obi1
16 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
16 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
16 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
16 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
16 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
16 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
16 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
16 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
16 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
16 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.
Fan Shout
Zero2Cool (15h) : Patriots / Panthers feeling is what I got. didn't watch that one either
Zero2Cool (15h) : Easier to get a camera on her in the suite where she can't impact the game by being distraction???
TheKanataThrilla (15h) : This is the least excited I have been in a long time for a Super Bowl. Unfortunately they both can't lose.
wpr (15h) : So why don;'t they have her on the sidelines and doing the halftime fandango instead of sitting on her but in a $1,000,000 suite?
Zero2Cool (16h) : Think more eyes on Super Bowl with Swift fans pulling for her TE boyfriend?
Zero2Cool (16h) : She dating the TE of the Chiefs.
Zero2Cool (16h) : Taylor Swift has millions of fans, yeah?
Zero2Cool (17h) : They did. They are going to show the post production Sunday with plethora of ads.
wpr (5-Feb) : I thought KC already won
Zero2Cool (4-Feb) : If you wanna post about the Super Bowl, please, by all means, open a topic. They are free this month! 😁
Zero2Cool (4-Feb) : There doesn't need to be a topic. There's a playoff prediction thread.
packerfanoutwest (4-Feb) : and there no SB contest over in the other Packer forum, either
buckeyepackfan (4-Feb) : #2Officially Retires!
beast (4-Feb) : Probably no SB topic as people are wore out talking about the Chiefs, Refs and Eagles
Zero2Cool (4-Feb) : Packers reportedly have their new LB coach, promoting Sean Duggan to that role
Zero2Cool (4-Feb) : WR Cooper Kupp is being traded.
packerfanoutwest (4-Feb) : why is there no SB Prediction topic?
Zero2Cool (3-Feb) : Anthony Perkins spent 2024 as a defensive quality-control coach with the Packers.
Zero2Cool (3-Feb) : Packers lose another assistant.
Zero2Cool (3-Feb) : Defensive Player of the Year and Browns star Myles Garrett has requested a trade.
Zero2Cool (3-Feb) : deleted all my browser history and autofill and passwords. gonna be fun!
packerfanoutwest (3-Feb) : too funny
packerfanoutwest (3-Feb) : Lions QB Jared Goff was the offensive MVP
packerfanoutwest (3-Feb) : for the Pro Bowl, which is flag football
Zero2Cool (2-Feb) : Rather, the murder WAS covered up to prevent ...
Zero2Cool (2-Feb) : JFK murder was a cover-up to prevent war with Cuba/Russia.
Martha Careful (1-Feb) : I have always admired the pluck of the man
Zero2Cool (1-Feb) : I remember thinking he was going to be something good.
Mucky Tundra (1-Feb) : The Dualing Banjo!
Zero2Cool (31-Jan) : Jets have named Chris Banjo as their special teams coordinator, Former Packers player
Zero2Cool (31-Jan) : Jaguars have hired Anthony Campanile as their DC. We lose coach
Zero2Cool (30-Jan) : QB coach Sean Mannion
Zero2Cool (30-Jan) : DL Coach DeMarcus Covington
dfosterf (30-Jan) : from ft Belvoir, Quantico and points south. Somber reminder of this tragedy at Reagan Nat Airport
dfosterf (30-Jan) : So eerily quiet here in Alexandria. I live in the flight path of commercial craft coming from the south and west, plus the military craft
dfosterf (30-Jan) : So eeri
Mucky Tundra (30-Jan) : Now that's a thought, maybe they're looking at the college ranks? Maybe not head coaches but DC/assistant DCs with league experience?
beast (30-Jan) : College Coaches wouldn't want that publicly, as it would hurt recruiting and they might not get the job.
beast (30-Jan) : I thought they were supposed to publicly announce them, at least the NFL ones. Hafley was from college, so I believe different rules.
Mucky Tundra (30-Jan) : Who knows who they're interviewing? I mean, nobody knew about Hafley and then out of nowhere he was hired
beast (30-Jan) : I wonder what's taking so long with hiring a DL coach, 2 of the 3 known to interview have already been hired elsewhere.
Zero2Cool (27-Jan) : Packers coach Matt LaFleur hires Luke Getsy as senior assistant, extends Rich Bisaccia's deal
Zero2Cool (27-Jan) : Chiefs again huh? I guess another Super Bowl I'll be finding something else to do.
Mucky Tundra (27-Jan) : Chiefs Eagles...again...sigh
dfosterf (27-Jan) : Happy Birthday Dave!
Mucky Tundra (27-Jan) : happy birthday dhazer
TheKanataThrilla (26-Jan) : Exactly buck...Washington came up with the ball. It is just a shitty coincidence one week later
buckeyepackfan (26-Jan) : I forgot, they corrected the call a week later. Lol btw HAPPY BIRTHDAY dhazer!
buckeyepackfan (26-Jan) : That brings up the question, why wasn't Nixon down by contact? I think that was the point Kanata was making.
buckeyepackfan (26-Jan) : Turnovers rule, win the turnover battle, win the game.
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2024 Packers Schedule
Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM
Eagles
Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM
COLTS
Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM
Titans
Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM
Rams
Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM
CARDINALS
Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM
TEXANS
Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM
Jaguars
Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM
LIONS
Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM
Bears
Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM
49ERS
Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM
DOLPHINS
Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM
Lions
Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM
Seahawks
Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM
SAINTS
Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM
Vikings
Sunday, Jan 5 @ 12:00 PM
BEARS
Sunday, Jan 12 @ 3:30 PM
Eagles
Recent Topics
8m / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

4-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

4-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

4-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

4-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / earthquake

4-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / earthquake

1-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

1-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

29-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

27-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

25-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

25-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

25-Jan / Random Babble / Martha Careful

20-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

20-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

Headlines
Copyright © 2006 - 2025 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.