[jacketree]

Points are all that matter, and if the defense and special teams don't score points, the offense better.  How many are needed depend on the quality of the defense, but separating that in this context I think the only really significant measure is points per possession. Barring onside kicks and outside of the coin toss and late-half time management, each team should have roughly the same number of possessions in a game.  Successful offenses score more often than not; and score touchdowns more often than field goals.  I don't think it matters whether an offense takes two plays or twenty. (Both are pretty epic drives aren't they?)

A plodding offense that always scores is better than an explosive offense that is just as liable to throw it away as to break off a big run.  So the normal stuff we don't have to think too hard about:  3rd down efficiency, 4th down efficiency, red zone efficiency.  Not scoring in 8 plays, starting at the 5 is not efficient.  Maybe that's the fragility you seek.  Another word would be clutch.  Making a play at the right time matters. That fourth down to take the lead against USC is more important than 2nd and 6 sometime in the first quarter at their own 42 or whatever.

Just my feeling, but against better defenses, this version of the offense is simply not as clutch than the better versions under Shaw.  New QB; all or nothing running game; running the play clock all the way down all the time are my "culprits".  And that same first down pitch into a stacked box, seems to leave lots of second and longs.  Harder to be clutch more often.  I used to remember drives where there were only a couple of third downs to convert.

The same holds for defense.  Total yards gained against is indicative of the quality of the defense to be sure, but what they do with their backs against the wall and when they do it is more important.  Getting off the field.  Not giving away 50 yards on 3rd and long when the opponent has the ball at its own 1 yard line. Stuff like that.

I think we are thinking too hard about this.

Addendum:  I do understand the benefit of resting a defense during time consuming drives.  Shaw generally values that; someone like Chip Kelly doesn't seem too worried about it.

[jacketree]

Points are all that matter, and if the defense and special teams don't score points, the offense better.  How many are needed depend on the quality of the defense, but separating that in this context I think the only really significant measure is points per possession. Barring onside kicks and outside of the coin toss and late-half time management, each team should have roughly the same number of possessions in a game.  Successful offenses score more often than not; and score touchdowns more often than field goals.  I don't think it matters whether an offense takes two plays or twenty. (Both are pretty epic drives aren't they?)

A plodding offense that always scores is better than an explosive offense that is just as liable to throw it away as to break off a big run.  So the normal stuff we don't have to think too hard about:  3rd down efficiency, 4th down efficiency, red zone efficiency.  Not scoring in 8 plays, starting at the 5 is not efficient.  Maybe that's the fragility you seek.  Another word would be clutch.  Making a play at the right time matters. That fourth down to take the lead against USC is more important than 2nd and 6 sometime in the first quarter at their own 42 or whatever.

Just my feeling, but against better defenses, this version of the offense is simply not as clutch than the better versions under Shaw.  New QB; all or nothing running game; running the play clock all the way down all the time are my "culprits".  And that same first down pitch into a stacked box, seems to leave lots of second and longs.  Harder to be clutch more often.  I used to remember drives where there were only a couple of third downs to convert.

The same holds for defense.  Total yards gained against is indicative of the quality of the defense to be sure, but what they do with their backs against the wall and when they do it is more important.  Getting off the field.  Not giving away 50 yards on 3rd and long when the opponent has the ball at its own 1 yard line. Stuff like that.

I think we are thinking too hard about this.

Addendum:  I do understand the benefit of resting a defense during time consuming drives.  Shaw generally values that; someone like Chip Kelly doesn't seem too worried about it.