Best defenses of all time

[Blue&Silver]

No doubt, I was drooling just reading your response. lol To me is says alot about the Seahawks defense given how close to the vest the NFL calls penalties yet they remained aggressive and hard hitting. They allowed few yards after catch as someone was their to put the hit on the reciever. It was just a very impressive showing by the Seahawks defense I have to say as a defensive guy I enjoyed watching it.

There is a distinct difference between Seattle, and some of the great defenses of the past like Pittsburgh, Rams, Eagles and Bears. I'm not sure any of Seattle's front seven would be a starter on those defenses, but their secondary is a different story. That's where Seattle's real talent lies.

 

[Wayne02]

Wilson's team has a defense, Romo's team does not. You give that Seattle defense to Romo and he will be much better than 8-8. Besides, it's stupid for these kind of debates because Wilson is one man, and Romo is one man.

It takes the whole 53 to win a game.

I agree, I'm not comparing the two QB's, there hasn't been one QB who has won the Super Bowl without a superior team around him.

 

[Wayne02]

Even if they were healthy, it isn't as if they are great receivers. Harvin is a great athlete and can do multiple things, but as a pure receiver he isn't that great.

Percy Harvin and Sidney Rice are a heck of an upgrade over Golden Tate and Doug Baldwin.

 

[5Stars]

I agree, I'm not comparing the two QB's, there hasn't been one QB who has won the Super Bowl without a superior team around him.

What I will debate is that, Wilson will be the more successful QB than RGknee will ever be. Of course, I could be wrong depending on what teams both play on, but from the QB position....I think Wilson is better given that both have the same talent on each team.

 

[Risen Star]

I'm not saying that Romo doesn't have his own problems to deal with, but you're making an unfair assessment about Wilson's productivity when both of his top 2 targets were out the entire year, and he still managed to overcome it.

First of all, his top two targets aren't Dez Bryant and Jason Witten.

Secondly, that doesn't absolve him from failing to mature as a pocket passer. I saw no progress in that area when I expected it because, like I said, I was a fan last year.

The Seahawks won the Super Bowl, but not because of Russell Wilson. Romo is a better QB right now. By a lot. You'd see how much of Wilson's BS leadership would help him in this circus in Dallas. While Romo would find his inner clutch playing in Seattle.

 

[Wayne02]

First of all, his top two targets aren't Dez Bryant and Jason Witten.

Secondly, that doesn't absolve him from failing to mature as a pocket passer. I saw no progress in that area when I expected it because, like I said, I was a fan last year.

The Seahawks won the Super Bowl, but not because of Russell Wilson. Romo is a better QB right now. By a lot. You'd see how much of Wilson's BS leadership would help him in this circus in Dallas. While Romo would find his inner clutch playing in Seattle.

That's fine if you'd like to believe that Romo is a better QB right now. Romo will always put up better numbers because of the system that he plays in. Wilson plays in a run oriented offense, and he fits that team a lot better than Romo would. Wilson is great on 3rd downs because of his escape ability and he does what needs to be done. NO QB, WINS BECAUSE OF JUST THE QB, so you can't use that as a knock against Wilson. The bottom line is Romo, could not start over Wilson in Seattle right now, not because he's not as good as Wilson, but because of the personnel on offense. Romo would be throwing to 2 5'10 wide receivers with average speed and below average leaping ability, and without a sure handed tight end. Romo does not have the escape ability as Wilson so he would not fit great within that Seattle team. Russell Wilson does not have to put up all world numbers to be a great QB, because he fits perfectly within that system better than any other QB in the league right now.

 

[Risen Star]

That's fine if you'd like to believe that Romo is a better QB right now. Romo will always put up better numbers because of the system that he plays in.

He puts up better numbers because he's a better QB. He would put up better numbers in Seattle under the same system.

Wilson plays in a run oriented offense, and he fits that team a lot better than Romo would. Wilson is great on 3rd downs because of his escape ability and he does what needs to be done. NO QB, WINS BECAUSE OF JUST THE QB, so you can't use that as a knock against Wilson. The bottom line is Romo, could not start over Wilson in Seattle right now, not because he's not as good as Wilson, but because of the personnel on offense. Romo would be throwing to 2 5'10 wide receivers with average speed and below average leaping ability, and without a sure handed tight end. Romo does not have the escape ability as Wilson so he would not fit great within that Seattle team. Russell Wilson does not have to put up all world numbers to be a great QB, because he fits perfectly within that system better than any other QB in the league right now.

Actually I can say he would start over Wilson. Unless the best fit for that offense is the worse QB.

They showcase the QB's escape ability because that's all he can do at a high level. He's either going to hand the ball off or run around like he's playing in a sand lot. He's not capable of working within the pocket and going through his reads. Which is why he is not as good as Tony Romo.

He sure looks good with that cast of players and it's confusing some people to how good he actually is.

 

[Wayne02]

He puts up better numbers because he's a better QB. He would put up better numbers in Seattle under the same system.




Actually I can say he would start over Wilson. Unless the best fit for that offense is the worse QB.

They showcase the QB's escape ability because that's all he can do at a high level. He's either going to hand the ball off or run around like he's playing in a sand lot. He's not capable of working within the pocket and going through his reads. Which is why he is not as good as Tony Romo.

He sure looks good with that cast of players and it's confusing some people to how good he actually is.

You keep saying he looks good with a good cast of players, ON DEFENSE, but on offense, his weapons are average at best. You can continue to tread on Wilson all you want to, but the truth is, Wilson is the perfect QB for that team and Romo wouldn't have more success when he has the pocket collapsing on him and having to look forward to throwing to Doug Baldwin and Golden Tate. You ever think that Russell Wilson has to play a lot of sandlot football because he doesn't have a Dez Bryant who can separate from the defensive backs? If Romo was under center with that Seahawks offense, his productivity would go way down and he quite possibly would not finish the season. Wilson is a major difference maker for that team because he rarely makes bad decisions and he can make things happen when the pocket collapses.

 

[KJJ]

No, not even close. The most dominating front seven in the History of the NFL was the Fearsome Foursome, the Purple Gang, the Steel Curtain and the Doomsday Defense, all were more talented then the Bears front seven in 85, IMO. That 85 Bears team did it because of the 46 scheme. Not as much talent IMO. Once teams figured out the 46, game over.

You're giving an opinion as am I it's all based on opinion but the 85 Bears defense is mentioned by many as the greatest defense in NFL history primarily due to their front 7 that destroyed QB's en route to a 15-1 season and a 36 point blowout win in the SB. Offensively the Bears were average and were led by an average QB but the team is ranked as one of the top 5 greatest teams in NFL history due to their dominating defense that annihilated QB's. The Bears defense combined for 136 sacks in 84 (setting an NFL record with 72) and in 85. The Rams Fearsome Foursome and the Vikings Purple Gang were great "defensive lines" but they never led their teams to a championship.

The Purple Gang kept coming up short in SB's the Vikings were dominated in each of their 4 SB appearances while the Fearsome Foursome never even reached a SB. The Steel Curtain was no doubt a great defense due to their consistency over a period of several years but that defense was being complimented by a great offense that had Hall of Famers on the OL, at QB, RB and at both WR positions. Both sides of the ball were loaded with HOF players. No defense other than maybe the 2000 Ravens had as dominating a "season" defensively as the 85 Bears. Both teams won SB's in blowouts due to their great defenses. The 2000 Ravens had an average offense and arguably the worst QB to ever lead a team to a SB championship.

The 2000 Ravens went 4 straight games scoring only 6 offensive points but their defense only allowed an average of 10 points a game. The Seahawks blowout of the Broncos in the SB is why their defense is being compared to the 85 Bears, 2000 Ravens and some of the other great defenses. The Seahawks defense is being judged off the 2013 season. Judging the greatest front 7/defenses in NFL history is based on whether you're judging off of consistency over a period of seasons or one great season. The greatest offenses in NFL history are judged by one great statistical season. Every offense is measured by what the 1999 Rams greatest show on turf accomplished as well as the 2007 Pats and now the 2013 Broncos.

Everyone looks at the numbers. As great as the Steel Curtain defense was the Steelers never won a SB by more than 10 points. Both the Cowboys and Rams had success against the Steel Curtain and the Rams were being led by an average QB in Vince Ferragamo. What ultimately won those SB's for the Steelers was their explosive offense that couldn't be stopped in the 4th quarter. It was Bradshaw to Swann and Stallworth that sealed those victories. In all 4 of the Steelers SB victories it was future HOF offensive players (Harris, Swann and Bradshaw twice) that were named the games MVP. In the 85 Bears SB win it was Richard Dent who was named the games MVP. For the 2000 Ravens SB win it was Ray Lewis named the games MVP. For the 2002 Bucs it was Dexter Jackson a safety named the SB MVP and for the 2013 Seahawks it was Malcolm Smith named the SB MVP. All those teams won SB's with great defensive performance throughout the season and in the SB.

Regardless of the scheme it takes damn good players to be a dominate defense and the 85 Bears had some damn good players check their roster. The Cowboys ran the Tampa 2 this past season that the 2002 Bucs dominated with but the Cowboys ended up with one of the worst defenses in NFL history because they don't have a Warren Sapp, Derrick Brooks, John Lynch or a Ronde Barber. Regardless of the scheme the Cowboys defense sucks because they have a bunch of average players that don't even know where to line up. They looked like crap under Wades scheme for most of his tenure and under Ryan's scheme that's worked fine in NO. I don't care what scheme you run you have to have good players for the scheme to work.

 

[Risen Star]

You keep saying he looks good with a good cast of players, ON DEFENSE, but on offense, his weapons are average at best. You can continue to tread on Wilson all you want to, but the truth is, Wilson is the perfect QB for that team and Romo wouldn't have more success when he has the pocket collapsing on him and having to look forward to throwing to Doug Baldwin and Golden Tate. You ever think that Russell Wilson has to play a lot of sandlot football because he doesn't have a Dez Bryant who can separate from the defensive backs? If Romo was under center with that Seahawks offense, his productivity would go way down and he quite possibly would not finish the season. Wilson is a major difference maker for that team because he rarely makes bad decisions and he can make things happen when the pocket collapses.

I don't think so. I don't think a QB who is vastly superior at making reads and throwing the ball would produce less than a sandlot player who has to run around because he lacks the skills to play within the pocket.

Wilson runs around not because the offense needs him to, he runs around because he himself has to. If you put a superior QB under center they would look like a new offense.

BTW, Seattle's offense was carried to a Super Bowl. They won a title based on defense and the run game. The two areas Wilson doesn't factor in. He was carried to a title, he didn't do any carrying. Romo is capable of doing more. Because he's a legit QB.

 

[Risen Star]

Peyton Manning can't run around anymore either. He could show up drunk and instantly improve that Seattle offense.

Wilson isn't a perfect fit. He's just the very fortunate player under center for that team right now. It can confuse fans into thinking he's some kind of great leader of a championship team.

 

[KJJ]

Correction: The Steelers did win one of their 4 SB's by more than 10 points over the Rams in 79 31-19.

 

[Wayne02]

I don't think so. I don't think a QB who is vastly superior at making reads and throwing the ball would produce less than a sandlot player who has to run around because he lacks the skills to play within the pocket.

Wilson runs around not because the offense needs him to, he runs around because he himself has to. If you put a superior QB under center they would look like a new offense.

BTW, Seattle's offense was carried to a Super Bowl. They won a title based on defense and the run game. The two areas Wilson doesn't factor in. He was carried to a title, he didn't do any carrying. Romo is capable of doing more. Because he's a legit QB.

What facts are you basing this on, that Wilson can't make reads? Is it your opinion? You're still not getting the point that Wilson isn't asked to carry the team. You're making it sound like Matt Flynn could have gotten that team to the Super Bowl. Winning the Super Bowl doesn't just come down to that one game, it takes an entire season to win it.

 

[Wayne02]

Peyton Manning can't run around anymore either. He could show up drunk and instantly improve that Seattle offense.

Wilson isn't a perfect fit. He's just the very fortunate player under center for that team right now. It can confuse fans into thinking he's some kind of great leader of a championship team.

So are you saying that Matt Flynn could have done what Wilson did this year?

 

[Risen Star]

What facts are you basing this on, that Wilson can't make reads? Is it your opinion? You're still not getting the point that Wilson isn't asked to carry the team. You're making it sound like Matt Flynn could have gotten that team to the Super Bowl. Winning the Super Bowl doesn't just come down to that one game, it takes an entire season to win it.

I see you're searching for firmer footing now. He went from the perfect QB in that offense to hey, it's not like Matt Flynn could have won that Super Bowl.

Yes, I'm basing this on my educated opinion that the reason he's so active outside the pocket is because he lacks skills inside of it. This is a guy who oversaw one of the worst passing attacks in the league this year. What that team does worst is what he gets paid to do.

I was a fan of his last year. I just didn't see any maturation as a pro QB this year. I'm not easily fooled by the title. Congrats, but his skills as a QB didn't play a part in it. I'd give him credit for not turning the ball over. That's about it. Other than that he was carried there by a great supporting cast. Give Romo that same situation and he'd collect rings.

Now I'm not saying he's always going to play this way. I'd still take him over most of the young QBs in today's game but right now, today, he is not even close to the QB of Tony Romo.

 

[Wayne02]

I see you're searching for firmer footing now. He went from the perfect QB in that offense to hey, it's not like Matt Flynn could have won that Super Bowl.

Yes, I'm basing this on my educated opinion that the reason he's so active outside the pocket is because he lacks skills inside of it. This is a guy who oversaw one of the worst passing attacks in the league this year. What that team does worst is what he gets paid to do.

I was a fan of his last year. I just didn't see any maturation as a pro QB this year. I'm not easily fooled by the title. Congrats, but his skills as a QB didn't play a part in it. I'd give him credit for not turning the ball over. That's about it. Other than that he was carried there by a great supporting cast. Give Romo that same situation and he'd collect rings.

Now I'm not saying he's always going to play this way. I'd still take him over most of the young QBs in today's game but right now, today, he is not even close to the QB of Tony Romo.

I brought up Matt Flynn because you brought up Peyton Manning, you brought up one extreme so I countered your extreme with an extreme of my own. Ok, so you're basing this all on your opinion, that's cool, but opinions don't mean anything. The guy played his role and it led to him and his team winning a ring, you can use hypotheticals all day long about Romo would be able to win this and that, but it's just your opinion, unfounded by any real facts.

 

[barney]

Seattles current defense is good but is good but it is by no means invincable

 

[joseephuss]

Percy Harvin and Sidney Rice are a heck of an upgrade over Golden Tate and Doug Baldwin.

I don't think Rice is an upgrade. He has had one really good season in his career and that was 4 years ago. The rest of the time he has hardly done anything. I don't think he is a difference maker. Now Harvin can have an impact because of his athleticism, but he is not a polished receiver. The Seahawks are definitely more dangerous offensively with him; however, I still don't think they are a great offense with him or Rice. Perhaps they are upgrades. That doesn't mean Wilson has great weapons when they are healthy. None of those guys are the targets Dez and Witten are for Dallas. They generate offense in different ways.

 

[Risen Star]

I brought up Matt Flynn because you brought up Peyton Manning, you brought up one extreme so I countered your extreme with an extreme of my own. Ok, so you're basing this all on your opinion, that's cool, but opinions don't mean anything. The guy played his role and it led to him and his team winning a ring, you can use hypotheticals all day long about Romo would be able to win this and that, but it's just your opinion, unfounded by any real facts.

Yeah but I wasn't saying any QB could win in Seattle. You did say he was the perfect QB for that offense, which is complete nonsense. The league it littered with QBs who could produce more than he did this year.

Russell Wilson didn't lead the Seahawks to anything. That's the point. He was carried there by an epic defense and a beast of a running game.

 

[Redball Express]

Fruitful???

Yeah..

Like they rode the wave of the team's success,too.

Not as in fruitful like your banana and cheerios fruitful.