So much for the NEED to have a "franchise QB"...

[CosmicBills]

Anyway... this isn't about Bradshaw (nice job getting away from answering the simplest of questions though, lol).

What question? The ones you ignore from everyone else? Or your illogical question above about offenses and defenses?

 

I'll answer that one: An offense that scores 32 points will not win every time. But a defense that allows 0 points will not win every time either (ties exist). So again, what does that prove?

 

Oh, right. Nothing.

[McD]

I like how you take two or three posts to respond to one. Part of the entertainment value (the only value) of your responses.

 

Lol... well, lets see... I'm posting as much as you are, and I'm also working on a paper. This is my break every few minutes. I've still put more critical thought and effort in defending my post, while I mostly get garbage in return. All good though, this board is for entertainment purposes only. Group behavior... interesting subject.

[K Gun Special]

Bradshaw had a defense LOADED with HoF defensive players and Offensive weapons. When you have an O with 2 HoF WR's a HoF RB and a HoF Center to anchor the line... damn, you need to be better that EVERYONE in your Era. Then lets look at the other side of the ball shall we... Joe Greene, Jack Ham, Jack Lambert Mel Blount... nice core of D there... you think he played "behind in many games"? Bradshaw to his credit had two good SB appearances, but two aweful ones to boot. And the road he took to get there he put up massive numbers like 86 yds 0 TD's and 1 Int. I think he averaged about 150 yds 1.5 TD and 2.5 Int's in the games just to get TO the SB... Yep, he sure LED them there... lol.

 

Thank you for your post to add to the ridiculousness, your opinion I don't mind, but you're trying to pass that info on as fact. I'm going fact on Bradshaw, but I can see your claims on rules changes, but I'll still respectfully refute his greatness.

 

 

 

Bradshaw rode the coattails of those teams, plain and simple. The man had mediocre regular season numbers and only two good (very good) post season games... his last two SB's. Now any given Sunday a guy or team can flourish, but Bradshaw never LED his team to those games on his arm or skills. That D, those two WR's the O-line, and running game he had took them there... Bradshaw MANAGED hose games far more than he LED them.

 

 

Sure you can.

 

Theres no denying there were other great players on that team.

 

But by your analysis Jim Kelly is not a hall of famer, he had HOF WRs, RB, DE, and possibly a few more yet to be inducted.

 

Kelly was always near the top but never the best of his day..... but he was a winner outside the SBs, and that counts for a lot..... A LOT.

 

The point is that Bradshaw put up great #s and won...despite having a great D, so many SB winners have great players around them.

 

You cant tell me the QB on a team that won 4 super bowls in 6 years and had top 10 stats is not a HOF.

 

As to the era thing, you cant compare....

 

For example - would the steel curtain defense or even the 85 bears be as good with todays PI rules and offense oriented officiating???

 

Numbers now are inflated, which is why you can have a guy in the bottom third of the NFL (fitz) have better numbers than a HOF 4 time super bowl champion.

 

If you or anyone wants to translate that into meaning Fitz is as good as bradshaw than you know less than you let on.

[McD]

What question? The ones you ignore from everyone else? Or your illogical question above about offenses and defenses?

 

I'll answer that one: An offense that scores 32 points will not win every time. But a defense that allows 0 points will not win every time either (ties exist). So again, what does that prove?

 

Oh, right. Nothing.

 

YES!!!! You got it halfway right! Way to go!!! now... you still tried to go around the question, so one more time for you...

 

Riddle me this... if a team scores 32 points a game will they ALWAYS win? _NO__ CORRECT!!! +1!

 

Now this... if a team doesn't allow a single point in a game will they EVER LOSE? ____________ I know this is tough, but just read carefully. Key here is WILL THEY EVER LOSE??? We know ties exist man.

 

Sure you can.

 

Theres no denying there were other great players on that team.

 

But by your analysis Jim Kelly is not a hall of famer, he had HOF WRs, RB, DE, and possibly a few more yet to be inducted.

 

Kelly was always near the top but never the best of his day..... but he was a winner outside the SBs, and that counts for a lot..... A LOT.

 

The point is that Bradshaw put up great decent #s and won...despite having a great D, so many SB winners have great players around them.

 

You cant tell me the QB on a team that won 4 super bowls in 6 years and had top 10 stats is not a HOF.

 

As to the era thing, you cant compare....

 

For example - would the steel curtain defense or even the 85 bears be as good with todays PI rules and offense oriented officiating???

 

Numbers now are inflated, which is why you can have a guy in the bottom third of the NFL (fitz) have better numbers than a HOF 4 time super bowl champion. Of course, I'd like more info on passer rating.

 

If you or anyone wants to translate that into meaning Fitz is as good as bradshaw than you know less than you let on.

 

I'll bite on that. No major issues to that post, well thought out and substantiated. Thanks!

 

Now... I still don't buy into Bradshaw that much. I'll look into his #'s compared to others of his generation. The thing that I will say is this... If Kelly has the Era's greatest D, he'd have 4 rings of his own.

[thebug]

YES!!!! You got it halfway right! Way to go!!! now... you still tried to go around the question, so one more time for you...

 

Riddle me this... if a team scores 32 points a game will they ALWAYS win? _NO__ CORRECT!!! +1!

 

Now this... if a team doesn't allow a single point in a game will they EVER LOSE? ____________ I know this is tough, but just read carefully. Key here is WILL THEY EVER LOSE??? We know ties exist man.

 

 

What if a team scores a million points in a game and doesn't allow any points, who won the game, the O or the D?

 

THE TEAM!

[K Gun Special]

YES!!!! You got it halfway right! Way to go!!! now... you still tried to go around the question, so one more time for you...

 

Riddle me this... if a team scores 32 points a game will they ALWAYS win? _NO__ CORRECT!!! +1!

 

Now this... if a team doesn't allow a single point in a game will they EVER LOSE? ____________ I know this is tough, but just read carefully. Key here is WILL THEY EVER LOSE??? We know ties exist man.

 

 

 

I'll bite on that. No major issues to that post, well thought out and substantiated. Thanks!

 

Now... I still don't buy into Bradshaw that much. I'll look into his #'s compared to others of his generation. The thing that I will say is this... If Kelly has the Era's greatest D, he'd have 4 rings of his own.

 

 

quite simply and im sure im not the first to say this...... You need a QB and you need Defense, you cant have them both be average and expect success.

You CAN succeed with a great QB and average D.

You CAN succeed with a great D and average QB.

 

Super Bowl winning QBs are almost always first round picks, as are their opposing QBs.

 

I think you are losing people by preaching about Defense when its been shown several times its not necessary to have in order to achieve success.

 

 

The Bills need to improve at every position.

 

Regardless of anyone's personal draft philosophy none of you have the duty to assemble a NFL team.

 

Nix has been very clear that he is going to take the best player at #3. Not the best player they need but the best player. Turns out this is what successful franchises do as well. The skill is in hitting with your picks which we clearly havent been able to do.

 

We can debate QB vs D, and specifically DL, til the cows come home but dont be surprised if they pick a WR or CB.

 

The roster is a mess and you cant go wrong improving any position at this point.

[CosmicBills]

Lol... well, lets see... I'm posting as much as you are, and I'm also working on a paper. This is my break every few minutes. I've still put more critical thought and effort in defending my post, while I mostly get garbage in return. All good though, this board is for entertainment purposes only. Group behavior... interesting subject.

I don't know about the rest of you, but I've got five bucks that paper is written in crayon!

[McD]

What if a team scores a million points in a game and doesn't allow any points, who won the game, the O or the D?

 

THE TEAM!

 

That's a LOT of points. Not sure if there's been that many scored in the history of the league, so I assume this is really just a silly unfounded post. But, there's been many shutouts (see, those ACTUALLY happen!). I have no issue with TEAM play, and a nice healthy balance would be great (balance being top of the league balance, not being #24 and #25). Going D, D and more D (in FA and the draft), will slow teams down, flip the field many, MANY more times than we did the past few seasons, and not make us play from behind (therefore making us predictable and one dimensional on O). Is this too realistic an argument for you?

[CosmicBills]

That's a LOT of points. Not sure if there's been that many scored in the history of the league, so I assume this is really just a silly unfounded post. But, there's been many shutouts (see, those ACTUALLY happen!). I have no issue with TEAM play, and a nice healthy balance would be great (balance being top of the league balance, not being #24 and #25). Going D, D and more D (in FA and the draft), will slow teams down, flip the field many, MANY more times than we did the past few seasons, and not make us play from behind (therefore making us predictable and one dimensional on O). Is this too realistic an argument for you?

Actually you're wrong. There has never been a shut out in the Super Bowl. So once again, your facts and logic are irrelevant.

 

Or should I say, "I assume this is really just a silly and unfounded" thread.

Edited January 27, 2011 by tgreg99

[McD]

I don't know about the rest of you, but I've got five bucks that paper is written in crayon!

 

Major GPA: 4.00

Cumulative Undergraduate GPA: 3.96

 

Not that it matters, but there you have it man... thanks!

 

BTW...You still haven't manned up on that answer!

 

Actually you're wrong. There has never been a shut out in the Super Bowl. So once again, your facts and logic are irrelevant.

 

Or should I say, "I assume this is really just a silly and unfounded" thread.

 

Dude...WTF are you talking about? Who's talking about shutouts in a SB?? Again, you're proving yourself unworthy of discussion. Go ahead and find me talking about SB's in my response.

[CosmicBills]

Major GPA: 4.00

Cumulative Undergraduate GPA: 3.96

 

Not that it matters, but there you have it man... thanks!

 

BTW...You still haven't manned up on that answer!

 

 

 

Dude...WTF are you talking about? Who's talking about shutouts in a SB?? Again, you're proving yourself unworthy of discussion. Go ahead and find me talking about SB's in my response.

Your entire thread is about defense winning. I assume you mean super bowls as the stats you reference have been super bowls where the number 1 O faced off against the number 1 D.

 

But again, you're dishonestly arguing a point (point is used lightly here) because you either don't have the mental capacity to realize how flawed your original post (and subsequent posts) have been or you just have a problem admitting you're wrong.

 

It's cool. Keep going. You're the one looking like an ass. It's awesome.

[McD]

Your entire thread is about defense winning. I assume you mean super bowls as the stats you reference have been super bowls where the number 1 O faced off against the number 1 D.

 

But again, you're dishonestly arguing a point (point is used lightly here) because you either don't have the mental capacity to realize how flawed your original post (and subsequent posts) have been or you just have a problem admitting you're wrong.

 

It's cool. Keep going. You're the one looking like an ass. It's awesome.

 

Since you couldn't possibly find all of the statistics that would show a true #1 O vs true #1 D outside of the SB, that's where I came up with the 3 games (ironically, and to provide STATS to MY argument, the D kicked ass). That part is pretty simple man. Of course I seem to be the only one generating said statistics, so what is it you want me to go back on?? Nothing have proven me wrong, although I have had good debates on it. You... lol, you wont even answer a question like a man, and you're giving me ****, lol... C'mon man!

[CosmicBills]

Since you couldn't possibly find all of the statistics that would show a true #1 O vs true #1 D outside of the SB, that's where I came up with the 3 games (ironically, and to provide STATS to MY argument, the D kicked ass). That part is pretty simple man. Of course I seem to be the only one generating said statistics, so what is it you want me to go back on?? Nothing have proven me wrong, although I have had good debates on it. You... lol, you wont even answer a question like a man, and you're giving me ****, lol... C'mon man!

I've answered all of your questions yet you refuse to answer mine. Which again shows your utter lack of reading comprehension. But again, keep swinging. It's great.

[thebug]

That's a LOT of points. Not sure if there's been that many scored in the history of the league, so I assume this is really just a silly unfounded post. But, there's been many shutouts (see, those ACTUALLY happen!). I have no issue with TEAM play, and a nice healthy balance would be great (balance being top of the league balance, not being #24 and #25). Going D, D and more D (in FA and the draft), will slow teams down, flip the field many, MANY more times than we did the past few seasons, and not make us play from behind (therefore making us predictable and one dimensional on O). Is this too realistic an argument for you?

 

 

Yes it was a silly post, in response to another silly post. What if a team doesn't score a single point in a game, will they ever win? kinda silly eh.

 

I have no problem with focusing on D in the draft.

[McD]

I've answered all of your questions yet you refuse to answer mine. Which again shows your utter lack of reading comprehension. But again, keep swinging. It's great.

 

What question is that?

 

Here's mine again, because you haven't answered it... we're ALL waiting. FYI... the question you HAVE NOT answered is #3.

 

1. If a team scores 32 points a game will they ALWAYS win? _NO__ CORRECT!!! +1!

 

2. If a team doesn't allow a single point in a game will they EVER LOSE? ____________ I know this is tough, but just read carefully. Key here is WILL THEY EVER LOSE??? We know ties exist man.

 

Yes it was a silly post, in response to another silly post. What if a team doesn't score a single point in a game, will they ever win? kinda silly eh. But they'll NEVER lose!

 

I have no problem with focusing on D in the draft.

 

Right on man, now you're getting it!

[CosmicBills]

What question is that?

 

Here's mine again, because you haven't answered it... we're ALL waiting. FYI... the question you HAVE NOT answered is #3.

 

1. If a team scores 32 points a game will they ALWAYS win? _NO__ CORRECT!!! +1!

 

2. If a team doesn't allow a single point in a game will they EVER LOSE? ____________ I know this is tough, but just read carefully. Key here is WILL THEY EVER LOSE??? We know ties exist man.

It's a false question with terribly misleading logic that you're manipulating. It's dishonest and logically unsound. To be an honest question, it should be: If a team scores 32 points a game will they always win & If a team doesn't allow a single point will they always win?

 

You're mixing and matching.

 

But, because I'm bored, I'll answer your dishonest and flawed question. Of course the answer is no, a defense that gives up 0 points will never lose. But they won't always win either. But what does that prove? Nothing ... it's as meaningless a stat as tackles.

 

Your thesis statement in the title of the thread is that Defense wins .... PERIOD. You say you'd LIKE a franchise QB, but they're not necessary. Teams with the best defenses ALWAYS win. That's what you're hammering. You're dealing in absolutes but ignoring the true facts. After all, winning in the NFL means winning the Super Bowl. That's the aim of each team when the season starts. Yet, this year, the number 1 ranked defense in the league didn't even make the playoffs. How can you then say that "defense wins.... Period". Clearly it doesn't.

 

The question I pose to you (again) and that you keep ignoring because you know you can't answer it, is how do you explain the last 14 Super Bowl winners? During the past 14 Super Bowls, 10 different QBs won during that time. 70% of them are Hall of Famers. Of the remaining 3, two played at or above Pro Bowl levels during the championship run. The one who didn't had the benefit of one of the best defenses ever assembled.

 

So, one time in the past 14 years a team has won a Super Bowl without a franchise QB at the helm. That's a 0.071% rate. Do you really believe that a 0.071% success rate proves your theory? Does that prove that Defense wins ... Period! That's what you want to hang your hat on?

[Mr. WEO]

Nice attempt at going AROUND a question, but it's not that easy... you see AGAIN you refuse to follow directions. Please reread and answer accordingly... I'll BOLD the items you evidently tried to go around so everyone can see it.

 

Riddle me this... if a team scores 32 points a game will they ALWAYS win? ___________

 

Now this... if a team doesn't allow a single point in a game will they EVER lose? ____________

 

There's still only "yes" and "no" (or a direvitive thereof) as possible answers.

 

 

 

Isn't that a defensive play BTW...??? Damn, those D's are good!

It is true that, in any sport, if your opponent scores no points, you can't lose. You may have been the first of our species to have pointed this out. College has not been wasted on you. Keep studying, though.

 

How that relates to your OP is a mystery. Crappy teams can shut out other teams. So what?

[thebug]

Major GPA: 4.00

Cumulative Undergraduate GPA: 3.96

Not that it matters, but there you have it man... thanks!

 

BTW...You still haven't manned up on that answer!

 

 

 

Dude...WTF are you talking about? Who's talking about shutouts in a SB?? Again, you're proving yourself unworthy of discussion. Go ahead and find me talking about SB's in my response.

 

 

3.96 % is really not that good. At least I gradraated with 51%. See you didn't do good, so you undergradraated.

[McD]

It's a false question with terribly misleading logic that you're manipulating. It's dishonest and logically unsound. To be an honest question, it should be: If a team scores 32 points a game will they always win & If a team doesn't allow a single point will they always win? Check the #'s of teams that have LOST that have scored over 32 pts against the #'s of teams that have LOST giving up 0 pts.. Go with %'s if you'd like a more accuarate #.

 

You're mixing and matching.

 

But, because I'm bored, I'll answer your dishonest and flawed question. Of course the answer is no, a defense that gives up 0 points will never lose (CORRECT!). But they won't always win either. But what does that prove? Nothing ... it's as meaningless a stat as tackles.

 

Your thesis statement (holy hell, this was a thesis now?!?!?) in the title of the thread is that Defense wins .... PERIOD. You say you'd LIKE a franchise QB, but they're not necessary (True). Teams with the best defenses ALWAYS win (I never said always wins, I told you I don't deal with absolutes, BUT in the head-to-head meetings between #1 O and #1 D... well, D has kicked their ass... why do I need to keep telling you this, lol) That's what you're hammering. You're dealing in absolutes but ignoring the true facts (I have provided facts, you have not). After all, winning in the NFL means winning the Super Bowl. That's the aim of each team when the season starts. Yet, this year, the number 1 ranked defense in the league didn't even make the playoffs (Lol... go take a look at where that team ranked offensively as well... #1!) Clearly you should provide stats that aren't biased, and while you're at it, you should know that I would know that info . How can you then say that "defense wins.... Period". Clearly it doesn't (clearly it has in the only OBJECTIVE way to measure it... 3-0 baby!).

 

 

The question I pose to you (again) and that you keep ignoring because you know you can't answer it, is how do you explain the last 14 Super Bowl winners? (why only the last 14 years?) During the past 14 Super Bowls, 10 different QBs won during that time. 70% of them are Hall of Famers. Of the remaining 3, two played at or above Pro Bowl levels during the championship run. The one who didn't had the benefit of one of the best defenses ever assembled.

 

So, one time in the past 14 years a team has won a Super Bowl without a franchise QB at the helm. That's a 0.071% rate. Do you really believe that a 0.071% success rate proves your theory? Does that prove that Defense wins ... Period! That's what you want to hang your hat on? (so I show you a 100% success rate of #1 D over #1, and THAT isn't good enough?)

 

Check out the bolded

 

3.96 % is really not that good. At least I gradraated with 51%. See you didn't do good, so you undergradraated.

 

Thanks for knocking any credibility you had out of the water. Thanks for playing.

[1B4IDie]

You did it McD! 10 pages!

Out manned, out gunned, out of position and you're still belligerently defending that Defense is the only thing that matters.

Even in the face of the many posters that have iterated and reiterated that there are only 1st round Franchise QBs left in the playoffs.

You are a special breed and a true American hero.

A tip of the hat sir.

20!

 

Lets go for 100 Pages!