Jump to content

Are Elite Defenses on Brink of Extinction?


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Call_Of_Ktulu said:

The future is having 1 pass rusher, 3 LB's that can cover and a good secondary. Defense 35% of your cap Offense 65% of your cap. If you have 3 elite defensive players you pay them then fill in the rest with solid players.

Yep.

 

What you need to do defensively is get after the quarterback and cover. Can't get gashed in the run game but it's not a top priority.

 

Basically need a couple players capable of making big plays to alter a few possessions a game.

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

FOUND IT: 

any team dominant on one side of the ball and competent on the other is a good team. We're not either right now but rule changes don't preclude an elite defense from having an equal effect on the game. The other team is playing the same rules. So if it's so easy to March up and down the field we're going to be able to March up and down and have a competitive advantage in stopping the other team from doing so quite as much. 

 

It's just relative to the league any given season if the best defense gives up 30 points a game and the league is averaging 50 then ya don't have to score 50 on a bad offensive night. You nab the easy 35 if rules begin to get that whack on offense. Eagles D did just enough to stop Brady to win with a clear competitive advantage compared to Pats that couldn't stop Nick Foles. The Jags played shootouts after the Bills because they were playing jacked up offenses with poor defense.

 

The teams that win Superbowls are dominant on one side and top 10 on the other. Doesn't matter which way but it's recently been the better defensive teams that win anyway! Like every recent year! 

 

Eagles D > Pats D, Pats D > Falcons D, Broncos D > Panthers D, Seattle D > Broncos D, Giants D > Pats D.

 

Doesn't matter if it's a shootout, Nick Foles beat Brady because they were subpar defending him. Jags had it on Steelers. If it's so easy to score that Bortles can do it, his defense is just as closely matched against a great offense yet slightly gave the edge to win. Falcons shootout likewise. Just have to be better than the team on one side of the ball than they are on your side.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Hebert19 said:

No.  But they are getting harder to build when advantage goes to offense more often than not.  Cant hit QB.  Cant touch WR.   Tight cap allows teams to build one or other.  Rarely both. 

 

Look at NBA.  That's what NFL will be in 1p years at this rate.  

NBA was trending like that in the 90s. It got crazy low scoring in the early 2000s. Yeah it's offensively oriented but the greatest defenses of all time are recognized relative to their position. One would think the 2004 Pistons averaging 70 PPG allowed is the best ever but most say 2007(?) Celtics championship team is the best ever relative to the higher scoring around the league. Another team pretty high up there? The recent Warriors team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With the rules the way they are you will be seeing a lot more 50 point games in the future. Our offense can't even score 1 TD a game, everyone on that side of the football should be fired. You bring in a good OC and pay him more than the HC if you have too.

27 minutes ago, PetermanThrew5Picks said:

FOUND IT: 

any team dominant on one side of the ball and competent on the other is a good team. We're not either right now but rule changes don't preclude an elite defense from having an equal effect on the game. The other team is playing the same rules. So if it's so easy to March up and down the field we're going to be able to March up and down and have a competitive advantage in stopping the other team from doing so quite as much. 

 

It's just relative to the league any given season if the best defense gives up 30 points a game and the league is averaging 50 then ya don't have to score 50 on a bad offensive night. You nab the easy 35 if rules begin to get that whack on offense. Eagles D did just enough to stop Brady to win with a clear competitive advantage compared to Pats that couldn't stop Nick Foles. The Jags played shootouts after the Bills because they were playing jacked up offenses with poor defense.

 

The teams that win Superbowls are dominant on one side and top 10 on the other. Doesn't matter which way but it's recently been the better defensive teams that win anyway! Like every recent year! 

 

Eagles D > Pats D, Pats D > Falcons D, Broncos D > Panthers D, Seattle D > Broncos D, Giants D > Pats D.

 

Doesn't matter if it's a shootout, Nick Foles beat Brady because they were subpar defending him. Jags had it on Steelers. If it's so easy to score that Bortles can do it, his defense is just as closely matched against a great offense yet slightly gave the edge to win. Falcons shootout likewise. Just have to be better than the team on one side of the ball than they are on your side.

I wouldn't say the Patriots were subpar in defending Foles. Foles was putting those passes right on the money and was locked in. When a QB is doing that there is no defense that can stop them. Two of the best playoff performances by a QB with a Super Bowl win came from two QB's that I never thought could elevate their games to that level. Foles and Flacco were unstoppable and their improvements in passing accuracy over the years make me believe that Allen could be a good QB in a few more years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Historically, the sport of football has always fluctuated back and forth.

 

I would like to believe that Defensive Coordinators will eventually adapt - coming up with new schemes, player combinations and strategies to counter everything we are seeing today.  Instead of Cover 2 or Cover 3 being used everywhere, something brand-new will take hold of the league and Defense will become an actual thing again. 

 

I would like to believe that...  But unfortunately, I think too much of what we are seeing is the result of rule changes.  Defensive players are now being handicapped at every turn.  They can't touch the receiver at any point after 5 yards.  They can't have any contact when the ball is in the air.  They can't tackle with their head in a lowered position.   They can't touch the quarterback below the waist or above the shoulder.  They can't even fall with their body weight on the passer.

 

Defense will always be important -- in a sense.  It's just that elite defenses might eventually be those who give up 25-30 points, instead of those who give up 10-15.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Finkle Is Einhorn said:

In an era where qb busts are down and offensive penalties are up have we seen the last of truly elite defenses.   Are the  2013 Seattle Seahawks the last  dominant game changing defense we will ever see in the NFL. The 69 Vikings, the 69 chiefs,  The 76 Steelers, the 85 Bears, the 86 giants, the 91 eagles, the 2000 ravens, the 2002 bucs, and 2013 Seahawks all were defenses that in their own right could win multiple games.  In the near future we will see slot receivers playing for twice as long and putting up twice the numbers , running backs rushing for 2000 yards a year will be common ground, qbs will be playing longer than punters, and the days of a dominant bone crushing defense that instills fear into the offensive opponent will be a distant memory . Hopefully we savored and truly appreciated the 13 Seahawks because the NFL has morphed into something new and that is a part of the game that Will never be seen again.

No.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Finkle Is Einhorn said:

   I would probably rate 85 Bears, 76 steelers, and 2000 ravens As a step above the 13 Seahawks and 15 Broncos , all still elite but maybe becoming less elite?  So you think that elite defenses are going to trend toward being more frequent in today's NFL? 

You have given us 3 "elite" defenses between 1976-2000 and 2 between 2000-2015.

 

That's an elite defense every 8 years before 2000 and an elite defense every 7.5 years since 2000.  So yes, they are getting more frequent based on your OP.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dont think it will ever go away, but the requirement that you need to have a great defence, or that its defence that wins championship is not necessary any more. Today's game is all about offence and being able to outscore your opponent. You dont need to dominate and hold them back, as long as you can match them point for point. An average defence with a high scoring offence is how many of the best teams have been built. 

 

Not many teams will focus on trying to get a defence that will shut down opponents cause most offences today are too hard to shut down. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, PetermanThrew5Picks said:

FOUND IT: 

any team dominant on one side of the ball and competent on the other is a good team. We're not either right now but rule changes don't preclude an elite defense from having an equal effect on the game. The other team is playing the same rules. So if it's so easy to March up and down the field we're going to be able to March up and down and have a competitive advantage in stopping the other team from doing so quite as much. 

 

It's just relative to the league any given season if the best defense gives up 30 points a game and the league is averaging 50 then ya don't have to score 50 on a bad offensive night. You nab the easy 35 if rules begin to get that whack on offense. Eagles D did just enough to stop Brady to win with a clear competitive advantage compared to Pats that couldn't stop Nick Foles. The Jags played shootouts after the Bills because they were playing jacked up offenses with poor defense.

 

The teams that win Superbowls are dominant on one side and top 10 on the other. Doesn't matter which way but it's recently been the better defensive teams that win anyway! Like every recent year! 

 

Eagles D > Pats D, Pats D > Falcons D, Broncos D > Panthers D, Seattle D > Broncos D, Giants D > Pats D.

 

Doesn't matter if it's a shootout, Nick Foles beat Brady because they were subpar defending him. Jags had it on Steelers. If it's so easy to score that Bortles can do it, his defense is just as closely matched against a great offense yet slightly gave the edge to win. Falcons shootout likewise. Just have to be better than the team on one side of the ball than they are on your side.

You forget the pats/Seahawks Super Bowl. I would definitely say the Seahawks D was better than the pats, but they still lost.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, MAJBobby said:

Build a real offense. Please Build a Real offense and move into Modern Football. 

I believe they are trying to but it's easier to start a rookie QB's career on the back of a potential future HOF running back's last few years.  Allen can develop without so much pressure so yeah they don't throw the ball as much but once Allen gets there, I think that Daboll wants to throw the ball more.  He just needs more talent to work with.  Next offseason is huge

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Watkins101 said:

You forget the pats/Seahawks Super Bowl. I would definitely say the Seahawks D was better than the pats, but they still lost.

I didn't forget, I'm just listing my points of recent SB winners. I skipped Ravens 49ers cause Ravens weren't really good at much of anything, but did have a good offensive performance from playoff Flacco.

 

And the Pats stole a win on a goal line defensive steal from Butler becoming elite out of nowhere. But whatever, I listed 5/7 Superbowls. The defense will never be less valuable when it's half the side of the ball. It's just sports. NBA recognized dominant defense based on relative scoring offense. That's why one of the Warriors teams  are a very highly ranked team defensively.

 

Just making the point if both sides are playing by the same rules.. philosophy changes.. offenses score more. The competitive advantage on defense is always half the game. How did Bortles and Foles wax the Pats defense? Subpar. Bortles beats Steelers after low scoring Bills game? Because they can March up and down the field on the Steelers just like everyone else. The Steelers just couldn't March up and down as much because that pesky defense made had them unable to keep up. 

 

That's how sports involving a defense and offense works. Both always equally important.

Edited by PetermanThrew5Picks
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, BringBackOrton said:

You conveniently forgot the 2015 Broncos because they were too recent and contrary to your wholly original point.

 

I was going to mention them. Their defense won them many games that year with no help from the offense whatsoever. Their defense produced a lot of points themselves, even.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...