obi1
15 years ago

The best case scenario is to have a top defense... Of course the old addage, "If you don't get scored on, you can't lose..." applies here.

However, how many times have you heard "It's better to be lucky than good"... I noticed on the list, ALL of the superbowl winning teams seem to have a very good defense except for last couple of years, but several teams with not as good offenses have won the superbowl...

So I'd say defense first.

"WhiskeySam" wrote:



You misread the list then. The majority of the teams in Zombie's list had offenses and defenses in the top 10, and of those the majority had a higher offensive ranking than defensive. Great D, greater O.

"obi1" wrote:



NO, I didn't.

Look at the Ravens, Bucs and the Pats. Their offensive stats weren't too impressive yet they all won the superbowl. Their defenses were top notch.

Other than the last 2 years, Just about EVERY superbowl Champion had stellar defenses... Mind you, they all had great offenses as well, but, The 3 teams I mentioned above did win w/o a stellar offense.
However, There is not a case of the great offensive team who won the superbowl with a mediocre defense... Other than the Giants and the Colts... LAST 2 years.

We also can't really count the Giants because they got VERY hot at the end for the superbowl and rode the momentum throughout teh playoffs.

One more thing, of all the points that the team was credited for in this list, how many of the points scored came by the way of returns/defense?

"WhiskeySam" wrote:



It's simple math. Count how many teams that won the Super Bowl had an offensive ranking higher than their defensive ranking. It's 11-6 in favor of a higher ranked offense.

"obi1" wrote:



I STILL don't understand how you say that I misread the list. IF I did, you are not getting my point.

I simply pointed out that before the last year or two, there were several teams who's mediocre offenses were made up by stellar defenses.
I understand YOUR point. Don't think I didn't get it because I noticed the same stat that YOU pointed out right away.

However, a team that is 1st on offense and 5th on defense would not be considered to have a MEDIOCRE defense where a tea that has a 14th rated offense with a 1st rate defense could be considered mediocre offense.

That was what I based my theory on...
blank
WhiskeySam
15 years ago
That's all well and good except the majority of the time their offenses are better than their defenses. That leads to the conclusion that in general balanced teams win titles, and of those balanced teams, the majority were better offensively than defensively relative to the rest of the league. I believe that was option C and pretty close to Packnic's original post.
Nemo me impune lacessit
zombieslayer
15 years ago



If Zombie used the official ranks it includes all scores because the NFL game book does not differentiate between an "offensive" and "defensive" score as any team in posession of the ball is defined as being the offense. This might be why many rankings are based on yards allowed/gained instead of points.

Edit: by that same token points allowed includes any int, fumbles, or returns for TDs or safeties taken AGAINST your team so it should even out.

"WhiskeySam" wrote:



I use points for very simple reasons. I think yards is all bull. A lot of yardage is deceptive - garbage yardage after they're down by 20 points and their opponent goes to prevent D.

The other thing, I've seen a lot of games where the QB throws for 300+ yards, the RB runs for 100+ yards, and they still lose because they're kicking field goals or turning the ball over but the other team is in the end zone.

Points are real. They're what win games. Yards do not win games. They just help your fantasy team.
My man Donald Driver
UserPostedImage
(thanks to Pack93z for the pic)
2010 will be seen as the beginning of the new Packers dynasty. 🇹🇹 🇲🇲 🇦🇷
zombieslayer
15 years ago



It's simple math. Count how many teams that won the Super Bowl had an offensive ranking higher than their defensive ranking. It's 11-6 in favor of a higher ranked offense.

"WhiskeySam" wrote:



Bingo!
+1
My man Donald Driver
UserPostedImage
(thanks to Pack93z for the pic)
2010 will be seen as the beginning of the new Packers dynasty. 🇹🇹 🇲🇲 🇦🇷
beast
15 years ago
Shut down the other team.

I don't like the Bears but I like how they play with

Shut down the other teams offense with great defense

Get very good yardage with STs

And a solid QB that won't turn over the ball much but still make some plays and run the ball down the other teams throat.
UserPostedImage
beast
15 years ago



It's simple math. Count how many teams that won the Super Bowl had an offensive ranking higher than their defensive ranking. It's 11-6 in favor of a higher ranked offense.

"WhiskeySam" wrote:



:eeeek: Wait there has only been 17 Super Bowls?

And here I thought there were 42 Super Bowls already.
UserPostedImage
WhiskeySam
15 years ago



It's simple math. Count how many teams that won the Super Bowl had an offensive ranking higher than their defensive ranking. It's 11-6 in favor of a higher ranked offense.

"beast" wrote:



:eeeek: Wait there has only been 17 Super Bowls?

And here I thought there were 42 Super Bowls already.

"WhiskeySam" wrote:



We're referring to Zombie's list of Super Bowl winners going back to 1987.
Nemo me impune lacessit
wpr
  • wpr
  • Preferred Member
15 years ago



If Zombie used the official ranks it includes all scores because the NFL game book does not differentiate between an "offensive" and "defensive" score as any team in posession of the ball is defined as being the offense. This might be why many rankings are based on yards allowed/gained instead of points.

Edit: by that same token points allowed includes any int, fumbles, or returns for TDs or safeties taken AGAINST your team so it should even out.

"zombieslayer" wrote:



I use points for very simple reasons. I think yards is all bull. A lot of yardage is deceptive - garbage yardage after they're down by 20 points and their opponent goes to prevent D.

The other thing, I've seen a lot of games where the QB throws for 300+ yards, the RB runs for 100+ yards, and they still lose because they're kicking field goals or turning the ball over but the other team is in the end zone.

Points are real. They're what win games. Yards do not win games. They just help your fantasy team.

"WhiskeySam" wrote:



So many posts to reply to and so little time. Here goes...

All stats can be misleading. There have been plenty of teams that got their points come from their great defense. 85 Bears was just one example. If the offense only has to go 30-50 yards for a TD if really makes a big difference. We have all seen games that a team wins and all the points came from either defensive TDs or special teams returns.

There is no reason to assume just because your defense gets a lot of turnovers that your offense is going to give up a lot of turnovers as well. Those things do not "even out" over the course of a season. Take a look at the turnover +/-margins. The teams with the best records tend to win the turnover battle. Thus skewing the points scored for their team's offense.

It is funny to watch so many people chose option "C". That was not a choice. Who would not want the #1 ranked offense and Defense? Ok besides the Lions? It is like asking someone do you want incredible good looks or a boatload of cash and they say "Both." We already knew that. Now choose one of the options that is available. Don't wimp out. Make a real decision people.

It is not shocker that the teams that win the SB have balanced games. It would not matter if you had the #1 ranked offense OR defense if your team was also last on the other side of the ball &/or was extremely weak on special teams.
Those of us that have favored having a stud defense are saying that IF your offense is only an average offense and they (the defense limits the opponent to a lot of 3 and outs, your offense will have more opportunities to score. Your team will be in better field position. Your defense, come crunch time, will be more rested than the other teams defense who spent longer periods of time on the field. Case in point is to look at how many winning teams have better running games in the 4th Qtr. If your offense has been out there for most of the game so has the other guy's defense and those big boys are getting a bit tired. Winning teams can run the ball successfully even though the other team knows you are going to run the ball but they just can't stop you. (Packers teams from the 60's).
Other other side, if you have a high powered offense you may well score in 3-6 plays and then it is your defense that is right back out there again trying to stop the other teams offense. Some times it works other times it does not.

One thing that I do not think was mentioned in the post was that the rules in the NFL today are slanted to the offense. Every time the defenses get better the rules committee changes things a bit in order to juice the scoring back up. In reality and over the long haul, the high powered offense will find a way to beat the high powered defenses if for no other reason than the owners make it harder for the defense to do their job. I just find it more thrilling to watch a defense flex their muscles and smash the RB who is trying to get back to the line of scrimmage and get the QB running for his life.
UserPostedImage
WhiskeySam
15 years ago



If Zombie used the official ranks it includes all scores because the NFL game book does not differentiate between an "offensive" and "defensive" score as any team in posession of the ball is defined as being the offense. This might be why many rankings are based on yards allowed/gained instead of points.

Edit: by that same token points allowed includes any int, fumbles, or returns for TDs or safeties taken AGAINST your team so it should even out.

"wpr" wrote:



I use points for very simple reasons. I think yards is all bull. A lot of yardage is deceptive - garbage yardage after they're down by 20 points and their opponent goes to prevent D.

The other thing, I've seen a lot of games where the QB throws for 300+ yards, the RB runs for 100+ yards, and they still lose because they're kicking field goals or turning the ball over but the other team is in the end zone.

Points are real. They're what win games. Yards do not win games. They just help your fantasy team.

"zombieslayer" wrote:



So many posts to reply to and so little time. Here goes...

All stats can be misleading. There have been plenty of teams that got their points come from their great defense. 85 Bears was just one example. If the offense only has to go 30-50 yards for a TD if really makes a big difference. We have all seen games that a team wins and all the points came from either defensive TDs or special teams returns.

There is no reason to assume just because your defense gets a lot of turnovers that your offense is going to give up a lot of turnovers as well. Those things do not "even out" over the course of a season. Take a look at the turnover +/-margins. The teams with the best records tend to win the turnover battle. Thus skewing the points scored for their team's offense.

It is funny to watch so many people chose option "C". That was not a choice. Who would not want the #1 ranked offense and Defense? Ok besides the Lions? It is like asking someone do you want incredible good looks or a boatload of cash and they say "Both." We already knew that. Now choose one of the options that is available. Don't wimp out. Make a real decision people.

It is not shocker that the teams that win the SB have balanced games. It would not matter if you had the #1 ranked offense OR defense if your team was also last on the other side of the ball &/or was extremely weak on special teams.
Those of us that have favored having a stud defense are saying that IF your offense is only an average offense and they (the defense limits the opponent to a lot of 3 and outs, your offense will have more opportunities to score. Your team will be in better field position. Your defense, come crunch time, will be more rested than the other teams defense who spent longer periods of time on the field. Case in point is to look at how many winning teams have better running games in the 4th Qtr. If your offense has been out there for most of the game so has the other guy's defense and those big boys are getting a bit tired. Winning teams can run the ball successfully even though the other team knows you are going to run the ball but they just can't stop you. (Packers teams from the 60's).
Other other side, if you have a high powered offense you may well score in 3-6 plays and then it is your defense that is right back out there again trying to stop the other teams offense. Some times it works other times it does not.

One thing that I do not think was mentioned in the post was that the rules in the NFL today are slanted to the offense. Every time the defenses get better the rules committee changes things a bit in order to juice the scoring back up. In reality and over the long haul, the high powered offense will find a way to beat the high powered defenses if for no other reason than the owners make it harder for the defense to do their job. I just find it more thrilling to watch a defense flex their muscles and smash the RB who is trying to get back to the line of scrimmage and get the QB running for his life.

"WhiskeySam" wrote:



It's not turnover margin that evens out, it's turnovers and returns for scores. Slightly different stat.
Nemo me impune lacessit
porky88
15 years ago



It's simple math. Count how many teams that won the Super Bowl had an offensive ranking higher than their defensive ranking. It's 11-6 in favor of a higher ranked offense.

"zombieslayer" wrote:



Bingo!
+1

"WhiskeySam" wrote:



I would argue that teams with good defenses benefits and helps the offense more than vice versa. Considering they benefit from turnovers and field position. Good offenses benefit defenses how? By giving them a big point lead, but in the end if they already have a good defense that doesn't allow many points, then the lead is kind of a wash in the end.

Of course this backs up the theory that having both is probably the best. :thumbright:

My point is you can throw stats out all you want, but let's be honest.

Giants playoff run was fantastic because of their defense and Eli Manning's play.

Colts playoff run resulted in two wins that you have to chalk up to their defensive play. That being Chiefs and Ravens.

Steelers playoff run was the result of a fantastic defense and quite frankly, good coaching.

Patriots won with Brady and a good defense.

Buccaneers won with a good defense.

Ravens won with a good defense.

Rams won with their high powered offense, but their defense was also a takeaway machine.

Denver was more so John Elway and their running game.

96 Packers I fine tough to figure out actually. You can argue Brett Favre, but the defense and special teams were outstanding.

Cowboys won with a running game and great defense. Troy Aikman only threw more than 20 touchdown passes one time in his entire career.

49ers of Walsh and Redskins of Gibbs were basically offense in my opinion.

Giants of Parcells did it with defense.

85 Bears did it with defense.

You can fine examples for both, but the saying offenses wins game and defenses win championships kind of comes into play.

The offense will get you to the post season, but the defense wll win for you in the post season.
Similar Topics
Users browsing this topic
    Fan Shout
    dhazer (3m) : wow the last 2 picks are really stupid and probably will be special teams players Top 10 draft pick next year book it
    TheKanataThrilla (46m) : I think he ended up with a terrible RAS score
    dhazer (49m) : Anyone know what went on with Kitchens from Florida? At 1 point he was to be the Packers 1st round and he is way down the board now
    Martha Careful (16h) : Z, could you please combine my thread with yours please. I obviously did not see it when I Created it
    Martha Careful (19h) : Re: 'Kool-Aid' McKinstry. Other than Icky Woods, has there ever been a good NFLer with a childish nickname?
    Martha Careful (21h) : Packers looking to trade up
    Martha Careful (23h) : Flag?
    Martha Careful (23h) : Sag?
    Nonstopdrivel (26-Apr) : It rhymes with "bag."
    beast (26-Apr) : Family? That's Deadpool's F word
    Nonstopdrivel (26-Apr) : Not THAT f-word.
    Zero2Cool (26-Apr) : fuck
    beast (25-Apr) : 49ers are Cap Tight
    beast (25-Apr) : Fuck
    Mucky Tundra (25-Apr) : Kanata, I will be when I'm on my lunch later
    TheKanataThrilla (25-Apr) : Love you NSD
    Nonstopdrivel (25-Apr) : Huh. I guess the F-word is censored in this fan shout.
    Nonstopdrivel (25-Apr) : Anyone who doesn't hang out in the chat probably smokes pole.
    TheKanataThrilla (25-Apr) : GoPackGo Thinking CB is the pick tonight
    TheKanataThrilla (25-Apr) : Anyone hanging out in the chat tonight?
    Zero2Cool (25-Apr) : whoa...49ers have had trade conversations about both Deebo Samuel and Brandon Aiyuk
    Zero2Cool (25-Apr) : I hope they take a Punter at 9th overall. Be bold!
    Mucky Tundra (25-Apr) : I may end up eating those words but I think they need a lot more talent then their 4 picks can provide
    Mucky Tundra (25-Apr) : I really hope they stand pat and Draft a WR
    Mucky Tundra (25-Apr) : @DMRussini
    Mucky Tundra (25-Apr) : The Chicago Bears are very open for business at 9 and telling teams they are ready to move for the right price, per source
    buckeyepackfan (24-Apr) : Lions extend Penei Soul 4yrs - 112mil
    buckeyepackfan (24-Apr) : Lions extend St. Brown 4 years 120mil and
    Mucky Tundra (24-Apr) : Now look, trading up to 13 to take a TE might not seem like a good idea later but it will be later!
    dfosterf (24-Apr) : (Your trade up mock post)
    dfosterf (24-Apr) : Mucky- The only thing fun to watch would be me flipping the f out if Gute goes up to 13 and grabs Brock Bowers, lol
    beast (24-Apr) : DT Byron Murphy II, Texas... whom some believe is the next Aaron Donald (or the closest thing to Donald)
    Zero2Cool (24-Apr) : What? And who?
    Mucky Tundra (24-Apr) : *sad Mucky noises*
    Mucky Tundra (24-Apr) : @JoeJHoyt Murphy said he’s been told he won’t slide past pick No. 16.
    wpr (23-Apr) : Just about time to watch Sonny Weaver stick it to the seahags. I never get tired of it.
    Martha Careful (23-Apr) : *game plan
    Martha Careful (23-Apr) : IMHO, not even close. He is not a guy you game play around.
    Mucky Tundra (23-Apr) : is Aiyuk worth a 1st rounder?
    Zero2Cool (23-Apr) : 49ers are seeking a 1st round pick in exchange for WR Brandon Aiyuk
    Mucky Tundra (22-Apr) : Based on Gutes comments, now I don't feel as silly having 13 picks in my mock the other day
    Zero2Cool (22-Apr) : Zach Wilson to Broncos.
    Zero2Cool (22-Apr) : Gutekunst says he'd love to have 13 or 14 picks. He's trading back huh lol
    beast (22-Apr) : Someday we'll have a draft betting scandal
    beast (21-Apr) : Sometimes looking extremely amazing, sometimes looking extremely lost
    beast (21-Apr) : I haven't looked into the QBs, but some have suggested Maye has some of the most extremely inconsistent tape they've seen
    beast (21-Apr) : Well it also sounds like Patriots are listening to trade offers, not that seriously considering any, but listening means they aren't locked
    Zero2Cool (21-Apr) : Maye needs to be AFC
    Mucky Tundra (21-Apr) : Not liking the idea of the Vikings getting Maye
    Zero2Cool (21-Apr) : Vikings HC joked that he may or may not have sent flowers to Bob Kraft. That's where rumor came from.
    Please sign in to use Fan Shout
    2023 Packers Schedule
    Sunday, Sep 10 @ 3:25 PM
    Bears
    Sunday, Sep 17 @ 12:00 PM
    Falcons
    Sunday, Sep 24 @ 12:00 PM
    SAINTS
    Thursday, Sep 28 @ 7:15 PM
    LIONS
    Monday, Oct 9 @ 7:15 PM
    Raiders
    Sunday, Oct 22 @ 3:25 PM
    Broncos
    Sunday, Oct 29 @ 12:00 PM
    VIKINGS
    Sunday, Nov 5 @ 12:00 PM
    RAMS
    Sunday, Nov 12 @ 12:00 PM
    Steelers
    Sunday, Nov 19 @ 12:00 PM
    CHARGERS
    Thursday, Nov 23 @ 11:30 AM
    Lions
    Sunday, Dec 3 @ 7:20 PM
    CHIEFS
    Monday, Dec 11 @ 7:15 PM
    Giants
    Sunday, Dec 17 @ 12:00 PM
    BUCCANEERS
    Sunday, Dec 24 @ 12:00 PM
    Panthers
    Sunday, Dec 31 @ 7:20 PM
    Vikings
    Sunday, Jan 7 @ 3:25 PM
    BEARS
    Sunday, Jan 14 @ 3:30 PM
    Cowboys
    Saturday, Jan 20 @ 7:15 PM
    49ers
    Recent Topics
    37m / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    39m / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

    4h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Nonstopdrivel

    8h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

    9h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

    10h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

    16h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

    20h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    20h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    26-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

    26-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Nonstopdrivel

    25-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    25-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / buckeyepackfan

    25-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

    24-Apr / Random Babble / beast

    Headlines
    Copyright © 2006 - 2024 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.