Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Ever wonder why the AFC always has the "best" defenses?


  • Please log in to reply
32 replies to this topic

#16 Smitty Is Our Savior

Smitty Is Our Savior

    Jesus Shuttlesworth

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,788 posts
  • LocationSydney, Australia

Posted 14 January 2013 - 01:40 AM

maybe the NFC appears to have the best QBs because the defenses suck


Maybe the NFC appears to have the best QBs because the defenses suck, but really the AFC defenses suck even more, yet the AFC QBs still suck more than we thought they sucked before hand.

#17 teeray

teeray

    THE SWAGNIFICENT

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,331 posts

Posted 14 January 2013 - 08:36 AM

Andrew Luck- overrated???


Absolutely. Here is what I think of Luck

http://www.carolinah...d/#entry2080713

#18 teeray

teeray

    THE SWAGNIFICENT

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,331 posts

Posted 14 January 2013 - 08:38 AM

maybe the NFC appears to have the best QBs because the defenses suck


The AFC gets to play the NFC too. Those QBs still sucked.

They would probably stink in the CFL too.

#19 csx

csx

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,112 posts

Posted 14 January 2013 - 09:54 AM

The AFC gets to play the NFC too. Those QBs still sucked.

They would probably stink in the CFL too.


and their defenses face the NFC as well....way to shoot your argument in the foot

#20 teeray

teeray

    THE SWAGNIFICENT

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,331 posts

Posted 14 January 2013 - 10:24 AM

and their defenses face the NFC as well....way to shoot your argument in the foot


Yes. They played 64 times and the AFC lost 39 of them.

The 12 games they play against the pooty AFC > the 4 games against the NFC.

Defensive numbers are still inflated because of the AFC schedule.

#21 BlackCnqstdr

BlackCnqstdr

    Junior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 123 posts

Posted 14 January 2013 - 10:52 AM

The Broncos had to play Ben, M Ryan, Schaub, Rivers twice, Brady, Freeman, Newton, Brees and Flacco. That's ten out of their 16 games and they finished 4th in points against and 2nd in yards against.

Cinci played Flacco twice, Ben twice, both mannings, rivers, romo, and RG3 finished 6th in yards against 8th in points against.

Houston played manning, rodgers, flacco, cutler, stafford, brady, and luck twice 7th in yards against, 9th in points against.

Pitt played Flacco twice, Dalton twice, both Mannings, Vick, RG3, Romo, and Rivers 1st in yards 6th in points.

The problem isn't with AFC defenses being overrated, it's with your perception of NFC QBs

Like Manning is "mr. clutch" (3948 yards 26 tds 15 ints 59.9% completions) and rivers is terrible (3606 26, 15 64.1%

Jay Cutler is top half easily (3000 19, 14 58.8%) and andy dalton is "meh" (3600 27, 16 62.3%)

Matt Stafford has ridiculous talent (4967 20, 17 59.8) andy luck is overrated (4300 23, 18 54.1%)

#22 teeray

teeray

    THE SWAGNIFICENT

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,331 posts

Posted 14 January 2013 - 01:31 PM

The Broncos had to play Ben, M Ryan, Schaub, Rivers twice, Brady, Freeman, Newton, Brees and Flacco. That's ten out of their 16 games and they finished 4th in points against and 2nd in yards against.

Cinci played Flacco twice, Ben twice, both mannings, rivers, romo, and RG3 finished 6th in yards against 8th in points against.

Houston played manning, rodgers, flacco, cutler, stafford, brady, and luck twice 7th in yards against, 9th in points against.

Pitt played Flacco twice, Dalton twice, both Mannings, Vick, RG3, Romo, and Rivers 1st in yards 6th in points.

The problem isn't with AFC defenses being overrated, it's with your perception of NFC QBs

Like Manning is "mr. clutch" (3948 yards 26 tds 15 ints 59.9% completions) and rivers is terrible (3606 26, 15 64.1%

Jay Cutler is top half easily (3000 19, 14 58.8%) and andy dalton is "meh" (3600 27, 16 62.3%)

Matt Stafford has ridiculous talent (4967 20, 17 59.8) andy luck is overrated (4300 23, 18 54.1%)


Who did they play in those other games?? And you shouldn't put Luck, Vick, and Rivers in examples to say they played great QBs. You are even pushing it by including Flacco and Dalton.

How about the Panthers just in their division? Josh Freeman x2, Brees x2, Matt Ryan x2. Not to mention both Mannings, RG3, Cutler, Russell Wilson and Tony Romo.

Hey if you want to be taken seriously about talking QBs actually watch the games, don't go to ESPN and just look at the stats. Otherwise you might think Alex Smith (70% completion percentage, 13 TDs, 5 INTs, 104.1 passer rating) was actually good too.

Luck is overrated. If you can't complete more than 50% of your passes for 5 straight games, you are not playing very well.

Oh yeah, you left off River's 15 fumbles when comparing him to Eli Manning.

#23 BlackCnqstdr

BlackCnqstdr

    Junior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 123 posts

Posted 14 January 2013 - 02:30 PM

Show me where I called any of those qbs great.

How many "great" qbs do they have to play to be considered a legit defense? How many "great" qbs did the niners and seahawks play?

Let me narrow the list for you the niners played the cards and rams twice each, ponder, sanchez, fitzpatrick and tannehill. That leaves a possible 8 games against "great" qbs so they must be frauds right? The hawks played cards and rams twice, fitzpatrick, alex smith, Tannehill, Sanchez and Ponder. That leaves 7 games against possibly good qbs... frauds again.

If you're not seeing the obvious bias in discrediting Dalton, Flacco, and Luck while listing Freeman, Cutler, and Stafford as examples of good qbs I don't know what to tell you.

As far as Luck being overrated, its fun to zero in on one stat rather than watching the games right? You can't possibly be a good qb if you have a 3 game stretch with 1td and 9 int (Freeman) right? You can't possibly be a good qb with 0 300 yard games and 9 games UNDER 200 yards (R Wilson) right? You couldn't possibly be a good qb when you lead the league in pass attempts by a wide margin, have hands down the best receiver in the league and only threw 20 tds (Stafford) right?

What about the Panthers? I'm not the one calling defenses overrated for playing well against the teams they're scheduled to play.

Are you saying alex smith isn't a good qb? I know he's not a GREAT qb like stafford but not even good? you didn't watch him in the playoffs last year? I'm just trying to reconcile luck, smith, dalton, flacco being scrubs while your defense is to be applauded for stopping stafford and freeman. I guess its just me though.

Yes Rivers is a turnover machine and wildly inconsistent, just like Eli.

#24 teeray

teeray

    THE SWAGNIFICENT

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,331 posts

Posted 14 January 2013 - 03:01 PM

Show me where I called any of those qbs great.

How many "great" qbs do they have to play to be considered a legit defense? How many "great" qbs did the niners and seahawks play?

Let me narrow the list for you the niners played the cards and rams twice each, ponder, sanchez, fitzpatrick and tannehill. That leaves a possible 8 games against "great" qbs so they must be frauds right? The hawks played cards and rams twice, fitzpatrick, alex smith, Tannehill, Sanchez and Ponder. That leaves 7 games against possibly good qbs... frauds again.

If you're not seeing the obvious bias in discrediting Dalton, Flacco, and Luck while listing Freeman, Cutler, and Stafford as examples of good qbs I don't know what to tell you.

As far as Luck being overrated, its fun to zero in on one stat rather than watching the games right? You can't possibly be a good qb if you have a 3 game stretch with 1td and 9 int (Freeman) right? You can't possibly be a good qb with 0 300 yard games and 9 games UNDER 200 yards (R Wilson) right? You couldn't possibly be a good qb when you lead the league in pass attempts by a wide margin, have hands down the best receiver in the league and only threw 20 tds (Stafford) right?

What about the Panthers? I'm not the one calling defenses overrated for playing well against the teams they're scheduled to play.

Are you saying alex smith isn't a good qb? I know he's not a GREAT qb like stafford but not even good? you didn't watch him in the playoffs last year? I'm just trying to reconcile luck, smith, dalton, flacco being scrubs while your defense is to be applauded for stopping stafford and freeman. I guess its just me though.

Yes Rivers is a turnover machine and wildly inconsistent, just like Eli.


I never said that AFC defenses weren't legit. I said the reason why you see so many at the top is because they are inflated by playing pooty QBs in the AFC. In my last paragraph I said when you hear about a "good" defense in the AFC, be sure to check their schedule.

If you actually read what i wrote I list Cutler, Stafford, Schaub, and Flacco in basically the same category. Good but short of elite.

Dalton may be in the top half, but if he is, it is barely.

All I said about Stafford is that he has incredible talent and is a top half of the NFL QB. I don't think he is great yet.

And I don't zero in on one stat. When I analyze a QB it is a conglomerate of things from statistical analysis and actually watching them play. HOWEVER, by any metric if you are not completing 50% of your passes you are not playing that well. If you don't complete 50% of your passes over 5 games, you are not playing well for an extended period of time. If for a season you are below 55%, you aren't playing very well. After all, a QBs primary objective is to actually complete passes.

No Alex Smith is not good.

To put it simply, when you have the luxury of playing teams that are Qb'd by the likes of Weeden, Gabbert, Fitzgerald, Sanchez, Tannehill, Quinn/Cassel, Palmer, etc. and your 4th best QB in your conference is probably Joe Flacco, your defenses are going to rank higher than most teams in the NFC whose worst QB is whoever the Cardinals are currently using and then Sam Bradford. After that, there are no truly terrible QBs like the ones I listed above. And Bradford isn't terrible, he just isn't very good. After that you have maybe Vick. Yes, Mike Vick might be the third worst QB in the NFC, and he was an MVP candidate just 3 years ago.

#25 BlackCnqstdr

BlackCnqstdr

    Junior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 123 posts

Posted 14 January 2013 - 03:33 PM

In other words all the defenses at the top of the league have inflated numbers because they all spent over half their season playing subpar qbs, except maybe the bears. Got it.

#26 Future Of The Franchise

Future Of The Franchise

    The Ambassador of Booty

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,760 posts

Posted 14 January 2013 - 04:36 PM

The op makes more sense than 75% of the threads I've read here since the end of Week 17.

#27 teeray

teeray

    THE SWAGNIFICENT

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,331 posts

Posted 14 January 2013 - 05:07 PM

In other words all the defenses at the top of the league have inflated numbers because they all spent over half their season playing subpar qbs, except maybe the bears. Got it.


Out of he bottom 13 teams in the NFL in PPG, 10 are in the AFC!!

So 10 of the 16 teams in the AFC are in the bottom 13 in scoring. 11 of the 16 teams in the bottom half of the NFL in PPG are in the AFC.

So, to put that in perspective, 68% of the teams in the AFC are in the bottom half of the league in PPG. 77% of the bottom 13 teams in PPG are in the AFC, and @63% of the entire AFC is in the bottom 13 of the NFL in PPG.

Now it is just common sense that if you play teams that are inept offensively in will inflate your numbers defensively.

#28 BlackCnqstdr

BlackCnqstdr

    Junior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 123 posts

Posted 14 January 2013 - 05:32 PM

buffalo is 21st, st louis is 25th, arizona is 31st, the jets are 28th, miami is 27th.

That's 7 out of 16 games for both san fran and seattle. The same number of games denver played against offenses ranked 20th or lower. Houston also played 7 teams ranked 20 or below. Pitt played 8 games against offenses 20 or below.

Everyone in the league plays multiple games against bad teams every year and "inflates" their offensive and defensive numbers.

#29 teeray

teeray

    THE SWAGNIFICENT

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,331 posts

Posted 14 January 2013 - 07:14 PM

buffalo is 21st, st louis is 25th, arizona is 31st, the jets are 28th, miami is 27th.

That's 7 out of 16 games for both san fran and seattle. The same number of games denver played against offenses ranked 20th or lower. Houston also played 7 teams ranked 20 or below. Pitt played 8 games against offenses 20 or below.

Everyone in the league plays multiple games against bad teams every year and "inflates" their offensive and defensive numbers.


Without even looking I can tell you that Houston only played 3 games against a top 10 PPG team. So the other 13 games were against average to bad offenses.

Also without looking I can say that Carolina beat that just in their divisional games.

BTW if you want to contradict me you should just stay in the NFC West as you have done so far. Their schedules will match up favorably because they have Arizona and STL in their division so they have 4 games against bad offenses right off the bat and then they also have 4 games against the AFC so they will always have 6-8 games against terrible offenses.

To be better representative of what is really going on, you should look at the NFC North, South, and East and their schedules and look at top half and bottom half of PPG

#30 BlackCnqstdr

BlackCnqstdr

    Junior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 123 posts

Posted 14 January 2013 - 08:16 PM

Houston played 4 games against top ten offenses

San Fran played against 6

Seattle played against 2

Pitt played against 5

Denver also played against 5

I'm staying in the NFC West because SF and SEA are the top two teams in points and 3 and 4 in yards. They're arguably the top two defenses in the league and are benefiting from the exact same thing you seem to claim only benefits AFC defenses.

Chicago is ranked up there in both yards and points and played against 4 top ten teams and 4 below 20 teams. Throw in SF with the top offenses that gives you 5 and the other 11 games were against teams ranked 14th or lower. 14th being Minnesota with that world beater Ponder at QB.

Nobody plays a schedule full of elite teams.


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Shop at Amazon Contact Us: info@carolinahuddle.com