Defence vs Offence

[XPack]

A good defence with a mediocre QB is better than a elite QB and a mediocre defence.

Would you agree to this?

 

[swhitset]

A good defence with a mediocre QB is better than a elite QB and a mediocre defence.

Would you agree to this?

no

 

[adambr2]

Not really. An elite QB gives a team a chance in any season, provided he stays healthy.

Guess it depends how good and how mediocre of a defense and how good and how mediocre of a QB you're talking.

The Bears had a good defense but went nowhere. Jacksonville and Minnesota had the 6th and 11th respective offenses this year. It's not like they have gotten here completely on the backs of their defenses.

 

[XPack]

Jacksonville and Minnesota had the 6th and 11th respective offenses this year. It's not like they have gotten here completely on the backs of their defenses.

Well, with the likes of Keenum, Foles and Bortles, I'd say the D pulled the major weight and carried the team. More interesting on how they have good offences with meh QBs. They did better than the Steelers with top class playmakers in offence.

 

[rmontro]

A good defence with a mediocre QB is better than a elite QB and a mediocre defence.

I don't know if that is true or not, but it is certainly arguable. There have only been seven Super Bowl winners without a top ten defense (in points).
All four teams that are still in it have top ten defenses.
Who is a "mediocre quarterback" is a little more subjective, but I'm guessing there have been a similar number of Super Bowl champs with mediocre QBs as defenses outside of the top ten.

The thing that strikes me when I look at the playoffs this year is the teams do not look like the Packers. Right now we're seeing tough, physical, old school type teams with good defenses and good running games succeed.

There's simply no excuse for GB not fielding a good defense. You can't field slop defenses year after year and call yourself elite. I don't care if the "team identity" is a passing offense. Fortunately, I believe they are moving in the right direction.

 

[adambr2]

Well, with the likes of Keenum, Foles and Bortles, I'd say the D pulled the major weight and carried the team. More interesting on how they have good offences with meh QBs. They did better than the Steelers with top class playmakers in offence.

I think you're really underselling Keenum, he was very, very good this year.

Foles, I mean obviously Wentz was the heart and soul of that team up until the last month and the reason they got the 1 seed in the NFC.

Bortles...sure. But again, that was a top 6 offense, in part because Bortles took a big step forward this year.

 

[VegasPacker]

I somewhat agree....I'm more in the camp of you MUST have an elite franchise QB to consistently win in this league but I will certainly say if you have a truly first class, shut down violent defense and average QB play, you can win a Super Bowl as well....see the 85 Bears, 2000 Ravens, 2002 Bucs and 2016 Broncos as proof. Granted the Donkies had Manning but everybody knows that wasn't "vintage" Manning and the Broncos actually won that Super Bowl IN SPITE of Manning, not because of with that incredible defense.

 

[906Fan]

A good defense with a mediocre QB who is playing hot is better than a good QB with a mediocre defense. I think the jags and vikes fit that bill.

 

[adambr2]

A good defense with a mediocre QB who is playing hot is better than a good QB with a mediocre defense. I think the jags and vikes fit that bill.

Well yeah, but a QB who is hot is pretty much by definition a good QB at that time.

The Jags gave up 42 points today. That doesn't mean they don't have an elite defense, but they certainly didn't advance to the AFCCG on the strength of it today.

This year has been somewhat of an abberation. No one was picking the Vikings and Jaguars to go to the Super Bowl this year, they were picking us, or the Falcons, the Patriots -- QB driven teams. Look at the final 4 last year -- Packers, Falcons, Patriots, Steelers. All teams centered around elite offenses with elite QB play. In most years, that's the case, and if 3 plays went different ways, it'd be 3 very offensive driven teams joining the Patriots.

I think to some extent we're being prisoners of the moment here. I would need to see more than one postseason like this before I'd suggest that it's not a QB driven league anymore.

 

[BrokenArrow]

A good defence with a mediocre QB is better than a elite QB and a mediocre defence.

Would you agree to this?

It was last night.

 

[thisisnate]

I think people are asking because they see MN, Philly, and Jax in the playoffs yet, and then they look at our team. It's not a fair comparison though. We have an elite quarterback and a very bad defense. Those teams have elite defenses and average quarterbacking.

 

[XPack]

https://www.foxsports.com/nfl/galle...eahawks-packers-steelers-chiefs-giants-020117

Interesting stat. Of the 7 times, the No.1 defence faced off against the No. 1 Offence in Superbowl, defence won it 6 times against 1 for Offence.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

One thing I will say, if a team is relying solely on an elite QB, I would say its chances go down on winning a SB. Just look at the Packers over the last 20+ years with Favre and Rodgers. One player having an off day is a lot more likely to happen, than an elite defense having an off day as a collective unit.

Now the down side with having an elite defense, how long can you keep all those guys on your team? Packers have had it pretty good with having elite QB's behind center, now all they need is a top 15 defense to go with them.

 

[bigbubbatd]

I would point out that yesterday those good defenses got torched pretty good for 6 out of 8 quarters. The Steelers scored 42 and the saints put up 24 in one half. That is 66 points in 6 quarters of football. They both needed good offensive showings (and a little luck) to win.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I was surprised to see the Vikings defense "semi-collapse" in the second half yesterday. But I think that had a lot to do with having a big lead, Saints OC Pete Carmichael making some great adjustments, Drew Brees and finally the Vikings having some starters get knocked out of the game. I will take that Vikings defense any day.

 

[Mondio]

The vikings defense is good but, Brees had the jitters early on and made a bad pass on top of it. The guy was open, he just couldn't get it there. I'm not surprised the Saints scored on them, i'm surprised they had such a bad first half though.

What a change in games from Sat. to SUnday. Sat looked like teams that didn't even really belong other than the pats playing a 4th place team in any NFC conference and Sunday was 4 teams that refused to have their seasons end until they ended.

 

[bigbubbatd]

I was surprised to see the Vikings defense "semi-collapse" in the second half yesterday. But I think that had a lot to do with having a big lead, Saints OC Pete Carmichael making some great adjustments, Drew Brees and finally the Vikings having some starters get knocked out of the game. I will take that Vikings defense any day.

I agree it is a great defense but good offenses can neutralize great defenses. The Vikings weren't able to pressure Brees. Also remember starting in the first half Brees missed a td to Ginn in the sandejo pick, had a TD called back and then threw a red zone pick on a tip ball and missed a field goal. They could of easily put up 30 plus in that game. After the first 3 drives the saints settled in.

Their last 3 drives of the first half were the terrible under throw to the open ginn, then a 50 and 60 yard drive. No points on any of them. They then went td, TD, punt, TD, and fg. only one punt after the first two series. Lots of long drives. That was well before injuries.

 

[Raptorman]

A good defence with a mediocre QB is better than a elite QB and a mediocre defence.

Would you agree to this?

No. I'll say it again. One of these day your guys will get it. A good defense, top 8 in points per game, and a decent offense with a QB that doesn't make stupid mistakes and turn the ball over during the game. If a team defense can hold the other team to less than 17 ppg, they have a 75% chance of winning the game. The QB doesn't really matter unless he's throwing picks all game.

 

[n4t]

Ok.

What about the difference between a short fence and a tall fence?

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

No. I'll say it again. One of these day your guys will get it. A good defense, top 8 in points per game, and a decent offense with a QB that doesn't make stupid mistakes and turn the ball over during the game. If a team defense can hold the other team to less than 17 ppg, they have a 75% chance of winning the game. The QB doesn't really matter unless he's throwing picks all game.

The way you said that, I would have thought you have had Brett Favre on your team before.

 

[Dantés]

This is not meant to be critical, but every year I see people trying to make sweeping conclusions based on the teams that make it to the end. This year, it’s clear that you need to prioritize defense. However, if you look at the final four last year, it would basically tell you the opposite.

The bottom line is that you have to be very good to make it to Championship weekend, not to mention the Super Bowl. There is more than one successful recipe for being that good. Some teams do it with a more defense heavy club. Some teams with a more offensive. So I would caution against trying to draw conclusions based on one year.

One thing that has been consistent, however, is this: since 1993, there have been 25 Super Bowls. 22 of them are accounted for by Troy Aikman, Steve Young, Tom Brady, Ben Roethlisberger, Peyton Manning, Brett Favre, Aaron Rodgers, Drew Brees, Eli Manning, and Kurt Warner.

Of the other 3, one was won by Joe Flacco who was playing out of his mind.

I’m not saying that defense first teams don’t win Super Bowls. That’s not true. But if you want to find a really reliable correlary, it’s the quarterback.

 

[bigbubbatd]

This is not meant to be critical, but every year I see people trying to make sweeping conclusions based on the teams that make it to the end. This year, it’s clear that you need to prioritize defense. However, if you look at the final four last year, it would basically tell you the opposite.

The bottom line is that you have to be very good to make it to Championship weekend, not to mention the Super Bowl. There is more than one successful recipe for being that good. Some teams do it with a more defense heavy club. Some teams with a more offensive. So I would caution against trying to draw conclusions based on one year.

One thing that has been consistent, however, is this: since 1993, there have been 25 Super Bowls. 22 of them are accounted for by Troy Aikman, Steve Young, Tom Brady, Ben Roethlisberger, Peyton Manning, Brett Favre, Aaron Rodgers, Drew Brees, Eli Manning, and Kurt Warner.

Of the other 3, one was won by Joe Flacco who was playing out of his mind.

I’m not saying that defense first teams don’t win Super Bowls. That’s not true. But if you want to find a really reliable correlary, it’s the quarterback.

I wonder where those defenses ranked too? Both Packers super bowls were won with hall of fame QBs and top 10 defenses. I think more telling is you most likely need a good defense and a pro bowl qb to win. Sure there are anomalies but that seems to be the case more often than not.

 

[adambr2]

I wonder where those defenses ranked too? Both Packers super bowls were won with hall of fame QBs and top 10 defenses. I think more telling is you most likely need a good defense and a pro bowl qb to win. Sure there are anomalies but that seems to be the case more often than not.

There have been 5 Super Bowl champions this century that ranked outside the top 10 in defense, sometimes well outside the top 10 and near the bottom.

I think what it shows more is that an elite QB gives any team a chance at a Super Bowl independent of anything else and an elite defense makes it much easier.

 

[Raptorman]

This is not meant to be critical, but every year I see people trying to make sweeping conclusions based on the teams that make it to the end. This year, it’s clear that you need to prioritize defense. However, if you look at the final four last year, it would basically tell you the opposite.

The bottom line is that you have to be very good to make it to Championship weekend, not to mention the Super Bowl. There is more than one successful recipe for being that good. Some teams do it with a more defense heavy club. Some teams with a more offensive. So I would caution against trying to draw conclusions based on one year.

One thing that has been consistent, however, is this: since 1993, there have been 25 Super Bowls. 22 of them are accounted for by Troy Aikman, Steve Young, Tom Brady, Ben Roethlisberger, Peyton Manning, Brett Favre, Aaron Rodgers, Drew Brees, Eli Manning, and Kurt Warner.

Of the other 3, one was won by Joe Flacco who was playing out of his mind.

I’m not saying that defense first teams don’t win Super Bowls. That’s not true. But if you want to find a really reliable correlary, it’s the quarterback.

Ah yeah, ok.

Ranked defense in Points Per Game in years players won the Super Bowl. Average rank of the below defensive teams. 6.6 But Yeah, Top QB's are the link. BTW, Eli's defenses in the play offs held teams to under 17 ppg. Which would have placed them 3rd and 4th in DPPG during the regular season. Colts with Payton, during the playoffs they held the other teams to 6, 8, 34, 17 for an average of 16.25 points per game. Like I keep saying, you hold the other team to 17 points or less, you have a great chance of winning. QB doesn't play into much.

Troy Aikman,  2,3
Steve Young  8
Tom Brady  6,1,2,8,11,
Ben Roethlisberger  3,1
Peyton Manning   23,4
Brett Favre  1
Aaron Rodgers  2
Drew Brees  20
Eli Manning   17,25
Kurt Warner  4
Elway   6,8

 

[Raptorman]

Tale of two teams. Let's try this another way. Vikings and Packers are good example of how defense is important. After all, no one would claim the Vikings have had an elite QB the last 4 years.

Since 2014 when Zimmer took over the Vikings. Games in which the teams scored 20 points or more.
Packers average defense PPG rank for those 4 years 18.
Vikings average defense PPG rank for those 4 years 6

           W    L     Win %    OPPG    DPPG     APDL
Packers   41   12     .774      29.9   22.9    -10.9
Vikings   34    7     .829      28.1   18.3     -5.3

OPPG= Offensive points per game
DPPG= Defensive points per game
APDL= Average point differential in losses.

The APDL surprised me. After all, one would have thought that a team with an elite QB would be much closer to winning the games they lose than a team without an elite QB.