Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Best defense is a good offense


Nu Guns

Recommended Posts

Our whole offense is back and they are pretty damn solid!

Our line is great barring injury and even is Stewart misses some games, Goodson is a damn good football player.

Smitty, Moose, Moore are a good solid 3 unit and from what we have seen in the pre-season is looks like our TE's are finally going to get some action this year.

I know our run defense is going to be an issue , but I am hoping we can combat with a great offense. (best defense is a good offense formula)

I am worried that Fox will not use that formula, but given his contract status, he may not have a choice.

Jake's arm did look very strong in the preseason, which is great because I think he may be throwing a but more this year.

As long our offense can stay on the field, we will be fine.

But will Fox pass the ball when its 3rd and 14 ???

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Our whole offense is back and they are pretty damn solid!

Our line is great barring injury and even is Stewart misses some games, Goodson is a damn good football player.

Smitty, Moose, Moore are a good solid 3 unit and from what we have seen in the pre-season is looks like our TE's are finally going to get some action this year.

I know our run defense is going to be an issue , but I am hoping we can combat with a great offense. (best defense is a good offense formula)

I am worried that Fox will not use that formula, but given his contract status, he may not have a choice.

Jake's arm did look very strong in the preseason, which is great because I think he may be throwing a but more this year.

As long our offense can stay on the field, we will be fine.

But will Fox pass the ball when its 3rd and 14 ???

I have had these same thoughts myself. And have wondered as you......... would Fox be willing to open it up sooner. I guess that is the $64,000. question.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't blame you. You have seen what great offense and poor defense gets you. In 2008 it got NO an 8-8 season.

But I agree with you that great offense without at least good defense won't win the tough games or get you to the playoffs.

I hate to disagree, but NO had a great passing game in 2008, not a great overall offensive package.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hate to disagree, but NO had a great passing game in 2008, not a great overall offensive package.

You don't lead the NFL in offense without a great offensive package. Look at NE in 2007, they didn't run the ball much either but lead the league in offense as well. Balance can be a good thing but isn't necessary in order to have a great offensive team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wish I could remember the website I saw this killer stat at.

It basically showed the time of pos in each quarter and the impact on that teams OWN Defense and how long each drive was.

In a strange way relook at Carolina's year last year. DeA had TONS of long runs for td's. While cool to watch it had an odd impact on the Panther's D.

They would not sit all that long thus they could possbly be worn down come the 4th qrtr.

I think TOP is not viewed the way it once was. Simply having the ball longer is not as important as WHEN you hold the ball. If you are big play in the 2nd half but don't chew up the clock it could work against you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You don't lead the NFL in offense without a great offensive package. Look at NE in 2007, they didn't run the ball much either but lead the league in offense as well. Balance can be a good thing but isn't necessary in order to have a great offensive team.

Very true. But I don't know, I can't view a singular aspect of a team as making it great, regardless of how effective that aspect may be. Did the Saints legitimately go up against a stellar pass defense all last year (I'm asking because I don't know and don't want to look it up)? No one in the South can stop a pass effectively, and the AFCW and NFCN can't really make that kind of claim either.

If the Saints were to face a team that can competitively shut down the passing game, how would their offense look?

And if you ever have the nerve to make a point by using NE as a reference point again, well then I just don't know what I will do. They are all godless motherless freaks of nature and deserve to be mentioned only in eulogies.;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • In my opinion Fitterer was probably right about not paying McCaffrey. Now not wanting to "pay RBs" in my opinion isn't something you want to set in stone, to me it all comes down to the individual.
    • Maybe I'm just not understanding, but everywhere that I have read says that signing bonuses go against the cap prorated by as much as five years. The following example uses Andrew Luck's rookie contract as an example. "Take Andrew Luck, the first overall pick in the 2012 NFL draft. Luck signed a four-year contract with the Colts worth $22.1 million and included a $14.5 million signing bonus. Rather than a $14.5 million cap hit in 2012, the Colts spread out his signing bonus over the life of his contract. The hit against the cap would be $3.625 million per year over four years instead of a direct cap hit of $14.5 million directly in 2012. This gave the Colts more leverage and cap flexibility in signing other players." https://www.the33rdteam.com/nfl-signing-bonuses-explained/ I don't know why some of you think that signing bonuses aren't counted against the cap over the length of the contract, but whatever.   "The bonus with a signing is usually the most garish aspect of a rookie contract. Bonus is the immediate cash players receive when they ink a deal. It factors into the cap, but only for the whole contract duration, in terms of salary cap calculations. In the case of Bryce Young’s $24.6 million signing bonus, that’s prorated to approximately $6.15 million per season over a four-year deal. This format allows teams to handle the cap and provides rookies with some short-term fiscal stability, which is important given the high injury risk in this league." https://collegefootballnetwork.com/how-rookie-contracts-work-in-the-nfl/ I understand how signing bonuses can be a useful tool in order to manage the cap, and as one of the article suggests, signing bonuses may become important if you have a tight cap, but the bill is always going to come due. I'm not necessarily referring to you Tuka, but it seems to me that others simply don't want to understand that fact which is why they're reacting to what I'm saying negatively. How odd. In any event, I have a better general understanding of why signing bonuses are used now, and it's generally to fit salaries under the cap. Surely players, whether they be rookies or not, love a signing bonus because they get a good portion of their money up front. This in turn gives them more security and probably amounts to tax benefits as well. I also understand why teams would not want to use signing bonuses, particularly for players or draftees who have a higher probability of being gone before a contract even ends.
    • Get any shot you can at humane society, so much cheaper
×
×
  • Create New...