Points given up after a turnover. To my specific recollection I don't think they gave up a pick six nor a scoop and score. However, their ability to hold a team after a turnover to even a field goal was just atrocious. Like even after the Touisant fumble that was a long field and the defense was playing tough. But deep down I knew that was going to be when the dam broke. The defense made some real improvement but it was like they HAD to win the turnover battle because every turnover seemed like seven.
The Stat I'd really like to know
- Thread starter SteelerSask2
- Start date
I agree our ability to hold a team scoreless after a turnover seems to be not very good..I often found myself saying, after several first downs by the opponents, "ok lets hold them to a FG"...
The Toussaint turnover and subsequent score, would of never happened if not for the "Manning Turtle"...
I believe we did the same thing against the Bungholes. Turned it over and they marched down the field to take the lead.
We were putting our D on a short field the last couple months of the year. I remember 2 TOs early in the Indy game that JJ intercepted one in the EZ, and then we held them to a FG. Harrison's EZ INT was after a TO. I thought the D did a great job of points after TO.
Sure the last TO with Toussant ended up being their only TD drive, but we probably would have scored if Toussant didn't fumble.
Sure the last TO with Toussant ended up being their only TD drive, but we probably would have scored if Toussant didn't fumble.
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2014
- Messages
- 17,583
- Reaction score
- 21,632
- Points
- 113
Two teams play the game. Sometimes the other team makes the plays.
Certainly can't blame the D. Our losses were team losses.
It isn't about blame. It just seemed that no matter where the turnover occurred it was ending up in the end zone.
Ok so that looks like 67 points on 27 turnovers. Seemed much much worse than that. Must be perception.
- Joined
- Apr 18, 2014
- Messages
- 803
- Reaction score
- 297
- Points
- 63
From this we were 19th in giveaway points. Always seems worse when it's your team.
Yeah, I feel like for as bad as the defense was at times that when they were given a short field they stood tall. When teams had to go the length they had problems. Seems to be the bend but don't break defense we've seen for years.
Butler allowed the DEs to make plays. Lebeau's system did not allow for that as more than an accidental by product of holding the line.
Butler definitely brought more pressure from the secondary than Lebeau did in latter years.
Whether by design or necessity, Butler had his safeties playing a dual "hybrid" FS/SS role.
There were more "Fire" blitzes under Butler this year than I can remember in recent years.
He actually changed a fair bit; all things considered.