January 17, 201214 yr Their inability to cover receivers was glaring on 3rd down as well. There are exceptions like a Revis, but to me it goes hand-in-hand. If you can pressure the QB, your secondary can be weaker. Besides QB play, I think one could argue that a great pass rusher is the second most important player on a team these days.
January 17, 201214 yr There are exceptions like a Revis, but to me it goes hand-in-hand. If you can pressure the QB, your secondary can be weaker. Besides QB play, I think one could argue that a great pass rusher is the second most important player on a team these days. That's a good point. It just really blew my mind how wide open Giants receivers were on third down. I can only imagine how much better the Texans would have been with Mario Williams playing.
January 17, 201214 yr That's a good point. It just really blew my mind how wide open Giants receivers were on third down. I can only imagine how much better the Texans would have been with Mario Williams playing. In all honestly, if they could have entered the post-season healthy, the Texans would have been my pick to win the AFC. In fact, if they'd have just had Schaub, I'd have picked them. The defense played at a high level even without Mario, but the offense was never the same. A third-string rookie just cannot keep things on the same level as a veteran like Schaub. They had the most complete team in the AFC, IMO. Too bad for them. Like most others, the Giants winning wasn't a surprise, but the margin was, although the game was more competitive than that in truth. They stretched it out late. I thought the Packers lost the game when they chose to go for it on 4th down around midfield when the score was 20-13. They should have punted and made NY try to drive the field. They had forced two 3-and-outs to start the third quarter. I didn't feel like they needed to press the issue at that point in the game. I bet Packers fans don't want to see Eli coming to town in January ever again. In fact, since 2000, the Packers are 3-5 in the post-season at Lambeau Field. Perhaps we can put to bed the mystique that teams cannot win in the cold Green Bay weather in January.
January 17, 201214 yr In all honestly, if they could have entered the post-season healthy, the Texans would have been my pick to win the AFC. In fact, if they'd have just had Schaub, I'd have picked them. The defense played at a high level even without Mario, but the offense was never the same. A third-string rookie just cannot keep things on the same level as a veteran like Schaub. They had the most complete team in the AFC, IMO. Too bad for them. Like most others, the Giants winning wasn't a surprise, but the margin was, although the game was more competitive than that in truth. They stretched it out late. I thought the Packers lost the game when they chose to go for it on 4th down around midfield when the score was 20-13. They should have punted and made NY try to drive the field. They had forced two 3-and-outs to start the third quarter. I didn't feel like they needed to press the issue at that point in the game. I bet Packers fans don't want to see Eli coming to town in January ever again. In fact, since 2000, the Packers are 3-5 in the post-season at Lambeau Field. Perhaps we can put to bed the mystique that teams cannot win in the cold Green Bay weather in January. I think the 4th down call was the second biggest play of the game behind the hail mary to end the first half. I also agree on Lambeau. The Packers aren't built to win in cold weather.
January 17, 201214 yr Author Wow, after all of this debate, this is the conclusion? You need to be good to get it done? Deep... Maybe you should know what the debate was before speaking on it.... The debate started with me and SSC, because he basically was stating how it was better to have a top offense than a top defense. That it is harder to beat a top offense, than a team with a top defense. For me I never once said having a top offense was bad, but just that playing a team with a top defense can be equally as hard. His theory was since they didn't play top offenses, that is why the Bengals did well and couldn't outscore top offenses. I talked about the fact that the Bengals played 11 games against teams in the top 10 in defense in total yards, scoring, and defensive passer rating. So just because they didn't play top offenses like the Pats, Packers, and Saints, it didn't mean playing top defenses was easy. Playing top defenses will make QB's struggle some, even the great ones struggle more when playing these defenses. Yet he wanted to give no credit to that when talking about Dalton, who was a rookie going against those defenses. So next time you might be a little better off knowing what the debate was. Because by saying you have to be good in both areas to have the most success, backs my argument up even more. Considering I didn't say it didn't matter if a team had a top offense, like he has said about defenses. The argument was about how teams with top defenses can also be as good and as we have seen usuallly a little better than a team with just a top offense. Nice try though Mal.
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.