10 years from now someone will look at the team rankings and see a top 10 D in PPG and a 17th ranked O and think friggin Pete ball. No wonder we suck.
TOP usually isnt a huge difference in games., This year in played a huge roll IMO. We have had the ball for 25.1 minutes a game, that's the lowest in since 2003. Might be one of the lowest in history. I doubt 1992 was much worse. Even though we are last we score just under a point a minute and figuring Wilson wasn't right for at least 4 of those games we are over 1 point per minute. Thats actually pretty good. GB has a 7 min advantage in time but only a 4 PPG in scoring. Im not saying we are as good as they are but we have done pretty well with what we have. This team can score points, they just need more time, a D that can get TOs and a couple more stops a game
This D is more aggravating to me than the 1992 offense was. Cant get off the field, no TOs, very few big plays. The 92 D was ranked 17th in PPG and we know who was to blame. This offense is in the same boat. 25 mins a game might not seem like a huge problem so I randomly looked at 3 of the worst blowouts in NFL history to see how the TOP matched up.
Seahawks 58 cards 0 cards TOP 25:33
Seahawks 48 broncos 8 broncos TOP 28:07
Jets 47 rams 3 rams TOP 22:57
3 equally inept teams chosen randomly were measured, tested and found wanting averaged about 25.5 minutes per game.
Our O is playing pretty good football. Even Waldron who i dont like because he is a ram isnt the biggest problem. Our D needs wholesale changes. I would rather find 11 young kids with speed and aggression making mistakes learning on the run rather than watch the 40 mins of WFT offense grind down the field.
TOP usually isnt a huge difference in games., This year in played a huge roll IMO. We have had the ball for 25.1 minutes a game, that's the lowest in since 2003. Might be one of the lowest in history. I doubt 1992 was much worse. Even though we are last we score just under a point a minute and figuring Wilson wasn't right for at least 4 of those games we are over 1 point per minute. Thats actually pretty good. GB has a 7 min advantage in time but only a 4 PPG in scoring. Im not saying we are as good as they are but we have done pretty well with what we have. This team can score points, they just need more time, a D that can get TOs and a couple more stops a game
This D is more aggravating to me than the 1992 offense was. Cant get off the field, no TOs, very few big plays. The 92 D was ranked 17th in PPG and we know who was to blame. This offense is in the same boat. 25 mins a game might not seem like a huge problem so I randomly looked at 3 of the worst blowouts in NFL history to see how the TOP matched up.
Seahawks 58 cards 0 cards TOP 25:33
Seahawks 48 broncos 8 broncos TOP 28:07
Jets 47 rams 3 rams TOP 22:57
3 equally inept teams chosen randomly were measured, tested and found wanting averaged about 25.5 minutes per game.
Our O is playing pretty good football. Even Waldron who i dont like because he is a ram isnt the biggest problem. Our D needs wholesale changes. I would rather find 11 young kids with speed and aggression making mistakes learning on the run rather than watch the 40 mins of WFT offense grind down the field.
