen years at QB) then that "hole" becomes a much larger part.

[JoeSkins]

Well... in college he is way wrong. Everette Golston is going to be good... but he's barely "okay" right now and that's from a Notre Dame fan. And say what you want about AJ McCarron's W-L record, but he's nothing to write home about. Aaron Murray will contribute on Sunday's however.

Good post OF.

Why can't Notre Dame's own fans get Everett Golson's name right? I'll walk that back a bit though, since almost no one on TV or in print gets it right either, contributing to the problem.