Printable View
[size=13pt]Football Outsiders: Ranking the LBs[/size]
Doug Farrar
FootballOutsiders.com, Updated 10 hours ago
...Here are the top 16 linebacking units in football with last year's rank in parentheses...
[size=13pt]Football Outsiders: Ranking the LBs 17-32[/size]
Doug Farrar
FootballOutsiders.com, Updated 9 hours ago
Here is the bottom half of the linebacking units in football with last year's rank in parentheses:
"singersp" wrote:
Fair assessment of the Vikings there.Quote:
[size=13pt]Football Outsiders: Ranking the LBs 17-32[/size]
Doug Farrar
FootballOutsiders.com, Updated 9 hours ago
Here is the bottom half of the linebacking units in football with last year's rank in parentheses:
I'd like to believe they are higher, but I don't disagree with anything which was written.
I'm expecting huge things out of EJ that will propel them into the top-16 for next year, however.
=Z=
Hmm, the article said that our defense saw the pass more than any other team in the league. I wonder where we reank in "defensive yards per pass attempt."
Anybody know where to find out?
"V" wrote:
Here are the Vikings passing defense stats from last year:Quote:
Hmm, the article said that our defense saw the pass more than any other team in the league. I wonder where we reank in "defensive yards per pass attempt."
Anybody know where to find out?
Team
G
Att
Att/G Cmp Pct
Yds
Yds/G
TDs Int
Sck SckYds
Minnesota 16 599 37.4
355
59.3 3818 238.6
15
21
30
197
It's not a ranking of what you're looking for, for sure, but if you want to do the math, NFL.COM has the best stats.
http://www.nfl.com/stats/teamsort/NFL/DEF-PASSING/2006/regular?sort_col_1=8
=Z=
[size=18pt]Defensive Yards per pass attempt[/size]
Rank Team Yds Att Yds/Att 1 Chicago 3116 581 5.36 2 Philadelphia 3067 525 5.84 3 Buffalo 3019 513 5.88 4 Jacksonville 3078 523 5.89 4 Oakland 2413 410 5.89 6 Baltimore 3011 509 5.92 7 San Diego 3212 538 5.97 8 Carolina 3000 500 6 9 New Orleans 2854 474 6.02 10 Miami 3007 497 6.05 11 New York (A) 3222 532 6.06 12 Indianapolis 2548 415 6.14 13 New England 3203 518 6.18 14 Denver 3410 538 6.34 15 Minnesota 3818 599 6.37 16 Pittsburgh 3393 529 6.41 17 Green Bay 3309 515 6.43 18 New York (N) 3649 567 6.44 19 Seattle 3256 504 6.46 20 Cleveland 3242 499 6.5 21 Kansas City 3334 506 6.59 22 St. Louis 3035 451 6.73 23 Tennessee 3602 530 6.8 23 Tampa Bay 3354 493 6.8 25 Houston 3444 504 6.83 26 Dallas 3506 511 6.86 27 Cincinnati 3818 555 6.88 28 Detroit 3520 511 6.89 28 San Francisco 3571 518 6.89 30 Arizona 3694 522 7.08 31 Atlanta 3668 515 7.12 32 Washington 3491 486 7.18
Nice work Josdin!
As I expected, we were middle of the road, but we just got passed on a lot because our run D was so good.
"V" wrote:
Or - the Vikes run D was so good because people passed so much.Quote:
Nice work Josdin!
As I expected, we were middle of the road, but we just got passed on a lot because our run D was so good.
The Patriots didn't bother to run on the Vikes.
What do you think their mindset was:
A.
We can't run on these guys, so we better pass
B.
They can't stop our passing attack, so why bother running?
As they are winners, I tend to think the Pats are more in the B camp than A.
=Z=
"Zeus" wrote:
Very possible, the pass defense was no doubt the weakness.Quote:
"V" wrote:
Or - the Vikes run D was so good because people passed so much.Quote:
Nice work Josdin!
As I expected, we were middle of the road, but we just got passed on a lot because our run D was so good.
The Patriots didn't bother to run on the Vikes.
What do you think their mindset was:
A.
We can't run on these guys, so we better pass
B.
They can't stop our passing attack, so why bother running?
As they are winners, I tend to think the Pats are more in the B camp than A.
=Z=
You can look at it either way.
Its just more motivating to think of our run defense as dominant which caused people to pass more and make our pass defense look worse than they they were...
"Zeus" wrote:
We gave up somewhere in the area of 2.3 yards per carry. That tells me that it was just because teams didnt run on us. Our pass defense was terrible, but dont take away what we did against the run.Quote:
"V" wrote:
Or - the Vikes run D was so good because people passed so much.Quote:
Nice work Josdin!
As I expected, we were middle of the road, but we just got passed on a lot because our run D was so good.
The Patriots didn't bother to run on the Vikes.
What do you think their mindset was:
A.
We can't run on these guys, so we better pass
B.
They can't stop our passing attack, so why bother running?
As they are winners, I tend to think the Pats are more in the B camp than A.
=Z=
"WinonaVike" wrote:
Quote:
"Zeus" wrote:
We gave up somewhere in the area of 2.3 yards per carry. That tells me that it wasn't just because teams didnt run on us. Our pass defense was terrible, but dont take away what we did against the run.Quote:
"V" wrote:
Or - the Vikes run D was so good because people passed so much.Quote:
Nice work Josdin!
As I expected, we were middle of the road, but we just got passed on a lot because our run D was so good.
The Patriots didn't bother to run on the Vikes.
What do you think their mindset was:
A.
We can't run on these guys, so we better pass
B.
They can't stop our passing attack, so why bother running?
As they are winners, I tend to think the Pats are more in the B camp than A.
=Z=
2.8 YPC with cushion from #2.
The low total rush yards are probably skewed by the easy pass defense but I don't see that having a correlation to YPC.
Teams rushed on Baltimore only about 20 more times yet we had a .5 better YPC.
Stats
*You meant wasn't, right Winona?