What's better? (1 Viewer)

BlackNGoldblood

Cruisin' for a Bruisin'
VIP Contributor
Joined
Oct 5, 2006
Messages
5,754
Reaction score
5,301
Age
49
Offline
For a team like the Ravens to achieve a 9-2 record with a plus-15 turnover ratio? Or for a team like the Saints to be 7-4 despite a minus-9 turnover ratio?
I say it can go both ways. You never want your team to get into a habit of turning the ball over and not forcing turnovers. However, it says plenty about your team to have one of the worst TO ratios, but still one of the better records in the league. Maybe the Saints, for example, could be due for a change in that stat and thus become even more tougher to beat.
 
if they wouldve never turned the ball over we would be undefeated,but we turned the ball over alot in those games we lost hence we lost.i think that in the four games we lost we averaged turning the ball over 3 times if im not mistaken...panthers 1....ravens 4.....bengals i think 4.....and the steelers 3.just seems when we play bad we play very bad and when we play good we play very good
 
For a team like the Ravens to achieve a 9-2 record with a plus-15 turnover ratio? Or for a team like the Saints to be 7-4 despite a minus-9 turnover ratio?
I say it can go both ways. You never want your team to get into a habit of turning the ball over and not forcing turnovers. However, it says plenty about your team to have one of the worst TO ratios, but still one of the better records in the league. Maybe the Saints, for example, could be due for a change in that stat and thus become even more tougher to beat.

In the case of the Saints, it's easy to see how turnovers were directly responsible for losses. That's correctable as evidenced by the Atlanta game.

However, when I also know that the reason the Ravens are on the plus side is because of that stout D, I'm a little torn. Can we just take their D with our O for the last 8 games?
 
In the case of the Saints, it's easy to see how turnovers were directly responsible for losses. That's correctable as evidenced by the Atlanta game.

However, when I also know that the reason the Ravens are on the plus side is because of that stout D, I'm a little torn. Can we just take their D with our O for the last 8 games?

Hmm....8 games huh? So we're either not getting a bye and losing in the NFC Championship game, or getting the bye and.............:rock:
 
9-2 is better than 7-4 no matter what.
 
Well ra, you make a good point. I wasn't really comparing records, though. I was just comparing any two teams with good records but with totally opposite turnover ratio stats. The Ravens and Saints were just an example.
 
Name the last team that won a Super Bowl without a top 10 defense.
 
Name the last team that won a Super Bowl without a top 10 defense.

Hmmm...my guess would be that you briefly researched this before posing the question and the answer is not obvious.

My first guess would have to be........2000 Ravens.











Kidding. My first guess would be the 99 Rams, but that's off the top of my head.
 
No, it's not a trick... you can go back to Super Bowl I and you won't see a team with a defense ranked any lower than maybe 10-12ish that won the championship.

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/

Nice website for quick stats.

As far as the topic goes... the Ravens won the head-to-head match pretty soundly.
 

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