Jump to content

Without A Good Defensive Line, It Seems Your Chances Of Winning A Sb Are Slim.


alwaysfallforward
 Share

Recommended Posts

It seems we hear a lot about how without a good QB, you won't likely win a Super Bowl. It is true that you probably won't win a SB without a QB who is at least decent, however it seems most teams that win SBs have exceptional D-lines and/or front 7s, especially a great pass rush.

06 Colts-great pass rush with Freeney/Mathis

07 Giants-great pass rush with Strahan/Umenyora/Tuck, got after Brady.

08 Steelers-great pass rush with Pit's D-line and Harrison/Woodley

09 Saints-great pass rush with guys like Smith

10 Packers-great D-line anchored by Raji, with a great pass rush with guys like Matthews

11 Giants-great pass rush with guys like Tuck

12 Ravens-great D-line anchored by Ngata, great pass rush with guys like Suggs

13 Seahawks-great D-line, with great pass rushers like Avril and Bennett, put a lot of pressure on Manning

14 Patriots probably had the worst D-line of the teams listed here, however it was good, anchored by Wilfork, with fairly good play on D-line.

QB play is important, however it seems being able to get after the QB may be just as important in terms of winning a Super Bowl. With how good offenses are at finding favorable situations for receivers, it seems aiming to stop the QB is the better way to go, if you stop the QB you stop all the receivers.

If the Falcons don't get a good D-line, I don't see them doing much better than maybe 8-8 or 9-7, if even that. I would blame play in the trenches for the Falcons struggles the last 2 seasons more than anything. Hopefully the Falcons can better their D-line, because it's very hard to overcome poor play on the D-line imo, even with a great secondary.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree, you have to have better than average play from both lines.

I've watched a couple games of Shelton and his tape is really good. I'm liking the idea of him to the Saints more and more.

I will say I believe a defense has to be good at something for the team to succeed. A little vague, I know lol

Be it pressure, turnovers, 3rd down defense etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree, you have to have better than average play from both lines.

I've watched a couple games of Shelton and his tape is really good. I'm liking the idea of him to the Saints more and more.

I will say I believe a defense has to be good at something for the team to succeed. A little vague, I know lol

Be it pressure, turnovers, 3rd down defense etc.

There probably is at least one thing every defense does well, however I think I know what you mean. I actually think that your touching on something that is often the difference between a team's defense helping out an offense well enough to likely be successful, and a team's defense making it too tough on an offense to likely be successful.

The 'bend but don't break' defense, is a good example. One instance of it is with the Packers gashed them up for a lot of yards, however they held the Packers to what was tied for their lowest scoring total at home(including playoffs), with 26 points, because of their ability to play bend but don't break defense. Make a team drive down field slower, give yourself more chances to make the stop, and eventually make it. I think that was also a big difference between ATL in the regular season versus the Packers in 2010, and the ATL-GB playoff game for the 2010 season. We played bend but don't break defense against them in the regular season, but our defense broke in the playoffs.

I think bend but don't break defense is very underrated, and is mistaken for teams not finishing well, as opposed to a good defensive strategy. At times, fans may say their teams left points on the field, however I think it often has more to do with a team playing great 'bend but don't break defense', than the offense screwing up. It's part of why I don't usually think 'we left points on the field' is a valid reason for why a team will likely get a better result in the next meeting with a team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The battles in the trenches often go unnoticed but are the most important. A team that's built from the inside out will be very successful. If u can protect the QB, and get after the opposing teams qb, that's a recipe for success.

It is indeed true that that is a likely recipe for success.

On the offensive side, if you have a line that can protect the QB well, they have more time to make a read, and there's more of a chance you can complete a pass if the play doesn't go how you expected and the intended target isn't in a good position, receivers will have more time to get open and etc.

On the defensive side, If you get pressure and are able to cause errors, your stopping the QB, which means your stopping every receiver on the field. IMO it is A LOT easier to overcome bad secondary play than a lack of pressure.

The Super Bowl was actually a great example of how easily a good game plan can overcome a shut down corner. The Pats managed to move the ball well on the Seahawks, while Sherman only gave up 1 pass for 6 yards I believe. They targeted the middle of the field a lot, and even for a great slot defender, it is very difficult to defend that. They seem to do well with short slants, which are tough for any defender to cover well, and they also do screens well to guys like Amendola and Edelman. I don't know if screens count as passes completed towards a corner, however NE seemed to have some success throwing screens towards Sherman. Sherman isn't a bad tackler, however a guy like Edelman in open space will likely find a way to get yards. You may tackle him, but he does well with yards while being tackled, so he could still be effective.

With all the ways to get around a great cover corner, it seems as though without a good pass rush, your pass defense likely won't be able to do much better than play a 'bend but don't break' style of defense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is indeed true that that is a likely recipe for success.

On the offensive side, if you have a line that can protect the QB well, they have more time to make a read, and there's more of a chance you can complete a pass if the play doesn't go how you expected and the intended target isn't in a good position, receivers will have more time to get open and etc.

On the defensive side, If you get pressure and are able to cause errors, your stopping the QB, which means your stopping every receiver on the field. IMO it is A LOT easier to overcome bad secondary play than a lack of pressure.

The Super Bowl was actually a great example of how easily a good game plan can overcome a shut down corner. The Pats managed to move the ball well on the Seahawks, while Sherman only gave up 1 pass for 6 yards I believe. They targeted the middle of the field a lot, and even for a great slot defender, it is very difficult to defend that. They seem to do well with short slants, which are tough for any defender to cover well, and they also do screens well to guys like Amendola and Edelman. I don't know if screens count as passes completed towards a corner, however NE seemed to have some success throwing screens towards Sherman. Sherman isn't a bad tackler, however a guy like Edelman in open space will likely find a way to get yards. You may tackle him, but he does well with yards while being tackled, so he could still be effective.

With all the ways to get around a great cover corner, it seems as though without a good pass rush, your pass defense likely won't be able to do much better than play a 'bend but don't break' style of defense.

Yea definitely, a dominant front 7 can make an average secondary look great. And a great secondary can make your pass rush look better than it is, but imo if you wanna have consistent success on D you better be able to get after the Q and also be able to maintain the run. If the saints focused more on the front 7, i believe the D would be in a much better position.

On offense a great line is the second most important thing next to a qb imo. Cause if you can pass protect and open running lanes, that can cover up the deficiencies you may have on D. So ya, real talk, build your team from the trenches on out and you have a good recipe for success.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yea definitely, a dominant front 7 can make an average secondary look great. And a great secondary can make your pass rush look better than it is, but imo if you wanna have consistent success on D you better be able to get after the Q and also be able to maintain the run. If the saints focused more on the front 7, i believe the D would be in a much better position.

On offense a great line is the second most important thing next to a qb imo. Cause if you can pass protect and open running lanes, that can cover up the deficiencies you may have on D. So ya, real talk, build your team from the trenches on out and you have a good recipe for success.

I think the Falcons would be much better focusing on D-line as well. They have brought in a lot of pretty good corners and safeties in recent years, however their pass defense hasn't done much better than a 'bend but don't break' defense'.

With run defense, D-line is also big imo. I remember when Atlanta had Grady Jackson. He was a beast in run defense, I believe he lead the league in TFL in 2006, he may have been the best run stuffing DT in the league. Our run defense I believe went from near the bottom, to top 10 from 2005 to 2006. Other than Michael Turner, he was probably the best FA acquisition that Atlanta has made since I started watching NFL Football regularly in 2005.

It's kind of crazy to me that so many fans seemingly put the focus on Smith, conservative play calling(which I don't even think we had), or Matt Ryan as the big reason why Atlanta has struggled the last 2 years, when we may have had the worst combined lines in the league.

With that combination, even getting to 7-9 is hard IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

lol I mean things can change but at this moment I do not see them going 10-6. More like 7-9, 8-8

I think our defense can improve enough to get us around 10 wins. Noone is talking about the offense though. I think that's what's going to make us or break us. If they struggle with the scheme change then it's always next year

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the Falcons would be much better focusing on D-line as well. They have brought in a lot of pretty good corners and safeties in recent years, however their pass defense hasn't done much better than a 'bend but don't break' defense'.

With run defense, D-line is also big imo. I remember when Atlanta had Grady Jackson. He was a beast in run defense, I believe he lead the league in TFL in 2006, he may have been the best run stuffing DT in the league. Our run defense I believe went from near the bottom, to top 10 from 2005 to 2006. Other than Michael Turner, he was probably the best FA acquisition that Atlanta has made since I started watching NFL Football regularly in 2005.

It's kind of crazy to me that so many fans seemingly put the focus on Smith, conservative play calling(which I don't even think we had), or Matt Ryan as the big reason why Atlanta has struggled the last 2 years, when we may have had the worst combined lines in the league.

With that combination, even getting to 7-9 is hard IMO.

I agree. Successful NFL play begins and ends along the line play.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There probably is at least one thing every defense does well, however I think I know what you mean. I actually think that your touching on something that is often the difference between a team's defense helping out an offense well enough to likely be successful, and a team's defense making it too tough on an offense to likely be successful.

The 'bend but don't break' defense, is a good example. One instance of it is with the Packers gashed them up for a lot of yards, however they held the Packers to what was tied for their lowest scoring total at home(including playoffs), with 26 points, because of their ability to play bend but don't break defense. Make a team drive down field slower, give yourself more chances to make the stop, and eventually make it. I think that was also a big difference between ATL in the regular season versus the Packers in 2010, and the ATL-GB playoff game for the 2010 season. We played bend but don't break defense against them in the regular season, but our defense broke in the playoffs.

I think bend but don't break defense is very underrated, and is mistaken for teams not finishing well, as opposed to a good defensive strategy. At times, fans may say their teams left points on the field, however I think it often has more to do with a team playing great 'bend but don't break defense', than the offense screwing up. It's part of why I don't usually think 'we left points on the field' is a valid reason for why a team will likely get a better result in the next meeting with a team.

Very good point.

Yards dont matter and forcing a team to be methodical is one of the easier ways to compliment a high flying offense. TURNOVERS and good 3rd down defense. Its hard for a team to march 80 yards every time to score. They will eventually make mistakes and a defense that capitalizes on that is a defense I want.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very good point.

Yards dont matter and forcing a team to be methodical is one of the easier ways to compliment a high flying offense. TURNOVERS and good 3rd down defense. Its hard for a team to march 80 yards every time to score. They will eventually make mistakes and a defense that capitalizes on that is a defense I want.

The Seahawks seemed to master that philosophy against the Broncos in the SB. Peyton Manning breaks a SB record for most completions, and the Broncos only score 8 points. Granted, a lot of them did come when SEA already had a big lead in the second half, however they did use it in the first half as well IMO.

Early on, DEN struggled to move the ball, however there was the drive where SEA got a pick 6. DEN moved the ball down field, however SEA got a pick, returned it for a score, and a drive that was actually a good drive by DEN for the most part IMO, ends in 7 points for SEA.

It may have been the best instance of a defense out strategizing an offense that I've seen in my time watching football, Browns versus Colts in 2008 may have been better, however I didn't see that game, lol. DEN is a pass happy team, and SEA managed to eliminate the big play. If you throw anything but screens and short slants that much at a defense like SEA's there will likely be some INTs coming.

It's brilliant strategy IMO because they were able to stop DEN from scoring, and only needed to win a few of the battles on the drive. Granted, DEN did pretty much play right into their hands IMO, however the strategy was still brilliant IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...