For sure something to look at. My point is and has been top 10 defense stats in the NFL are strictly based on yards allowed. That's flawed for many reasons. One you mentioned. Another is and I think it's the biggest, yards allowed depends more on schedule than even how good your D is. Houston was very good on yards allowed. I'd say playing Jacksonville and Indy 4 times helped more than just how good they played.

 

In another thread someone asked me to where the last top 10 super bowl champions ranked in scoring offense and defense. 4 times in the last 10 years a team finished in the top 10 in scoring offenses who won the super bowl. 8 times out of the last 10 years a team finished in the top 10 in scoring defenses who won the Super Bowl. Which I looked those scoring defenses were also in the top 10 in yards. Do you want to know where Green Bay ranked last year in scoring offense and scoring defense? They finished 10th in scoring offense, and 2nd in scoring defense. So their defense was even better than their offense when they won the Super Bowl. This year their defense was not very good while their offense was still great and now they are sitting at home. So are people still wanting to argue that having a top offense is even more important?

 

Having both are important, however having a top defense with an offense that is at least average or better than average has shown to be even better for making runs to win the Super Bowl.

Scoring Defense is a much better stat than yards allowed.

Scoring Defense is a much better stat than yards allowed.

 

Which after looking at the top scoring defenses in the NFL this year, the Bengals still played 10 games against the top 10 scoring defenses 11 if you count the playoff game. I went even further and looked back over the last few seasons, and basically teams who were in the top 10 in yards allowed were also in the top 10 in points scored. I get what you are trying to say about the yards allowed stat, however most of the time the same teams who are in the top 10 in yards allowed, are also in the top 10 in the categories that you say are important. Which gets back to if your not giving up many yards, that many the other stats will end up good too. So me talking about all the games the Bengals have played against top defenses is valid, and even valid in the categories that you find most important. We wasted all this time for no reason. I know offense is important, however just been trying to get you to realize that having top defenses, and playing against top defenses is also very important in how good a team is. You basically written off the thing about the Bengals playing top defenses, however I was just trying to get you to see that is wrong to do. It's not like I didn't know teams had to score too, however they both are very important. Just so happens the top defensive teams usually do even better in the playoffs.:thumb:

I really never wrote off playing top Defenses. They lost to every good team and every good Defense they played. Good teams and good QB's still score points against good defenses. I agree with you that he should improve because he was only a rookie and he'll have a full offseason. I'm just not sure we as a whole didn't overrated him.

Which after looking at the top scoring defenses in the NFL this year, the Bengals still played 10 games against the top 10 scoring defenses 11 if you count the playoff game. I went even further and looked back over the last few seasons, and basically teams who were in the top 10 in yards allowed were also in the top 10 in points scored. I get what you are trying to say about the yards allowed stat, however most of the time the same teams who are in the top 10 in yards allowed, are also in the top 10 in the categories that you say are important. Which gets back to if your not giving up many yards, that many the other stats will end up good too. So me talking about all the games the Bengals have played against top defenses is valid, and even valid in the categories that you find most important. We wasted all this time for no reason. I know offense is important, however just been trying to get you to realize that having top defenses, and playing against top defenses is also very important in how good a team is. You basically written off the thing about the Bengals playing top defenses, however I was just trying to get you to see that is wrong to do. It's not like I didn't know teams had to score too, however they both are very important. Just so happens the top defensive teams usually do even better in the playoffs.:thumb:

 

The two teams playing for the Super Bowl were both ranked outside the top 25 on D.

The two teams playing for the Super Bowl were both ranked outside the top 25 on D.

 

Easy now. You're hurting FC's argument...he'll either ignore it, or write 14 pages on how they have actually been playing like top 10 defenses during the playoffs.

The two teams playing for the Super Bowl were both ranked outside the top 25 on D.

 

Easy now. You're hurting FC's argument...he'll either ignore it, or write 14 pages on how they have actually been playing like top 10 defenses during the playoffs.

 

I guess you all also failed to see that going into these Championship games that I predicted the Giants and Pats to win. AverageJoesGym you need to know what your talking about before you jump into an discussion. As for SSC I have never once said having a top defense is even better. You went on and on about the QB's the Bengals played. And how Dalton coudn't win in a shootout, and benfitted from not playing top QB's. My thing was that playing top defenses is just as hard as playing a top QB. Especially considering the Bengals QB was a rookie playing 11 games against them. In these playoffs we have seen these top QB's look normal while playing top defenses. Even today we seen the Ravens defense make Brady struggle and work for everything he got, and seen how the 49ers defense did the same to Manning. Both the Ravens and 49ers ended up losing not because of the other teams offenses, but because of special teams failures. My argument all along and SSC knows this, was that playing top defenses can be just as tough as playing top QB's. These playoffs have shown that, and even today it showed that. The two QB's now playing for the Super Bowl had to get help from special teams to get by, because they were not able to be as sharp going against these defenses. I think me predicting the Pats, and Giants to win shows that I was not saying only top defenses win. If I thought that I would have said it would have been a Ravens/49ers Super Bowl, my whole argument was that playing top defenses for a QB can be just as hard as competiting against a top QB on the other side. My argument was shown to be true throughout these playoffs, and even today in the losses. A former bust and average QB in Alex Smith had a chance to be an elite QB because of his defense, and same with Flacco against one of the best of all time in Brady. Playing a top QB is tough, just like playing a top defense is tough and that has been my argument all along.

Easy now. You're hurting FC's argument...he'll either ignore it, or write 14 pages on how they have actually been playing like top 10 defenses during the playoffs.

 

However since you felt like jumping into a conversation you know nothing about. The Giants defense has played like one of the best defenses in the playoffs. I think I seen a stat showing how they have given up less than 17 points a game in their last 4 games. I don't think its a coincidence that they have now won their last 4 games in games that had to be won. They went on their horrible losing streak during the year because their defense sucked during that time. Their defense turned it around and now look at them. So imagine how good of a team they would have been during the season if they played all season long like they have at the end of the year. So imagine playing a team who's defense consistently played at that level all year long, those were the defenses the Bengals played 11 games against this year. Which is what are whole argument started with. SSC saying playing top QB's was harder, and I said playing top defenses can also be just as tough. Which these playoffs have supported that even more, and even today with how those defenses made Brady and Manning play. Definitely did play as great as normal for them.

Easy now. You're hurting FC's argument...he'll either ignore it, or write 14 pages on how they have actually been playing like top 10 defenses during the playoffs.

 

He went with option B

However since you felt like jumping into a conversation you know nothing about. The Giants defense has played like one of the best defenses in the playoffs. I think I seen a stat showing how they have given up less than 17 points a game in their last 4 games. I don't think its a coincidence that they have now won their last 4 games in games that had to be won. They went on their horrible losing streak during the year because their defense sucked during that time. Their defense turned it around and now look at them. So imagine how good of a team they would have been during the season if they played all season long like they have at the end of the year. So imagine playing a team who's defense consistently played at that level all year long, those were the defenses the Bengals played 11 games against this year. Which is what are whole argument started with. SSC saying playing top QB's was harder, and I said playing top defenses can also be just as tough. Which these playoffs have supported that even more, and even today with how those defenses made Brady and Manning play. Definitely did play as great as normal for them.

 

Know nothing about? How do you figure? I've read you post the same 10,000 word posts in about 10 different threads this postseason. And you did try to make the point (by using stats that were proven to be incorrect) that teams with top 10 defenses do better in the playoffs than teams with top 10 offenses. When it turns out it was pretty much even you changed your stance that you need to be good at both.

He went with option B

 

That's the one I figured he'd go with.

Know nothing about? How do you figure? I've read you post the same 10,000 word posts in about 10 different threads this postseason. And you did try to make the point (by using stats that were proven to be incorrect) that teams with top 10 defenses do better in the playoffs than teams with top 10 offenses. When it turns out it was pretty much even you changed your stance that you need to be good at both.

 

Quite simply the best QB in the AFC is playing against a top 3 QB from the NFC for the Super Bowl and the defenses of those teams were ranked 27th and 31st. He had to make a change somewhere. This is a QB driven league because of the rules and Alex Smith was so bad yesterday they couldn't covert a 3rd down.

Know nothing about? How do you figure? I've read you post the same 10,000 word posts in about 10 different threads this postseason. And you did try to make the point (by using stats that were proven to be incorrect) that teams with top 10 defenses do better in the playoffs than teams with top 10 offenses. When it turns out it was pretty much even you changed your stance that you need to be good at both.

 

Stats I found on espn.com and I admitted when looking on nfl.com they were different. My stance from the beginning before the playoffs even began, that playing top defenses could be just as hard as playing a top QB. So those playoff stats still show that you usually need a top defense just as much as you need a top QB correct since they were about the same? So your argument with me is about what? My argument was that playing top defenses can be just as tough and throughout these playoffs it was shown, and throughout other playoffs it has been shown. SSC started this back by acting like playing top QB's is so much tougher, and where has that been proven to be true? So once again know what your talking about and what the argument started from. So who's argument between me and him has been proved to be more correct? We seen top QB likes Rodgers, and Brees lose because a teams defense forced them into turnovers and make them look normal. We seen Tom Brady play bad by his standards, and needing a dropped pass and then a missed field goal to win his game because of that defense slowing him down. We seen Manning need overtime and two screw ups by a punt returner to beat a QB who didn't convert a 3rd down all game. SSC argument has been the one proven more wrong, and if you knew what started this argument you would see that. You would also see who changed and backtracked from their original comments even more. Thank you

Quite simply the best QB in the AFC is playing against a top 3 QB from the NFC for the Super Bowl and the defenses of those teams were ranked 27th and 31st. He had to make a change somewhere. This is a QB driven league because of the rules and Alex Smith was so bad yesterday they couldn't covert a 3rd down.

 

Your argument started by how it was harder to play top QB's than teams with top defenses. How has that argument been proven true? My argument was that it can be just as hard playing top defenses, and we have seen in past playoffs and even these playoffs that top defenses are just as hard to beat. We saw Rodgers and Brees lose because their defenses couldn't stop anyone, and also because the defenses they played made them look normal. We seen yesterday a defense make Brady look normal, and honestly probably getting lucky to win because of a dropped pass and missed field goal. Eli Manning still needed two mistakes by a punt returner, and also needed overtime to beat an average QB who didn't convert a 3rd down. All because a top defense kept the Giants offense down.

 

So once again how has your argument been proven to be right? Mine was that playing top defenses can be just as hard, just like what the Bengals played. Your argument was the Bengals schedule would be tougher playing more top QB's than to defenses? I think we have seen that it wouldn't be harder your way either. I was showing that playing top defenses can be just as hard, and I think we have seen that. You have changed your stance more on it than me. So thank you too

Giants defense is ranked 27th. Stats lie.