I do think yards allowed is a better reflection vs points allowed personally. It’s not a shocker that teams that get to the CC are tops in scoring against. After all points is how you win and lose games. It makes sense the the teams that give up the fewest points make it to the SB.
A bend but don’t break is a strategy defenses use when they know they aren’t that good. So sure they might not being giving up max points, but they are on the field more, wearing down, hoping for game altering turnovers. A team that consistently holds their opponents to the fewest yards (especially when constantly winning), is a much better reflection of a great defense. That’s the reason is the metric used for defensive rankings. NFL.com is not the only one using this metric.
Mobility is nauseating to watch actually. A QB who can’t perform from the pocket and is constantly trying to escape, even when it’s not necessary, is the hardest thing to watch. Deshaun Watson, Caleb Williams, Lamar Jackson, are my absolute least favorite QBs to watch.
You tend to bring up mobility in a very lose term when defending Goff. Some just want the ability to move just a little. I think most still prefer the pocket passer to be the top trait.
I personally think Mahomes is overrated (not saying he is one of the best in the league cause he is). He’s not the GOAT people think he is.
Yards allowed isn’t a “better” defensive metric than points allowed — it’s just noisier. Yards and points are strongly correlated, but points (and point differential) track wins and championships better because games are decided by scoring - not field position aesthetics.
If “bend but don’t break” were just what less talented defenses do, the Belichick Patriots wouldn’t exist — they routinely ranked much higher in points allowed than yards allowed and won six Super Bowls doing it. That’s not hiding weakness; that’s prioritizing outcomes, being situationally focused and forcing opposing offenses to snap the ball more waiting for an opportunistic mistake…
So what it does as well is prioritize turnover creation. More snaps = more decision points = more chances for opponent mistakes, especially when defenses tighten situationally. Turnover differential correlates with winning far more strongly than yardage does, second only to scoring itself. That’s why historically great defenses are often better in points and takeaways than in raw yards allowed. Treating yardage as the “truest” defensive metric ignores how defenses are actually designed to win games.
If you actually want the best bridge between defense quality and team success, it’s efficiency metrics like DVOA/EPA that account for situation, opponent, and leverage — not raw yardage totals inflated by pace, garbage time, and field position. Saying yards allowed is superior while ignoring how points, efficiency, and championships actually line up is just substituting intuition for evidence.
I said the exact same thing in regards to winning and the two metrics…
And I didn’t say it was the best indicator of a good defense. I said it was the better metric of the two.
A team doesn’t give up few yards but a ton of points. Thats not a correlation that exists (or rarely). But there are teams that give up a lot of yards but it doesn’t always result in points against.
where there are yards, there are points scored. Not the other way around.
I still simply do not agree…. First off you used basketball for context and so I will reply to that first-
Magic
Steph
Oscar Robertson
Isiah Thomas
Stockton
Chris Paul
Steve Nash
J Kidd
The Glove
Russ Westbrook/SGA (on his way)
Those are arguably the top 10 point guards of all time…
Assuming 4250 yards each of the next 2 years and Goff is top 15 all time in passing by age 33
6 more years averaging 3,950 and he’s tied with Stafford while being a year younger-
I expect Goff to win at least 6 more playoff games in his career…. Passing the likes of Brees and Marino
He’s not Zeke, Magic or Oscar… he’s likely not even Paul, Nash and certainly not Stockton- nor Cade….Or SGA
he might be D Fox… or maybe (Puke) Brunson
we literally had Stafford and he demanded out.
we never had a chance at Maye, Young, Stroud, Caleb, Lawrence, etc
Should we have dumped Goff after a near NFCC win and replace him with the pre-Vikings Darnold?
Should we have traded Stafford for the wildcard of Josh Allen? In hindsight yes…
Drafted Purdy late and gotten rid of Goff?
We all know that Goff has limitations, but so does Lamar or even Hurts who has a ring… I bet Philly is glad they didn’t listen when told he couldn’t read a defense or throw accurately- it’s worked out fine
make stuff up-much? Jared does mess up, has made errant throws, has held onto the football too long “at times”, He cannot run (well), racks up INT’s, gets sacked, he does need a better line and better playcaller. Jared is not “Elite”, Jared has some pretty shitty games at -times. and is not perfect…no QB is. is that what you require?
So I point out how Purdy’s out-of-structure play in that game helped them win - literally showing you how out-of-structure play can affect a game when the opposing QBs have similar stats - and your response is…Goff played very well? Well that’s great. I saw the game too. But how is that addressing my example? Do you care to address why Purdy’s QBR is so high and Goff’s was so middling? Its because Purdy played out of structure and made enough plays to come back and seal that game. I don’t care if there were other things that happened or not in that game, he still had to make those plays. One of them was a huge 3rd and 4 with four minutes left. He was about to be sacked, evaded and ran for the first down. He extended the drive and they scored a TD to make it 34-24. He gets sacked and its 30-24 if they make the FG. They won 34-31…
You guys are both knee jerk reacting way too hard on my responses. Its not about Goff. Its about the value of out-of-structure QBs. In that they, like, have real value that is often hard to see with bulk stats?
You are missing my point in all of this. My point isn’t to gauge what HOF PG Goff most resembles comparatively. My point is to say that out-of-structure play isn’t well measured by traditional statistics. It doesn’t tell nearly the whole story sometimes. Just like traditional stats don’t tell the whole story on the Isiah Thomas vs John Stockton debate. I’m not saying John Stockton wasn’t good. I’m trying to explain why Isiah can be overlooked if that is all you look at…
And also, I am not advocating for a new QB. Goff does well enough in this system. But don’t make bad arguments to defend him.
