- Thread starter
- #1
A lot of people have said that it's unlikely we sustain our turnover success from this year. I agree that hanging another +28 is unlikely, but I don't know that a drastic change should be expected.
Offensively speaking, we likely throw more than 5 INTs, but if Smith is at QB, I don't think it would be significantly more. He has shown over the last season and a half that he protects the ball well (I won't call it good decision making, because that implies that QBs make decisions to throw INTs. Smith is extremely careful and rarely takes a risk thus lowering his INT total). I don't see this changing next year.
We fumbled 5 times this year in the run game. That number seems really low. We lost 2 of them. That also seems really low. Smith fumbled 7 times. We lost 2 of those.
However, in 2010 non-QBs fumbled 6 times and we lost 2. We seem to have sustained that. Smith fumbled 4 times and lost 2.
In 2009 non-QBs fumbled 5 times and we lost 2. Smith fumbled 3 times and lost 1.
I think based on a 3 year trend we do a pretty good job of not fumbling and it has proven that protecting the football in terms of lost fumbles is sustainable.
So the takeaways. . .
We had 38 takeaways this year. This tied us for 1st with GB. We were first in fumble recovers with 15 (we forced 20 fumbles which was tied for 4th). To recover 75% of fumbles seems like a lot. However 14 teams recovered roughly 75% of their forced fumbles (note that not all fumbles are considered forced as NE recovered 110% of forced fumbles). Minnesota recovered 15 of 20 as well. So recovering 3 of 4 forced fumbles does not seem "out of whack."
Interceptions could be a different story. Obviously re-signing Goldson and Rogers would play a role (combined for 12 of our 23), but Goldson has always shown good ball skills and hands. There is no reason to expect a regression there. Rogers may have been an anomaly this year and may regress. Brown showed very good ball skills and the willingness to make plays on the ball. I don't expect a regression there.
Most importantly with INTs though, 22 of 23 came from our DBs. Willis was the only non-DB to have an INT. I would expect that to improve next year.
Do I expect a +28 again? No. But we were +28, GB was +24 and Detroit was next best at +11. I don't see us falling far enough for it to significantly impact our ranking.
Offensively speaking, we likely throw more than 5 INTs, but if Smith is at QB, I don't think it would be significantly more. He has shown over the last season and a half that he protects the ball well (I won't call it good decision making, because that implies that QBs make decisions to throw INTs. Smith is extremely careful and rarely takes a risk thus lowering his INT total). I don't see this changing next year.
We fumbled 5 times this year in the run game. That number seems really low. We lost 2 of them. That also seems really low. Smith fumbled 7 times. We lost 2 of those.
However, in 2010 non-QBs fumbled 6 times and we lost 2. We seem to have sustained that. Smith fumbled 4 times and lost 2.
In 2009 non-QBs fumbled 5 times and we lost 2. Smith fumbled 3 times and lost 1.
I think based on a 3 year trend we do a pretty good job of not fumbling and it has proven that protecting the football in terms of lost fumbles is sustainable.
So the takeaways. . .
We had 38 takeaways this year. This tied us for 1st with GB. We were first in fumble recovers with 15 (we forced 20 fumbles which was tied for 4th). To recover 75% of fumbles seems like a lot. However 14 teams recovered roughly 75% of their forced fumbles (note that not all fumbles are considered forced as NE recovered 110% of forced fumbles). Minnesota recovered 15 of 20 as well. So recovering 3 of 4 forced fumbles does not seem "out of whack."
Interceptions could be a different story. Obviously re-signing Goldson and Rogers would play a role (combined for 12 of our 23), but Goldson has always shown good ball skills and hands. There is no reason to expect a regression there. Rogers may have been an anomaly this year and may regress. Brown showed very good ball skills and the willingness to make plays on the ball. I don't expect a regression there.
Most importantly with INTs though, 22 of 23 came from our DBs. Willis was the only non-DB to have an INT. I would expect that to improve next year.
Do I expect a +28 again? No. But we were +28, GB was +24 and Detroit was next best at +11. I don't see us falling far enough for it to significantly impact our ranking.
JK. The law of averages is not a causal thing and it has no memory. The fact that the ball rolled to us one year, will not cause the ball to roll to the other team the next year. So I take some solace in that, despite the fact that it doesn't make it more likely to repeat, either. Hope it continues.
