Cheese Curds - News Around The League 2022

[Yoop]

Romo annoys me. Way over the top. Drawing on the screen as the play is about to start. Total clown.

The think I like about Olson is he’s not over the top. He doesn’t have that big game feel, but he doesn’t take over the game or distract from the game.

I like Greg

I agree! Romo says stupid stuff like,"it was a perfect throw if it had been accurate." He yells and is too often nonsensical. He no longer makes many interesting comments about the situation as he used to do. Olson makes these types of good, informative situational comments. He also doesn't yell.

Agree, Romo was less talkative at first, but gave good info, now he just runs on and on and has become a distraction, Olson has stayed low key, gives pertinent info and doesn't run on and on about stuff the viewer doesn't need to hear.

I hav't followed this development to much, but I think I'll enjoy Brady, he's also a low key guy in the lean of Olson, Romo acts so hyped up at times he can't shut up.

[Raptorman]

the idea that defense wins Championships is complete bunk and anyone with a lic of football sense knows that without scoring ability a team doesn't stand a chance, this isn't the 60's where low-scoring games depended so much more on great defense to keep it that way, this is the era of quick scoring offenses and defense can barely keep up.

Really? Let's take a look at this. There have been 42 teams with the number 1 or 2 offense to ever play in the Super Bowl. 19 of them won, for a 45.2% win rate. There have been 37 number 1 one or 2 defenses in the Super Bowl. 23 have won. For 61.2%. Now, here's the interesting thing. 10 teams have had either a top 1 or 2 offense and defense. And those records are 6 wins an 4 losses. So even having a top offense and defense doesn't guarantee a win.

The number 1 offense and number 1 defense have met in the Super Bowl exactly once. 1989. When San Fran beat Denver. San Fran had the number 1 offense and number 4 defense while Denver had the number 8 offense and number 1 defense.

Something interesting from last year. The Rams and Bengals both had the number 7 offense on points. Both scored 460 points on the year. But, the Ram's defense was 4 points better over the year. 372 points to 376 points. 15th and 17th.

[Yoop]

the idea that defense wins Championships is complete bunk and anyone with a lic of football sense knows that without scoring ability a team doesn't stand a chance, this isn't the 60's where low-scoring games depended so much more on great defense to keep it that way, this is the era of quick scoring offenses and defense can barely keep up.

Really? Let's take a look at this. There have been 42 teams with the number 1 or 2 offense to ever play in the Super Bowl. 19 of them won, for a 45.2% win rate. There have been 37 number 1 one or 2 defenses in the Super Bowl. 23 have won. For 61.2%. Now, here's the interesting thing. 10 teams have had either a top 1 or 2 offense and defense. And those records are 6 wins an 4 losses. So even having a top offense and defense doesn't guarantee a win.

The number 1 offense and number 1 defense have met in the Super Bowl exactly once. 1989. When San Fran beat Denver. San Fran had the number 1 offense and number 4 defense while Denver had the number 8 offense and number 1 defense.

Something interesting from last year. The Rams and Bengals both had the number 7 offense on points. Both scored 460 points on the year. But, the Ram's defense was 4 points better over the year. 372 points to 376 points. 15th and 17th.

and game time mistakes often over come ratings

I don't get into this stat stuff as you like to Raptor, because to much is decided by player matchups of the two facing teams, and just how emotional and keyed up certain players get.

scoring is what decides these games, whether that be plus or below 20, unless you have a smothering defense, which is a good description of the pass rush of the Giants in 2011, or the dominance of both pass rush and coverage of the 85 Bears, 60's Packers, 70's Steelers then a top 10 or so defense with a real good offense (top 5 or so) is formidable, and if KC wins tonight thats a good example of my opinion, there defense going off stats is average, but it's the SB, and if they match up well, they'll be better then those average stats.

the idea that defense wins championships is a half truth at best.

not to mention that it takes very good drafting plus UFA to build one, and near impossible to retain more then just a few seasons, get a good QB with some skill position talent and you can keep that rolling two or even 3 times as long.

my team just went a decade trying to build a defense over sustaining a dominate offense, and all we have to show for it is dominating weaker teams, we have relied far to much on Rodgers to win against teams we face in the PO's, we have come to expect him as well as Adams or Jones to over come the best defenses we see all season with limited skill position talent, and when any of those 3 or others fail to bring the A game, drop passes, fumble, Rodgers can't over come that.

people here look at those fails and I get to hear how Rodgers was less then perfect, and this Defense wins Championship mantra I think to defend the idiocy thats went on here for a decade, and thats just not true imo. and I think thats why Rodgers has been so pissed off since 2016.

[Pckfn23]

Ah, no I didn't. This line is just wrong. There is a rhyme and reason before 2015.



There have been 112 teams in the Super bowl. 92 have had a top-10 offense. 86 have had a top-10 defense. The 5 teams that scored the most points on offense in NFL history have all lost the Super Bowl. Up until and including the year 2000, only 9 teams that didn't have a top-10 offense made it to the Super Bowl. It's been very standard throughout the years. A top-10 offense and top-10 defense are your best bet to make it to the big game.

You absolutely missed the scope of what I was looking at... I was only looking at the last 20 years, so your 112 teams and not true statement is nonsense to my original post. So what you say may be true and what I said is also...

ya know why people have trouble following? heres a clue, the stats never give a complete picture of the reality, there simply a reference, the Giants where a good example, using a full season of defensive stats doesn't come close to explaining how dominate there defenses where in the PO games, and you use these tactics to win every argument, it's why it is so frustrating to have a conversation with you.

and these graphs with dots for teams, are more confusing then explanative.

the idea that defense wins Championships is complete bunk and anyone with a lic of football sense knows that without scoring ability a team doesn't stand a chance, this isn't the 60's where low scoring games depended so much more on great defense to keep it that way, this is the era of quick scoring offenses and defense can barely keep up.

Balance has been the order of the day for most teams, a potent scoring attack coupled with a better then average defense is a winning formula.

your attempt to defend the BS thats went on here concerning team building is a joke, we have spent almost all of our picks on defense, and let the offense continually decline and you and others here support this crap, and that approach has led to one and done in the PO's, and who do you blame, one of the best QB's the league has ever seen, now do you realize why we disagree?

An interesting look at Super Bowl teams as far as O and D rank in points and yards. Prior to 2016 there wasn't really a rhyme or reason to SB participants. Since and including 2016 every SB participant has had a top 8 O in points. The chart is the last 20 years of O and D points from the SB teams.

[Raptorman]

not to mention that it takes very good drafting plus UFA to build one, and near impossible to retain more then just a few seasons, get a good QB with some skill position talent and you can keep that rolling two or even 3 times as long.

Really? Name one good QB that has multiple Super Bowl wins that didn't also have a good defense in doing so. You can't, because they don't exist. The only player that even comes close is..............Eli Manning. The only QB with multiple wins who did not have a top defense during his time in New York.

[texas]

not to mention that it takes very good drafting plus UFA to build one, and near impossible to retain more then just a few seasons, get a good QB with some skill position talent and you can keep that rolling two or even 3 times as long.

Really? Name one good QB that has multiple Super Bowl wins that didn't also have a good defense in doing so. You can't, because they don't exist. The only player that even comes close is..............Eli Manning. The only QB with multiple wins who did not have a top defense during his time in New York.

And even in Eli's case, when I think about his Giants teams that won it all, that strong defensive line is what I think about first. So I would have said that his teams, rather than being the exception, were actually strong datapoints in favor of the argument.

Because it's also possible that a defense starts the year sucking but by the end of the year becomes quite good. When Peyton Manning won his first, his defense I remember sort of came together late and carried him.

[Yoop]

not to mention that it takes very good drafting plus UFA to build one, and near impossible to retain more then just a few seasons, get a good QB with some skill position talent and you can keep that rolling two or even 3 times as long.

Really? Name one good QB that has multiple Super Bowl wins that didn't also have a good defense in doing so. You can't, because they don't exist. The only player that even comes close is..............Eli Manning. The only QB with multiple wins who did not have a top defense during his time in New York.

quit painting my opinion with something I didn't say, which is that a great offense doesn't need a good defense, it simply doesn't need to be the best defense in the league or even top 10 to win, as the the stats show, your bound and determined to think defense is what matters most, and that just BS, the defense has to excel, or the offense has to excel and the other has to be good enough, preferably better then average.

and again stats about this stuff, like most stats don't give a true picture, these rankings leave to much to the imagination, in big games often we see elevation in performance, so to say what a unit did during the season means it made the difference in PO games is not always accurate, without Purdy the Niners #1 defense couldn't over come that loss from the offense.

again having a better balance of both being above average or even better then that should be the goal of every team builder, to do what our GM's have done for a decade relied on offense to much, and with a depletion of talent it put to much on the QB to over come, I'll never change my opinion on this, your wasting your time trying to prove defense wins these big games bringing seasonal stats to the conversation, to many variables are involved

[Raptorman]

it simply doesn't need to be the best defense in the league or even top 10

This is why 50 out of the previous 56 SB winners had a top 10 defense and 39 of the Losers had a top 10 defense. No, you don't need a top-10 defense win. But the odds increase greatly if you do.

And let's look at today's SB. The Eagle's offense outscored the Chief's offense. The difference in the game at the end was the TD by the Chiefs...........Defense.

[Raptorman]

not to mention that it takes very good drafting plus UFA to build one, and near impossible to retain more then just a few seasons, get a good QB with some skill position talent and you can keep that rolling two or even 3 times as long.

Really? Name one good QB that has multiple Super Bowl wins that didn't also have a good defense in doing so. You can't, because they don't exist. The only player that even comes close is..............Eli Manning. The only QB with multiple wins who did not have a top defense during his time in New York.

And even in Eli's case, when I think about his Giants teams that won it all, that strong defensive line is what I think about first. So I would have said that his teams, rather than being the exception, were actually strong datapoints in favor of the argument.

Because it's also possible that a defense starts the year sucking but by the end of the year becomes quite good. When Peyton Manning won his first, his defense I remember sort of came together late and carried him.

Eli's defense sucked the whole year. But they really stepped it up in the post season. That is indisputable. Just go back and look at the scores of the games during the years they won.

[Yoop]

it simply doesn't need to be the best defense in the league or even top 10

This is why 50 out of the previous 56 SB winners had a top 10 defense and 39 of the Losers had a top 10 defense. No, you don't need a top-10 defense win. But the odds increase greatly if you do.

And let's look at today's SB. The Eagle's offense outscored the Chief's offense. The difference in the game at the end was the TD by the Chiefs...........Defense.

get serious, that was the 2nd highest scoring SB all time, yes there was some excellent defense, but KC put up 21 2nd half points against the leagues #2 defense to pull out this win, and stifled one of the most potent offenses in the league with there average defense according to seasonal stats.

The Eagles will be back, there offense will demand that, not there great defense though, it got whipped on because when a offense adjust, it takes defense to long to counter those changes and that was on display for all of us to watch last night, Reid dialed up the motion which amounted to easy mis direction TD's, when a offense can accomplish that, defense will always struggle to defend it, when you see a team come back the way KC did last night, obviously it's offense prominence at work.

[BF004]

The Eagles will be back,

Already over the cap, 10 starters are FA’s, losing their DC and OC, and Jalen Hurts needs a contract.

They aren’t going to be the same team, by a good stretch, going forward.

Like any team, depends upon restocking talent. They got a couple of firsts, so they could make some noise there, but a tall order nonetheless. I think we can all appreciate here in GB how hard it actually is to get there.

[Yoop]

The Eagles will be back,

Already over the cap, 10 starters are FA’s, losing their DC and OC, and Jalen Hurts needs a contract.

They aren’t going to be the same team, by a good stretch, going forward.

Like any team, depends upon restocking talent. They got a couple of firsts, so they could make some noise there, but a tall order nonetheless. I think we can all appreciate here in GB how hard it actually is to get there.

wow, didn't realize that, all along I thought they where a young team, to bad, it probably will be hard for them to get back to the dance, they'll be in our boat, kicking dead money to keep players.

that offense when clicking is a bull dozer, those RPO's are brutal, really hard to defend a guy like Hurts, the Eagles punted only twice, if they get third and short it's practically automatic first down, great game.

[NCF]

The Eagles will be back,

Already over the cap, 10 starters are FA’s, losing their DC and OC, and Jalen Hurts needs a contract.

They aren’t going to be the same team, by a good stretch, going forward.

Like any team, depends upon restocking talent. They got a couple of firsts, so they could make some noise there, but a tall order nonetheless. I think we can all appreciate here in GB how hard it actually is to get there.

wow, didn't realize that, all along I thought they where a young team, to bad, it probably will be hard for them to get back to the dance, they'll be in our boat, kicking dead money to keep players.

that offense when clicking is a bull dozer, those RPO's are brutal, really hard to defend a guy like Hurts, the Eagles punted only twice, if they get third and short it's practically automatic first down, great game.

It's a pretty tough list for them.