Some of you that have known me for a while know that I am a numbers freak. Whether it is Bobby Kielty's Splits as a RHH vs LHH that drove me crazy as the A's ran him out against RHP, or, the fact that The Raiders were ranked #1 against the pass last year, although teams only threw against them 25.6 times a game, one thing should be clear, I am always looking for new ways to compile the given information, statistics in this case, in such a way to prove or disprove a point.
Last year, I did a test to see what kind of defenses win championships.
Today, I want to test this theory again by using the Raiders numbers to see if they really should be a 2-7 team.
Their defense ranks 13th in points allowed and is 27th in takeaways while allowing the 17th most yards a game.
Combined defensive score: 57
On offense they are only averaging 17 points a game which has them in 24th in the League in scoring. Their 293 yards a game has them in 26th place in yardage and their turnovers rank in 26th (By the way, they are dead last in TO ratio).
Combined offensive score: 76
That is a combined 133 score out of a possible worst 192.
I'd say that by starting here we can begin to see why this team is 2-7.
They give the ball away too much, do not take it away enough to make a difference and cannot score or gain enough yardage to make up for the defense giving it up.
End of story.
If I were the coach and I saw this, I would think to myself, "Self, it is time to start shaking things up in my schemes. I need to start taking more chances on both sides of the ball. I need to get someone under center that can put up points and yards and I need to take more chances on defense. Period. It isn't as if the chances will have a negative effect on my turnover ratio, heck it is already the worst, AND I'M NOT SCORING POINTS!!!"
So, on November 14th, here is where we stand, Raider Nation.
Our aggregate score is bordering on last year's at the same juncture. Thus a 2-7 record.
The highest score