Sorry guys...Defense doesn't win championships anymore.
by 16to80fan on Jan 10, 2012 8:28 PM PST
Email
PrintIt is a cliche that is heard repeatedly. Defense wins championships. It is tried and true. Except, it isn't anymore. We don't hear that now. In today's NFL all anybody wants to talk about is offense. Offense is what wins now, right? Look at the last few Super Bowl winners: Packers, Saints, Steelers, Giants, Colts, and Patriots. Every one of them with a with a potential Hall of Fame level quarterback. So offense wins championships, right? Nope. So if offense doesn't win championships and defense doesn't win championships what does? Teams win championships.
It is easy and simplistic to pick one side of the ball and say that is what wins. Analysts love things that are easy and simplistic. It is also catchy. And most importantly it is sexy to look at offenses. But why don't we look a little closer at these last few winners.
2010 Packers
It is the Packers with Aaron Rodgers. It must be all about the offense. He had one of the greatest seasons ever this year. Their offense was unstoppable this season. And that defense is pathetic. The difference is we aren't talking about this year. We are talking about last year. And last season the defense wasn't pathetic. It was borderline awesome.
Defense:
Points allowed: 2nd
Yards allowed: 5th
Take Aways: 3rd
Offense:
Points: 10th
Yards: 9th
Turnovers: 9th
Wow, if I knew nothing about the amazing Aaron Rodgers (which he is) and his super offense I would say that looks like a well balanced but defensive based team. A team balanced enough to win a Super Bowl and they did.
2009 Saints
This is the one team that comes the closest to ruining my entire post. They were an offensive team. They gave up a lot of points and a lot of yards on defense. But they also led the league in takeaways. Who needs a three and out when you can just get an interception or a fumble on a regular basis.
Defense:
Points allowed: 20th
Yards allowed: 25th
Take Aways: 1st
Offense:
Points: 1st
Yards: 1st
Turnovers: 9th
This team was opportunistic on defense. The defense gave the offense extra possessions by creating turnovers. And in my opinion, knowing that the defense didn't have a great chance at stopping the Colts the Saints kicked a brilliant onside kick coming out of halftime in the Super Bowl. I believe that is a special teams play, not an offensive play. That makes them a balanced team.
2008 Steelers
Now this team was way back three years ago. I know most of us don't really remember that far back. I know to an analyst that might as well have been prior to the invention of the forward pass. Because defense is dead and has been for a long time.
Defense:
Points allowed: 1st
Yards allowed: 1st
Take Aways: 4th
Offense:
Points: 20th
Yards: 22nd
Turnovers: 11th
This is clearly a defensive team. Without a doubt. But I am sure the team they played was another defensive minded team that lucked in. Oh wait they beat a top 5 offense in the Arizona Cardinals who had a bottom 3rd defense. This Steelers team is probably the most 1 dimensional defensive team to win the Super Bowl in the last 10 years. But they got hot in the playoffs and ranked 2nd in points scored in the post season that year. That makes them a well balanced team.
2007 Patriots Giants
The Patriots were an offensive juggernaut. There was no team that could beat them. Oh wait, sorry. The Giants were basically a kind of average middle of the pack team during the regular season. Balanced between offense and defense but average. Then the playoffs started. Eli jumped to another level and his stats went up in basically every category. But, they actually averaged slightly less points per game in the playoffs than they did in the regular season. However, their defense jumped up to a tie for 1st in fewest points allowed per game.
Defense:
Points allowed: 17th
Yards allowed: 7th
Take Aways: 22nd
Offense:
Points: 14th
Yards: 16th
Turnovers: 14th
The Giants were a well balanced team that had a lights out defensive run through the playoffs. Not to mention some magic from Eli and his little friend in the Super Bowl. They held the record breaking Pats offense to 14 points in the Super Bowl but it took the entire team to win it.
2006 Colts
Much like the 2009 Saints this team tried to ruin my post. They were an offensive team that had a somewhat opportunistic defense that created some turnovers. At least during the regular season they were. Then the playoffs started and something crazy happened. The Colts turned into super defense. They only gave up 6 and 8 points in their first two playoff games and averaged giving up nearly 100 yards per game less than the regular season.
Defense:
Points allowed: 23rd
Yards allowed: 21st
Take Aways: 8th
Offense:
Points: 2nd
Yards: 3rd
Turnovers: 6th
The Colts were not a well balanced team during the regular season but for the playoffs Peyton finally had a team.
2005 Steelers
Another well balanced but defensive team.
Defense:
Points allowed: 3rd
Yards allowed: 4th
Take Aways: 13th
Offense:
Points: 9th
Yards: 15th
Turnovers: 6th
2004 Patriots
Just an overall well balanced team.
Defense:
Points allowed: 2
Yards allowed: 9
Take Aways: 1
Offense:
Points: 4
Yards: 7
Turnovers: 9
2003 Patriots
Pretty balanced but clearly leaning on the defense.
Defense:
Points allowed: 1
Yards allowed: 7
Take Aways: 3
Offense:
Points: 12
Yards: 17
Turnovers: 6
2002 Bucs
Defense:
Points allowed: 1
Yards allowed: 1
Offense:
Points: 18
Yards: 24
Turnovers: *
*The place I was getting that stat from stopped at 2003
2001 Patriots
Defense:
Points allowed:6
Yards allowed: 24
Take Aways: *
Offense:
Points: 6
Yards: 19
Turnovers: *
2000 Ravens
Defense:
Points allowed: 1
Yards allowed: 2
Take Aways: *
Offense:
Points: 14
Yards: 16
Turnovers: *
Over the last 11 Super Bowls a team that was ranked #1 in one of the defensive categories won 6 times. Teams that were ranked #1 in one of the offensive categories won 1 time. Teams that I would say were clearly leaning toward the defensive side won 5. Teams that were clearly leaning offensive won 2. Teams that I would say are balanced won 4, however, I would say that all of the teams were pretty balanced in their own way. Even if they weren't balanced in the regular season they certainly picked it up in the playoffs.
2011 49ers
Clearly a defensive leaning team. But just outside the top 10 in the most important offensive category (points scored) and number 1 in another. I didn't include special teams in any of the analysis but the 49ers are number 1 in several of those categories as well. This is a very good and well balanced team.
Defense:
Points allowed: 2
Yards allowed: 4
Take Aways: 1(t)
Offense:
Points: 11
Yards: 26
Turnovers: 1
2011 Saints
Clearly an offensive team. Just outside the top 10 in the most important defensive category though (points allowed). The Saints also have a good kicker and returner.
Defense:
Points allowed: 13
Yards allowed: 24
Take Aways: 31
Offense:
Points: 2
Yards: 1
Turnovers: 7
Both the 49ers and the Saints are pretty balanced teams that do tend to favor one side of the ball. The game between the two will come down to who can execute their game plan better and probably who gets a few of the breaks to go their way. Either team can win it all by playing their game and getting improvement in just one area. If they Saints can get some turnovers a repeat of 2009 would not be surprising. If the 49ers can just execute in the red zone then they will be able to put up more than enough points to beat anybody anywhere.
In this era of the offense it takes more than a lot of yards to win a Super Bowl. But rarely do teams win it all without having all facets of the game working right. Defense doesn't win championships. Offense doesn't win championships. Teams win championships.
This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of Niners Nation's writers or editors. It does reflect the views of this particular fan though, which is as important as the views of Niners Nation's writers or editors.
107 comments
|
2 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
"Teams win championships."
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
by Drew Kerr on Jan 10, 2012 9:17 PM PST reply actions 3 recs
Yup ...
… TEAMS WIN CHAMPIONSHIPS… THE TEAM THE TEAM THE TEAM …!!
I'm your " Huckelberry "...it's just my game ..( .AleX ) was asked , what do you think about all the game manager talk ... AleX i guess i just managed myself a VIctory ... Extend the Man ...!!
These types of comments aren't really necessary.
I realize everyone is pumped up for the game and all that… but we don’t need to talk about ripping anyones arm or heads off even if just as a metaphor.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
why not though?
I get not wishing injury and what not, but its not realistic to think anyone’s limbs will be torn off…
Dunno... guess if that's your thing then go for it...
I just think it serves to provoke people who may be visiting from the other site is all. All the pictures and all that are done in fun but ripping his “right arm” off kind of insinuates wanting to take him out of the game… hurt his throwing arm.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
ok thats understandable
right after I posted this I was actually thinking that was your reasoning, which is a perfectly good point.
I understand what you are saying, but think exaggeration makes it a jest
I totally agree that hoping someone gets injured is classless and wrong. But I honestly hope we sack Brees every time he drops back to pass. That would be acceptable to say. But realistically, if we do sack him that much, there is a very high probability he would get injured. That doesn’t make my comment bad, but where do you draw the line? Can I hope we sack the crap out of him? That implies internal damage if you are realistic, but clearly not the intention. Can we hope Aldon Smith crushes him? Again, realistically, crushing is pretty bad. What about stomping him into the grass river-dance style?
Long winded, but point is, you have to determine whether malice is intended. That post was clearly focused on praising PW and exaggerating his physicality. Taking extreme exaggeration realistically, like ripping arms off, is an over-analysis of the comment, or more importantly intent, of the comment. And yes, I am also over-analyzing your previous comments… :p
by AKinferno on Jan 11, 2012 11:09 PM PST up reply actions 2 recs
I know and I get the point...
It’s just something delicate…
I think had I said something like that I may have got a warning or something like that… It may have been done in jest but there is a lot of back and forth between the two fan bases this week (more than others probably) and it’s just best to keep things relatively civil.
I am pumped… I think every Niner fan on this planet is pumped (including possibly Clutchtree and salary-cap even)… but I’m just sayin’… save face. All that.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
Green Bay had an awesome defense last year; teams who have won the playoffs this year played great defense.
only game that lacked defense was the lions vs. saints game. saints picked stafford twice and lions defense has been pathetic.
"You know whats funny? I always thought uhm dogs lay eggs and I learned something new today" Peter Griffin
They really did.
I think it gets forgotten how good their D was last year because they are so offensive based this year.
It is very possible their D really steps it in the playoffs this year and they have another great run. However, if they don’t I don’t think they can win it again with D being as bad as it has been.
I think the 1 dimensional teams are going to start falling off. Whether that is the 49ers, Falcons, Pack, Saints, Texans, or Pats I don’t know. But all of those teams need good performances from the weaker side of the ball in order to move on. Whoever gets that is going to be looking good.
Joe, Jerry, Steve, and....Who is next?
broncos won
and niners are ranked 10nth in scoring! with much better red zone offense the niners would be ranked much higher in points scored! Turnovers are going to be the key in this game; Niners win or break even in the turnovers and Niners have a good shot at winning this game!
"You know whats funny? I always thought uhm dogs lay eggs and I learned something new today" Peter Griffin
by HUNGRY HUNTER on Jan 10, 2012 10:49 PM PST up reply actions
Packers
Their defense was playing good at the end there. I do think that the Giants defense is a slight bit better than the Packers in this one. And I also think that the Giants offense is good enough to keep up.
This week will be the ultimate test of the good ol’ “Defense Wins Championships” theory.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
Well... maybe not this weekend and maybe not the next exactly but you get my drift I think.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
They don't have the same defense this year
They basically played the 3-4 defense with three nose tackles on the line. This year they have had no such luxury and teams have been able to take advantage of their holes at LB and S.
I just looked at the ages of their entire defense and we definitely have youth on them too. Not sure if that really will make a difference one way or another though.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
I'm confused. Are you being facetious again?
The stats you posted clearly show that teams who are among the league-best in takeaways and points allowed consistently win more championships than pure offensive juggernauts. Football is a “team” sport; yes, true – and we have arguably the most balanced team in the NFL. But defenses still win championships (luckily we have arguably the best defense in the NFL, too).
2010 – Packers had a great defense last year, and they rode that into the post-season. Rodgers and the running game got hot at the right time, but their defense was what got them there and was what, at the end of the day, stopped Roethlisberger from driving at the end of the Superbowl to beat them. Look at
2009 – The Saints were 1st in takeaways. This is why neither the Saints nor Patriots will win it all this year. They don’t create enough turnovers.
2008 – Obvious defensive team is obvious.
2007 – The Giants’ run was an anomaly – it shouldn’t be used to state much. However, the one thing to note is that all their games were close, relatively low-scoring contests. Their DEFENSE kept them alive and carried them. Their average game was 21 to 16.
2006 – You said it yourself about the Colts. Their defense turned into a juggernaut in the playoffs. Still, during the season, they were 8th in takeaways."
2005 – Defensive leaning team.
2004 – Defensive leaning team.
2003 – Defensive team.
2002 – Obvious defensive team is obvious.
2001 – Average game score was 18 to 16. Defense won them that championship.
2000 – Obvious defensive team is obvious.
A team has never rode a crazy strong offense to a Superbowl without their defense at least creating turnovers. If the Saints or Patriots win the Superbowl this year, then we will have to eat crow and possibly throw away the “defense wins championships” slogan – though, of course, one year could just be an anomaly.
The fact is, if Green Bay does not win, either San Francisco or Baltimore or Houston will. I give Green Bay a shot because while they are an offensive leaning team, at least their defense creates turnovers (and points).
If NE or NO wins it all I would be shocked. In fact, I hope Denver and San Francisco win this weekend so all this “the beginning of the quarterback era” talk can go away and die. Denver has a decent defense. Their pass rush might be able to upset."
9 times out of 10, a great defense is required to win a Superbowl. That is the formula that has always worked.
Alex Smith Will Win a Superbowl
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Alex-Smith-Will-Win-a-Superbowl/205058042848290
by liberty_JAC on Jan 10, 2012 9:45 PM PST reply actions 1 recs
Yes, you are right about the facetiousness.
The point I was really trying to make is that 1 dimensional teams don’t really win championships.
To win the Super Bowl a team has to be a good TEAM.
I could have hit special teams a lot as well. I could basically just use Adam Vinatieri and the Saints onside kick as an example. ST stats are hard for me to find.
But yes, I did want to show that this talking point that it is all about offense wasn’t true.
I used the title I used just so people will look at my post. I am a bit of an attention whore but I like to pretend it is just marketing.
Joe, Jerry, Steve, and....Who is next?
Hmmm...
“The point I was really trying to make is that 1 dimensional teams don’t really win championships.”
I disagree with that kind of. Teams have ridden strong defensive performances to Superbowls several times in the last decade. Other than the obvious Bucs and Ravens – teams that were quite clearly one-dimensional – you have teams like the Giants and Patriots of 01 who, as I mentioned, only gave up 16 points a game in the playoffs.
I don’t think a team that is one-dimensional in the offense direction can win a Superbowl – I don’t know that one ever has. But one-dimensional defensive teams have won championships.
“I could have hit special teams a lot as well. I could basically just use Adam Vinatieri and the Saints onside kick as an example. ST stats are hard for me to find.”
Funny, I was about to make a post soon about special teams. Maybe I still will tonight.
“But yes, I did want to show that this talking point that it is all about offense wasn’t true.”
There we certainly agree, and I think your post showed that very well. Even when a team was offensive leaning, their defense had to be at least pretty good – or at least a turnover machine – in order for them to make a run.
“I used the title I used just so people will look at my post.”
lol, I figured as much. Probably a good tactic.
Alex Smith Will Win a Superbowl
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Alex-Smith-Will-Win-a-Superbowl/205058042848290
by liberty_JAC on Jan 10, 2012 10:05 PM PST up reply actions
Oh...
… and if SF, DEN, and NYG all win… then it will be awesome. I mean, since the media won’t much about Smith, Manning, or Flacco/Yates, we will have to endure another week of Tebowmania; but at least Brady, Rodgers, and Brees will be gone and it will that much more obvious that an excellent defense is required.
Either way, don’t be surprised to lose 2 of the 3 offensive juggernauts this weekend. I would not be shocked if all 3 lost, though Denver really has a tall order in front of them, judging by the last time they met New England. It’s all about the pass rush for all these games. Even great quarterbacks look not-so-great when getting pressured.
The one primary shame that will come out of a New Orleans Superbowl victory is that the pundits will be too busy putting Brees into the Hall of Fame to talk about the fact that his offensive line is freakin’ amazing.
Not trying to down-play Brees – because he is really good – but put Chad Henne behind that line and I bet New Orleans still wins the South and gets passed the Lions (oh, and please don’t let this one controversial comment nullify all the other points I made, lol). I’m a big believer in systems and context. Great players are important, but a great system is more important. Great systems make good players look great, and foster them to be great – and great systems create dynasties. Great players that look superb despite playing in a crappy system are rare – and they usually exist as strong individual efforts on teams that lose a lot.
Alex Smith Will Win a Superbowl
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Alex-Smith-Will-Win-a-Superbowl/205058042848290
Some day
I would like to look into what really makes a dynasty or long term successful team.
Because depending on the person/pundit it is the:
Owner
GM
Coach
System (Kind of the same thing as coach)
Great QB (QB’s in the the 49ers case)
Some people say that Walsh was only great because of Montana. Some say that Montana was only great because of Walsh. Same things with Brady and Belichick. Elway and Shanahan. The Steelers have great ownership. Landry years. And on and on. I am guessing it has to do with a little bit of all of them and maybe different teams different pieces. And of course some of it is luck. But I think it would be a fun project to look into.
Joe, Jerry, Steve, and....Who is next?
I agree it would be interesting.
I wish I knew enough about football to know the answer. With my limited knowledge now, I lean towards the system being the most important thing. And that is based primarily off the anecdotal knowledge of guys like Flynn and Cassle coming in and looking like Gods as back-ups because they are playing in a winning system.
Plus, at the end of the day, the media has to create a bias towards individual efforts being the most important factor because that is what puts butts in seats and that is what makes money. No one wants to hear about all the complications of context and team-work and well-rounded system play; or about compromising over weaknesses in order to express strengths, and all that goes into that.
Just give people a face and say, “This guy does it all by himself! He’s amazing! Buy his jersey!”
Alex Smith Will Win a Superbowl
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Alex-Smith-Will-Win-a-Superbowl/205058042848290
by liberty_JAC on Jan 10, 2012 10:10 PM PST up reply actions
I've thought this about Brady myself, and it's probably true of Steve Young
They were guys who weren’t given much thought out of college, but had the tools. They sat and learned a system, and were coached up in that system, and were probably brought in by the organizations because they thought they may be the right fit for the systems being run. At the point they were put in the driver’s seat, they knew exactly what to do and were able to do it. Put them in the wrong situations and they may not have the storied careers they’ve had. Don’t get me wrong, they may have had good careers anyway, but then again, maybe not. Brady was definitely more Alex Smith than Tom Brady when he took over the reigns that first year (not a knock on Alex). He simply grew into his roll and then ran with it with talent and confidence.
WWJHD?
If the Broncos win next week... the world is ending for sure and we all better start repenting right then and there.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
Imagine if they get to the Superbowl....
shivers
Though, I would love if they made it as long as we did, too. Beating Denver for all the chips seems so right, and it’s just too funny that people will be able to make the comparison:
Montana vs. Elway
Smith vs. Tebow
… ??? lol. The most unlikely of heroes.
Alex Smith Will Win a Superbowl
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Alex-Smith-Will-Win-a-Superbowl/205058042848290
Tim would suggest you repent right now
The world may not be destined for judgement today, tomorrow, or this year, but you never know when your own time is up…
You should work for ESPN
Your analysis of the 2008 Steelers would fit perfectly with their theme of talking out of your ass.
"Whoever said WAR is HELL must have been talking about Aaron Rowand" - McCoven faithful
by shahbazi3 on Jan 10, 2012 11:39 PM PST reply actions 1 recs
whut?
What was wrong with the ‘08 Steelers reference? None of their chips came from riding their offense or QB, evidenced by Rothy’s 0 total SB MVP’s. Although I will admit he drove them down against the Cards. He was pretty bad against the Seahawks. Ref’s gave them that one.
WWJHD?
He may have not read the whole thing?
That would be my guess.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
You mad, bro?
"Bears are crazy, Willie. They'll bite your head off if you're wearing steak on it."
by Blank x2 on Jan 11, 2012 6:49 AM PST via mobile up reply actions
I would love to work for ESPN.
talking out of your ass
I do that all the time. Almost constantly to be perfectly honest.
Joe, Jerry, Steve, and....Who is next?
If this article showed me anything its...
Every 3 years, a defensive team wins the super bowl. And it looks like the last one was the 2008 Steelers… LET’S GO NINERS
"Whoever said WAR is HELL must have been talking about Aaron Rowand" - McCoven faithful
You must've missed the part where we were 11th in scoring points.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
49ers are still...
a “defensive” team. The identity of this team is defense and special teams.
by David Fucillo on Jan 11, 2012 11:10 AM PST up reply actions
Wrong.
The identity of this team is playing as a team and doing what it takes in all facets to win. The offense has been pretty clutch when they have needed to as well.
The perception is “defensive team” but that is in fact NOT the identity.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
11th in scoring points is a lot better than some of those teams above that have won the Superbowl.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
Its definitely a defensive team. You cant win the field position battle without that beinh so.
The defense has provided the turnovers that put the offense in position to have that scoring avg. Definitely a defensive team, offense was clutch in 3 or 4 of the 13 wins.
"What the hell are you mixing in that look-aid"
I think we have a great defense. But I don't think it means that we are ONLY a "defensive teams"
Or that it is even our identity…. I think it’s a total team mentality… the defense helps the offense, the offense helps the defense and special teams helps both…
We have a kick ass defense… I think everyone knows it… but I don’t discount our offense ever. I learned that after watching the Eagles game.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
Are you kidding me?
Our defense is Elite (one of the greatest rushing defenses in NFL history, oh and overall this season). Our Special Teams, Elite (1st in the league). You can pick stats to make the O look good, but they had the best average starting position in the league. The D got more takeaways than any other team in the league, giving them more opportunities on a shorter field than nearly every other offense. But they are tied for 21st in TDs. , still had to keep kicking field goals. 52 attempts! 11 more than any other team. 9 from over 50 yards, only the Raiders attempted more (1 more).
The Offense is struggling. They are the weakest link. They are making strides and aren’t turning over the ball. But the identity of this team is the Defense and Special Teams. Period.
I do not agree with that.
I think that they are our strengths but not necessarily the “identity” as I have mentioned before.
The TEAM plays as a unit… if one is struggling the other one picks them up. The offense HAS bailed the defense out as well as the opposite.
Period.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
The Defense has played great all year, as has ST
There is a reason both are tops in the NFL. The exception may be in the final game. But I wouldn’t say the Offense has bailed the D out any other time than that. There have been times the Offense stepped up their game and actually produced, but to say they bailed out the D when they allowed an average 14 points a game is a stretch.
We do have a great TEAM. Noone is arguing that. But the O is the weakest squad on the team. Which is crazy, cause we have some great players on that squad. But it is what it is. And it is lead by the D and ST. The only argument that could justify otherwise, which you seem to be trying to make, is that there is no such thing as a defensive or offensive team. Because it is a team sport and all parts are equal. In that case, let’s agree to disagree. And that is a perspective thing, and not really the intent of this particular thread.
So the defense was playing great when the Eagles put up 24 and the offense had to come back?
That’s not the only instance that I can use too…
As I said, it’s a balanced team… people have this misconception that our offense is horrible and our defense is always setting them up at the oppositions 20 or something…and that’s just not the truth.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
I Disagree , this is a well rounded team that realise on ball control and efficentcy ...
… Dashon stated today that the big difference for this Defense is that the Offense is sustaning long drive , moving the Chains and giving the Defense less time on the field … Harbaugh did this same type of ball control Team at Stanford , this is by design …!!
I'm your " Huckelberry "...it's just my game ..( .AleX ) was asked , what do you think about all the game manager talk ... AleX i guess i just managed myself a VIctory ... Extend the Man ...!!
We're still a defensive team...
With a great special teams unit and a very efficient offense. Not sure what the debate is. It should something hat fans should embrace more given that the offense has improved all season, has been clutch in big games and has actually score TDs in 6 of the last 9 red zone attempts. On top of the act that we are elite in the other two phases.
by Panda4Niner on Jan 12, 2012 12:27 AM PST up reply actions
Yes and Qb is one of them ...!!
I'm your " Huckelberry "...it's just my game ..( .AleX ) was asked , what do you think about all the game manager talk ... AleX i guess i just managed myself a VIctory ... Extend the Man ...!!
I think the only team that is comparable to the Saints this year on that list is the 2006 Colts.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
...only
8th in takaways > 31st in take aways
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
pretty important when considering the field position that gives you.
Either the Saints offense is so good they don’t need defense, or they haven’t played any legit defenses.
WWJHD?
I would not say they've played all bad defenses... I think they have faced some so-so defenses.
But they have not faced a top 5 defense one time this year yet; or possibly even top 10 defenses.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
I guess the Titans have a "top 10 defense" but they nearly lost that game.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
They played the Texans , I think top Ten D ...!!
I'm your " Huckelberry "...it's just my game ..( .AleX ) was asked , what do you think about all the game manager talk ... AleX i guess i just managed myself a VIctory ... Extend the Man ...!!
We played Houston #2 defense
When they were completely healthy
by mississippisaintsfan on Jan 11, 2012 6:18 AM PST up reply actions
I know it's st my opinion, and there is some homerism in this, but...
SF defense > Houston defense
Not by a mile, but I think our defense is more complete and is just better than the Texans’ defense.
"Bears are crazy, Willie. They'll bite your head off if you're wearing steak on it."
by Blank x2 on Jan 11, 2012 6:52 AM PST via mobile up reply actions
#2 in what? That was the second game of the year and they went to your place and only lost by 7.
Btw… they finished 4th in allowing points… which is the most important stat for a defense… A team could give up all the yards inn the world but holding a team in points is what helps to win games.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
But turnovers are something that can change quickly.
The way the Colts started playing D in 2006 or the way Pitt started scoring in 2008 showed me that teams can pick it up in the post season. It doesn’t always happen but it can. I am sure there are more examples than just those two.
Joe, Jerry, Steve, and....Who is next?
it's hard to tell, because turnovers sometimes just happen in a 1 game scenario
I was kind of annoyed when Watt had that pick 6 against the Bengals as.. it was so random.. He’ll have maybe 1 of those for the rest of his career, but there was one.. in a playoff game, at a huge moment under 2 minutes in the 1st half..
Completely random. Of course it took skill. Without the skill it would have just been a batted down ball, but even with the skill, he might never have another pick 6 for the rest of his career.
Someone might fumble a snap, or a ball might take a weird bounce and hit someone in the back of the leg on a punt.. turnovers go a long way to deciding games, particularly when they directly result in a TD.
Draft: 1. Kendall Wright 2. Trumaine Johnson
FA: Smith, Morgan, Brooks, Rogers, Snyder
by whistlingmountain on Jan 11, 2012 8:02 AM PST up reply actions
You are so right.
In a single game anything can happen. Trends, stats, probability doesn’t matter.
This game could end in any fashion. Blowout by either (with a few turnovers or an injury) low scoring either team wins, high scoring either team wins, (a couple broken tackles or turnovers) you just never now.
I think we all have an idea what we think will happen. Trends and stats suggest one thing or another will happen. Certain types of games tend to favor one team over the other but in 1 game you never know.
Joe, Jerry, Steve, and....Who is next?
my general sentiment was that you're observing super bowl champs from the last few years
in a general way, but when you look closer you can see all kinds of teams just BARELY losing. I mean that Cardinals team that basically had no defense what-so-ever lost because of a 99 yard defensive TD to end the half and a then secondarily from a toe tapping full extension last second TD ( though the Steelers would have had 1 more play ).
Should that Cardinals team be included when looking at teams that can win the super bowl because they were so close that it’s hard to ignore that they lost on such massive randomness as a 99 yard defensive TD with no time on the clock to end the half? Does including them change anything? What about the Eagles, Panthers, and Rams teams that lost to the Patriots on game winning field goals with no time on the clock? What about the Patriots team that lost earlier in the playoffs to the Colts giving up a 21 point comeback when all they had to do was fall to the ground after an interception. What about the Patriots Samuel dropping a game winning interception followed by the helmet catch?
Randomness!
Draft: 1. Kendall Wright 2. Trumaine Johnson
FA: Smith, Morgan, Brooks, Rogers, Snyder
by whistlingmountain on Jan 11, 2012 8:17 AM PST up reply actions
I think the point and illustration was presented well enough to grasp the concept
that the teams who have won over the past 10 years have been a lot more balanced than their counter part. Sometimes, even if there are a few different variables and freak things that happen, the balanced team is going to prevail because they were doing both things well throughout the game.
That play in the SB that you reference in Harrison’s pick was indeed the game. But it was strategy on defense that allowed him to drop back and read Warner due to something they probably saw on film.
So to me, whoever is better prepared and more balanced always has the better chance…
I think that was the illustration being made. There is validity to it no matter how hard you try to discount it.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
I believe there is a little more involved here
You forgot the rule changes that have helped the offense and hurt the defense
If you even look at a QB in the pocket your hit better be perfect or it’s 15 yards
Cant hit a defenseless reciever gotta wait till he catches it
The refs are calling Pass interference
The refs are calling less holding on OLines
The nfl is trying to change the way the game is played and turn it into the Arena league
I guess this weekend is as good as it gets to see if Defense’s or offense’s win championships
- O v #1 D
by mississippisaintsfan on Jan 11, 2012 6:15 AM PST reply actions
There's no doubt offenses are more weighted
There’s more to it than just #1 D vs #1 O though
There’s really something to the whole “low scoring mentality” vs “high scoring mentality.” This is more a battle between those than #1 offense and defense.
The low scoring mentality focuses on eating clock, they’ll generally play on outdoors on grass, they won’t take many risks that might result in turnovers or many risks in general for incomplete passes that stop the clock. They play their defense back and force the opposing team to go on long drives then tighten up in the red zone to force field goals.
The high scoring mentality focuses on attacking at all times, on offense and defense. It’s a higher risk game because it tends to result in “longer” games with more plays and more opportunity for point swings. It has a much higher ceiling when thing go right, much higher. These teams are usually in doors on artificial turf ( no always, see the Pats ), they require an all-pro level QB to win the super bowl because super bowl runs end on 1 dud.
There’s often confusion on who the best defense is because we look at yards or points or whatever, but the best defense is usually the best good defense that has an offense willing to play complementary ball ( or incapable of doing anything other than complementary ball ).
The best offense is usually a team with a great QB that is willing to take a lot of risks.
This is why there’s no formula for winning the super bowl, because it’s a mix of teams playing some sort of consistent low risk ball and teams playing high risk ball. It’s practically random at this point. I don’t see how any level headed fan can look at what’s left in the playoffs and say that any of these games are really more than 2-1 odds, and the majority of them will basically be 50/50 games. Half of them will be decided by lucky bounces, tipped balls, lost footing.. They Patriots, Ravens, Packers, Saints, 49ers, and Giants are all good teams capable of winning the super bowl. The Broncos and Texans are both ok teams capable of upsetting the others in a 1 game scenario… Exactly what the NFL and fans want.. fans like uncertainty.
Draft: 1. Kendall Wright 2. Trumaine Johnson
FA: Smith, Morgan, Brooks, Rogers, Snyder
by whistlingmountain on Jan 11, 2012 7:32 AM PST up reply actions
I think I agree with much of this
This is the first year I remember (did not research it, so… take it with a grain of salt) having 1-4 in both conferences and being able to see just about all 8 teams able to make it. I would put the Broncos (who I support and follow) and the Texans at the bottom of the chances, but the other 6 have legit claims. I do think the Niners have the BEST overall shot with GB being second (being #1 seed and reigning champs and all…). Ugly things can happen in a short time. A slip here, a bad angle there, a turnover, and the game can be out of hand quickly. The Niners need to play good ball, but we are more than capable of it.
If I had to put my life on it, I'd still put it on the Packers
They’re at home, they have more talent than any other team, they have 1 of the 3 great QBs, they won it last year.
Pats and Ravens next, only because they play 1 less 50/50 game
then 49ers/Saints
then Giants
then Texans
…
then Broncos
Draft: 1. Kendall Wright 2. Trumaine Johnson
FA: Smith, Morgan, Brooks, Rogers, Snyder
by whistlingmountain on Jan 11, 2012 7:59 AM PST up reply actions
Before I started writing this post I would have agreed with you
and if the Packers can get hot on defense and get turnovers (which they are more than capable of doing) then they should win it all. If they can get turnovers then they are very similar to the 09 Saints.
However, if they can’t get turnovers I don’t think they will win it all and may not beat the Giants.
Joe, Jerry, Steve, and....Who is next?
Yea but don't those go hand in hand?
I mean, the Giants have an aggressive risk-taking offense. They had 4 games in the regular season without a turnover out of 16 and none of those 4 teams played such an aggressive turnover-causing defense like the Packers who have a TON of interceptions.
I’d say it’s a massive upset if the Packers don’t get at least 1 interception in the game.
It would be like saying, I don’t think the Saints can win if they only score 2 TDs. That’s all fine and well, but how many games did they only score 2 TDs in the season? 1?
Draft: 1. Kendall Wright 2. Trumaine Johnson
FA: Smith, Morgan, Brooks, Rogers, Snyder
by whistlingmountain on Jan 11, 2012 8:12 AM PST up reply actions
You are right.
You know what I had a brain lapse there for a second. I was thinking of the Saints this year who aren’t getting as many turnovers as 09.
You are right Packers have shown all season that they can get turnovers. It would be a big surprise if they stopped in the playoffs.
Joe, Jerry, Steve, and....Who is next?
Yes, but this isn't the first time the NFL has adjusted to increase offense
There have been many from the very beginning of professional football. At one time if a pass was incomplete then the other team took over at that spot like if it was a punt. That got changed. The ball becoming pointed at both ends. The hash marks got moved closer together. The 5 yard bump and run rule. There are many more.
The league has always adjusted to make it more offense friendly. This isn’t the first time that has happened. However, the teams that are the best at defense within the current rules tend to win more championships than the the teams that are the best at offense.
But really the point of my post was that to win a Super Bowl a team has to be good at both and probably special teams as well. They don’t necessarily have to be good at them both all year long but during the playoffs they need to be.
Joe, Jerry, Steve, and....Who is next?
I still think the biggest effect of the adjustment is that
now games have 14-20 more points. Even the bad offenses score more. So instead of 6-3 games, we have 13-10 games. Instead of 21-20 games, we have 31-27.
I would like to see the illegal contact and PI penalties changes ( the former more than the latter, but everyone else seems to think the opposite ). Just because I don’t like how weighted passing has become over running.
Draft: 1. Kendall Wright 2. Trumaine Johnson
FA: Smith, Morgan, Brooks, Rogers, Snyder
by whistlingmountain on Jan 11, 2012 8:06 AM PST up reply actions
I agree but I think that we are a dying breed.
I don’t like watching video game football. Football is the ultimate team sport and I like it that way.
And don’t get me wrong, I like scoring. I don’t want to go back to the days of the single wing and constant single digit scores.
I like it in that 17-27 points per game range. With some out liars of course. That way when the two best defensive teams play and it is 7-3 (1990 MNF game between 10-1 Giants and 10-1 49ers) that is exciting and when the occasional shootout happens that is also exciting.
Joe, Jerry, Steve, and....Who is next?
I just don't like that in those 7-3 games
that the game is now decided by which team can get a 50 yard pass interference penalty, or 3 first downs by illegal contact that happened somewhere that didn’t matter.
The 49ers Ravens game this year was a great example.
I feel like it matters less when say, the 49ers play the Giants or Saints. Because the 49ers are capable of putting up more points if required, they’ll just play at a higher tempo, but when the game comes down to whether a ref throws a 50 yard penalty on something that might not have been a penalty, might not have been caught anyway, that’s brutal.
When it’s 3rd and 15 and a guy away from the ball gets bumped 9 yards down field and it’s sometimes ignored, and sometimes a 1st down, that’s brutal.
The reason I don’t like the weight of passing vs running is because it’s completely devaluing certain types of players that give the game its strategic dynamic. Everyone is becoming faster and lighter, which not only results in a more similar strategy from week to week, but way more injuries.
Draft: 1. Kendall Wright 2. Trumaine Johnson
FA: Smith, Morgan, Brooks, Rogers, Snyder
by whistlingmountain on Jan 11, 2012 8:23 AM PST up reply actions
I agree with both of you...
It seems we see the “thrilling” shootout more and more because of rule changes that favor the pass over the run. Everyone likes to see a shootout once in a while, sure, and ratings go up and the money pours in like Niagara Falls. Unfortunately, when it becomes so common, they lose their appeal. I, like many others I know, would like to see a defense heavy game, where both offenses struggle to get down the field, once in a while, but the rules have changed to accomodate pass-heavy, high-scoring games, thus diminishing their effect. Some of these illegal contact and PI penalties have become so ridiculous you almost have to wonder if it’s a different game under the same name.
That said, I do believe, that with these offensive-friendly rule changes, a defense that can be dominant playing by rules that hinder it, well, that’s truly done something meaningful. An offense that puts up huge numbers when the rules facilitate it is not as impressive. Don’t get me wrong, I love the Saints and have a huge man-crush on Drew Brees, but I don’t believe he’d have the numbers he has today back in 1984.
"I don't suffer from drug addiction. I enjoy it very much."
by cajuncreation on Jan 11, 2012 12:15 PM PST up reply actions
Agreed 100% Roll Tide
Im a MS.State fan but I work around alot of LSU fans and they can be kind of a pain in the a**
excepicially when I was with them when they beat MS State
by mississippisaintsfan on Jan 11, 2012 8:48 AM PST up reply actions
Agree.
When LSU came to WVU, their players AND their fans were completely obnoxious douches.
I was so happy they were shut out in the national title game. Maybe not all of their fans, but the ones we experienced were classless.
"Bears are crazy, Willie. They'll bite your head off if you're wearing steak on it."
by Blank x2 on Jan 12, 2012 7:53 AM PST via mobile up reply actions
I think it all still comes down to "Any given Sunday/Saturday/Thursday/whatever day they are playing on"...
Sorry, but the cliche addage totally works. We all watch and support our teams almost religiously, and it’s all fine and dandy to track stats and look at game film and study trends, but when it comes right down to it – nobody truly knows who is gonna win. This is why Vegas and gambling sites have over/under.
Yeah, we have a “better defense” and yeah, the Saints have a “better offense”. But isn’t it all about how the defense and offense of each team actually executes? I mean we have all seen games over the past decade that one team has won the turnover battle and still lost the game. It boils down to who is executing and taking advantage of what they are given to win the game.
This is why people tune into and watch their favorite sport, because the uncertainty is killing you and you have to find out who is doing better on the field. We’re suckers for the underdogs, because that is our nature, but in the end we watch the games because it is entertaining and you don’t really know who is gonna win. Hope, wish, crunch numbers all you like – but it comes down to the execution of the game on the field.
I'll take the Saints' 3rd down defense against the Niners 3rd down offense
by BlackandGold4ever on Jan 11, 2012 10:55 AM PST reply actions
No its their 3rd down offense vs our 3rd down defense.
"What the hell are you mixing in that look-aid"
high percentage vs. very low percentage.
law of average tells me that they will convert some and we will stop some.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
The "when" is the key factor on Saturday
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
Simple Stat
Since 2000, 7 teams have won championships with a top 3 defense in terms of points allowed. Only 2 have won a championship with a top 3 offense.
Defense wins championships.
I love that we're drawing difinitive conclusions from a sample size of 7
and most of those 7 games were decided on the last possession.
Draft: 1. Kendall Wright 2. Trumaine Johnson
FA: Smith, Morgan, Brooks, Rogers, Snyder
by whistlingmountain on Jan 11, 2012 4:06 PM PST up reply actions
It's relative if the sample size of seven is over the past decades worth of SB's.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
It is a sample size of 10.
Seven to three is a notable difference.
Particularly when it's done in a decades worth of time.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
it's not decades of time
it’s just the modern decade because the rules are different
Draft: 1. Kendall Wright 2. Trumaine Johnson
FA: Smith, Morgan, Brooks, Rogers, Snyder
by whistlingmountain on Jan 12, 2012 4:41 AM PST up reply actions
No it isn't. Flip a coin 10 times.
10 times is nothing.
Look I’m not looking to denounce 16to80 or anything, I commend his effort. Takes time to write these things, but for statistical analysis that has some modicum of credence you’d have to show all the teams that made the playoffs. What if of the 120 teams to make the playoffs 70% fit the defensive mold and only 30% fit the offensive mold, then 7-3 is EXACTLY where it should be, what if that’s what the whole league was?
See what I mean?
Draft: 1. Kendall Wright 2. Trumaine Johnson
FA: Smith, Morgan, Brooks, Rogers, Snyder
by whistlingmountain on Jan 12, 2012 4:43 AM PST up reply actions
I get your point in adding context for playoff situation and putting substance behind those teams.
But the fact is that the teams have won those games in the past 10 years have had a certain formula… that formula was team football. Offense could not do it without defense, defense could not do it without offense… and special teams supported both. I think that has been the formula for winning for as long as the sport has been around.
The point being made was supported by the skeleton of the past decades worth of Superbowls and I get that… but to flesh it out more would have looked like a gigantic scroll. So I think he did a good enough job at illustrating the point he was trying to get across.
At this point you are just nitpicking the post.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
And most of those teams
were really well rounded teams. The Bucs and Ravens are the exceptions.
3 of those 7 teams you referenced had a top 10 offense to go with that top 3 defense. I know it isn’t top 3 but it is top 10 (that is really good). Another won of those 7 had a top 12 offense. And the 2008 Steelers got really hot in the playoffs and ranked 2nd in points scored during the playoffs.
I am not sure if you read the article but I stand by my point that I was trying to make. Well rounded teams usually win the Super Bowl. I only went back to 2000 but I am guessing that point would hold true historically.
Teams with bad anything don’t usually win Super Bowls. There are exceptions but they are the exception not the rule.
Joe, Jerry, Steve, and....Who is next?
So in your opinion, where does 11th in scoring stand?
Is that a “bad something”?
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
I would say no it isn't bad, it is good.
Not great.
But there is really only one thing that is preventing it from being great, RZ TD’s.
Personally I don’t think it would be a shock if the 49ers really improve on that in the post season. They were starting to improve at the end of the year. They have been working on it a lot. And the Saints gave up a TD on over 62% of their opponents RZ possessions this year (2nd worst in the league).
Joe, Jerry, Steve, and....Who is next?
You have got to know that Fangio has paired with Harbaugh to emulate the Saints defense
in the RZ with our 1st team defense…. And in watching the replay of the Saints/ Lions… there is a lot to be taken out there when it comes to our offense vs their defense.
Our defense vs their offense is going to be a HUGE deal in this game because I think our offense can get some points on their defense. I also don’t discount our ST’s in the possibility of scoring AND … our defense. We have the potential to score in 3 facet’s opposed to their 2 in offense and ST’s.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
Defense is what wins championships
Notice that a majority of those teams forced turnovers.
"Cruelty," Willis said. "It’s not giving another person what they want. That’s our mindset on defense, to go out and play with everything we have and not give the other team anything."
So wait, you made another long fanpost in which you’re sarcastic about the defense?
"And thank you to God for making me an Atheist." - Ricky Gervais
by MichaelClutchtree on Jan 12, 2012 8:55 AM PST reply actions
I am a one trick pony.
They were in response to different things and different types of articles. The title of this post is sarcastic but the entire post wasn’t.
My other post was in response to the overreaction at the end of the Rams game.
This article started as something that I just wanted to look into myself because of all the talk about this being the era of the offense and defense is dead.
And finally, if you have a problem with communication through the use of sarcasm then I am worried that you and I wont be able to develop the relationship I was hoping for. I communicate almost exclusively with sarcasm. I can’t even tell when I’m being sarcastic anymore. I still hope we can be friends though.
Joe, Jerry, Steve, and....Who is next?
by 16to80fan on Jan 12, 2012 11:28 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
The point of the post was that team football wins championships.
The title was sarcastic…
I am pretty sure your comment was just as sarcastic but you never know.
Check out my site!! Sign up for a free account @
The Hometown Fan
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Niners Nation
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Shutdown Corner - NFL - Yahoo! Sports
- Former high-school star Brian Banks does serious time on trumped-up charge, now hopes for an NFL shot
- Former ‘idiot kicker’ Mike Vanderjagt in trouble after accosting junior-high heckler
- Adrian Peterson blows teammates away in footraces; appears to be on the mend
- UPDATE: Charlie Sheen didn’t buy Lawrence Taylor’s Super Bowl ring
- Alex Smith gets blown up by Jon Beason over Cam Newton comments
