Where Y'at, Danny?

Including Porter > Robinson.
It’s 2011, Danny.

I wasn’t being sarcastic either.

The Saints had 41 recorded pass attempts, which includes one by Chase Daniel. I don’t understand how that poor boy is going to get any game experience reading defenses if they don’t let him pass a little. Damn that Payton, run-run-run……………..

That it was called that….but that is funny as hell.

Although, I’m referring to the 2007 and 2008 seasons, neither of which had anything to do with their reaching the NFCCG.

I think that Kansas City had that goal yesterday against Green Bay, and I think a lot of teams have that goal against the Saints (having a desire to keep Drew off the field, and prevent the offense from getting into a flow). Where I disagree with CP is that TOP should not be a game strategy. One cannot call a “third and TOP”. One can call a run, that will in most cases result in the clock continuing to run, or one can call a pass, which may have a better chance of getting a first down (extending the drive, and buying more plays to consume more time). So as a result, the game-ending TOP will be a value dependent on how the game has gone. Even the issue of letting the clock run down has a plus/minus: letting the play clock run down uses time, but accelerating calls (like the Turbo-Ducks), or no-huddle offense, may be more effective if it’s easier to get first downs.

So TOP, like winning the game, can be a goal, and that goal may shape certain decisions at certain points in time, but in itself is not an independent variable. IMO.

Saints have disproven that theory more than a dozen times in the past few years.

No, they haven’t. The Saints haven’t had a low TOP over the past few years.

No NFL coach does it because it’s a poor strategy. What’s the question?

The question is why are you blind to the fact that a number of coaches do? Their teams’ success directly correlates to that. It is NOT poor strategy. The question was rhetorical — or rather, tongue in cheek — based on your faulty stance.

The Saints obviously don’t put heavy emphasis on TOP throughout a game, yet their TOP has still been better than average despite that. That’s because they have Drew Brees. It’s his passing efficiency (generally speaking) that’s keeping TOP up. My stance is not nearly as far fetched as yours. It’s merely that with more emphasis on TOP throughout, we’d win games more comfortably and more frequently.

For whatever reason, you seem to automatically associate higher TOP with less scoring. The two are in no way mutually exclusive. If they were, the Saints wouldn’t currently rank 5th in TOP. Further, even if a team ranked first in TOP, that doesn’t mean they couldn’t get even better by virtue of more TOP. They could completely dominate TOP like the 1985 Bears, a team led by a journeyman QB. With Brees, we could have the best of both worlds. If we ran a more balanced attack, the frequency of failed drives would diminish. That’s the crux. We’d still have Drew Brees to guide us down the field. He simply wouldn’t be as much a focal point of opposing defenses, meaning he would be able to accomplish that more efficiently. More efficiently = on a higher percentage of occasions.

If we were talking about a considerable reduction in the number of overall possessions, then sure, that might lead to less overall scoring. It would also lead to less overall scoring for the opponent, though. In reality, that concern is baseless in terms of how it would affect the Saints scoring total, as the most you’d likely be eliminating is one drive. The catch being that if even one non-scoring drive is rendered a scoring drive because of it (and MORE than one likely would), you’ve improved, in terms of scoring efficiency.

The basis of this hypothesis has been on display in every single solitary game this season. The Saints score more efficiently in drives that feature less than 60% passing AND 60% running. Not coincidentally, it’s generally those drives that result in a considerable increase in TOP. Not as much from running (although that is a contributing factor), but more so from the extension of said drives (i.e., increased number of first downs prior to scoring). Of course, if they were rushing the ball 70% of the time and still moving the sticks, they would be even more dominant in TOP, scoring efficiency and winning.

That against the average opponent. Dominance is relative. If the opponent successively took the same approach, it would be a wash, just as New Orleans versus Green Bay was virtually a wash on the “we’re not going to concentrate on TOP whatsoever” opposite end of the spectrum. The bottom line being that most teams don’t feature a QB as prolific as Drew Brees (I’m talking about his efficiency, NOT cumulative yardage totals) and most teams don’t put a lot of emphasis on the run.

We COULD be the exception to both. The benefits of that may be difficult to envision, as most teams that DO emphasize the run happen to have a stout defense. And you’re right, that certainly helps TOP, as well. If we’re talking about the Saints in 2012 or 2013, beefing up the defense is a noble aspiration, if only for that reason. In any given season, however, regardless of the level of defensive play, greater TOP helps teams win.

If you consider it poor strategy, then think of it as a lawn mower that sits lower, due to its square wheels. Drew Brees is better (stronger) than most QBs, so he’s the guy you want pushing that mower. His dink and dunk accuracy is what sets him apart from most QBs. That, coupled with the occasional long throw, be it to convert a 2nd or 3rd-and-a-mile, or just to keep opposing CBs on their toes, will still get those wheels a ’turning, be they square, round or triangular.

Land eleven elite players on defense to help him push it and pretty soon you’d forget those wheels were square. Allow Mark Ingram to develop into the elite RB he at least has the potential to be and that would help push that mower, also. In the end, your lawn is going to look immaculate and no one is going to be sweating, including the fans. Continue to use a conventional round wheeled mower like nearly every other team and sure, your QB will continued to be considered one best lawn maintains guys around. That doesn’t dismiss the fact that the grass will need cutting again sooner, primarily because the mower sits another inch or so off the ground (read: wasn’t as efficient), despite being easier to push.

Assuming you get paid a flat rate (read: the Lombardi Trophy) to maintain this person’s lawn all summer, doing a less than ideal job each time you cut it surely isn’t in anyone’s best interests. Of course, the counter argument to that would be, “a lawn mower doesn’t have to have square wheels in order to sit closer to the ground”. And that’s exactly the point I’m making.

Putting more emphasis on TOP is NOT poor strategy, NOR does it present a particular burden (as square wheels would), even if you don’t have eleven elite defensive players to help you mow the lawn. As a lawn mower that merely sits a little closer to the ground, it may take some getting used to, but it will save you plenty of sweat over the course of the entire summer. Further, having ANY back (even RBBCs including the likes of Julius Jones) to help you push it would still make things easier. Having a (theoretically) BETTER back, like Mark Ingram? Even easier. Elite defense? Even easier.

They all contribute to better TOP, hence winning, in their own way. In doing so, they often lead to more comfortable wins. Not without fail, obviously. You STILL have to finish cutting the grass (score more points than your opponent) each time out. Your chances of getting paid are going to diminish each time you don’t. For whatever reason, the fellow who cuts the check tends to pay attention to W-L records. That’s unfortunate, as we could have gotten paid twenty times throughout the ‘60s and ’70s, if he wasn’t such an observant pr***.

BUT WE WIN BECAUSE WE SCOAR QUICKLY!!!!!!1 No, we win because we score AND prevent our opponents from scoring. A fitting example? Saints vs Vikings, 2008. Two Reggie Bush punt returns for TDs and a loss. Had both been replaced by even standard Saints TD drives, we’re more likely to have won the game . Had both (or either) been replaced by drives with heavier than normal emphasis on TOP (such as the final drive against the Eagles in our 2006 playoff game), then we would have increased our chances of winning FAR more so. If for no other reason, an increased sense of urgency in future HOFer Gus Frerotte.

As I view it, scoring (read: finishing) is typically nothing more than the icing on the TOP cake. Granted, most cakes are going to suck without ANY icing, but a cake that is primarily comprised of icing is going to suck, as well. If you took an inventory of our pantry, we currently have ample amounts of both, but we still have more icing than we have cake batter. Divide “as is” up into 16ths any way you want. At some point, you’re going to produce a cr*** y cake. We’ve already produced 3 this year and have come close to screwing up a few more. To make 16 delicious cakes, which should be any team’s goal, we’re going to need more cake batter.

As far as icing providers go, we’ve always had those, even if it’s just a dab here and a dab there. Julius Jones scored two TDs in the Seattle playoff game. Had we managed to win the game by virtue of better TOP (read: keeping Lynch and Hasselbeck off the field), they would have contributed to the victory. The same goes for any Brees TD pass in a loss. Have I EVER suggested concentrating on improving time of possession, IN LIEU of scoring each time you have the ball? Of course not. You’re the only person I know that seems to make that association.

rotoworld.com:

Tony Gonzalez has now caught 60 or more passes in an NFL record 13 straight seasons. This season has been among the most remarkable of Gonzalez’s career as he somehow has flourished at age 35. His catches per game, yards per catch and touchdowns are all up from a year ago. Gonzalez is currently fantasy’s No. 3 tight end, behind only Rob Gronkowski and Jimmy Graham.
Source: Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Dec 5

Yes, it is. And every point you just made can also be applied to TOP. Including the conveniently deceptive use of the word “winning”, in order to drive home the half-baked point. Leading is not synonymous with winning. It is a scoreboard lead that often times results in BOTH takeaways and TOP increases. That doesn’t rule out the importance of either, in terms of winning games. Takeaways also occur when no lead is present. TOP is also accrued when no lead is present. Both are beneficial to that team’s chances of winning the game. The circumstances of how or when they occur should carry very little weight if any, in terms of their importance. There are some isolated exceptions, obviously. A kneel down at the end of a blow out win is technically TOP that didn’t contribute to the victory. An interception late in a blow out win is technically a takeway that didn’t contribute to the victory. Generally speaking, however, both are contributing factors to winning. Even with a large lead, an interception thwarts at least one attempt of the opposition pulling closer. Even with a large lead, increased TOP could possibly thwart at least one attempt of the opposition pulling closer. If nothing else, it will increase their sense of urgency, thereby making the takeways more likely.

I still don’t think TOP’s importance lies in when it’s accrued. I’m with you on the latter points.

who went to San Diego in the mid ’80’s and prospered in Air Coryell.

let’s make like a tree and get out of here

reference?