Our 80 Million Dollar Oline
-
I would like to know where you come up with "$80 million" offensive line number? Or did you just make that up?
Though it is probably an irrelevent question it is a fair question to ask however: what are the guaranteed contract salaries for each position on the team. Is there even a place to find out that info....or is it confidential.
Assuming you do find those numbers, then you will need to ask yourself if the Browns are getting value for their money based on those player's performance.
I made it up, but I challenge you to discredit that we have paid more for OL guys the last 11 years and still stank
I made it up, but I challenge you to discredit that we have paid more for OL guys the last 11 years and still stank
There is no doubt that the Browns have had some stinko OLs in the past and if they were paid a farthing they were probably overpaid....but with the likes of Thomas, Mack, and Steinbach I can't say they have not performed up to their pay grade. And there may be some other current OL that aren't performing up to their pay grade.
One of the big problems right now is that Steinbach isn't in there.
-
Larry, you keep missing it.. Every GM is not stupid, the smart GM's like me understand how to win. You get a franchise QB and franchise set of skill players who score points and then disruptive players on defense and when that is all done you get OL guys, When you are really good at filling those needs and building a championship franchise you at times have the luxury of expending top pics on OL guys occasionally. That is the MO of the Steelers
BS Rich. That was NEVER the MO of the Steelers. The QB was the LAST piece of the puzzle the Steelers added. They had their complete defense in place, their RBs, WRs, and most of their OL. They were able to have a 15-1 record with a rookie QB.
SMART GMs don't risk getting their meal ticket franchise quarterbacks pulverized behind suspect o-lines either. Go look up the qb sacks\ knockdowns stats- it's a fair indicator of a teams record. Rothlisberger may not last the year the way he's getting creamed, because outside of Pouncey, their o-line got neglected. BTW, if your premise were true Rich, those winning genius GM wouldn't be wasting high picks on offensive linemen regardless- they'd be praying they could get lucky like the Colts did when they landed Jeff Saturday as an UFA, and drafting even more skilled position players.
We ruined Couch getting him killed behind a suspect o-line. Ask Sam Bradford how he likes going out there and getting beat up every Sunday because his o-line sucks. And Rothlisberger was the LAST piece of the puzzle, as Gipper said. Unless Rich is referring to Bradshaw, who's lucky he didn't get paralyzed when Turkey Jones gave him a WWF piledriver into the turf. Green Bay had the luxury of sitting Rodgers behind Farve for years- that's a rarity in today's NFL. The Saints picked up Brees as the last piece of the puzzle too, IIRC. Troy Aikman had his career shortened by the concussions he took his first couple years in Dallas because his line couldn't protect him.
And the chain is as strong as it's weakest link. Teams aren't going to bother testing Joe Thomas or Alex Mack- why should they? Any defensive coordinator with half a brain is going to attack Pinkston, Lauvao, and Pashos. I rewatched the game, and I don't think I saw the Browns o-line give McCoy a classic Peyton Manning bulletproof pocket once.
SMART GMs don't risk getting their meal ticket franchise quarterbacks pulverized behind suspect o-lines either. Go look up the qb sacks\ knockdowns stats- it's a fair indicator of a teams record. Rothlisberger may not last the year the way he's getting creamed, because outside of Pouncey, their o-line got neglected. BTW, if your premise were true Rich, those winning genius GM wouldn't be wasting high picks on offensive linemen regardless- they'd be praying they could get lucky like the Colts did when they landed Jeff Saturday as an UFA, and drafting even more skilled position players.
We ruined Couch getting him killed behind a suspect o-line. Ask Sam Bradford how he likes going out there and getting beat up every Sunday because his o-line sucks. And Rothlisberger was the LAST piece of the puzzle, as Gipper said. Unless Rich is referring to Bradshaw, who's lucky he didn't get paralyzed when Turkey Jones gave him a WWF piledriver into the turf. Green Bay had the luxury of sitting Rodgers behind Farve for years- that's a rarity in today's NFL. The Saints picked up Brees as the last piece of the puzzle too, IIRC. Troy Aikman had his career shortened by the concussions he took his first couple years in Dallas because his line couldn't protect him.
And the chain is as strong as it's weakest link. Teams aren't going to bother testing Joe Thomas or Alex Mack- why should they? Any defensive coordinator with half a brain is going to attack Pinkston, Lauvao, and Pashos. I rewatched the game, and I don't think I saw the Browns o-line give McCoy a classic Peyton Manning bulletproof pocket once.
So you just said the Steelers players of three and winners of two of the last five Super Bowls eat siht becuase they focused on other than the OLINE thznks your wisdom is astute
-
Larry, you keep missing it.. Every GM is not stupid, the smart GM's like me understand how to win. You get a franchise QB and franchise set of skill players who score points and then disruptive players on defense and when that is all done you get OL guys, When you are really good at filling those needs and building a championship franchise you at times have the luxury of expending top pics on OL guys occasionally. That is the MO of the Steelers
BS Rich. That was NEVER the MO of the Steelers. The QB was the LAST piece of the puzzle the Steelers added. They had their complete defense in place, their RBs, WRs, and most of their OL. They were able to have a 15-1 record with a rookie QB.
You clearly never read Dan Rooneys book the secret to winning in the NFL............and you obviously never understood Paul Browns "greatest show in football the Cleveland Browns dominationg for more than a decade................but you suck the manure you are fed.......................while Belichcik laughs and says keep sucking stupid so we can win...........and you beturass the Steelers formula has always been field stretchers on offense lead by a franchise QB and disrupters on D ...........................and then having the OL filled in
But we are Brownstown focused on Dawgs and OLs and losing
You clearly never read Dan Rooneys book the secret to winning in the NFL............and you obviously never understood Paul Browns "greatest show in football the Cleveland Browns dominationg for more than a decade................but you suck the manure you are fed.......................while Belichcik laughs and says keep sucking stupid so we can win...........and you beturass the Steelers formula has always been field stretchers on offense lead by a franchise QB and disrupters on D ...........................and then having the OL filled in.
I don't care what they wrote....I care what they did.....and maybe in fact the formula you suggest was followed by the Browns in the 50s and the Steelers of the 70s ....but it was NOT followed by the Steelers of the 2000s. The 2000s Steelers plugged in the QB as the very last piece. That you cannot deny.
And, yes, sure....I want a franchise QB here and I want the field stretchers....and I think it is now time to go out and get them.
However, if we had to follow the 2000s Ravens route and go first with the dominant defense and the dominant running game (which the 2005 Steelers also used for their title), I will be happy with that as well.
If we have a Trent Dilfer at QB or a Trent Dilfer II (i.e. BR circa 2005) and we win or challenge for a title...that is fine with me.
You see....I don't really give a shit what the formula is. You and Ghoolie seem to be stuck on the formula. I'll take any formula that brings Ws.
Right now, this team is trying to follow the 80s 49ers formula. If it works, fine. If not, go to the Ravens formula, or to the old Browns and Steelers formula, or the Packers formula.
In the words of Tommy Lee Jones: "I don't care".
But we are Brownstown focused on Dawgs and OLs and losing
Actually, only you and the Ghool seem to be focusing on them. The "Dawg" BS can go as far as I am concerned. The OL can consist of your Granny and the Grateful Dead for all I care, as long as they block.
-
not sure on your babbling but only one team won the Bowl on Defense the 2000 Ravens............................but focus on that and be committed to losing to reality.......................OFFENSE WINS CHAMPIONSHIPS
Offense Wins.......Franchise QB's are the key.............Defense keeps you in the game.........Go Buckeyes -
zzzzzzzzzzzzzz
Like we talked about before game 1....we knew we didnt have playmakers and we knew we would have one of the worst offenses. Look at the top 10 or so teams...they all have playmakers on their team
Whats more amazing is that more than half of our board members don't acknowledge this.
Rich you are right, but at the same time, Why get your hopes up man? only to get your heart ripped out. We will still be a boring slow team until we draft or sign playmakers!
-
not sure on your babbling but only one team won the Bowl on Defense the 2000 Ravens............................but focus on that and be committed to losing to reality.......................OFFENSE WINS CHAMPIONSHIPS
not sure on your babbling but only one team won the Bowl on Defense the 2000 Ravens............................but focus on that and be committed to losing to reality.......................OFFENSE WINS CHAMPIONSHIPS
I don't know what league you have been watching the last decade or so, but in addition to the 2000 Ravens, the 2002 Tampa Bay Bucs followed the same model, the 2005 Steelers followed the same model, and to a great extent the 2008 NY Giants also followed that formula.
Yes, the Pats, Saints, Colts, and to an extent the 2008 Steelers were offensive juggernauts....but by no means has that been the only path to championship success. These teams with monster defenses...and quite frankly, mediocre offenses won Super Bowls.
Sure, I want the offensive juggernauts....but beggars can't be choosers and I will take the defensive killers if that is all there is to take.
Were you not watching?
-
not sure on your babbling but only one team won the Bowl on Defense the 2000 Ravens............................but focus on that and be committed to losing to reality.......................OFFENSE WINS CHAMPIONSHIPS
not sure on your babbling but only one team won the Bowl on Defense the 2000 Ravens............................but focus on that and be committed to losing to reality.......................OFFENSE WINS CHAMPIONSHIPS
OK yinzer. Let's give you the reins of the Cleveland Browns right here, right now. What are YOU going to do beginning November 2011 to make this team the offensive juggernaut you want it to be?
-
not sure on your babbling but only one team won the Bowl on Defense the 2000 Ravens............................but focus on that and be committed to losing to reality.......................OFFENSE WINS CHAMPIONSHIPS
I don't know what league you have been watching the last decade or so, but in addition to the 2000 Ravens, the 2002 Tampa Bay Bucs followed the same model, the 2005 Steelers followed the same model, and to a great extent the 2008 NY Giants also followed that formula.
Yes, the Pats, Saints, Colts, and to an extent the 2008 Steelers were offensive juggernauts....but by no means has that been the only path to championship success. These teams with monster defenses...and quite frankly, mediocre offenses won Super Bowls.
Sure, I want the offensive juggernauts....but beggars can't be choosers and I will take the defensive killers if that is all there is to take.
Were you not watching?
I don't know what league you have been watching the last decade or so, but in addition to the 2000 Ravens, the 2002 Tampa Bay Bucs followed the same model, the 2005 Steelers followed the same model, and to a great extent the 2008 NY Giants also followed that formula.
Yes, the Pats, Saints, Colts, and to an extent the 2008 Steelers were offensive juggernauts....but by no means has that been the only path to championship success. These teams with monster defenses...and quite frankly, mediocre offenses won Super Bowls.
Sure, I want the offensive juggernauts....but beggars can't be choosers and I will take the defensive killers if that is all there is to take.
Were you not watching?
I dont know what you league you have been watching but what team won the Super Bowl with OL making tds and or the defense kiilling offense
right now average score for winning team is 31 points ....................s.o much for the defense wins stupidity
and OH yeah NO ! greatest pick ever Joe Thomas never played in a playoff game so much for dime a dozen OL guys]
and BTW the Big Ben with NO OL has been in three super bowls and won two
smoke that up your crack pipe
'
-
I don't know what league you have been watching the last decade or so, but in addition to the 2000 Ravens, the 2002 Tampa Bay Bucs followed the same model, the 2005 Steelers followed the same model, and to a great extent the 2008 NY Giants also followed that formula.
Yes, the Pats, Saints, Colts, and to an extent the 2008 Steelers were offensive juggernauts....but by no means has that been the only path to championship success. These teams with monster defenses...and quite frankly, mediocre offenses won Super Bowls.
Sure, I want the offensive juggernauts....but beggars can't be choosers and I will take the defensive killers if that is all there is to take.
Were you not watching?
I dont know what you league you have been watching but what team won the Super Bowl with OL making tds and or the defense kiilling offense
right now average score for winning team is 31 points ....................s.o much for the defense wins stupidity
and OH yeah NO ! greatest pick ever Joe Thomas never played in a playoff game so much for dime a dozen OL guys]
and BTW the Big Ben with NO OL has been in three super bowls and won two
smoke that up your crack pipe
'
I dont know what you league you have been watching but what team won the Super Bowl with OL making tds and or the defense kiilling offense
right now average score for winning team is 31 points ....................s.o much for the defense wins stupidity
and OH yeah NO ! greatest pick ever Joe Thomas never played in a playoff game so much for dime a dozen OL guys]
and BTW the Big Ben with NO OL has been in three super bowls and won two
smoke that up your crack pipe
'
Obviously since you ignored my point you agreed with it. There have been several teams with mediocre offenses and great defenses that have won the title. There are no ifs and or buts about it and if you disagree you are fricking nuts.
And yea, Big Ben with a questionable offensive line at times has won a couple and been to another SB. My point exactly. Mediocre offense....outf**kingstanding defense.
.
-
Defensive and Offensive rankings of recent Super Bowl winners:
2000 Ravens Offense rank: 16, Defense rank: 1
2002 Bucs Offense rank: 24, Defense rank: 1
2003 Pats Offense rank: 17, Defense rank: 1
2004 Pats Offense rank: 7, Defense rank: 2
2005 Steelers Offense rank: 15, Defense rank: 4
2006 Colts Offense rank: 2, Defense rank: 23
2007 Giants Offense rank: 16, Defense rank: 7
2008 Steelers Offense rank: 22, Defense Rank: 1
2009 Saints Offense rank: 1, Defense rank: 20
2010 Packers Offense rank: 10, Defense rank: 5
Also, 2010 Steelers SB losers: Offense rank: 14, Defense rank: 2
Thus, having a mediocre offense and an outstanding defense gives a team a title much more frequently than the other way around. The Saints and Colts were far more the abberation.
-
Defensive and Offensive rankings of recent Super Bowl winners:
2000 Ravens Offense rank: 16, Defense rank: 1
2002 Bucs Offense rank: 24, Defense rank: 1
2003 Pats Offense rank: 17, Defense rank: 1
2004 Pats Offense rank: 7, Defense rank: 2
2005 Steelers Offense rank: 15, Defense rank: 4
2006 Colts Offense rank: 2, Defense rank: 23
2007 Giants Offense rank: 16, Defense rank: 7
2008 Steelers Offense rank: 22, Defense Rank: 1
2009 Saints Offense rank: 1, Defense rank: 20
2010 Packers Offense rank: 10, Defense rank: 5
Also, 2010 Steelers SB losers: Offense rank: 14, Defense rank: 2
Thus, having a mediocre offense and an outstanding defense gives a team a title much more frequently than the other way around. The Saints and Colts were far more the abberation.
Defensive and Offensive rankings of recent Super Bowl winners:
2000 Ravens Offense rank: 16, Defense rank: 1
2002 Bucs Offense rank: 24, Defense rank: 1
2003 Pats Offense rank: 17, Defense rank: 1
2004 Pats Offense rank: 7, Defense rank: 2
2005 Steelers Offense rank: 15, Defense rank: 4
2006 Colts Offense rank: 2, Defense rank: 23
2007 Giants Offense rank: 16, Defense rank: 7
2008 Steelers Offense rank: 22, Defense Rank: 1
2009 Saints Offense rank: 1, Defense rank: 20
2010 Packers Offense rank: 10, Defense rank: 5
Also, 2010 Steelers SB losers: Offense rank: 14, Defense rank: 2
Thus, having a mediocre offense and an outstanding defense gives a team a title much more frequently than the other way around. The Saints and Colts were far more the abberation.
Sp what is your point that having defense that collapses in the Super Bowls wins a tomato
Bottom line the Super Bowl winning team has an average point total of 31..........................and that says defense is not a winner but offense is...............................but keep spewiing useless stats without facts to support the numbers
Offense Wins.......Franchise QB's are the key.............Defense keeps you in the game.........Go Buckeyes -
Defensive and Offensive rankings of recent Super Bowl winners:
2000 Ravens Offense rank: 16, Defense rank: 1
2002 Bucs Offense rank: 24, Defense rank: 1
2003 Pats Offense rank: 17, Defense rank: 1
2004 Pats Offense rank: 7, Defense rank: 2
2005 Steelers Offense rank: 15, Defense rank: 4
2006 Colts Offense rank: 2, Defense rank: 23
2007 Giants Offense rank: 16, Defense rank: 7
2008 Steelers Offense rank: 22, Defense Rank: 1
2009 Saints Offense rank: 1, Defense rank: 20
2010 Packers Offense rank: 10, Defense rank: 5
Also, 2010 Steelers SB losers: Offense rank: 14, Defense rank: 2
Thus, having a mediocre offense and an outstanding defense gives a team a title much more frequently than the other way around. The Saints and Colts were far more the abberation.
Sp what is your point that having defense that collapses in the Super Bowls wins a tomato
Bottom line the Super Bowl winning team has an average point total of 31..........................and that says defense is not a winner but offense is...............................but keep spewiing useless stats without facts to support the numbers
i hate being proven wrong too... Great defense give mediocre offenses more chances to scoreSp what is your point that having defense that collapses in the Super Bowls wins a tomato
Bottom line the Super Bowl winning team has an average point total of 31..........................and that says defense is not a winner but offense is...............................but keep spewiing useless stats without facts to support the numbers
-
not again man...
do you guys have any substance to offer in these threads? we all know the WRs stink. we all know the QB isnt a future hall of famer. we all know running the ball isnt our team anymore
the line is the most important part of a team but football is the purest TEAM sport in the entire world and 5 guys up front cant win it by themselves
-
Defensive and Offensive rankings of recent Super Bowl winners:
2000 Ravens Offense rank: 16, Defense rank: 1
2002 Bucs Offense rank: 24, Defense rank: 1
2003 Pats Offense rank: 17, Defense rank: 1
2004 Pats Offense rank: 7, Defense rank: 2
2005 Steelers Offense rank: 15, Defense rank: 4
2006 Colts Offense rank: 2, Defense rank: 23
2007 Giants Offense rank: 16, Defense rank: 7
2008 Steelers Offense rank: 22, Defense Rank: 1
2009 Saints Offense rank: 1, Defense rank: 20
2010 Packers Offense rank: 10, Defense rank: 5
Also, 2010 Steelers SB losers: Offense rank: 14, Defense rank: 2
Thus, having a mediocre offense and an outstanding defense gives a team a title much more frequently than the other way around. The Saints and Colts were far more the abberation.
Defensive and Offensive rankings of recent Super Bowl winners:
2000 Ravens Offense rank: 16, Defense rank: 1
2002 Bucs Offense rank: 24, Defense rank: 1
2003 Pats Offense rank: 17, Defense rank: 1
2004 Pats Offense rank: 7, Defense rank: 2
2005 Steelers Offense rank: 15, Defense rank: 4
2006 Colts Offense rank: 2, Defense rank: 23
2007 Giants Offense rank: 16, Defense rank: 7
2008 Steelers Offense rank: 22, Defense Rank: 1
2009 Saints Offense rank: 1, Defense rank: 20
2010 Packers Offense rank: 10, Defense rank: 5
Also, 2010 Steelers SB losers: Offense rank: 14, Defense rank: 2
Thus, having a mediocre offense and an outstanding defense gives a team a title much more frequently than the other way around. The Saints and Colts were far more the abberation.
the saints defense was actually pretty good and the stats dont show that. they scored so often that the defense spent a ton of time on the field.
the colts defense was better than the stats said too. freeney, mathis, bob sanders, antoine bethea, gary brackett etc
-
Mostly just through here.
While I live in Tn, I have never met Ghoolie, and have met Rich once, but mostly through the boards and playing fantasy sports together.
Tailgates are interesting...in the end it's all good. We don't stand around pointing fingers at people calling them idiots if that's what you mean. We shake hands, slap backs, and share a few hours together having a good time.
Mostly just through here.
While I live in Tn, I have never met Ghoolie, and have met Rich once, but mostly through the boards and playing fantasy sports together.
Tailgates are interesting...in the end it's all good. We don't stand around pointing fingers at people calling them idiots if that's what you mean. We shake hands, slap backs, and share a few hours together having a good time.
Hope to attend my first browns board tailgate jam next month for rams game. lookin forward to sharing shots of Makers Mark with some of you crazy guys!!!
-
I knew either ghoolie or his henchman, rich4eagle, started this thread.
-
Defensive and Offensive rankings of recent Super Bowl winners:
2000 Ravens Offense rank: 16, Defense rank: 1
2002 Bucs Offense rank: 24, Defense rank: 1
2003 Pats Offense rank: 17, Defense rank: 1
2004 Pats Offense rank: 7, Defense rank: 2
2005 Steelers Offense rank: 15, Defense rank: 4
2006 Colts Offense rank: 2, Defense rank: 23
2007 Giants Offense rank: 16, Defense rank: 7
2008 Steelers Offense rank: 22, Defense Rank: 1
2009 Saints Offense rank: 1, Defense rank: 20
2010 Packers Offense rank: 10, Defense rank: 5
Also, 2010 Steelers SB losers: Offense rank: 14, Defense rank: 2
Thus, having a mediocre offense and an outstanding defense gives a team a title much more frequently than the other way around. The Saints and Colts were far more the abberation.
Sp what is your point that having defense that collapses in the Super Bowls wins a tomato
Bottom line the Super Bowl winning team has an average point total of 31..........................and that says defense is not a winner but offense is...............................but keep spewiing useless stats without facts to support the numbers
Sp what is your point that having defense that collapses in the Super Bowls wins a tomato
Bottom line the Super Bowl winning team has an average point total of 31..........................and that says defense is not a winner but offense is...............................but keep spewiing useless stats without facts to support the numbers
No that says without a top defense the 31 pts would look more like 40 or 50+. Defense and special teams add to that total anyway. The Packers had a pick 6 that was the difference in last year's Super Bowl (just like many previous Super Bowls). Having a top defense doesn't mean you allow 0 pts a game. The Gipper is using stats to prove his point. You have yet to refute his claims with any relevant facts..
-
not sure on your babbling but only one team won the Bowl on Defense the 2000 Ravens............................but focus on that and be committed to losing to reality.......................OFFENSE WINS CHAMPIONSHIPS
not sure on your babbling but only one team won the Bowl on Defense the 2000 Ravens............................but focus on that and be committed to losing to reality.......................OFFENSE WINS CHAMPIONSHIPS
Yawn- wrong again Rich. And I even managed to overlook Tampa Bay's SB that was won on DEFENSE. Short attention span? you're old enough to remember this one, right? The 1985-6 Bears set Super Bowl records for sacks (eight) and fewest rushing yards allowed (seven). Or perhaps you don't realize when your defense gets lots of three and outs, it sets up your offense to score a ton of of points? So much for those "victory margins" in the Super Bowl.
Now don't go getting all hysterical on us when we've been showing you your premise is more full of holes than Swiss Cheese.
-
Defensive and Offensive rankings of recent Super Bowl winners:
2000 Ravens Offense rank: 16, Defense rank: 1
2002 Bucs Offense rank: 24, Defense rank: 1
2003 Pats Offense rank: 17, Defense rank: 1
2004 Pats Offense rank: 7, Defense rank: 2
2005 Steelers Offense rank: 15, Defense rank: 4
2006 Colts Offense rank: 2, Defense rank: 23
2007 Giants Offense rank: 16, Defense rank: 7
2008 Steelers Offense rank: 22, Defense Rank: 1
2009 Saints Offense rank: 1, Defense rank: 20
2010 Packers Offense rank: 10, Defense rank: 5
Also, 2010 Steelers SB losers: Offense rank: 14, Defense rank: 2
Thus, having a mediocre offense and an outstanding defense gives a team a title much more frequently than the other way around. The Saints and Colts were far more the abberation.
Sp what is your point that having defense that collapses in the Super Bowls wins a tomato
Bottom line the Super Bowl winning team has an average point total of 31..........................and that says defense is not a winner but offense is...............................but keep spewiing useless stats without facts to support the numbers
Sp what is your point that having defense that collapses in the Super Bowls wins a tomato
Bottom line the Super Bowl winning team has an average point total of 31..........................and that says defense is not a winner but offense is...............................but keep spewiing useless stats without facts to support the numbers
The facts are right in front of you....its just that they get in the way of your delusion.
And the fact is that more often a team with an outstanding defense and a mediocre offense wins titles than a team with an outstanding offense and a mediocre defense.
(lets also note how many time that point total you cite was significantly augmented by defensive plays: The Bucs brought back two Ints for TDs. The 2008 Steelers win by like a 100 yard return by Harrison, etc. etc. etc.)
-
Defensive and Offensive rankings of recent Super Bowl winners:
2000 Ravens Offense rank: 16, Defense rank: 1
2002 Bucs Offense rank: 24, Defense rank: 1
2003 Pats Offense rank: 17, Defense rank: 1
2004 Pats Offense rank: 7, Defense rank: 2
2005 Steelers Offense rank: 15, Defense rank: 4
2006 Colts Offense rank: 2, Defense rank: 23
2007 Giants Offense rank: 16, Defense rank: 7
2008 Steelers Offense rank: 22, Defense Rank: 1
2009 Saints Offense rank: 1, Defense rank: 20
2010 Packers Offense rank: 10, Defense rank: 5
Also, 2010 Steelers SB losers: Offense rank: 14, Defense rank: 2
Thus, having a mediocre offense and an outstanding defense gives a team a title much more frequently than the other way around. The Saints and Colts were far more the abberation.
the saints defense was actually pretty good and the stats dont show that. they scored so often that the defense spent a ton of time on the field.
the colts defense was better than the stats said too. freeney, mathis, bob sanders, antoine bethea, gary brackett etc
the saints defense was actually pretty good and the stats dont show that. they scored so often that the defense spent a ton of time on the field.
the colts defense was better than the stats said too. freeney, mathis, bob sanders, antoine bethea, gary brackett etc
Yes, these stat rankings don't account for turnover ratio which was very important for the Saints.
And Indy's defense stepped it up in the playoffs, but they weren't all that during the season.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login