RickyInKenner

yeah. the introduced it in the 80s, it blew up in 89/90, it wasn't a pass first league before that, people ran the ball alot.

...lol...

SaintFanInATLHELL

It's not that it's inconceivable, just unlikely.

By the way JP and JK, the 49ers in the 80s had a top 10 scoring defense (regular season) every year that they won the SB:

2nd in 1981, 1st in 1984, 8th in 1988, 3rd in 1989. 6th in 1994.

So did the Rams in the 1990s.

In fact the last two years are the exceptions since 1983. The Giants were 17th and the Colts were 23rd. However, the Giants were 1st last postseason and the Colts were 2nd in the postseason their SB winning year. Each were under 17 pts/game and each played 4 games.

BTW last year the Pats were #2 a scant 0.1 ppg behind the Giants in the postseason. And they too were in the top 10 in scoring defense in the regular season.

The Patriots in the SB were the poster boys for the perfect offense. And they got shut down. Any defense that can stop the run and rush the passer with their front 4 are going to win a ton of football games. Just look at Tennesee last year as a perfect example. Their offense was frankly horrific. Yet they won 10 games in arguably the best division currently in the NFL and made the playoffs.

Teams who don't play defense do not win championships.

There's a reason that it's both in my signature and my avatar.

SFIAH

Super Bowl Championships: New Orleans Saints:1, Carolina:0, Atlanta Chokers: STILL ZERO

Only Atlanta choked in an unchokable situation... Life is definitely good.

Euphoria

Ya might want to go revisit the 80's the 49'ers were a solid club Offense to Defense. THey had a damn good D.

Tobias-Reiper

.. yeah, Ronnie Lott, Charles Haley, Keena Turner, Tim McKyer, Kevin Fagan, Bill Romanowski, Dwight Hicks, Manu Tiuawhatever.. yeah they all sucked..

JKool

SFIAH, I bow to your superior knowledge on this point.

Very interesting.

Can you clarify for me how "scoring defense" is measured (again, this is just a question - it is not leading or critical in any way)? I just want to know what I should be looking for (statistically, at least).

Secondarily, I am now interested in this idea of defense winning games. There is one way in which that is obviously false (since with no points, you can't win). So the way it is intended must be more complex - good defense increases you chance of winning. It is not the only thing that matters, but it is an important part. This is what ya'll have in mind, right?

Now, if the Giants and Patriots both have a top 10 scoring defense, and the Patriots had a better offense, the prediction is that the Patriots should win? Thus, having a great defense is a necessary, but not sufficient condition (requirement) for winning the SB. What then are the other factors that seriously increase the probability of winning the SB? Or, another way of thinking about it might be this: winning games (including the big game) requires a complex set of things (one of which is having a great defense).

"... I was beating them with my eyes the whole game..." - Aaron Brooks

Memnoch_TP

Bow to his knowledge, just not his wisdom. Defense winning championships has NOTHING to do with NOT picking up Shockey. You have to have an offense, and a damn good one is better than an average one or a bad one.

I mean, we could probably trade Drew Brees for some stud defensive player. Wouldn't be too hard to do. I mean, we can get by with Brunell. He is solid, but not spectacular. Get Shaun Alexander and trade Reggie for a stud DB, and we are rolling.

I mean, why not? If upgrading the offense = hurting the defense, downgrading the offense should assure us a Super Bowl victory.

Who would have thought that Drew Brees and Reggie Bush were actually dragging us down. Drew and Reggie are why the defense sucks! Those bloody offensive leeches should be run out of town on a rail.



Have you ever gone to Waffle House? You see all those numbers they scribble on the side of the check? They are magic. No matter how many times you tally up the numbers, they are always different. They just shift around, and the waitress just approximates a total and scribbles it down. This is the phenomenon I have labeled "Waffle House Mathematics".

SFIAH, you have created the strategy and personnel version of "Waffle House Mathematics". Riddle me this, Waffle Master, why didn't we have "The Dome Patrol Part Deaux" when A.B. was behind center? LOL.

"Human beings, who are almost unique in having the ability to learn from the experience of others, are also remarkable for their apparent disinclination to do so." -- Douglas Adams.

SoulStar

Im sorry, but I see the need to post on this topic.

For those of you who are against shockey joining the saints think of this?

Shockey had his best year as a rookie when Payton was there!

Now I know some of you say so what, but also keep in mind that once Payton got his hands on Jason Witten of the Cowboys that man became a bigger threat on the field than T.O. If you look at all the cowboys killer plays the past few seasons it's Witten who is making the catch for Romo.

When the Pats, Giants, and Philly whipped up on the Cowboys this year Witten was a non factor. When the Saints spanked the cowboys two years ago, Payton made sure that Romo's safety blanket of Witten was accounted for.

Payton knows offense, and he knows how to use a TE to the make him a game breaker so to speak. If the man wants Shockey, then get the deal done, but do not trade away anything more than 3rd for him.

We all know DEF is the path to the Superbowl, but if you can make this deal for shockey then you cant pass on it.

Trust in Payton.

You say that were nuts for pulling for them, you call them sorry, you wonder why we deal with them year after year. Well New Orleans is like no other city in the world, and no fans are anything like saint fans.

jeanpierre

Re: TOo 49er's Offense and Defense

Yeah the 49'ers had what is affectionately known as playmakers but they didn't consistently shut down offenses week in and week out...

I seem they struggled against teams such as the Bengals for example...

But the 49'ers and Rams as you have pointed out had far superior offenses to their defense; and when you put points on the board at the rate the 80's 49ers and 90's Rams did, then the opposition has to anyone? anyone? anyone?

Go one dimensional...that's right and then you can have your 2-3playmakers in the right position for turnovers and possible score conversions...

But the point is you take what is an very good offense and make it great; this is consistent with the point I've made that you take what you got and maximize it...

And while the 49ers had some HOF'er on Defense, they were not a walk on the field and shut the opposition down defense that some of the good teams had...

Further, the Rams example you brought up further illustrates my point about taking an offense to the next level and letting the Rams defense get its turnovers; seriously, you think the Rams defense in its last run of success scared opposing offenses?!?

It's not that my way is the right way, I just make the right way my way...

mikesaintfan

so billy miller and eric johnson vs defenses that dont care about them equaling shockeys catches vs defenses that plan for him as a big time player is a good thing? if other teams place more focus on shockey and keep him at bm/ej stats what does that do for colston, bush, duece and meachum/patten/henderson?

SaintFanInATLHELL

Points per game. Since the number of games is fixed for the regular season, total points scored against the defense also qualifies.

BTW any "superior knowledge" I may have is from researching the topic. The stats are all on Pro-Football-Reference.com - Pro Football Statistics and History at the top of any team's page for a given year. Also I scrounged up the postseason data from the stats section of NFL.com - Official Site of the National Football League

Defense winning championships. The reason is that good defense and running the football function more consistently over a wider variety of conditions. As an example I take you back to 2000, the Baltimore ravens:

2000 Baltimore Ravens Statistics & Players - Pro-Football-Reference.com

If you take a look they only gave up more than 20 points twice all season, and no more than 10 in the playoffs. When you're only giving up 10 points a game, You are always in contention.

Now the problem with teams that shoot it out without a defense is that if the offense sputters at all, then you lose the game. It puts a lot of pressure on an offense to be perfect.

The other aspect, which I've been saying here about the Saints for awhile, is that a defense can give up quite a bit, but if they prevent you from scoring, they've done their job. Put it this way: in a drive an offense needs to succeed on every third down, the defense only needs to succeed on one.

And you missed one final point: the defense can score too, both directly and indirectly. Directly by a turnover return for a TD. Indirectly by a turnover that gives you offense such great field position.
Correct. That's why I have the word virtually in my signature.

Yes. But it's not all that complex. A team has to be able to run the ball effectively and not turn the ball over. Since your defense will virtually always back you up.

But I want to remind you that until that last drive the Patriots defense had done their job. That top 10 defense had their team in a position to win the. That final drive by the Giants was as improbable as they come. Here's a pretty good video of it:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7195569314950590387&ei=uP8iSNzsK4amrwK6p-3IAg&hl=en
Without the 4th and 1 conversion and the literally miracle play from Manning to Tyree (which IMHO would result in a sack or incompletion 99% of the time), the game is over with the Giants scoring 10 points. A fanstastic and improbable finish to be sure.

But to finish up, in an ideal NFL world, your team has the best offense, the best defense, and comes away champions. But in virtually every instance in a playoff run, the best defense during that playoff run prevails because it simultaneously takes pressure off your offense while exerting tremendous pressure on opposing offenses.

BTW great offenses and defenses complement one another. That's why the Rams and Cowboys of the 90's and the Niners of the 80's were so successful.

That's where I'd like to see the Saints going in this next window. And our offense is going to be a great contributor to the effort. But IMO it's a near championship caliber offense RIGHT NOW! Brees' surgical precision with the ball almost always works in lieu of that consistent running game that I referred to above. However, like all great offenses the Saints can be shut down by superior defense. Witness the NFC championship game, the Indy game, and the Tennessee game for recent examples.

So that gets us back to Shockey. I know ya'll think I don't think he'll make the offense better. He would. My issue is the potential costs on three fronts: players/picks, dollars, and team chemistry.


Are you willing to give up next year's first for the guy?

What about Harper, your best starting safety?

Are you willing the risk the guy being unhappy with his production?

He's going to want his money. Do you pay him over Smith? Over Colston?

What if Vilma returns to earlier 4-3 and becomes the beast in the middle we think he's going to be. Paying him will impact both the draft pick and potentially Shockey's money.

It's not as clear cut as "He's great! Get him!"

I know it's a lot to read. The Professor is just trying to drop some knowledge.

SFIAH

Super Bowl Championships: New Orleans Saints:1, Carolina:0, Atlanta Chokers: STILL ZERO

Only Atlanta choked in an unchokable situation... Life is definitely good.