Defense wins championships after all . . .

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: Defense wins championships after all . . .

     

    The top defenses in the league still give up about 14 or 15 points a game.  There may be a slight increase in points given up by the best defenses, but it's marginal.  Just as an example, the 2003 Patriots (which I think we'd all agree were a good defense and gave up the least points of any team that year) gave up 222 points during the regular season (10 rushing TDs, 11 receiving TDs, and 25 FGs--point total assumes all TDs were 7 points). 

    The top three defenses (by points given up, again assuming all TDs were 7 points) in 2011 were:

    Steelers (220 points--7 rushing TDs, 15 receiving TDs, and 22 FGs)

    49ers (227 points--3 rushing TDs, 20 receiving TDs, 22 FGs)

    Ravens (231 points--10 rushing TDs, 11 receiving TDs, 28 FGs)

    These are all right in the same vicinity as the 2003 Pats. 

     

    I still maintain that the primary difference between the Pats teams in the first part of the 2000s and recent years is that the defense was much more dominant back then.  We won with defense and a complementary offense back then.  Now we need to win with offense and it's just not as reliable.  We have trouble winning close games.  

     

     

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from Muzwell. Show Muzwell's posts

    Re: Defense wins championships after all . . .

    My bottom line is you have great QB play, you have a chance. Without it, you have none. Doesn't matter how good your defense is. Now, if you have both, obviously your chances are that much better.

    The Patriots have had a chance for 12 years now.  If the defense is improved, so are the chances this year. But even if the defense is the same, they still have a better chance than probably 26 teams or so.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from digger0862. Show digger0862's posts

    Re: Defense wins championships after all . . .

    We aren't as good as those 2001, 2003 and 2004 teams. They were a dynasty. They were a once-in-a-lifetime-if-you're-lucky team. It's only natural to want that again. Just don't hold your breath.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: Defense wins championships after all . . .

    I agree great QB play is a big part of the equation.  Let's face it, winning Super Bowls isn't easy and takes many things.  The Pats have the good QB.  What they've been lacking is a reliable defense that can hold the lead in close games and control the pace of the game or, in the absence of such a defense, an offense that doesn't break down when just a single key skill player is hurt (i.e., Gronk) or against athletic front sevens (i.e., the Giants). 

     

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from RallyC. Show RallyC's posts

    Re: Defense wins championships after all . . .

    In response to Muzwell's comment:

    My bottom line is you have great QB play, you have a chance. Without it, you have none. Doesn't matter how good your defense is. Now, if you have both, obviously your chances are that much better.

    The Patriots have had a chance for 12 years now.  If the defense is improved, so are the chances this year. But even if the defense is the same, they still have a better chance than probably 26 teams or so.



    Ahhhh yeah! Now were talkin'.  Muz, that is so true, especially today. CB is the key and that includes over the slot. An average D with great CB play becomes a very good D and wins. Every year this point becomes more and more important. Of course, a greet QB must be part of the championship formula for the Team, but I see the CB position as the most critical on any D. 

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: Defense wins championships after all . . .

    In response to RallyC's comment:

     

    In response to Muzwell's comment:

     

     

     

    My bottom line is you have great QB play, you have a chance. Without it, you have none. Doesn't matter how good your defense is. Now, if you have both, obviously your chances are that much better.

    The Patriots have had a chance for 12 years now.  If the defense is improved, so are the chances this year. But even if the defense is the same, they still have a better chance than probably 26 teams or so.

     

     



    Ahhhh yeah! Now were talkin'.  Muz, that is so true, especially today. CB is the key and that includes over the slot. An average D with great CB play becomes a very good D and wins. Every year this point becomes more and more important. Of course, a greet QB must be part of the championship formula for the Team, but I see the CB position as the most critical on any D. 

     

     

     



    The play of Talib and Dennard in camp has to be promising.  The only thing that makes me just a tad nervous is that they are practicing mostly against rookie WRs.  There is a possibility that they look so good in part because the receivers are so inexperienced. 

     

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from RallyC. Show RallyC's posts

    Re: Defense wins championships after all . . .

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

    In response to RallyC's comment:

     

    In response to Muzwell's comment:

     

     

     

    My bottom line is you have great QB play, you have a chance. Without it, you have none. Doesn't matter how good your defense is. Now, if you have both, obviously your chances are that much better.

    The Patriots have had a chance for 12 years now.  If the defense is improved, so are the chances this year. But even if the defense is the same, they still have a better chance than probably 26 teams or so.

     

     



    Ahhhh yeah! Now were talkin'.  Muz, that is so true, especially today. CB is the key and that includes over the slot. An average D with great CB play becomes a very good D and wins. Every year this point becomes more and more important. Of course, a greet QB must be part of the championship formula for the Team, but I see the CB position as the most critical on any D. 

     

     

     



    The play of Talib and Dennard in camp has to be promising.  The only thing that makes me just a tad nervous is that they are practicing mostly against rookie WRs.  There is a possibility that they look so good in part because the receivers are so inexperienced. 

     


    Valid concerns, no doubt. But I can tell ya, both Deeard and Talib have excellent technique. The difference between adequate or very good/great CB's in the NFL is excellent technique. Though McCourty was a superior CB as a rookie, his technique had lots of holes. Once the DCs had time to dissect the rookie and identify those holes, they started targeting him in ways to capitalize on his weaknesses. Its kinda like a rookie in MLB who hits well outta the gate, but once the tapes show holes in his swing, pitchers take advantage. Both Talib and Dennard have smooth mechanics and have the ability to make fluid transitions and great reads. They will be so much fun to have out there together barring injuries, or.......well, you know.......

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from redsoxfan94. Show redsoxfan94's posts

    Re: Defense wins championships after all . . .

    In response to wozzy's comment:

    Yep, you've given us every reason we lost except for the most obvious, the offense scoring less than half of their regular season average points per game. But I guess that doesn't really matter in the big picture...

    The whole saying "that's why they play the games" was for reasons like this, regardless of what you did all year, the entire season comes down to one game and you have to play it. 

    The defense does what they do, be ordinary, average, and the offense is half as good as they usually are is usually a recipe for disaster.

    Very good defenses win championships but having an offense that can score against very good defenses matters also.  The last two Super Bowls we went to, the defense held the Giants to the lowest of our three Super Bowl victory totals.  We didn't score.




    amen wozzy nice post

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from Salcon. Show Salcon's posts

    Re: Defense wins championships after all . . .

    We didn't score.

     

    That's the bottom line right there.  The simple object of the game is to score more points than the other team.

    I got more than I expected from our mediocre defense.  I expected more from our powerful offense with or without Gronk.  Didn't happen.

    Now ofcourse we'll hear from the "BB failed as a GM" contingent and the"number of possessions"contingent and the "defense couldn't make one final stop" contingent etc. etc.

     

     

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from Towelie-Toke. Show Towelie-Toke's posts

    Re: Defense wins championships after all . . .

    I think it's a myth.  It's not just the offense, not just the defense, or ST. It's all of the above. Regardless of whether it's a high or low scoring game, whoever has more wins Laughing

     

    Seems like paralysis by overanalysis.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: Defense wins championships after all . . .

    In response to RallyC's comment:

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to RallyC's comment:

     

    In response to Muzwell's comment:

     

     

     

    My bottom line is you have great QB play, you have a chance. Without it, you have none. Doesn't matter how good your defense is. Now, if you have both, obviously your chances are that much better.

    The Patriots have had a chance for 12 years now.  If the defense is improved, so are the chances this year. But even if the defense is the same, they still have a better chance than probably 26 teams or so.

     

     



    Ahhhh yeah! Now were talkin'.  Muz, that is so true, especially today. CB is the key and that includes over the slot. An average D with great CB play becomes a very good D and wins. Every year this point becomes more and more important. Of course, a greet QB must be part of the championship formula for the Team, but I see the CB position as the most critical on any D. 

     

     

     



    The play of Talib and Dennard in camp has to be promising.  The only thing that makes me just a tad nervous is that they are practicing mostly against rookie WRs.  There is a possibility that they look so good in part because the receivers are so inexperienced. 

     

     


    Valid concerns, no doubt. But I can tell ya, both Deeard and Talib have excellent technique. The difference between adequate or very good/great CB's in the NFL is excellent technique. Though McCourty was a superior CB as a rookie, his technique had lots of holes. Once the DCs had time to dissect the rookie and identify those holes, they started targeting him in ways to capitalize on his weaknesses. Its kinda like a rookie in MLB who hits well outta the gate, but once the tapes show holes in his swing, pitchers take advantage. Both Talib and Dennard have smooth mechanics and have the ability to make fluid transitions and great reads. They will be so much fun to have out there together barring injuries, or.......well, you know.......

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I do think the two of them transformed the secondary last year and think they are and will continue to be very good.  It's just when I read reports of them being completely dominant in training camp, I do always wonder how much of that is due to their talents and how much due to the guys they are up against. Hopefully, the receivers are great too, because that means a great defense and a great offense.  Can't wait to see them in action Friday. 

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from TrueChamp. Show TrueChamp's posts

    Re: Defense wins championships after all . . .

    In response to Salcon's comment:

    We didn't score.

     

    That's the bottom line right there.  The simple object of the game is to score more points than the other team.

    I got more than I expected from our mediocre defense.  I expected more from our powerful offense with or without Gronk.  Didn't happen.

    Now ofcourse we'll hear from the "BB failed as a GM" contingent and the"number of possessions"contingent and the "defense couldn't make one final stop" contingent etc. etc.

     

     




    Great post Salcon!

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: Defense wins championships after all . . .

    In response to russgriswold's comment:

     

     

    NE's Ds in SB 42 held leads of 7-3 for much of that game and in SB 46 held leads of 10-9, 17-12 and 17-15.

    What did our offense do while those Ds were holding leads?

    You'll never escape the facts. The 2007 and 2011 Ds ABSOLUTELY played well enough to walk out of there champs.  What didn't happen, was our offense failed to score points.

    I'll never forget getting a call at halftime of SB 42 up 7-3.  I said "I am very concerned even with them up in the game".

    I knew right then and there if our offense didn't come out in the 3rd qtr and really start to dictate, the odds for the Giants stealing it, would go up.

    I was right again, Prolate. I hate being right when our team loses and knowing WHY we'll lose, but I am still right in the analysis.

    In all seriousness, I thought after them going into halftime of SB 46, they'd put the uneven half behind them and get focused. They were great on that first drive and I felt like it was their game to lose, but the offense literally up and vanished the entire rest of the game while the D held and held and held some more.

    2 FGs, holding the Giants offense down isn't a D that can't hold leads?

    Hmm.

    It appears you're having a tough time accepting what has gone on and what BB is addressing for our team.    

    When you're at the game, flying in from Toronto like that, do you cheer when our offense sucks? If so, what do you say to the people around and what is their reaction with your analysis? lol

    The only difference between SB 42 and SB 46 is I didn't know WHY our offense sucked so bad in SB 42 becuase it was something pretty new. We got a taste of it in the AFC title game, I thought it was an aberration, but SB 42 was the start of the problems that continued on with our Welker-centric offense right through SB 46.

    You're just going to have to let it go. Any deflection or continued excuse making train just won't work anymore.

    The Ds outperformed each offense over the course of the game. It's a fact that cannot be denied.

    You'll never, ever, ever see a slam dunk, lights out D in a SB in a dome with 2 minutes or less to go.

    Good thing McNabb was puking on his shoes, Jon Kasay kicked the ball out of bounds, and Lovie SMith's D sat back vs our offense in Sb 36 huh?

    Without those somewhat lucky things occurring, our Ds would have been seen as blowing leads in all 3 of those SBs.

    But, what they did do is play generally very well throughout the majority of the game. 



    Well yes, the offense didn't score again after that great drive to begin the half.  But the defense let the Giants score two field goals and one TD on their next four drives.  But you think that's great defense. 

    LMAO

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from pezz4pats. Show pezz4pats's posts

    Re: Defense wins championships after all . . .

    In response to russgriswold's comment:

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to russgriswold's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

     

     

     

    NE's Ds in SB 42 held leads of 7-3 for much of that game and in SB 46 held leads of 10-9, 17-12 and 17-15.

    What did our offense do while those Ds were holding leads?

    You'll never escape the facts. The 2007 and 2011 Ds ABSOLUTELY played well enough to walk out of there champs.  What didn't happen, was our offense failed to score points.

    I'll never forget getting a call at halftime of SB 42 up 7-3.  I said "I am very concerned even with them up in the game".

    I knew right then and there if our offense didn't come out in the 3rd qtr and really start to dictate, the odds for the Giants stealing it, would go up.

    I was right again, Prolate. I hate being right when our team loses and knowing WHY we'll lose, but I am still right in the analysis.

    In all seriousness, I thought after them going into halftime of SB 46, they'd put the uneven half behind them and get focused. They were great on that first drive and I felt like it was their game to lose, but the offense literally up and vanished the entire rest of the game while the D held and held and held some more.

    2 FGs, holding the Giants offense down isn't a D that can't hold leads?

    Hmm.

    It appears you're having a tough time accepting what has gone on and what BB is addressing for our team.    

    When you're at the game, flying in from Toronto like that, do you cheer when our offense sucks? If so, what do you say to the people around and what is their reaction with your analysis? lol

    The only difference between SB 42 and SB 46 is I didn't know WHY our offense sucked so bad in SB 42 becuase it was something pretty new. We got a taste of it in the AFC title game, I thought it was an aberration, but SB 42 was the start of the problems that continued on with our Welker-centric offense right through SB 46.

    You're just going to have to let it go. Any deflection or continued excuse making train just won't work anymore.

    The Ds outperformed each offense over the course of the game. It's a fact that cannot be denied.

    You'll never, ever, ever see a slam dunk, lights out D in a SB in a dome with 2 minutes or less to go.

    Good thing McNabb was puking on his shoes, Jon Kasay kicked the ball out of bounds, and Lovie SMith's D sat back vs our offense in Sb 36 huh?

    Without those somewhat lucky things occurring, our Ds would have been seen as blowing leads in all 3 of those SBs.

    But, what they did do is play generally very well throughout the majority of the game. 

     

     



    Well yes, the offense didn't score again after that great drive to begin the half.  But the defense let the Giants score two field goals and one TD on their next four drives.  But you think that's great defense. 

     

     

    LMAO

     

    [/QUOTE]

    I didn't say it was "great". It was very good. 2 FGs allowed in a half isn't good? All we needed is for Brady to not screw up on the two plays he ROYALLY did.

     

    The last TD never would have happened if they managed the clock better with no INT or Welker catches the high throw. This is the point you're glossing over.

    Our D played closer to their ceiling than what the offense did with Brady in the shotgun.

    [/QUOTE]


    2 fg's and a TOUCH DOWN  OUT OF 4 DRIVES !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    And that last TOUCH DOWN wouldn't have happened if the D could make a STOP.

    The O can't always have a 3 score lead  to make up for the D allowing 75% scores.

    The D, did NOT play to their ceiling.

    Their ceiling would have been 2 picks, a fumble recovery and at least 3, 3 & outs, A DRIVE THAT DIDN'T CONSIST OF 10 PLAYS AND 3, 3RD DOWN CONVERSIONS, AND A STOP IN GINTS TERRITORY.

    NONE OF THAT HAPPENED!  NONE OF IT!

    WORST PASSING D TO PLAY IN A SB. PERIOD!

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from pezz4pats. Show pezz4pats's posts

    Re: Defense wins championships after all . . .

    In response to russgriswold's comment:

    ^^^^Nope. Brady crapped his pants in the 4th. Those are the Cliff Notes with what you were trying to say. lol

    If he's so great, why was he so bad when it mattered, Pezzy?



    First QB ever to throw an INT on 1st down in the 4th qtr of a SB.

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from pezz4pats. Show pezz4pats's posts

    Re: Defense wins championships after all . . .

    In response to russgriswold's comment:

    In response to pezz4pats' comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to russgriswold's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

     

    ^^^^Nope. Brady crapped his pants in the 4th. Those are the Cliff Notes with what you were trying to say. lol

    If he's so great, why was he so bad when it mattered, Pezzy?

     

     



    First QB ever to throw an INT on 1st down in the 4th qtr of a SB.

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

     

    ^^Totally unglued to the point he can't say he's been had. 

    "Tarkenton's first play from scrimmage in SB IX was a Safety just like Rex Grossman."

    Oh, wait I mean, Brady.

    LOL!!

    I love watching Pezzy become unglued.   Why would anyone compare the supposed GOAT to Tarkenton, let alone Rex Grossman in a SB?

    Seems weird. If Brady is so great, why he is playing like busts or QBs who lost 4 SBs and had weak TD/INT ratios?

    Hmmm.

    [/QUOTE]

    First QB ever to throw an INT on 1st down in the 4th qtr of a SB., says rusty!

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from pezz4pats. Show pezz4pats's posts

    Re: Defense wins championships after all . . .

    In response to russgriswold's comment:

     

    In response to pezz4pats' comment:

     

     

     

    In response to russgriswold's comment:

     

     

     

     

    In response to pezz4pats' comment:

     

     

     

     

     

     

    In response to russgriswold's comment:

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    ^^^^Nope. Brady crapped his pants in the 4th. Those are the Cliff Notes with what you were trying to say. lol

    If he's so great, why was he so bad when it mattered, Pezzy?

     

     

     

     

     



    First QB ever to throw an INT on 1st down in the 4th qtr of a SB.

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    ^^Totally unglued to the point he can't say he's been had. 

    "Tarkenton's first play from scrimmage in SB IX was a Safety just like Rex Grossman."

    Oh, wait I mean, Brady.

    LOL!!

    I love watching Pezzy become unglued.   Why would anyone compare the supposed GOAT to Tarkenton, let alone Rex Grossman in a SB?

    Seems weird. If Brady is so great, why he is playing like busts or QBs who lost 4 SBs and had weak TD/INT ratios?

    Hmmm.

     

     

     



    First QB ever to throw an INT on 1st down in the 4th qtr of a SB., says rusty!

     

     

     

     

     



    Second all time but first in control with a lead in the SB.

     

     

    LOL!

    First QB ever to pretend he's the GOAT and get worse and worse and channel Rex Grossman. bawahah

     




    Brady "pretends" he's the "GOAT"? 

     

      WOW!  You're really exceeding your lying limit tonight. aren't ya?

    Time to delete your account, again.

    How does a  banned (deleted) account re-surface 3-4 times? And with an accumulated thread count?  Can you explain that?

    Can any one else re-incarnate any of their banned accounts (other than that 1 reset)?   HMMMMM 

    bub bye!

     

Share