Shula also deserves some credit for our stout D.

[CharlottePanther]

oh hey look another dumb cliche your pawpaw told you that hasn't held up

Im just a firm believer in "defenses wins championship."

[Growl]

Im just a firm believer in "defenses wins championship."

 

Oh really because it seems that there is another axe your grinding at play here

 

 

 

 

God I love ground and pound, clock control offenses. Forget this basketball style, shoot out type offenses. I just love seeing offenses like ours that is super stingy with that football and doesnt like to give it back and just pounds it.

 

 

oh gee look there it is after all

[frash.exe]

Guys gah run dah foobaw

[frash.exe]

People who still think defense wins championships are usually the guys at the stadium still trying to make the mullet happen, or people who just discovered the internet after they realized their local library has high speed

[pantherclaw]

The best defense has always been a ball control offense that sustains drives, keeping the opposing offense off the field.

It's even more imperative in today's pass happy NFL.

[CelticCat]

No. As has already been said in this thread, not only does the evidence not support this. it suggests the opposite. The only people who still believe this are the schmucks who grew up watching the steelers with pappy and can't let it go and the poor impressionable souls who buy into their thought process

 

What evidence? there is no 1 stat that you can say definitively leads to wins and loses. But TOP is a great barometer.

 

There are obviously exceptions to every rule like Baltimore last year and the wildcard Giants but take a look at the other winning SB teams season TOP over the last 10 year. They are all top 10.

 

NE, Pitt, GB, NY (1st SB), NO, IND all had top 10 TOP,

 

Then have a look at the amount of #1 overall seeds (usually based off high octane Offenses) that have failed to win the big one.

 

Its no surprise that team like the Giants, Minn, Jax and Wash are on the negative side of TOP while the Broncos, Seattle, Chiefs, Saints and NE are on the positive. But there are exceptions like ATL and Phily. But keep in mind Philys 3 wins came against teams with a combined record of like 1-15, They beat the Skins on opening day when RGIII clearly wasn't ready, the Giants and Tampa.

[Chimera]

What evidence? there is no 1 stat that you can say definitively leads to wins and loses. But TOP is a great barometer.

There are obviously exceptions to every rule like Baltimore last year and the wildcard Giants but take a look at the other winning SB teams season TOP over the last 10 year. They are all top 10.

NE, Pitt, GB, NY (1st SB), NO, IND all had top 10 TOP,

Then have a look at the amount of #1 overall seeds (usually based off high octane Offenses) that have failed to win the big one.

Its no surprise that team like the Giants, Minn, Jax and Wash are on the negative side of TOP while the Broncos, Seattle, Chiefs, Saints and NE are on the positive. But there are exceptions like ATL and Phily. But keep in mind Philys 3 wins came against teams with a combined record of like 1-15, They beat the Skins on opening day when RGIII clearly wasn't ready, the Giants and Tampa.

stop talking about wins! the most important thing is making top 10 on sc!!!! Second most important is insulting people on a message board cuz I can't back up my claims

[CelticCat]

People who still think defense wins championships are usually the guys at the stadium still trying to make the mullet happen, or people who just discovered the internet after they realized their local library has high speed

 

When is the last time a team won a SB playing shitty D. Even teams with lower ranked D's like the Saints, Colts and Giants stepped up with huge defensive plays to win the SB. The Giants contained Brady twice to win it.

[MadHatter]

When is the last time a team won a SB playing shitty D. Even teams with lower ranked D's like the Saints, Colts and Giants stepped up with huge defensive plays to win the SB. The Giants contained Brady twice to win it.

Exactly.

Those who think a high scoring offense with a shitty D wins championships are the same whi that think Madden is real football.

[frash.exe]

When is the last time a team won a SB playing shitty D. Even teams with lower ranked D's like the Saints, Colts and Giants stepped up with huge defensive plays to win the SB. The Giants contained Brady twice to win it.

 

What the fug are you even talking about? I'm talking about how stupid people sound taking a basic concept and summing up the whole fuging game in a nutshell. Thanks for making that point, I feel much better about the idea that we should cut all of our offensive talent and just call dive plays on offense while we spend all of our money on defense, I mean that's where it starts and ends right? I know that because Joe Namath mentioned it on Monday Night Football while I poo my huggies in my father's lap in 1986.

 

Question, is anybody in this thread actually serious about analyzing football or are you guys just here to parrot broad football clichés that you first heard when you were 2 years old?

[frash.exe]

What evidence? there is no 1 stat that you can say definitively leads to wins and loses. But TOP is a great barometer.

 

There are obviously exceptions to every rule like Baltimore last year and the wildcard Giants but take a look at the other winning SB teams season TOP over the last 10 year. They are all top 10.

 

NE, Pitt, GB, NY (1st SB), NO, IND all had top 10 TOP,

 

Then have a look at the amount of #1 overall seeds (usually based off high octane Offenses) that have failed to win the big one.

 

Its no surprise that team like the Giants, Minn, Jax and Wash are on the negative side of TOP while the Broncos, Seattle, Chiefs, Saints and NE are on the positive. But there are exceptions like ATL and Phily. But keep in mind Philys 3 wins came against teams with a combined record of like 1-15, They beat the Skins on opening day when RGIII clearly wasn't ready, the Giants and Tampa.

 

Um, Indy was bottom ten in TOP in 2006. So how strong exactly is a rule that has recently had a 30% failure rate, at least?

 

I wasn't going to fact-check this but Madhatter cosigned your post and seeing as how I'd be surprised if he could tie his shoes I couldn't help

 

[frash.exe]

stop talking about wins! the most important thing is making top 10 on sc!!!! Second most important is insulting people on a message board cuz I can't back up my claims

 

Thank you for continuing to come into the thread to tell everybody sarcastically that you agree with people who warp stats in favor of your confirmation bias keep us posted

[Chimera]

"hey guys, you should catch up to the modern nfl. here is a 7 year old anomaly to prove how old fashioned you are"

[frash.exe]

Lol you think this is an anamoly.

 

Pretty much any informed person who follows football understands that TOP is a byproduct stat that can be caused by many different things, it can be caused by a team that plays good offense, like the Saints are right now, a team that likes to run the ball a lot, like the 2-4 Texans (though a lot of this is also due to high percentage passing, despite the horrid turnovers), or, in our case, simply outclassing opponents that aren't playing good football in any phase of the game.

 

It's not something you specifically aim to achieve but the end result of a myriad of different efficiency aspects. If you think Bill Belichick makes it the no.1 priority goal for his team before they walk out of the tunnel you're pretty much useless in this debate.