PDA

View Full Version : WHich would you rather have?


Rock Chalk
10-03-2009, 05:16 AM
All things being equal, which would you rather have, a great offense or a great defense?

Rock Chalk
10-03-2009, 05:18 AM
There is a poll on ESPN and I thought it was an interesting poll so I wanted to see what the Orangemane felt about it.

Pick Six
10-03-2009, 05:46 AM
Defense stops the other team from scoring. That's preferable to a shootout, IMO...

AlienBronco
10-03-2009, 05:46 AM
How about a great team.

Broncomutt
10-03-2009, 06:18 AM
Allow me to quote something my good friend "W" told me the other day.

Champions win tickets that....err, wait.:dummy:

Defenses sell champions their tickets.....hmmm...

Tickets are offensive to champions....???

The best offense is a good championship.....:hitself:

...err, I won't get fooled again!!:thanku:

cousinal11
10-03-2009, 06:20 AM
The best offense is a good defense.

Broncomutt
10-03-2009, 06:23 AM
Right, that's what I meant!!

cousinal11
10-03-2009, 06:28 AM
Right, that's what I meant!!

Throw in great punt and kickoff coverage, a powerful running game, a smart quaterback, a couple playmakers and...viola!

Broncomutt
10-03-2009, 06:32 AM
Right. Where's the Great Special Teams option?

This poll is IN-COM-PLETE!!

Wow, 3 posts in under 20 minutes. Still drunk from last night apparently.....

loborugger
10-03-2009, 07:03 AM
Great defense.

You are always in the game with a great 'D'.

Punisher
10-03-2009, 07:36 AM
Allow me to quote something my good friend "W" told me the other day.

Champions win tickets that....err, wait.:dummy:

Defenses sell champions their tickets.....hmmm...

Tickets are offensive to champions....???

The best offense is a good championship.....:hitself:

...err, I won't get fooled again!!:thanku:

:rofl:

OABB
10-03-2009, 07:37 AM
Defense...Watching dominant d is always more exciting than dominant o...but I'm a purist. As Herm Edwards said, this isn't Arena football.

v2micca
10-03-2009, 07:44 AM
I don't think anyone one wants a great offense at the expense of a good defense, or a great defense at the expense of a good offense.

Still, with the direction of the current NFL and the way the League keeps hand-cuffing defenders, It looks like a team with a Great Offense and a Good D will prevail over a team with a Great Defense and a Good Offense more often than not.

Jason in LA
10-03-2009, 08:14 AM
That's not a simple question to answer. Will the other side of the ball be horrible, average?

If you have a great O you can play with a lead, which could help the D play better. But if you have a great D then you can call a safe game plan on O to limit the turnovers and let the D win the game for you.

Give me a great D with a good running game and just pass the ball when needed. That formula seems to work a lot. Hell, the Steelers just won two Super Bowls doing that. The Giants too. Ben and Eli didn't need to air it out until needed.

gunns
10-03-2009, 10:25 AM
I don't think anyone one wants a great offense at the expense of a good defense, or a great defense at the expense of a good offense.

Still, with the direction of the current NFL and the way the League keeps hand-cuffing defenders, It looks like a team with a Great Offense and a Good D will prevail over a team with a Great Defense and a Good Offense more often than not.

Disagree. Pitt won last year with a great defense and a good offense. They were the #1 defense and Arizona was the #4 offense. The Tampa Bay and Baltimore SB seasons are good examples too. NE's first SB win, and last SB loss are good examples of defense winning a game and the offense maintaining it. In the 80's and 90's it was generally just the opposite, we won with a great offense and a good defense. No, it's not always like that but that seems to be the trend now.

BroncoInSkinland
10-03-2009, 10:27 AM
Defense...Watching dominant d is always more exciting than dominant o...but I'm a purist. As Herm Edwards said, this isn't Arena football.

I disagree there, I think a dominant D is more satisfying to watch, I love seeing another team shut down, and bent to the will of the Broncos, but a Dominant O has those electrifying moments that get the highlight of the week coverage. Exciting I would give to a great O, but I will take a dominant D over that any day of the week and twice on Sundays.

TonyR
10-03-2009, 10:33 AM
Without even a moment of hesitation, defense.

Punisher
10-03-2009, 10:39 AM
That like saying would you rather have Big Tits or a Nice ass.

Rock Chalk
10-03-2009, 10:40 AM
That like saying would you rather have Big boobies or a Nice ass.

See, Im an ass man.

If I gotta choose one or the other she better have a nice ass. Hence the reason I married my wife.

Punisher
10-03-2009, 10:45 AM
See, Im an ass man.

If I gotta choose one or the other she better have a nice ass. Hence the reason I married my wife.

LMAO oh man that's funny stuff, You mean your wife ass caught your attention then her personalty made you marry her.

Rock Chalk
10-03-2009, 10:48 AM
LMAO oh man that's funny stuff, You mean your wife ass caught your attention then her personalty made you marry her.

Not exactly....no.

I married the ass, the personality was suitable enough to make this an equitable proposition for me.

Punisher
10-03-2009, 10:51 AM
Not exactly....no.

I married the ass, the personality was suitable enough to make this an equitable proposition for me.

Oh ok I understand now, Well your ****ed :spit:

ludo21
10-03-2009, 11:01 AM
Defense - I love hard hitting low scoring games

lex
10-03-2009, 11:07 AM
If its a scenario where having a great defense, means having an equally poor offense, id rather have the great offense. If having a great defense means having a mediocre offense (and vice versa), I would be more about the defense.

When you have a great defense, and an equally bad offense, youre really vulnerable against great offenses. If you have a great offense, that can at east give you a punchers chance to outscore any other team.

If your offense is somewhat capable and you have a great defense, youre a lot less vulnerable.

Jason in LA
10-03-2009, 11:14 AM
Disagree. Pitt won last year with a great defense and a good offense. They were the #1 defense and Arizona was the #4 offense. The Tampa Bay and Baltimore SB seasons are good examples too. NE's first SB win, and last SB loss are good examples of defense winning a game and the offense maintaining it. In the 80's and 90's it was generally just the opposite, we won with a great offense and a good defense. No, it's not always like that but that seems to be the trend now.

I'd say that the Broncos '98 and '99 defenses were underrated. Those were some very good defenses and outplayed the O in some of those playoff wins. At KC in '97 and against the Jets in '98, the O struggled while the D played great all game.

Jason in LA
10-03-2009, 11:16 AM
That like saying would you rather have Big boobies or a Nice ass.

I go for women who have both. Kind of like the Broncos Super Bowl years. A good combination of both. ;D

lex
10-03-2009, 11:18 AM
I'd say that the Broncos '98 and '99 defenses were underrated. Those were some very good defenses and outplayed the O in some of those playoff wins. At KC in '97 and against the Jets in '98, the O struggled while the D played great all game.

Yeah, an added layer to the fact that those offenses dont get the credit they deserve because its more known as Elways last hurrah, is that the defense was better than many give credit for.

Jason in LA
10-03-2009, 11:22 AM
When you have a great defense, and an equally bad offense, youre really vulnerable against great offenses. If you have a great offense, that can at east give you a punchers chance to outscore any other team.



That's still a problem. If you have a great offense you do have a punchers chance, but your chances of getting knocked out go up too, in the way of turnovers. If you're relying on your O to run up the scoreboard, especially through the air, interceptions are going to happen, which will cost you the game ('07 and '08 Broncos are the perfect example).

So give me the great defense and get the O to Trent Dilfer their way to a win. Just play it safe on O and don't turn over the ball and the D has a chance to win the game (sounds like the '09 Broncos)

colonelbeef
10-03-2009, 11:57 AM
Great offense, good defense.

for all of the bs in this thread, that is how you put together a dynasty, particularly in recent years- see 49ers, 90's Broncos, or 90's Cowboys

doonwise
10-03-2009, 12:03 PM
Whichever one wins that year's superbowl.

TonyR
10-03-2009, 12:12 PM
Great offense, good defense.

for all of the bs in this thread, that is how you put together a dynasty, particularly in recent years- see 49ers, 90's Broncos, or 90's Cowboys

Not necessarily. All of those teams had very good defenses, particularly most of those Cowboys and Niners teams. On top of this, the most recent "dynasty", the Patriots, won their Super Bowls more because of their defenses and lost the one with the great offense. In almost every sport it's almost always the defense that makes the difference.

lex
10-03-2009, 12:15 PM
Not necessarily. All of those teams had very good defenses, particularly most of those Cowboys and Niners teams. On top of this, the most recent "dynasty", the Patriots, won their Super Bowls more because of their defenses and lost the one with the great offense. In almost every sport it's almost always the defense that makes the difference.


Their 2004 team had a more balanced offense than their 2007 season. Id be curious to know what the 04 Pats ppg were in the post season.

I just looked it up. The 04 Pats had 28.3 points a game (85 pts in 3 games). The 07 Pats had 22 pts a game (22 pts in 3 postseason games).

Mogulseeker
10-03-2009, 01:09 PM
I voted offense, even though I argued earlier that defense wins championships.

Offense is just funner.

Rock Chalk
10-03-2009, 02:33 PM
Great offense, good defense.

for all of the bs in this thread, that is how you put together a dynasty, particularly in recent years- see 49ers, 90's Broncos, or 90's Cowboys

THe 49ers of the 80s, the 90s Cowboys had DOMINANT defenses. Sure they also had great offenses but make no mistake, those defenses were absolutely dominant.

The near-Dynastic Broncos of the 90s also had great defenses. Overshadowed by that well-oiled machine of an offense with Elway on it. Atwater, Mobley, Smith, Romo all headed a very formidable defense that in crunch time won the superbowl for Denver against Green Bay and completely shut down the Falcons the following year.

But keep throwing **** against a wall, someday it might stick.

DBroncos4life
10-03-2009, 02:44 PM
As good as the Ravens D was it only got them 1 Super Bowl, same with the Bears. As good as the Colts O was it only got them 1 Super Bowl. The Rams O took them to two Super Bowls. They did win one. Teams like Denver who had way more talent on O but a above avg D would be nice. I guess Pitt is the model you are going for here? The D is pretty good and it now has two rings.

colonelbeef
10-03-2009, 03:27 PM
Not necessarily. All of those teams had very good defenses, particularly most of those Cowboys and Niners teams. On top of this, the most recent "dynasty", the Patriots, won their Super Bowls more because of their defenses and lost the one with the great offense. In almost every sport it's almost always the defense that makes the difference.

I knew the Pats would come up- I would suggest that the defense was very good, but more opportunistic than anything, with a knack for creating the big turnover. Those teams had great special teams paired with a very good defense and decent offense, I would surmise.

Again, the 80s and 90s 49ers, the 90s broncos, the 90s cowboys- the better unit on each of these squads was the offense, no question about it.

Point is there are multiple ways to skin a cat, you have to have balance, with one unit being capable of dominating from time to time, and the other unit able to hold it's own, and coming up with the big play here and there- be it a big run, or a big sack.

colonelbeef
10-03-2009, 03:29 PM
As good as the Ravens D was it only got them 1 Super Bowl, same with the Bears. As good as the Colts O was it only got them 1 Super Bowl. The Rams O took them to two Super Bowls. They did win one. Teams like Denver who had way more talent on O but a above avg D would be nice. I guess Pitt is the model you are going for here? The D is pretty good and it now has two rings.

Exactly my point.

The dynasty teams all had very good to great offenses.

There are 1 year wonders up and down that had either/or, see 1999 Rams, 2000 Ravens.

The Steelers of the past few years have definitely been known for their smashmouth defense- but the single best aspect of those teams has arguably been the run game.

colonelbeef
10-03-2009, 03:37 PM
THe 49ers of the 80s, the 90s Cowboys had DOMINANT defenses. Sure they also had great offenses but make no mistake, those defenses were absolutely dominant.

The near-Dynastic Broncos of the 90s also had great defenses. Overshadowed by that well-oiled machine of an offense with Elway on it. Atwater, Mobley, Smith, Romo all headed a very formidable defense that in crunch time won the superbowl for Denver against Green Bay and completely shut down the Falcons the following year.

But keep throwing **** against a wall, someday it might stick.

totally false. Its apparent that you don't know much about football, so I will keep this simple for you.

They had dominant offenses which forced opposing teams to constantly play from behind, which allowed the defenses to pin their ears back and rush the QB with players like Charles Haley- in turn, rushing QBs tends to create turnovers, which your dominant offense will turn into points. The defenses were above average to very good- the offenses were all time great ones, capable of dominating the time of possession with balanced attacks featuring stars at just about every skill position.

you use the term great far too liberally.

Troy Aikman, Steve Young, John Elway, Joe Montana, Jerry Rice, Emmitt Smith, Terrell Davis, Roger Craig, Michael Irvin disagree with you.

It's cute to parrot the "defense wins championships" quote, but in reality it takes a mix of three good units, usually with one being dominant. This unit can be offense or defense, which I have ably demonstrated.

Keep saying that the 49ers won because their defenses were better than their offenses though.

maher_tyler
10-03-2009, 03:47 PM
How about a great team.

Thats not the poll dumbass!!

Kaylore
10-03-2009, 04:09 PM
Actually the Niners defense got dominant before their offense did. The first year the Niners won the SB they had the number one defense and the number 13 offense.

The next SB they won in 84 they had the number one scoring defense and the number four offense.

There were a few years in between when they had the number one offense and their defense was in the tens and they were bounced in the first round.

ColonelBeef says that you don't know football if you say the 49ers defense was good, and it was just benefiting from them getting ahead. That's complete crap. It's the other way around. Ask any hardcore Niners fan which was better during their SB runs, offense or defensive or what made their team get over the hump and they'll tell you to a man it was the defense. Even in '94 when the Niners had the number one offense, their defense was ranked 6th. They had been eliminated the previous years because their defense was in the teens, even with the number one offense, and it wasn't until they got that up that they went over the hump.

Two of the three years the Cowboys won the SB they had the number one defense. Their offense was good, but it was never higher than four.

Baba Booey
10-03-2009, 04:19 PM
We had one of the best offenses in football last year and didn't amount to JACK SQUAT...

http://girlsinwhitedresses.files.wordpress.com/2009/09/matt-foley.jpg

skpac1001
10-03-2009, 04:22 PM
totally false. Its apparent that you don't know much about football, so I will keep this simple for you.

They had dominant offenses which forced opposing teams to constantly play from behind, which allowed the defenses to pin their ears back and rush the QB with players like Charles Haley- in turn, rushing QBs tends to create turnovers, which your dominant offense will turn into points. The defenses were above average to very good- the offenses were all time great ones, capable of dominating the time of possession with balanced attacks featuring stars at just about every skill position.



Hmmm... I would think under this theory the Colts would have at least as many championships in the last ten years as the Pats or Steelers.

Wes Mantooth
10-03-2009, 04:25 PM
Whichever results in superbowl wins, I don't care.

BMarsh615
10-03-2009, 04:37 PM
Great defense without a doubt. You will win a lot of games with a crappy offense if they only need to score 17 points to win the game.

HAT
10-03-2009, 04:43 PM
Great offense, good defense.

for all of the bs in this thread, that is how you put together a dynasty, particularly in recent years- see 49ers, 90's Broncos, or 90's Cowboys

This.

I'd take #1 D and #32 O over #1 O and #32 D all day every day....

But if the choice is #1 D and #15 O or #1 O and #15 D I'm taking the latter.

skpac1001
10-03-2009, 04:50 PM
This.

I'd take #1 D and #32 O over #1 O and #32 D all day every day....

But if the choice is #1 D and #15 O or #1 O and #15 D I'm taking the latter.

Out of curiosity, who did you pick to win in the superbowl last year?

TonyR
10-03-2009, 04:51 PM
I'd take #1 D and #32 O over #1 O and #32 D all day every day....

But if the choice is #1 D and #15 O or #1 O and #15 D I'm taking the latter.

Why? Just look at the last Super Bowl. Great defense and mediocre offense (Steelers) vs. great offense and mediocre defense (Cardinals). Guess who won?

(skpac beat me to it!)

skpac1001
10-03-2009, 05:05 PM
Why? Just look at the last Super Bowl. Great defense and mediocre offense (Steelers) vs. great offense and mediocre defense (Cardinals). Guess who won?

(skpac beat me to it!)

Just edit it to say Giants vs. Patriots Super Bowl.

HAT
10-03-2009, 05:06 PM
Out of curiosity, who did you pick to win in the superbowl last year?

Same as I do every year...The Broncos!

But seriously, Pitt averaged over 28 PPG in the playoffs last year

HAT
10-03-2009, 05:08 PM
Why? Just look at the last Super Bowl. Great defense and mediocre offense (Steelers) vs. great offense and mediocre defense (Cardinals). Guess who won?

(skpac beat me to it!)

For the precise reason beef stated. Dynasties.

TonyR
10-03-2009, 06:01 PM
For the precise reason beef stated. Dynasties.

See post #40.

Durango
10-03-2009, 06:40 PM
I always enjoyed watching the Broncos bust heads. That and watching Rauiders being carted off the field with some regularity. Great defense did that. It was good.