Do you prefer yards/points as the metric of a team’s unit?

[CSKreager]

There are so many examples of yards/points not being equal to a team's ranking.

The famous 1991 Eagles defense that was ranked #1 across the board in total defense, fewest passing yards, rushing yards, and total yards allowed? The Dome Patrol Saints actually led the league in fewest points allowed.

Similarly in 1992, the Cowboys had the NFL’s #1 ranked defense, but New Orleans again allowed the fewest points that year- in fact, the ‘92 version of the Dome Patrol had the #1 single season scoring defense of the 1990s.

In '91, 4 teams tied for the fewest passing TD's allowed- Buffalo/New Orleans/Denver/Phoenix- yet in terms of scoring defense: Saints #1, Broncos #3, Bills #19, Cards #22.

[ChrisBabcock]

Definitely yardage. I remember the Panthers 15-1 season a few years back they scored exactly 500 points leading the league. (obviously there were probably defensive and special teams TDs mixed in) I was curious as to where they ranked yardage-wise because their offense didn't seem that great to me. I found they ranked only 8th or so in total yardage gained. (somewhere around 8th, I don't have the exact number in front of me) I concluded they had to have been either at or near the top in turnover margin and average drive start field position to explain the discrepancy in those rankings. Sure enough, they were. Just goes to show that one stat by itself can't exist in a vacuum.

Merry Christmas everyone!

[RyanChristiansen]

I think yardage is the core data point, especially when you think about the origins of the game and how teams used to punt on earlier downs to gain field position. So many factors affect how many points might be scored, but the field is always 100 yards long.

[Rupert Patrick]

I don't think you can use one standard statistic to evaluate a team's offense or defense. Offensive points scored includes things like pick sixes, punt and kickoff return touchdowns, safeties, etc, which don't use any offensive yards to acquire them. Yards don't tell the whole story either, because you can travel from your 20-yard line to the opponents 1-yard line, and the 79 yards gained look impressive, but you don't get any points out of it. On the other hand, going from your 20 to the end zone is 80 yards, you get a touchdown, but the one-yard difference between the two scenarios is virtually insignificant in the number of yards gained, but the points scored for one team is seven, and the other team is zero. Using yards isn't the right way to go either.

Personally, I use several combinations of points and yards to evaluate an offense or defense. The first is yards per point, or yards divided by points. The second is points squared divided by yards divided by games. I think either works well.

On the other hand, in baseball, in league statistics they rate teams based on highest batting average instead of highest runs scored.

[Jay Z]

If you have to pick one, yards instead of points. Points are too influenced by the defense. 1970 Vikings scored an impressive sounding 379 points. They were below average in yardage. Defense scored 7 TDS, but that still leaves over 300 for the offense. Defense led the league in yardage and turnovers. Offense just got a ton of help.

There are other factors like turnovers, efficiency, yards per play. But yards are better than points if that's all you've got.

[Bob Gill]

I liked the method somebody -- Todd Pence, maybe -- introduced here a few years ago, which divided a team's yards gained by the number of possessions. As I recall, the playoff teams were almost all right at the top, and it made a lot of sense to me. (Also, somebody else -- I'm thinking Ralph Hickock -- added a refinement of some sort that made the results even better.)

Presumably you could do the same thing from a defensive perspective, and I suspect that would work well too.

[sluggermatt15]

I typically don't put a whole lot into yards, mostly because teams can drive up and down the field and either settle for FGs or turn the ball over. Does that really tell me everything? No. Points on the scoreboard are what matter and that is what is used to determine who wins games.

[Bryan]

Offense = yards

Defense = points

[Rupert Patrick]

Offense = yards

Defense = points

I might be in agreement with that statement.

I have noticed that many of the teams with the greatest defenses of all time, such as the 2000 Ravens, 1985 Bears, and 1976 Steelers to name a few, had mediocre to above average offenses with strong running attacks and below average to average passing attacks, but their defenses were so good that they put so many points on the board for the offense thru pick sixes or setting up great field position thru turnovers, that these teams were actually near the top of the league in points scored on offense, and had no business being there.

The 2000 Ravens, with Trent Dilfer at QB, despite their 5-game streak where the only points they scored were on Matt Stover field goals, still finished 14th in the league in points scored, but in reality they were one of the half dozen weakest offenses in the league in 2000. The 1985 Bears were second in the league in points scored, and their offense consisted of Walter Payton and a passing attack with a 17-16 TD-INT ratio. The 1976 Steelers were without Terry Bradshaw most of the regular season, and their offense consisted of Franco Harris and Rocky Bleier and an occasional screen pass; they still finished fifth in points scored during the regular reason. (I also broke out the seven games Mike Kruczek started, and in those seven games, Weeks 6 thru 12, the Steelers were also fifth in points scored amongst all teams over those seven weeks.)

I know if you studied the play-by-play for these teams, you would find their defenses put an average of ten points on the board each game (which was added to the offensive points scored) thru defensive touchdowns or turnovers which gave the offense great field position. And there is no telling how many points these defense took off the board from their opponents from said turnovers, not to mention sacks that turned potential field goal situations into punting situations.

[sluggermatt15]

Offense = yards

Defense = points

Why yards for offenses? Teams could drive from the 20 to the 20 and settle for FGs all the time. That would be misleading.