Which Would You Rather Have?
 

Which would you rather have for the 08' season? An offense that is ranked among the best in the league with a drop off in defense, or for the defense to continue being solid with the offense maintaining the same output as '07? Choose one option and tell me why.

Re: Which Would You Rather Have?
 

Whichever one gives us more wins

Re: Which Would You Rather Have?
 

[QUOTE=steveo395;414948]Whichever one gives us more wins[/QUOTE]

Well obviously, but which do you think gives us the best chance at winning at least as many games we did this year or more?

Re: Which Would You Rather Have?
 

[QUOTE=steveo395;414948]Whichever one gives us more wins[/QUOTE]

Exactly. I couldnt give a damn about rankings, last time I checked wins were all that was counted.

Re: Which Would You Rather Have?
 

Rankings? You want to talk about rankings. we don't even have a head coach. Talking about rankins!

Re: Which Would You Rather Have?
 

You guys are completely missing the point. Of course a wins a win. But, I'm asking, which do you think we have the better chance at winning with? A team that has an improved offense but a defense that has dropped off (I'm not talking in regards to stats alone but performance) or basically the same offensive and defensive output of this year. Which do you think gives us a better chance at being successful? A potent offense or a stingy defense?

Re: Which Would You Rather Have?
 

I would rather have an offense in the top 5 meaning that we are scoring lots of points. In today's NFL you have to score points. Let's face it is more easy to beat teams by out scoring them than it is to shut the opposing team down. Our defense will not be the '85 Bears or the 2000 Ravens. I do believe that our offense could step up in this west coast offense.

Re: Which Would You Rather Have?
 

I think you have to put points on the board. I think one of the biggest problems we faced last year was an inability to score touchdowns consistently. Too often we had to settle for field goals leaving little margin for error. But a good offense isn't just about scoring points it's about controlling the clock and setting the tempo of the game.

Re: Which Would You Rather Have?
 

If you look at the teams that went far in the playoffs this year, they all had the common denominator of being high scoring teams. Give me 28 points on offense over keeping a team to 17 pts on defense any day. I think you win more games by outscoring your opponents than you do by trying to stifle them.

Re: Which Would You Rather Have?
 

[QUOTE=Paintrain;414960]If you look at the teams that went far in the playoffs this year, they all had the common denominator of being high scoring teams. Give me 28 points on offense over keeping a team to 17 pts on defense any day. I think you win more games by outscoring your opponents than you do by trying to stifle them.[/QUOTE]

Exactly. The NFL is an offense oriented league now.

Re: Which Would You Rather Have?
 

[QUOTE=irish;414967]Exactly. The NFL is an offense oriented league now.[/QUOTE]

But what happens when that high octane offense meets a lock down defense?

Look at how the Raiders fell in Supebowl to Tampa. We need big D!

Re: Which Would You Rather Have?
 

[QUOTE=QBall;414983]But what happens when that high octane offense meets a lock down defense?

Look at how the Raiders fell in Supebowl to Tampa. We need big D![/QUOTE]
The Tampa 2 defense has been exploited (see 2006 Redskins and Buccaneers), so your example doesn't hold water, as that was 5 years ago, and even since then, the NFL continues to evolve.

Seeing as the defense was ranked in the Top 10, we could stand to go down a bit on defense and still be competitive on that side of the ball. Wins usually come from scoring more points than the other team, and if you cannot score, then you usually don't win (see Ravens in any year their D is suspect).

I'll take offense, and with the evolution of Jason Campbell and a healthy offensive line, they should be better than last year. Theoretically speaking of course.

Re: Which Would You Rather Have?
 

[quote]
Look at how the Raiders fell in Supebowl to Tampa. We need big D![/quote]

There's more missing than just that. Let's remember on the day of the big game the Raiders CENTER didn't show up. Their center was one of the best in the NFL until his flip out. That led to Warren Sapp riding Gannon like a pony.

As other have said, you have to go with the offense in today's game. The rules are catered to the offensive game. Illegal contact, Pass Interference, etc etc are all huge for the offense.

Re: Which Would You Rather Have?
 

[QUOTE=BDBohnzie;414987]The Tampa 2 defense has been exploited (see 2006 Redskins and Buccaneers), so your example doesn't hold water, as that was 5 years ago, and even since then, the NFL continues to evolve.

Seeing as the defense was ranked in the Top 10, we could stand to go down a bit on defense and still be competitive on that side of the ball. Wins usually come from scoring more points than the other team, and if you cannot score, then you usually don't win (see Ravens in any year their D is suspect).

I'll take offense, and with the evolution of Jason Campbell and a healthy offensive line, they should be better than last year. Theoretically speaking of course.[/QUOTE]

I'd take a top 5 defense over top 5 offense anyday! Look at 06' when our defense was terrible we couldn't win a game or force a turnover at all. That really was a bad year for us.

Re: Which Would You Rather Have?
 

The offense in '06 wasn't that great either...

Using the Ravens for example, needed a pretty productive offense to compliment their defense in '06 to go 13-3. Flash forward to '07, injuries to Heap and McNair among others, and their stellar defense pushes them to a 5-11 record, one of those losses to the worst team of the season (Miami).

Take a top half defense and pair them up with a great offense, and you have the recipe for a playoff bound, Super Bowl contender...at least that's the recipe. The cooks will have to know what to do with it...

Re: Which Would You Rather Have?
 

[quote=skinsguy;414943]Which would you rather have for the 08' season? An offense that is ranked among the best in the league with a drop off in defense, or for the defense to continue being solid with the offense maintaining the same output as '07? Choose one option and tell me why.[/quote]Philosophically, it's more important to have offense. Teams with great offense will find themselves in every game, and win the ability to win more games than a team with a great defense can.

With that said, the Redskins need better personnel on defense to sustain it, while their offense just simply needs more time to grow.

Re: Which Would You Rather Have?
 

I'd take a top 5 defense because, although teams with good defenses dominate the regular season, teams with bad defenses tend to get knocked out early in the playoffs.

Re: Which Would You Rather Have?
 

It's kind of a toss up with me. An elite offense will get you at least 9 or 10 wins per year and will most like get you in the playoffs each year. However, a good defense is going to make some big plays to get you through the playoffs. Example....Giants' defense in this season's playoffs. However, I believe the edge does go to the offense in today's NFL. An elite offense will put up plenty of points, but will also be able to eat up the clock.

In the end, you need both an elite offense and at least a top 10 or 15 defense in order to get you to the Super Bowl and to win it all. Of course, watch the Giants blow that theory clean out of the water this Sunday!

Re: Which Would You Rather Have?
 

[QUOTE=QBall;414991]I'd take a top 5 defense over top 5 offense anyday! Look at 06' when our defense was terrible we couldn't win a game or force a turnover at all. That really was a bad year for us.[/QUOTE]

How was '04 with our top 10 defense and #31 offense?

In '06, our offense was ranked in the 20's also. If you can't score, you don't win. It's quite simple really.

Re: Which Would You Rather Have?
 

Drop in defense. My uncle is Earle Bruce the ex Ohio State football coach during the 80's. He always had very nice balanced powerful offenses with more of a bend no break type zone defense. They were top 5 usually in the Big Ten defensively yardage wise, but the team always had the best turnover ration in the Big Ten as the defense was rather adept at causing turnovers. My point is I rather have a high powered offense with an increase in yardage allowed, provided we can get our turnover ration more in the plus column.

Re: Which Would You Rather Have?
 

I think you're better off with a shut-down D and a lousy O than the other way around. And I think it's far more likely to happen this year, too.

I don't think your team ends up very good in either scenario, so I'd rather take the one that's more enjoyable to watch. Just thinking back to 2006 when our defense was a seive, I could barely watch the team. I didn't even want our offense to score, I just wanted them to stay out on the field to keep our defense on the sidelines. But in 2004, when our D was dominant and our offense sucked, I had a great time watching each game.

Defensive games are exciting to me. Games that go 42-35 just feel like I'm watching Tecmo Super Bowl.

Re: Which Would You Rather Have?
 

I'll take the defense. Reason being, we lost every game except one by 8 points or less. We blew 5 halftime leads. Our offense was inches away from being an 11 or 12 win team. Our defense was fantastic most of the year. If we attack just a little bit more (like we did after JC went down), we're in good shape. Plus it's hard to think we'll have to deal with even half the serious injuries we did this year.

Re: Which Would You Rather Have?
 

[QUOTE=QBall;414983]But what happens when that high octane offense meets a lock down defense?

Look at how the Raiders fell in Supebowl to Tampa. We need big D![/QUOTE]

lets not forget about the skins loss to the raiders,highest scoring team ever up to the vikings who also lost to the falcons{cant remember how good the falcons def was} now the pats,highest scoring team ever,lets see how they do
Having said that,I'm all for the off,I'm sick of not scoring any points,its been years since we were good on off,probably sinnce Gibbs 1.0
Even if we were last in def so long as we were top 5 in off I would take it,at least the games would be exciting as hell and I'm used to seeing the games come down to the wire anyway

Re: Which Would You Rather Have?
 

[QUOTE=Paintrain;415134]How was '04 with our top 10 defense and #31 offense?

In '06, our offense was ranked in the 20's also. If you can't score, you don't win. It's quite simple really.[/QUOTE]

I just noticed your sig,thats hilarious:goodjob: