Offense and Defense Matters (and a little luck doesn't hurt either)

BamaMoon

Hall of Fame
Apr 1, 2004
20,932
15,934
282
Boone, NC
http://gridironnow.com/4-sec-football-scoring-stats/

Didn't see a discussion about this. It highlights four things:

1. How scoring above 30 improves winning percentage.

2. It also shows scoring between 20-29 points drastically reduces winning %, but take a wild guess who has a better record in this department than anybody else???:wink:

3. It also highlights that when you hold an opponent under 24 points your going to win more games.

4. The fourth is winning close games (under 7 points) and guess who is far and away the best (luckiest) at doing so? :wink:

Hey, numbers don't lie!:BigA:
 

Crimson1967

Hall of Fame
Nov 22, 2011
18,734
9,918
187
So the more points you score and the fewer you allow increases your chances of winning?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

BamaMoon

Hall of Fame
Apr 1, 2004
20,932
15,934
282
Boone, NC
So the more points you score and the fewer you allow increases your chances of winning?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Well, I guess that's always true, but at least the article took the time to show the case for it, but what I found most interesting is that Auburn was the leader in games won that were under 7 points.

We talk about how the Barn is lucky, but this stat seems to confirm it.
 

Redwood Forrest

Hall of Fame
Sep 19, 2003
11,042
907
237
76
Boaz, AL USA
A score of 30-24 mean you win a lot of games, lol

Yes, I see the point here but it does have a lighter side. I firmly believe defense wins championships ..... but you can't win without scoring. So it is a bit of a chuckle there. You can't win a championship game without scoring more points that your foe.
 

selmaborntidefan

TideFans Legend
Mar 31, 2000
36,432
29,735
287
54
This is a flawed an unnecessary statistical analysis on multiple levels and is fraught with misleading errors. Not that the basic premise is wrong, but it just galls me.

http://gridironnow.com/4-sec-football-scoring-stats/

Didn't see a discussion about this. It highlights four things:

1. How scoring above 30 improves winning percentage.
Common sense ought to indicate this. A recent analysis showed that the teams that won national titles in the last 25 years have an AVERAGE DEFENSIVE OVERALL RANKING of 9.66.......in other words, the teams to win national titles among the TEN BEST in the nation every single year when looked at as an average.

And that number is dramatically skewed by one team, 2010 Auburn, whose 53rd ranked defense was the second-worst in history to win a national title. That Auburn team surrendered 24.1 ppg.

Obviously, if you score 30, you beat 24. And if you beat the worst defense you SHOULD be able (all things being equal) to beat the best.


2. It also shows scoring between 20-29 points drastically reduces winning %, but take a wild guess who has a better record in this department than anybody else???:wink:
Well, there's a MAJOR difference in scoring 20 and scoring 30 but there's not a major one between 30 and 29; I'd be interested in seeing the numbers by integer - in other words, what does your percent decrease per point. Does it drop 1% at 29 for example?

3. It also highlights that when you hold an opponent under 24 points your going to win more games.
Auburn's 2010 awful defense gave up 24.1 ppg and won it all. But you can't count on that. Go look at their high-wire act all season that year.

4. The fourth is winning close games (under 7 points) and guess who is far and away the best (luckiest) at doing so? :wink:

Hey, numbers don't lie!:BigA:
But you'd have to analyze how many games that ended within seven points were actually games, too. For example, if you look at the score of Super Bowl XXVI, you see Washington beat Buffalo, 37-24, and you imagine "must have been a pretty good game."

Of course, Washington led 37-10 in the fourth.......

As far as lucky, while nobody should deny Ricardo Louis's Prayer at Jordan-Hare catch was just plain luck, maybe it's that they play in a lot of close games because they respond well to pressure and don't give up.

Stallings' Tide teams didn't exactly set the world on fire in terms of points won by. In 1991, the Tide was five plays from being 6-6 and somehow went 11-1. In 92, we only led La Tech, 6-0, in the fourth and our only TD was on a punt return. We led Tulane, 6-0, at the half. And we were tied with 5-5 Auburn, 0-0, at the half, too.

In 1994, we won EIGHT GAMES we trailed in the fourth quarter, most of them close.

So let's not dismiss them just because it's Auburn.
 

selmaborntidefan

TideFans Legend
Mar 31, 2000
36,432
29,735
287
54
Speaking of Madden, this is one he used to drive me nuts with:

"I always wanted - in a BIG game - to LOSE the toss and put my defense on the field first."

Uh, maybe I'm wrong but don't you get the option to do that if you WIN the toss?
 

TideEngineer08

TideFans Legend
Jun 9, 2009
36,284
30,895
187
Beautiful Cullman, AL
Stallings' Tide teams didn't exactly set the world on fire in terms of points won by. In 1991, the Tide was five plays from being 6-6 and somehow went 11-1. In 92, we only led La Tech, 6-0, in the fourth and our only TD was on a punt return. We led Tulane, 6-0, at the half. And we were tied with 5-5 Auburn, 0-0, at the half, too.

In 1994, we won EIGHT GAMES we trailed in the fourth quarter, most of them close.
The fun is in the winning.
 

afadam07

1st Team
Aug 21, 2008
480
0
35
Oklahoma City, OK
Speaking of Madden, this is one he used to drive me nuts with:

"I always wanted - in a BIG game - to LOSE the toss and put my defense on the field first."

Uh, maybe I'm wrong but don't you get the option to do that if you WIN the toss?
HAHA... maybe he just didn't want to be considered an idiot for choosing D first in the old style OT rules lol.
 

Alasippi

Suspended
Aug 31, 2007
12,875
2
57
Ocean Springs, MS
Speaking of Madden, this is one he used to drive me nuts with:

"I always wanted - in a BIG game - to LOSE the toss and put my defense on the field first."

Uh, maybe I'm wrong but don't you get the option to do that if you WIN the toss?
Most of the time, back then, the team that won the toss chose to receive. Different era.
Therefore, if Madden's Raiders lost the toss, chances are they'd be playing defense first.
Also, back then, if you won the toss and chose to kick off, then guess what. You kicked off to start both halfs. There was no "deferred".
 
Last edited:

Latest threads

TideFans.shop : 2024 Madness!

TideFans.shop - Get YOUR Bama Gear HERE!”></a>
<br />

<!--/ END TideFans.shop & item link \-->
<p style= Purchases made through our TideFans.shop and Amazon.com links may result in a commission being paid to TideFans.