Offense or Defense?

warriorzpath · 11-04-2009, 01:16 PM

I think usually when you have one unit (offense/defense) that gets all the attention and recognition ,then the other unit gets overlooked and underrated.

A great example of that was the 49ers of the 80's. The offense was considered an all-time great, but the defense was also great in it's own right. That defense was often overlooked, even though they had one of the greatest safeties in Ronnie Lott.

firstdown · 11-04-2009, 01:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wildcat

After watching last nights game vs ATL, I was thinking to myself... Is it better to have a top ranked Offense than it is a top ranked Defense?? It's a legitimate question in today's NFL. Look at WSH for an example.. Num 30th ranked Offense and a top 6 Defense yet 2-5 is this teams record... For my Saints, you have the top ranked offense in the league, but just an avg D.. 7-0 is our record.. So I would take the Offense over Defense any day..

As a Saints fan you should know that with still over half the season to play alot can happen. I'd hide a little longer in my hole until your 100% sure they will make the playoffs. Every year its seems the Saints start strong then Fail. I take your thread as a way for you to prop up your teams success at our expence. I guess there are no NO sites for you guys to have your little circle thing going. Do you also visit Browns and TB sites.

Trample the Elderly · 11-04-2009, 01:45 PM

Well just look at the results. Which is better? You have the answer right there in front of you, 2-5 soon to be a # 1 draft pick.

I love a strong defense and a power running game but this is the modern NFL. You need to have a half-way decent throwing game or you'll be just be a grab ass garbage team.

You can try to be old school and smother another team's offense but that doesn't fly when you're playing NE, IND, or now NO.

You can argue about an offense all day long. The Redskins have one without a backbone. Look at the results.

djnemo65 · 11-04-2009, 07:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

Yeah but how was that Colts D during that playoff run?

Ravens won with a crap passing attack. The Giants beat the Pats without an overly strong passing game.

Sanders helped the Colts stabilize the run defense in the playoffs sure, but you asked for a recent example of a great offense beating a great defense and the 2006 Superbowl counts as one. And btw, the Colts defense ranked 12th out of 12 teams in the playoffs that year, and were up on the 11th team by 40 yards per game. They set the bar pretty low during the season by being the worst run defense in history, but people seem to remember Bob Sanders coming back and things completely changing, when in fact they just went from worst ever to not worst ever.

And Eli Manning had a near 100 QB rating in the 07 playoffs. They passed very effectively during their run.

Dirtbag59 · 11-04-2009, 07:57 PM

I believe that you need a good offense (not great mind you) to win the Super Bowl but at the same time the best teams win with defenses capable of shutting down high powered attacks. The thing though that really irks me is all the talk about needing an elite Wide Reciever to win games. Yes they help but they don't exactly have a track record of winning championships.

Against The Grain: Disproving wide receiver myths | FanNation

Quote:

4. Great receivers win Super Bowls.

That might be true for quarterbacks, but not receivers. Amongst active players, the only two sure-fire Hall of Fame receivers -- Randy Moss and Terrell Owens -- have zero Super Bowl rings. A few borderline-to-probable Canton guys have won Super Bowls -- Isaac Bruce, Torry Holt, Hines Ward -- but their teams probably could have captured titles without them. The only virutal sure-thing Hall of Fame receiver to win a Super Bowl this decade was the Colts' Marvin Harrison in 2007.

I think part of the reason we're struggling with a top notch defense is due to the fact that we're trying to be a 60-40 passing team when all the while we can't really do anything well on offense. If we had a running game that could average 20 carries and a 4 ypc then we would be much better off. Running games are usually the best compliment to top notch defenses. However without one you need to find yourself a guy like Big Ben and doing that is easier said then done.

However getting back to Super Bowl winners, we've seen the majority of Super Bowl Champs win mainly with Defense over the past decade (I'm pretty sure if we look back further we'll find more teams who won with defense, but right now I believe the converstation is concerning winning in todays NFL). Among these teams are the Giants, Buc's, Patriots, Steelers, and Ravens who have 8 Super Bowl wins combined since 2000. The only teams to win with offense as the strongest unit were the Colts and Rams. Both of which had defenses that stepped up during the playoffs. Especially the Colts. Ironically the Patriots only Super Bowl lost came when the teams main strength was their offense and they lost to a team that relied primarily on their defense to win games.

Also as a foot note, the main reason the Rams got to the Super Bowl in 2000 was because their defense was able to hold the Buc's to 6 points. Granted the Buc's weren't a very good offensive team however very rarely will you win a game, let alone a conference championship, scoring 11 points. Ironically our top notch offense was knocked out of the playoffs in 1999/2000 by the Buc's who beat us mainly with defense.

tryfuhl · 11-04-2009, 08:16 PM

A good O and a very well coached D.

RedskinMike · 11-04-2009, 08:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chico23231

The popular sports saying "Defense wins champonships" is correct. Slingin Sammy's post are perfect examples. Of course there will be exceptions every now and then (Greatest show on turf Rams early 2000s), but generally you want a Defense over Offense any day.

"The greatest show on turf" had a very good defense.

Dirtbag59 · 11-04-2009, 08:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RedskinMike

"The greatest show on turf" had a very good defense.

Like I pointed out. No way they get to the Super Bowl without their defense that year as it's almost impossible to win in the playoffs scoring 11 points (the only team to score less most recently in a conference championship and win were the Buffalo Bills in 1991/92 with a 10-7 win over the Broncos). In fact they got knocked out of the first round of the playoffs the next year by the Saints, after barely making the playoffs, mainly because they couldn't play any defense. They only got back when they brought in Lovie Smith who fixed the D and even then they lost to the Patriots who came in with one of the best defensive gameplans in recent memory, holding the Rams top ranked offense to 17 points (A Redskin high in 2009).

Defense is the way to go when winning championships, however unless you have the Ravens Defense from 2001 you won't go anywhere without an offense to supplement your D. If you want to put a number on it I'd say you at least need an offense ranked 15th overall in points scored this is of course with a top 5 defense. If you were to win with offense then I'd say a top 5 offense with a defense playing well enough in the playoffs to be ranked top 10 (a la the Colts). Keep in mind the numbers in this last paragraph are arbitrary and not based on any research.

Quote:

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

Don't underestimate special teams...seriously

Good point. Part of the reason the Ravens were able to generate any sort of offense in 2000/2001 was because of the field position they were provided by Jermaine Lewis off punt and kick returns. Having that dominant defense helped in terms of field position but Jermaine Lewis was a huge lifeline for that team.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trample the Elderly

Well just look at the results. Which is better? You have the answer right there in front of you, 2-5 soon to be a # 1 draft pick.

Unfortunately we're not the only team taking in a handful of suck this year. Right now we're picking around 8th.

DBUCHANON101 · 11-04-2009, 10:36 PM

If i had to pick id say i would rather have a top ranked Offense with the defense being on the other end of the scale. If you had the 1st ranked scoring O and the last ranked D you would still be in position to win games, i couldnt see it happening the other way around.

mlmdub130 · 11-04-2009, 11:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trample the Elderly

Well just look at the results. Which is better? You have the answer right there in front of you, 2-5 soon to be a # 1 draft pick.

I love a strong defense and a power running game but this is the modern NFL. You need to have a half-way decent throwing game or you'll be just be a grab ass garbage team.

You can try to be old school and smother another team's offense but that doesn't fly when you're playing NE, IND, or now NO.

You can argue about an offense all day long. The Redskins have one without a backbone. Look at the results.

a great d will only get you so far you HAVE to have a decnt o and be able to put points on the board, pthe wise you will lose to winless teams

madden_commissioner · 11-05-2009, 04:50 PM

I'd start with the trenches, then defense and then offense. You gotta have to have a good running game if your defense is strong.

11-04-2009, 01:16 PM	#31
warriorzpath Registered User Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 1,880	Re: Offense or Defense? I think usually when you have one unit (offense/defense) that gets all the attention and recognition ,then the other unit gets overlooked and underrated. A great example of that was the 49ers of the 80's. The offense was considered an all-time great, but the defense was also great in it's own right. That defense was often overlooked, even though they had one of the greatest safeties in Ronnie Lott.

11-04-2009, 01:45 PM	#33
Trample the Elderly Playmaker Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Three Chopt Virginia Age: 47 Posts: 2,906	Re: Offense or Defense? Well just look at the results. Which is better? You have the answer right there in front of you, 2-5 soon to be a # 1 draft pick. I love a strong defense and a power running game but this is the modern NFL. You need to have a half-way decent throwing game or you'll be just be a grab ass garbage team. You can try to be old school and smother another team's offense but that doesn't fly when you're playing NE, IND, or now NO. You can argue about an offense all day long. The Redskins have one without a backbone. Look at the results. __________________ A funny thing happened on the way to the temple. The moneychangers bought the priesthood.

11-04-2009, 08:16 PM	#36
tryfuhl Gamebreaker Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Waldorf, MD Age: 41 Posts: 12,514	Re: Offense or Defense? A good O and a very well coached D.

11-04-2009, 10:36 PM	#39
DBUCHANON101 The Starter Join Date: May 2009 Location: Louisiana Posts: 1,373	Re: Offense or Defense? If i had to pick id say i would rather have a top ranked Offense with the defense being on the other end of the scale. If you had the 1st ranked scoring O and the last ranked D you would still be in position to win games, i couldnt see it happening the other way around. __________________ But there's booze in the blender. And soon it will render. That frozen concoction that helps me hang on.

11-05-2009, 04:50 PM	#41
madden_commissioner Registered User Join Date: Nov 2009 Posts: 25	Re: Offense or Defense? I'd start with the trenches, then defense and then offense. You gotta have to have a good running game if your defense is strong.

Offense or Defense?

Locker Room Main Forum