ESPN Power Rankings (1 Viewer)

To say that "the defense is playing the way everyone thought it would", and basing it on the past 4 games, is nothing more than lazy journalism and doesn't begin to tell the entire story.

vs Baltimore: the Ravens forced 5 turnovers, taking 2 back for TDs. Defense's fault? Hardly.
at Tampa: 14 pts allowed, and played very well (second quarter hiccup notwithstanding)
at Pitt: ok, hard to say much good about that defensive effort
vs Cinc: played pretty darn well to hold the Bengals to 10 points through 3+ quarters, especially considering the pressure put on them by our offense's failure to score points

The Saints defense has been mediocre all season long. People just overlooked it because the offense is so good and generally plays error-free football. The biggest turnover culprit in the Ravens and Bengals game was Drew Brees. He had two bad games. The first is somewhat understandable because Ravens defensive coordinator Rex Ryan is as good as his father and they continue to have one of the best units in the league. The Bengals is less understandable but even great quarterbacks have poor games once or twice in a season.

The analysts know Drew Brees is not the problem for this football team. They know, given his track record, he will bounce back. The defense will not as they have been consistently poor. So when you go to project the Saints' chances down the stretch run, are you going to weigh Drew Brees' two bad games as a greater factor than a defense that has struggled with all but the most timid of opposition? Of course not.
 
I understand what you are saying here, but the defense at this point just doesn't look as good right now as it did in the beginning of the season. ...

I don't disagree with that at all.



The Saints defense has been mediocre all season long. ... The defense will not as they have been consistently poor. ...


I'm not sure what team you were watching. The defense:

* played well at Cleveland
* held Atlanta to 3 points
* had a good game at Carolina, holding them to 14 until Foster broke his run with under 2 minutes
* held up against Philly, who had scored 30 or more points in each of the 4 games prior to playing us (held them to 24).

Yes, they played poorly at Pitt, and fell apart in the 4th quarter vs Cincy, but in those 2 games, plus the Baltimore game, our offense gave those teams 10 more possessions due to turnovers. Consistently poor is simply not accurate.
 
I'm not sure what team you were watching. The defense:

* played well at Cleveland
* held Atlanta to 3 points
* had a good game at Carolina, holding them to 14 until Foster broke his run with under 2 minutes
* held up against Philly, who had scored 30 or more points in each of the 4 games prior to playing us (held them to 24).

Yes, they played poorly at Pitt, and fell apart in the 4th quarter vs Cincy, but in those 2 games, plus the Baltimore game, our offense gave those teams 10 more possessions due to turnovers. Consistently poor is simply not accurate.

And yet you're judging the team's "turnover" problem on essentially two... maybe three games?

Consistently poor not accurate? I'll stick with consistently mediocre (lower half of the league) then and teams with consistently mediocre defenses rarely find themselves in position to do much in the playoffs (if they in fact get there).
 
The only ranking that counts right now is the division ranking and that is tied for 1st. I believe the second most important ranking is turnover differential and then points allowed. We are probably not good in the latter but tied for 1st in the division aint to bad.
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account on our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Users who are viewing this thread

    Back
    Top Bottom