Dispelling the Biggest Myth about the Fish

Thats just funny. I guess all of those NFL, College, high school football coaches are totally wasting thier time watching and breaking down film. All they really need to do is use the 21 point rule, and they'll know whether they played well or not. C'mon man.

Did the defense give up 21 points to San Diego? Or did they give up 16 and then Henne throws a pick six? The Buffalo game was 17-14 with 2:00 to go, then Henne throws 3 straight INTs. You gonna say the D didnt give us a chance to win? Colts game, we've got the ball, down 4, with 3 minutes left. That doesnt classify as a chance to win in your book? Had the ball down 2 with a couple minutes to go vs the Pats b/c Vontae makes a beast INT in the end zone vs Moss. Henne takes us down the field for the win. We didnt have a chance in that game? Same in the Jets game, and the Bucs game, Henne led the offense down the field for the score, but by your rule if you allow 21 points, youve got no chance. I mean, do you seriously think that 21 points is enough for us to beat teams like Indy, Houston, San Diego, Nawlins etc? If we had the Jets or Ravens D sure, but we dont. No offense dude, but the 21 point rule, or any other arbitrary rule, should be reserved for people who dont plan on making any real effort to understand the game.

 

Youre comparing this years defense to defenses from past eras when teams only threw the ball 10 times a game. Its apples and oranges. We scored 30 points in 4 straight games for the first time in team history, but you wont hear me saying that this years O was anything past average. Its a different era, different philosophies, different rules etc.

 

Watch the AFC Championship game. #1 D in the league vs the Colts, and by the 3rd qtr Peyton was shredding them with relative ease. The NFL has decided to make this a passing league, the rules dictate it. IMO it doesnt really matter how good your D is, youre youre going to struggle trying to stop the elite offenses. I think the O may have to do the heavy lifting, especially early in the year, but we have the tools on O to do it, if we're healthy.

 

Fair point. But is 23 points really enough to beat a team like Indy? More importantly, if I had offered you the game ending scenario before the game started, would you have taken it? Down 4, 3+ minutes to go, 2 time outs left vs a gassed Indy defense? Me, I'd have taken those odds, dont care if the score was 10-6, 27-23, or 49-45, it was a great opportunity to get a win, and we didnt pull it out.

 

Ok, well which games were they "terrible" in? I count two, Indy and Houston. And Im not sure youre understanding my point. The defense is not the reason we were losing games, it was the entire team that didnt play well, not just one unit. Of course we went defense in the draft, it was an old unit on the decline, especially at LB, which is really the only position that has been "over hauled". The offense is young and on the rise, adding more depth at G and a #1WR was enough for me. A seam busting TE wouldve been icing on the cake, but maybe next year.

 

I specifically asked you not to do that But oh well, reading the box score is enough for some folks, not me though.

 

By my count, Indy scored 24+ points in 10 out of 14 games, I'm not going to count the last two games, which they mailed in. The question was, with our defense, does anyone think 23 points would be enough to beat Indy?
In any case, yes the D played poorly, but we still had a good chance to win the game. Thats all Im saying.

 

How do you figure that?

 

Thanks man, but IMO youre over simpifying the issue. You cant just look at points allowed, thats just one stat. Youve gotta look at each individual game, 46-34 sounds like good offense and bad defense, but thats not what happened at all. 30-25 sounds like good offense, but our O stunk @ NYJ. 31-14 sounds like bad defense, but it really wasnt. I guess my question to you would be, in which game(s) did the defense allow so many points that the team didnt have a chance to win?

 

I'd definitely agree there. Allowing 21 to Indy or Nawlins is good defense, allowing 21 points to Buffalo is alot different. It depends on the team youre playing, field position, weather, gameplan, so many different variables that just using an arbitrary number doesnt really do much for you.

 

Which games woud those be?

 

Fair enough, but it only happened twice, vs Houston and NE, we were 1-1 in those games. I suppose you could count the Tennessee game as well, but the offense moved the ball all day, it was turnovers and missed opportunities that caused us to be down by 18, it wasnt bad defense.

Absolutely. But again, there were only 2 games, Tennessee and Houston, where we were forced to abandon our game plan because of a large deficit.

I gave the D an average grade in that game. NY scored ten points as a result of successfull fake punts that didnt fool anyone, Wake and Porter just missed the tackles. A bogus P.I. call on Will Allen led to another score, and a bomb to David Clowney led to the other score. Its not always bad defense that leads to scores, sometimes you have to just give credit when the opposing offense makes a great play, or executes thier offense.

Slow start is an understatement. We had 7 possessions in the first half, and got 2 first downs, reminiscent of the 2nd half of the Saints game. We scored on our second possession of the second half, but that was the only drive the offense put together all day. I have to disagree that the D allowed 2 quick scores though. Davone Bess muffed a punt at the MIA 29 yd line, and that led to a quick score. Ginn responded with a KRTD then yeah, the defense gave up a quick score, mostly b/c Vontae jumped that crossing route and whiffed, which allowed Cotchery to go 53 yds on what shouldve been a 7 yd completion.

I think teams knew right away that out LBs couldnt cover anyone, Gonzalez had a great game, Clark had a career game, and the cat was outta the bag. Our safeties were stuck in run support, or in the middle of the field to guard against the seam route, and that left out corners on an island outside. Thats what led to big plays IMO. Ive never seen so many bombs thrown with no safety anywhere in sight, in my entire life. Keep in mind, we also didnt have a a FS, Gibril is a SS with horrible ball/coverage skills. Our LBs were awful in coverage, awful at blitzing, just awful in general. So yeah, we gave up alot of big plays, buts its b/c we didnt have the talent to prevent them, same as our offense lacked the ability to create big plays. But we were only "blown out" of one game all year, against Houston. I know it sounds like Im defending the D, but all Im really saying is that they shouldnt be the whipping boys, the offense had egg on its face for much of the year also.