Random Commanders Thoughts

I'm not interested in convincing anyone that having a good defense is a critical component of winning a championship. Was just posting my opinion on the matter :)
 
Jimbo said:
An amazing feat to be sure. Unfortunately, rules changes favoring the offense over the past decade have made it extremely tough to shut another team out. Tack on 35 or 40-yard pass interference penalties and kickers who can go almost an entire season without missing a FG attempt and shutouts nowadays almost seem more a product of luck than great defense. Holding the other team to 10 points or less and winning the game makes me "almost" as happy as a shutout used to.
Click to expand...

Not to mention kickers who hitting from 50+ as easy as they used to hit from 35. That distance is a big killer and teams will go for a FG now where 20 years ago they would punt.
 
tshile said:
I'm not interested in convincing anyone that having a good defense is a critical component of winning a championship. Was just posting my incorrect opinion on the matter :)
Click to expand...

Fixed that for you. :) ;)
 
Lanky, you're incorrigible. :)

I did some shutout research by decades at Pro Football Reference to see if the number of shutouts has decreased over time. I included all seasons since the league went to a 16 game regular season schedule and playoff games were included.

Decade-2003-2012 76 shutouts

Decade 1993-2002 81 shutouts

Decade 1983-1992 112 shutouts

1978-1982 period 54 shutouts in five seasons averaging 10.8 shutouts per season which places it not too far from the following decade.

It's apparent that beginning in the 1990s the number of shutouts has decreased rather noticeably-between three and four fewer per season.
 
Besides what I mentioned before, I think you can also blame that decline on putting the QB's in dresses, no contact on receivers after 5 yards/defensive holding and barely being able to touch "defenseless" receivers.

If I didn't know better I'd swear the NFL would be happy if there was NEVER another shutout.
 
Jimbo said:
Besides what I mentioned before, I think you can also blame that decline on putting the QB's in dresses, no contact on receivers after 5 yards/defensive holding and barely being able to touch "defenseless" receivers.

If I didn't know better I'd swear the NFL would be happy if there was NEVER another shutout.
Click to expand...

Neo's point about kickers is a great one too. Guys are making 50-yarders look routine! Its very tough to keep a team behind the 45 yard-line all game. Very tough.
 
Lanky Livingston said:
Yep...this past year was an anomaly (two of the better defenses in the NFL facing off); in the past few years teams with abysmally bad defenses have made it to the superbowl on the backs of their offense.

The 2006 Colts, 2009 Saints and 2010 Packers are some of the most recent examples.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure those are great examples. The only one that really fits is the Saints with their 25th ranked defense.

The 2010 Packers had a great defense. They were 4th in yards and 2nd in scoring.

The 2006 Colts had a bad defense during the regular season, but got Bob Sanders, who had been injured pretty much all season, back for the post-season and his presence made a huge difference in the playoffs. I don't think it a coincidence that the one time the Colt defense showed up in the playoffs was the one time Manning was able to actually win a Superbowl.

Actually, the worst defense to win a Super Bowl, pretty much ever, was the 2011 Giants. Then again, they were probably the worst TEAM to ever win the Super Bowl, and just happened to get hot at just the right time. I'm not sure I'd use them as proof of anything other than Mara is a big fat conniving whiney bitch who probably has Poloriods of Roger Goodell with Jeff Lurie in leather chaps and a thong or something ... ahem.

Anyway, er, the Ravens this past season were 12th in scoring, 17th in yards. The remaining six superbowl-winning defenses of the past ten years have been top five in either scoring or yards, and often both.

So while I agree that the NFL is becoming more and more a QB-driven league, defense still does matter once you get to the playoffs. In my opinion.
 
Defense matters but you likely won't see another team like the 2000 Ravens or 2002 Bucs that won primarily with a dominant defense.

You now need more than a game manager at QB to win.

That pressure to find a qb has lead teams like

Minnesota and Jacksonville to take guys high in the draft that carried considerable risks.
 
Bulldog's Twin said:
Defense matters but you likely won't see another team like the 2000 Ravens or 2002 Bucs that won primarily with a dominant defense.

You now need more than a game manager at QB to win.

That pressure to find a qb has lead teams like

Minnesota and Jacksonville to take guys high in the draft that carried considerable risks.
Click to expand...

While generally I agree, I will point out that the 2008 Steelers had a dominant defense and a pretty limp offense. Roethlisberger was ok that year, but wasn't exactly tearing up the league. The defense pretty much carried that team.
 
Right...I guess I was thinking of the 2011/2012 Packers who were absolutely porous on defense.

The 2006 Colts were giving up close to 180 yards per game on the ground - they literally could not stop anyone. Whether or not Bob Sanders or Booger McFarland truly were the difference, it flies in the face of the "defense wins championships" notion when they're giving up that much on the ground every game in the regular season, but still go 12-4.
 
Lanky Livingston said:
Right...I guess I was thinking of the 2011/2012 Packers who were absolutely porous on defense.

The 2006 Colts were giving up close to 180 yards per game on the ground - they literally could not stop anyone. Whether or not Bob Sanders or Booger McFarland truly were the difference, it flies in the face of the "defense wins championships" notion when they're giving up that much on the ground every game in the regular season, but still go 12-4.
Click to expand...

And yet in the playoffs the Colts gave up 44, 83, 93, and 111 yards on the ground.

If your point is teams with lousy defenses and good quarterbacks can post winning records in the regular season, then yes, I agree.

If your point is defense isn't really important to winning a championship, that's where we would differ.
 
Henry said:
And yet in the playoffs the Colts gave up 44, 83, 93, and 111 yards on the ground.

If your point is teams with lousy defenses and good quarterbacks can post winning records in the regular season, then yes, I agree.

If your point is defense isn't really important to winning a championship, that's where we would differ.
Click to expand...

That's not my point at all. My point is that the "Defense wins championships" mantra is incomplete at best, flawed at worst. In today's NFL, you need much more than any one facet of the game.

Were the 2008 Steelers carried by defense? Sure...but they also had one hell of a running game and OL that could grind games out and keep their defense off the field. EDIT: And I would never characterize Ben Roethlisberger as a "game-manager."
 
Lanky Livingston said:
That's not my point at all. My point is that the "Defense wins championships" mantra is incomplete at best, flawed at worst. In today's NFL, you need much more than any one facet of the game.

Were the 2008 Steelers carried by defense? Sure...but they also had one hell of a running game and OL that could grind games out and keep their defense off the field. EDIT: And I would never characterize Ben Roethlisberger as a "game-manager."
Click to expand...

The 2000 Ravens had a better running game than the 2008 Steelers, and Brad Johnson was better in 2002 (he went to the pro-bowl that year) than Roethlisberger was in 2008 (his worst season of the past six).

I mean, I don't think anyone is arguing a team can win in the playoffs with NO offense ...
 
I didn't mean to imply that you only need a defense to win a championship. Having a good defense is just as important as being able to run out the clock/control possession with a ground game, or to put points on the board with a good QB/offense.

It's easy to forget how much a great defense can change the tide of a game, because you just don't see great defenses anymore, for many of the reasons already mentioned. I'd rather average 20-30 on offense and have a top 3 defense than be the type of team we were last year - lots of 30+ point games but among the worst defense in the league.

And for every game you find where a team with a bad defense won a superbowl I can find one where a good defense made the difference. The one that stands out the most in my mind over the last 10 years would be the last two giant super bowl wins.
 
tshile said:
I didn't mean to imply that you only need a defense to win a championship. Having a good defense is just as important as being able to run out the clock/control possession with a ground game, or to put points on the board with a good QB/offense.

It's easy to forget how much a great defense can change the tide of a game, because you just don't see great defenses anymore, for many of the reasons already mentioned. I'd rather average 20-30 on offense and have a top 3 defense than be the type of team we were last year - lots of 30+ point games but among the worst defense in the league.

And for every game you find where a team with a bad defense won a superbowl I can find one where a good defense made the difference. The one that stands out the most in my mind over the last 10 years would be the last two giant super bowl wins.
Click to expand...

As Henry pointed out, the 2011 Giants were probably the worst defense in the past two decades to win a superbowl.
 
Effing Giants ... sorry, what were we talking about?
 
50% third down effeiciency
266 total passing yards
83 total rushing yards
2 sacks, an interception
limited patriots to 22:55 TOP
held patriots to 17 points

seems like a pretty good outing against brady and company, but what do I know.
 
Henry said:
And yet in the playoffs the Colts gave up 44, 83, 93, and 111 yards on the ground.

If your point is teams with lousy defenses and good quarterbacks can post winning records in the regular season, then yes, I agree.

If your point is defense isn't really important to winning a championship, that's where we would differ.
Click to expand...

One thing about that Colts superbowl: It helps that they were against Sexy Rexy, I think.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 10, Members: 0, Guests: 10)

Who Read This Thread (Total Members: 116) Show all

Help Users

You haven't joined any rooms.

    You haven't joined any rooms.
    Top