Omerta+ 1,206 Posted November 10, 2012 We talk about this as a passing league, however as of late you see teams with great defenses getting the job done against high powered opponents ? SF-great defense, offense is a benefactor of all the three and outs CHI- Same as the first except with turnovers SEA- Far inferior to many teams on paper but the defense is so lopsided it is still tough MIA- Same as Seattle STL-same as SEA and MIA DEN-last year proved that defense will get you to at least the playoffs. HOU- Last year with a 3rd string QB and great defense they make noise in the playoffs. All of these teams other than chicago, Hou, and San Fran are inferior teams that play great defense and are competing well. The offense has had a free reign for 10 years but are we seeing the tide stemming and MAYBE going the other way. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Milla4Prez63 678 Posted November 10, 2012 First of all, the whole passing league this overblown. You can be a good team with different strengths. But of the teams you mentioned, the 49ers, Bears and Texans are the only legit contenders. (Not going to count Denver because Peyton Manning is their QB). I'm not sure why you brought the Rams up, they suck. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Glanvilles Grits 142 Posted November 10, 2012 First of all, the whole passing league this overblown. You can be a good team with different strengths. But of the teams you mentioned, the 49ers, Bears and Texans are the only legit contenders. (Not going to count Denver because Peyton Manning is their QB). I'm not sure why you brought the Rams up, they suck. I think it's gone pretty unnoticed but the Rams have one of the top pass defenses in the league right now. At least they were a couple weeks ago the last time I checked. Their secondary is absolutely scary and no one has really had too good of a passing game against them. The only reason they have as many wins as they do is because of their defense. Their offense is terrible. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ATL_Predator+ 1,196 Posted November 10, 2012 (edited) Defense wins championships, just ask Trent Dilfer Edited November 10, 2012 by ATL Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sarge+ 3,436 Posted November 10, 2012 (edited) Trent Dilfer, along with Brad Johnson, was an aberration. Defenses don't win championships. Strong, balanced teams do. Look at the QBs of the teams that have won the Super Bowl over the last 20 years. This is taken from Zack's post here: http://www.thegridironpalace.com/forums/index.php?/topic/62434-which-rookie-would-you-want-to-build-your-franchise-around/page__st__20 Super Bowl 27. Troy Aikman Super Bowl 28. Troy Aikman Super Bowl 29. Steve Young Super Bowl 30. Troy Aikman Super Bowl 31. Brett Favre Super Bowl 32. John Elway Super Bowl 33. John Elway Super Bowl 34. Kurt Warner Super Bowl 35. Trent Dilfer Super Bowl 36. Tom Brady Super Bowl 37. Brad Johnson Super Bowl 38. Tom Brady Super Bowl 39. Tom Brady Super Bowl 40. Ben Roethlisberger Super Bowl 41. Peyton Manning Super Bowl 42. Eli Manning Super Bowl 43: Ben Roethlisberger Super Bowl 44: Drew Brees Super Bowl 45: Aaron Rogers Super Bowl 46: Eli Manning Edited November 10, 2012 by Sarge 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Omerta+ 1,206 Posted November 10, 2012 When people say defense wins championships its true. It does not have to be that your defense is the only thing that gets you there. People assume that it has to be like when Dilfer and Johnson won the SB for the adage to be true. Look at Eli versus the Pats the first time. That defense won the game. It does not mean you have to have know offense it is just that any offensive production seems to outway dominant defense as with the Giants. Or the Steelers when they won. It was not that defense didn't win that it is just that people only remember offense. Even the smallest play will have people forgetting about the defense. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ATL_Predator+ 1,196 Posted November 10, 2012 With the passing league we're in today, if you have an elite or above average QB and a consistent, efficient pass rush...You can do big things. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Piggly Wiggly 960 Posted November 10, 2012 I think it's gone pretty unnoticed but the Rams have one of the top pass defenses in the league right now. At least they were a couple weeks ago the last time I checked. Their secondary is absolutely scary and no one has really had too good of a passing game against them. The only reason they have as many wins as they do is because of their defense. Their offense is terrible. Going up against mediocre QBs... especially ones from the NFC West inflates their stats. They went up against two real QBs (Rodgers and Brady) the last two games and they got absolutely TORCHED. And for the record, balanced teams win championships. 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Omerta+ 1,206 Posted November 10, 2012 Going up against mediocre QBs... especially ones from the NFC West inflates their stats. They went up against two real QBs (Rodgers and Brady) the last two games and they got absolutely TORCHED. And for the record, balanced teams win championships. Not Really. Gronk had a big day but that is because he was covered by a LB and they refused to change. That is not their secondary. Take out Gronks day against a LB and they were pedestrian through the air with their WR's. Then lets not forget that the running game gashed them. That score is not indicative of the secondary and how they played. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
oochymp 2,393 Posted November 10, 2012 Trent Dilfer, along with Brad Johnson, was an aberration. Defenses don't win championships. Strong, balanced teams do. Look at the QBs of the teams that have won the Super Bowl over the last 20 years. This is taken from Zack's post here: http://www.thegridir...nd/page__st__20 Super Bowl 27. Troy Aikman Super Bowl 28. Troy Aikman Super Bowl 29. Steve Young Super Bowl 30. Troy Aikman Super Bowl 31. Brett Favre Super Bowl 32. John Elway Super Bowl 33. John Elway Super Bowl 34. Kurt Warner Super Bowl 35. Trent Dilfer Super Bowl 36. Tom Brady Super Bowl 37. Brad Johnson Super Bowl 38. Tom Brady Super Bowl 39. Tom Brady Super Bowl 40. Ben Roethlisberger Super Bowl 41. Peyton Manning Super Bowl 42. Eli Manning Super Bowl 43: Ben Roethlisberger Super Bowl 44: Drew Brees Super Bowl 45: Aaron Rogers Super Bowl 46: Eli Manning this argument has always seemed rather circular to me, you need an elite QB to win a Super Bowl, but how do we define an 'elite' QB? has he won a Super Bowl? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Piggly Wiggly 960 Posted November 10, 2012 Not Really. Gronk had a big day but that is because he was covered by a LB and they refused to change. That is not their secondary. Take out Gronks day against a LB and they were pedestrian through the air with their WR's. Then lets not forget that the running game gashed them. That score is not indicative of the secondary and how they played. Pedestrian through the air? Brady didn't go to his main wideout targets much, but when he did, he didn't have much trouble. I wasn't impressed at all by St. Louis' secondary at any part of the game. *shrugs* What's the excuse for Rodgers dropping 342 yards and 3 TDs on them? lol. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Omerta+ 1,206 Posted November 10, 2012 Pedestrian through the air? Brady didn't go to his main wideout targets much, but when he did, he didn't have much trouble. I wasn't impressed at all by St. Louis' secondary at any part of the game. *shrugs* What's the excuse for Rodgers dropping 342 yards and 3 TDs on them? lol. What I am saying is that most of the offense was gronk and ridley. both were primarily abusing the LB's not the secondary. As to Rodgers...yeah...he just kind of dominated like he does. He is the best QB in the league though. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sarge+ 3,436 Posted November 10, 2012 this argument has always seemed rather circular to me, you need an elite QB to win a Super Bowl, but how do we define an 'elite' QB? has he won a Super Bowl? I'm pretty sure everyone would agree that every other QB on that list is far superior to Dilfer and Johnson. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
oochymp 2,393 Posted November 10, 2012 I'm pretty sure everyone would agree that every other QB on that list is far superior to Dilfer and Johnson. true, but a lot of those QBs weren't great when they won their first one, nobody was putting Eli near the elite conversation before he won a Super Bowl, now that he's got two he's almost unanimously elite, same with Big Ben (who was only a second year player when he won his first) though he's not as unanimously viewed as elite, most people at least put him at the top of the second tier, Tom Brady won it as a first year starter, sure he established himself as one of the best QBs the league has seen, but he wasn't when he won his first Super Bowl looking at the other side of it, how many people wouldn't consider Romo elite if he had a ring (or two)? same thing with Rivers? my point isn't that these QBs aren't good, obviously they are, my point is that we inflate their legacy based on the Super Bowl win(s) and then say you need a great QB like them to win one Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BradyFan81 404 Posted November 10, 2012 I'd say the passing game and offenses are stronger than ever. Carson Palmer is gonna throw for 4500+ yards for God's sake. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Glanvilles Grits 142 Posted November 10, 2012 Pedestrian through the air? Brady didn't go to his main wideout targets much, but when he did, he didn't have much trouble. I wasn't impressed at all by St. Louis' secondary at any part of the game. *shrugs* What's the excuse for Rodgers dropping 342 yards and 3 TDs on them? lol. Rodgers carved up the Texans as well. I expect the same against the Bears. The excuse for the Rams against the Packers is Aaron Rodgers. I'm not saying their the best in the league, but their secondary is one of the better secondaries in the league. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Sarge+ 3,436 Posted November 10, 2012 true, but a lot of those QBs weren't great when they won their first one, nobody was putting Eli near the elite conversation before he won a Super Bowl, now that he's got two he's almost unanimously elite, same with Big Ben (who was only a second year player when he won his first) though he's not as unanimously viewed as elite, most people at least put him at the top of the second tier, Tom Brady won it as a first year starter, sure he established himself as one of the best QBs the league has seen, but he wasn't when he won his first Super Bowl looking at the other side of it, how many people wouldn't consider Romo elite if he had a ring (or two)? same thing with Rivers? my point isn't that these QBs aren't good, obviously they are, my point is that we inflate their legacy based on the Super Bowl win(s) and then say you need a great QB like them to win one I think you're making a separate argument than what this thread is actually about. The point of debate here is that defense wins championships, but the reality is that almost every team that has won the Super Bowl in the last 20 years has had an elite offense or a borderline elite offense. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Turry 755 Posted November 10, 2012 Rodgers carved up the Texans as well. I expect the same against the Bears. The excuse for the Rams against the Packers is Aaron Rodgers. I'm not saying their the best in the league, but their secondary is one of the better secondaries in the league. But rodgers did not crave up the bears. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CampinWithaMissingPerson 2,025 Posted November 10, 2012 NFL rules favor the offense, it's always better to have the elite offense. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
oochymp 2,393 Posted November 10, 2012 I think you're making a separate argument than what this thread is actually about. The point of debate here is that defense wins championships, but the reality is that almost every team that has won the Super Bowl in the last 20 years has had an elite offense or a borderline elite offense. okay, then let's look at that (concise version below) 2001: Patriots were 19th in yardage with 305.1 ypg and 6th in points with 23.2 ppg, defensively they were 6th in points (17) and 24th in yards (334.5) 2002: Bucs were 24th in yardage (312.6) and 18th in scoring (21.6), but defensively they were #1 in both scoring and yardage defense (12.2 and 252.8), I know ya'll have dismissed this as an outlier, but that doesn't mean I don't get to use it 2003: the Patriots were 17th in yardage (314.9) and 12th in scoring (21.8) defensively they were 7th in yardage (291.1) and first in scoring (14.9) 2004: the Patriots are 7th in yardage (357.6) and 4th in points (27.3) defensively they were 9th in yards (310.8) and second in points (16.2) 2005: Pittsburgh's 15th in yards (321.8) and 9th in points (24.3) but defensively they're 4th in yards (284.0) and third in points (16.1) 2006: the Colts are 3rd in yards (379.4) and 2nd in points (26.7), defensively they were 21st in yards (332.2) and 23rd in points (22.5) 2007: the Giants were 16th in yards (331.4) and 14th in points (23.3) defensively they were 7th in yards (305) and 17th in points (21.9) 2008: the Steelers were 22nd in yards (311.9) and 20th in points (21.7), defensively they were first in yards and points (237.2 and 13.9) 2009: the Saints were first in yards and points (403.8 and 31.9) defensively they were 25th in yardage (357.8) and 20th in points (21.3) 2010: the Packers were 9th in yardage (358.1) and 10th in scoring (24.2) defensively they were 5th in yards (309.1) and second in scoring (15) 2011: the Giants were 8th in yardage (385.1) and 9th in scoring (24.6) defensively they were 27th in yardage (376.4) and 25th in scoring (25) For a version that's easier to read: year: offensive yardage rank, offensive scoring rank, defensive yardage rank, defensive scoring rank 2001: 19, 6, 24, 6 2002: 24, 18, 1, 1 2003: 17, 12, 7, 1 2004: 7, 4, 9, 2 2005: 15, 9, 4, 3 2006: 3, 2, 21, 23 2007: 16, 14, 7, 17 2008: 22, 20, 1, 1 2009: 1, 1, 25, 20 2010: 9, 10, 5, 2 2011: 8, 9, 27, 25 Average: 12.8, 9.5, 11.9, 9.2 that actually came out a lot closer than I anticipated, though it is slanted slightly toward defense and I do think it's worth pointing out that six times since 2001 the Super Bowl Champ was in the top five in one of the two major defensive categories while only three of the champs were in the top five in offense (one of which was also a top defense) and three of the champs led the league in scoring defense while only one led the league in scoring offense, I'd be interested to see how that ran out prior to 2001, but I've already taken too much time away from getting real work done Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
funnygunny 521 Posted November 11, 2012 The stats for 2007 could be so much more different Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
oochymp 2,393 Posted November 11, 2012 (edited) The stats for 2007 could be so much more different and yet that #1 offense (of all time, statistically) was held to only 14 points Edited November 11, 2012 by oochymp Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
