After going 4-0 in the Wild Card round, the divisional matchups have needed much more analysis. I have locked in 3 games already and the lone one I have been pondering over is GB/SF.
I decided to do a closer analysis to uncover the real facts about the defense and O line of these two teams - two areas where many presume SF will dominate. So, fact or myth?
1) SF Defense is far Superior
At first glance it certainly appears so. SF is in the top 5 in Points Allowed and Yards Allowed while Green Bay finished 11th in both categories. However, while most people are drooling over the SF pass rush, they fail to realize that GB actually had more sacks on the season than SF. GB 47 sacks, SF just 38.
Now if we factor in Sack %, that is the number of passing attempts by their opponents divided by the number of sacks, we get a better idea of how effective each pass rush really is. SF averages 1 sack for every 14.9 passing plays. GB on the hand averages a sack for every 12 passing plays. Let's also consider the fact that Charles Woodson did not play for 2+ months and I think that 11th ranked GB defense would certainly be closer to a 6th or 7th.
Result: Myth - While SF may have the better defense, it is certainly not by as wide a margin as people believe.
2) GB's Offense Line Blows
Again, when we look at the surface stats this statement appears to be true. GB allowed a whopping 51 sacks on the season, while SF allowed just 41. However, let's once again look at the Sack %. GB's Offensive line allowed a sack once every 10.9 passing plays. SF's Offensive line allowed a sack once every 10.6 Passing plays.
Result: Myth - One cannot simply say the GB O Line blows because they surrender more sacks. One must look at the efficiency of the O line and consider that GB attempted 122 more passing plays on the season than did SF.
My guy says SF wins this game, but the statistics certainly support GB. Many of the reasons why people choose to back SF appear to be misguided as shown above.
I'm going to sleep on this one, but hopefully the above analysis helps some of you decide.
After going 4-0 in the Wild Card round, the divisional matchups have needed much more analysis. I have locked in 3 games already and the lone one I have been pondering over is GB/SF.
I decided to do a closer analysis to uncover the real facts about the defense and O line of these two teams - two areas where many presume SF will dominate. So, fact or myth?
1) SF Defense is far Superior
At first glance it certainly appears so. SF is in the top 5 in Points Allowed and Yards Allowed while Green Bay finished 11th in both categories. However, while most people are drooling over the SF pass rush, they fail to realize that GB actually had more sacks on the season than SF. GB 47 sacks, SF just 38.
Now if we factor in Sack %, that is the number of passing attempts by their opponents divided by the number of sacks, we get a better idea of how effective each pass rush really is. SF averages 1 sack for every 14.9 passing plays. GB on the hand averages a sack for every 12 passing plays. Let's also consider the fact that Charles Woodson did not play for 2+ months and I think that 11th ranked GB defense would certainly be closer to a 6th or 7th.
Result: Myth - While SF may have the better defense, it is certainly not by as wide a margin as people believe.
2) GB's Offense Line Blows
Again, when we look at the surface stats this statement appears to be true. GB allowed a whopping 51 sacks on the season, while SF allowed just 41. However, let's once again look at the Sack %. GB's Offensive line allowed a sack once every 10.9 passing plays. SF's Offensive line allowed a sack once every 10.6 Passing plays.
Result: Myth - One cannot simply say the GB O Line blows because they surrender more sacks. One must look at the efficiency of the O line and consider that GB attempted 122 more passing plays on the season than did SF.
My guy says SF wins this game, but the statistics certainly support GB. Many of the reasons why people choose to back SF appear to be misguided as shown above.
I'm going to sleep on this one, but hopefully the above analysis helps some of you decide.
Your analysis is skewed because you dont address much of anything other than sacks.
#1 your offensive line analysis ignores the running game element. #2 Its not just about sacks., hurrys knock downs, tips, rushed throws et cetera. #3 Justin Smith is far too important. #4 Kapernick was sacked 33% less than smith, same #attempts. #5 GB defense is dynamically affected much differently by the fact that they are a run and gun offense. A running style team like SF leaves multidimensional offenses in play much longer than GB and thus has to permorm for more plays and has to keep both pass and rush D honest for more time.
Your analysis is skewed because you dont address much of anything other than sacks.
#1 your offensive line analysis ignores the running game element. #2 Its not just about sacks., hurrys knock downs, tips, rushed throws et cetera. #3 Justin Smith is far too important. #4 Kapernick was sacked 33% less than smith, same #attempts. #5 GB defense is dynamically affected much differently by the fact that they are a run and gun offense. A running style team like SF leaves multidimensional offenses in play much longer than GB and thus has to permorm for more plays and has to keep both pass and rush D honest for more time.
If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so. It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly. Covers does not provide any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in your relevant locality. Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it. As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.