D
Deleted member 6794
Guest
The Chiefs have more of an elite D than you would like to think imho.
Well, the Chiefs featured an average defense during the regular season and really didn't perform at an elite level in the playoffs either.
The Chiefs have more of an elite D than you would like to think imho.
they sure did in the Super Bowl.Well, the Chiefs featured an average defense during the regular season and really didn't perform at an elite level in the playoffs either.
The Chiefs allowed the Eagles 11 points in the second half, with the game on the line. That's a pretty good D and/or players who know how to bring it with the title on the line.The Chiefs have more of an elite D than you would like to think imho.
Agreed. It's naive to think they would have won the SB w/o that defense. Gotta give em credit.they sure did in the Super Bowl.
Actually, yes. Put another way, I believed the Chiefs would win. And yeah, in fairness, that D gave up 24 1H points and had about 10 mins. TOP. It was a game of two very different halves. When they needed to though, when the pressure was highest, the Chiefs were the better team.THAT Defense gave up 35 pts. Are you saying you expected KC to score more than 35 on the Philly defense?
they sure did in the Super Bowl.
A single game can decide a championship, but the level of play in that one game does not determine the true ability of a team's capability. There's a reason there are so few perfect, and nearly perfect records, for a season. If you're intent on making it about one game, none of them really succeed unless they win every game during the entire season, and nobody crosses a threshold a person determines is acceptable for their defense.I'm sorry, but I definitely don't consider a defense that gave up 35 points in a game as having played at an elite level.
The KC Defense allowed 22.2 points per game across 20 contests. That’s definitely not elite. If anyone was elite it was their Offense, with over 7,000 yards and 29.34 pts per game across those 20 contests.The Chiefs have more of an elite D than you would like to think imho.
IMO. Here is the problem with a lot of comments on here. People do not have time to read everything. He was specifically responding to a post that stated the Chiefs defense played elite in the SB. Therefore it is an appropriate response to single out that 1 game. IMO.
A single game can decide a championship, but the level of play in that one game does not determine the true ability of a team's capability. There's a reason there are so few perfect, and nearly perfect records, for a season. If you're intent on making it about one game, none of them really succeed unless they win every game during the entire season, and nobody crosses a threshold a person determines is acceptable for their defense.
Agreed. I think some people misinterpreted what you said. The KC defense was only average over the course of the year, and that was only because their offense was so potent that they were able to force a lot of teams to take to the air. Even, when saying their offense was so good, that's another point. They were pretty good, but had some flaws as well. They could end up relying on Mahomes arm way too often.As others have pointed out I was replying to another poster claiming the Chiefs defense performed at an elite level in the Super Bowl.
In addition their defense wasn't elite over the course of the entire season either.
Yeah A 38-35 SB wasn't decided by the D, it was decided essentially by which team had the ball last (I know, technically that was Philly, but with 4 seconds). The KC D did step up in the second half, allowing only 11 points. A little surprising considering 1H TOP favored Philly 20/10.Agreed. I think some people misinterpreted what you said. The KC defense was only average over the course of the year, and that was only because their offense was so potent that they were able to force a lot of teams to take to the air. Even, when saying their offense was so good, that's another point. They were pretty good, but had some flaws as well. They could end up relying on Mahomes arm way too often.
I haven’t added in the last several seasons, but the SB teams up until about 5 years ago did favor the D very slightly. At that point the SB Defenses in Scoring and rounded to the nearest whole number were #7 (6.8 etc) whereas the Offenses averaged just over #8 ranking (8.1). I did not use the ST rankings but oddly, that might factor nicely as a tie breaker. We have all witnessed how a great Return specialist can turn the tide pretty quickly.Yeah A 38-35 SB wasn't decided by the D, it was decided essentially by which team had the ball last (I know, technically that was Philly, but with 4 seconds). The KC D did step up in the second half, allowing only 11 points. A little surprising considering 1H TOP favored Philly 20/10.
I believe that most SBs are decided primarily by defense. Some people disagree and that's fine it's just an opinion. This SB was an exception and a lot more fun to watch.
And maybe with the rule changes being more kind to offense, especially on QB roughing, things are changing so the offense is the deciding factor. I don't know. Hey, as long as the games are interesting......
I haven’t added in the last several seasons, but the SB teams up until about 5 years ago did favor the D very slightly. At that point the SB Defenses in Scoring and rounded to the nearest whole number were #7 (6.8 etc) whereas the Offenses averaged just over #8 ranking (8.1). I did not use the ST rankings but oddly, that might factor nicely as a tie breaker. We have all witnessed how a great Return specialist can turn the tide pretty quickly.
So while it is true that Defenses had factored the most going back over 57 Superbowls. At best, it’s likely only by a few nose hairs. The last several Superbowls have had some high octane scoring Offenses.
6 of the last 10 Super Bowl Winners have scored 31+points.
The average SB Winner over the last 10 Superbowls below
Offense 30.6 points scored
Defense 19.0 points allowed
Hopefully Christian Watson and another high draft pick WR sparks our Offense to 30.6 and we get Captain as DC to attain 19.0 allowed!
The reality is that how good your offense is, compared to your defense, it's mostly due to how much money you're willing to pay out to make it happen. A team with a great offense rarely has better than a mediocre defense, because they spend more on shoring up the offense.While over the past two seasons teams with only mediocre defenses during the regular season won the Super Bowl each of the previous eight teams that ended up winning the Lombardi Trophy featured a top 8 scoring defense.
You're right. All the rule changes, or most of them, are designed to increase the output on offense, and rightfully so, to protect players. In the cap era, it's just not easy to win a SB, and a lot of luck is involved.The reality is that how good your offense is, compared to your defense, it's mostly due to how much money you're willing to pay out to make it happen. A team with a great offense rarely has better than a mediocre defense, because they spend more on shoring up the offense.
As for the game itself, over the last 20 years, the league itself has constantly changed the rules to make it easier for teams to put points on the board. It's what everyone should suspect. When you compare it to the game I first followed, where a QB threw the ball less than 15 times a game, and in a lot of cases, around 10.
These changes have happened to get more people watching the game. The old one score wins games of the past no longer apply to today's game.
The reality is that how good your offense is, compared to your defense, it's mostly due to how much money you're willing to pay out to make it happen. A team with a great offense rarely has better than a mediocre defense, because they spend more on shoring up the offense.
The Chiefs have more of an elite D than you would like to think imho.
I think it's not necessarily the talent that's the issue. It's the coaching. Barry hasn't been the answer and Gray just left town. GB brass doesn't seem to cut ties quickly with poor coaches and can't attract the top coaches (ex. Fangio).The Packers had one of the most expensive defenses in the league during several seasons of Rodgers' tenure as the starter. Unfortunately they overpaid for a lot of mediocre talent.
That sums it up well. How long did they keep Capers? Like six years, about 5 years too long. I’m kinda shocked MLF didn’t whack Barry. MLF doesn’t seem to have any cajones.I think it's not necessarily the talent that's the issue. It's the coaching. Barry hasn't been the answer and Gray just left town. GB brass doesn't seem to cut ties quickly with poor coaches and can't attract the top coaches (ex. Fangio).
This is true. Using the scoring ranking in points scored/allowed account for that, so it’s a level playing field there as far as theAs for the game itself, over the last 20 years, the league itself has constantly changed the rules to make it easier for teams to put points on the board.
I think it's not necessarily the talent that's the issue. It's the coaching. Barry hasn't been the answer and Gray just left town. GB brass doesn't seem to cut ties quickly with poor coaches and can't attract the top coaches (ex. Fangio).
That sums it up well. How long did they keep Capers? Like six years, about 5 years too long.