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. ๐Ÿ‡น๐Ÿ‡น ๐Ÿ‡ฒ๐Ÿ‡ฒ ๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡ท
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. ๐Ÿ‡น๐Ÿ‡น ๐Ÿ‡ฒ๐Ÿ‡ฒ ๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡ท
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 (1h) : Merry Christmas!
beast (9h) : Merry Christmas ๐ŸŽ„๐ŸŽ
beast (17h) : Sounds like no serious injuries from the Saints game and Jacobs and Watson should play in the Vikings game
packerfanoutwest (22h) : both games Watson missed, Packers won
Martha Careful (24-Dec) : I hope all of you have a Merry Christmas!
Mucky Tundra (24-Dec) : Oh I know about Jacobs, I just couldn't pass up an opportunity to mimic Zero lol
buckeyepackfan (24-Dec) : Jacobs was just sat down, Watson re-injured that knee that kept him out 1 game earlier
buckeyepackfan (24-Dec) : I needed .14 that's. .14 points for the whole 4th quarter to win and go to the SB. Lol
Mucky Tundra (24-Dec) : Jacobs gonna be OK???
Zero2Cool (24-Dec) : Watson gonna be OK???
packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : Inactives tonight for the Pack: Alexander- knee Bullard - ankle Williams - quad Walker -ankle Monk Heath
packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : No Jaire, but hopefully the front 7 destroys the line of scrimmage & forces Rattler into a few passes to McKinney.
packerfanoutwest (24-Dec) : minny could be #1 seed and the Lions #5 seed
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : We'd have same Division and Conference records. Strength of schedule we edge them
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I just checked. What tie breaker?
bboystyle (23-Dec) : yes its possible but unlikely. If we do get the 5th, we face the NFCS winner
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Ahh, ok.
bboystyle (23-Dec) : yes due to tie breaker
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I mean, unlikely, yes, but mathematically, 5th is possible by what I'm reading.
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : If Vikings lose out, Packers win out, Packers get 5th, right?
bboystyle (23-Dec) : Minny isnt going to lose out so 5th seed is out of the equation. We are playing for the 6th or 7th seed which makes no difference
Mucky Tundra (23-Dec) : beast, the ad revenue goes to the broadcast company but they gotta pay to air the game on their channel/network
beast (23-Dec) : If we win tonight the game is still relative in terms of 5th, 6th or 7th seed... win and it's 5th or 6th, lose and it's 6th or 7th
beast (23-Dec) : Mucky, I thought the ad revenue went to the broadcasting companies or the NFL, at least not directly
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I think the revenue share is moot, isn't it? That's the CBA an Salary Cap handling that.
bboystyle (23-Dec) : i mean game becomes irrelevant if we win tonight. Just a game where we are trying to play spoilers to Vikings chance at the #1 seed
Mucky Tundra (23-Dec) : beast, I would guess ad revenue from more eyes watching tv
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I would think it would hurt the home team because people would have to cancel last minute maybe? i dunno
beast (23-Dec) : I agree that it's BS for fans planning on going to the game. But how does it bring in more money? I'm guessing indirectly?
packerfanoutwest (23-Dec) : bs on flexing the game....they do it for the $$league$$, not the hometown fans
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I see what you did there Mucky
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : dammit. 3:25pm
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Packers Vikings flexed to 3:35pm
Mucky Tundra (23-Dec) : Upon receiving the news about Luke Musgrave, I immediately fell to the ground
Mucky Tundra (23-Dec) : Yeah baby!
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : LUKE MUSGRAVE PLAYING TONIGHT~!~~~~WOWHOAAOHAOAA yah
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I wanna kill new QB's ... blitz the crap out of them.
beast (23-Dec) : Barry seemed to get too conservative against new QBs, Hafley doesn't have that issue
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : However, we seem to struggle vs new QB's
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Should be moot point, cuz Packers should win tonight.
packerfanoutwest (23-Dec) : ok I stand corrected
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Ok, yes, you are right. I see that now how they get 7th
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : 5th - Packers win out, Vikings lose out. Maybe?
beast (23-Dec) : Saying no to the 6th lock.
beast (23-Dec) : No, with the Commanders beating the Eagles, Packers could have a good chance of 6th or 7th unless the win out
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I think if Packers win, they are locked 6th with chance for 5th.
beast (23-Dec) : But it doesn't matter, as the Packers win surely win one of their remaining games
beast (23-Dec) : This is not complex, just someone doesn't want to believe reality
beast (23-Dec) : We already have told you... if Packers lose all their games (they won't, but if they did), and Buccaneers and Falcons win all theirs
Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I posted it in that Packers and 1 seed thread
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
Saturday, Jan 4 @ 11:00 PM
BEARS
Recent Topics
9h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

9h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

13h / GameDay Threads / bboystyle

18h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

20h / Random Babble / beast

24-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

23-Dec / Random Babble / Martha Careful

22-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / packerfanoutwest

19-Dec / Random Babble / Zero2Cool

18-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

17-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

17-Dec / Featured Content / Zero2Cool

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

Headlines
Copyright ยฉ 2006 - 2024 PackersHome.comโ„ข. All Rights Reserved.