Points are points...you can score with a 30 yard drive...or an 80 yard drive...you can score without the ball via turnover...The one way to control the amount of the opponents scores, is to possess the ball.
That's factored out of the equation. Points are points. That is correct. They are what win and lose games.
Stop drives...as soon as possible...Points are the end result of good defense..Not the cause of good defense. The means to the end, is controlling the opponent's yards...It's why many offensive players measures are based on YARDS...QB's, RB's, WR's...Yards based. Football has always been a game of field position...It is a simulation of war...probably was based on taking territory. Yards control the game...If you can limit yards, you can usually limit points.
Here's the problem with your logic. You say that if you can limit yards, you can "usually" limit points. However, if you can limit points, you always limit points. And your argument is against points as the better measure.
Every stat is the result of the defense, not the cause. However, in order to have a good defense, you must not allow many points. Nobody cares about how many yards you allow if you don't allow the other team to score.
Thus, the means to the end is controlling the opponent's points, not yards.
Many have said...gain all the yards you like, as long as I can stop you from scoring...I say, keep allowing 400 yards a game, and luck into only allowing 10 points...Eventually, the sieve of a defense will prove to be inadequate..Allowing a bunch of yards with no points is usually a luck thing...just like, if you don't allow a bunch of yards but give up points, just a bad luck thing. Pretty soon, luck runs out...And you have a team that can't stop anyone, or a team that finally looks like the 85 Bears....
Except your logic here fails because we're talking about a 16 game season.(in actuality, this debate started as discussing TWO 16 game seasons) So luck isn't the answer here. We've got a full season (actually, two) of the defense giving up yardage but not points. That's not luck.
If you don't allow a bunch of yards but give up points over a 16 game season, it's not bad luck. It's a failure in strategy. If you do allow a bunch of yards but give up very few points over a 16 game season, it's not good luck. It's a successful strategy.
And the Rams run a successful strategy. The strategy results in giving up yardage but not points. In the end, points are all that matter.
Points allowed is the end product, how do you get there? Skill by limiting yards & opportunities to score, or sheer luck hoping for the turnover or the opponents ineptitude? You choose....
Your argument fails by chalking it up to luck. How does a team continue to get lucky for two full seasons?
It's not opponents ineptitude. It's not luck. It's the Rams having a combination of a top red-zone defense and a defense that trades yardage and methodical drives for negative plays.
There's nothing lucky about it. The Rams have a defensive strategy. The strategy is to minimize big plays, stop offenses from scoring TDs in the red-zone, force negative plays (TFLs, TOs, sacks, etc.), and force offenses to utilize long drives where they have to be almost perfect.(any mistakes puts them in 2nd and long or 3rd and long which is where our defense is at its most advantageous)
Judging a defense by yards over points it allowed minimizes this effective strategy for some nonsensical concept of what a defensive strategy should be. It prioritizes a stat that doesn't affect the outcome of a game over a stat that IS the outcome of the game.
It's simply not logical.
