2007 – 16.8 ppg
2008 – 25.3 ppg
2009 – 21.8 ppg
2010 – 22.9 ppg
2011 (15 games) – 24.0 ppg
2008 – 25.3 ppg
2009 – 21.8 ppg
2010 – 22.9 ppg
2011 (15 games) – 24.0 ppg
Offense is doing less controlling the clock than in past years, and is more turnover prone. Yet, on a PPG basis, we're actually ahead of where we were the past two seasons (with less D & ST scoring, if I had to guess).
Sanchez has regressed slightly this year, in a year where he should've improved markedly. And yet the team has put enough weapons around him that they continue to be able to score (at least by the measure of previous seasons).
The D is primarily responsible for the downgrade in the team's performance this year.
The D is primarily responsible for the downgrade in the team's performance this year.
3 comments:
Remember, though, that teams that are trailing in games tend to pile up yards and points late in games when they are desperate to catch up and the defenses move to the prevent.
Perfect example was this week's game--Sanchez goes for just under 300 yds but it took him almost 60 attempts to do it.
I'd be surprised if the Ravens have ever been in the top half of the league in points per game, yet they win 11 or 12 games almost every season while the Bengals have historically piled up points and were lucky to win 5 a year...
Agreed--which gets back, of course, to defense. Where winning teams are built. Exactly why the Pats will NOT win it all this year, even as a 1 seed.
My argument is not that the Jets are a potent, or even an improving, offense. My argument is that the drop off in results (Ws) cannot be attributed primarily to the O, when the stats of the D are more telling.
Any impact of the Jets playing from behind is likely marginal. It's not like they're 5-10 or getting whipped on the PF/PA spread. If that has had any impact, it's probably marginal. They played from behined some games last year, and some games this year.
Post a Comment