Galian Beast
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 14,735
- Reaction score
- 7,457
The case for why this defense can get us to the Super Bowl.
Games 1-4: 21.5
Games 5-8: 20.25
Games 9-12: 26.5
Games 13-15: 20.66
Defense is playing just about as well as we can ask for at the moment. I still maintain that this defense can get a lot better next year, but I think they're good enough to win if offense puts them in a good position.
Not a single game I would say that the Defense cost us the game. That says a lot to me. Even when the defense hasn't played particularly well, they haven't been the cause of us not winning.
49ers: 4 turnovers
Commanders: 2 turnovers (held to 17 in regulation)
Arizona: 2 turnovers, offense only scored 10 points, 7 came late.
Philly: 3 turnovers, couldn't stop the run
Philly might have been their worst defensive game of the year, but the 3 turnovers and lack of offensive production didn't help. I really didn't want Philly to make the playoffs, because while I think we match up well with them, I think they match up well with us as well if that makes any sense. I don't see many games going the distance between these two teams. I see a lot of blowouts based on how games get going. I do think that Philly is going to struggle against this Cowboys team going forward with an improved defense though.
We lost 4 games this year, and it hasn't been the defenses fault. That is a huge statement for Marinelli and why we can't let him go to Tampa Bay next year. You get this guy some legitimate upgrades, and it'll be very difficult to beat this team next year.
The reality is that Romo makes smart decisions because when he doesn't have to press and force the issue. As long as the defense isn't get gouged ala Denver 2013, he'll take what the defense gives him (which happens to be a lot when there are 8 in the box all day).
I think we've worried about this defense and its ability to defend against the pass, but I think that has been a bit misleading. We've played and beaten Russell Wilson, Drew Brees, and Andrew Luck. Hell those were some of the Defense's best games. This isn't to suggest that we're not going to face some difficulties in pass coverage, because we are; what it does say though is that I don't think this is a defense you're just going to get one dimensional against and have success passing the ball at will.
They have a defensive passer rating of 89.2. They might give up a lot of yards, they might not be able to get consistent and steady pressure, but they aren't letting teams just drive down and score on every drive either.
We've allowed 21 passing touchdowns, and we've intercepted the ball 16 times. That's pretty good. And we've become much better about not giving up the big play.
We're tied for 9th for least plays over 20 yards. That is 3rd best in the NFC, 2nd best in the playoffs in the NFC.
This defense isn't a juggernaut yet, but it has held its own consistently all year long. I don't think one dimensional teams are going to beat it.
Let me expand on what I'm talking about.
The Colts dropped a lot of passes and we didn't play Hilton, but they were #1 in passing yards going into that game, right now they're 21st in rushing yards (I'm sure having 1 yard didn't help), but my point is because we could focus on stopping the pass, they were able to make things difficult for the Colts.
Are there any teams with balance in the NFC?
Yes and no.
Seattle is somewhat balanced, but at the end of the day they don't have anything that scares me in their passing game without percy harvin. They will find it difficult to stretch the field consistently. If a team forces Wilson to beat them through the air, and shuts down that run. They'll lose. It might be a low scoring affair with their defense, but they'll lose.
Philadelphia was probably the next most balanced team, but the reason why I didn't want to play Philly whereas I'm not as worried about Seattle (the better team) is because Philly had big play ability. We have big play ability which is what I think puts us over Seattle. We can dictate to their defense in a way they can't to our offense.
Green Bay is somewhat balanced on offense, which poses somewhat of a threat, but their defense is much worse than ours. The numbers might not reflect it until you look deeper at who they've played and when they've struggled, but Green Bay's inability to stop the run is a major flaw when playing the Cowboys.
With all that said the nature of this argument changes in the playoffs, as the AFC have a host of much better balanced teams who have the offensive firepower to really impact our defense. New England, Pittsburgh... maybe Denver if the old Denver shows up... They all pose much bigger problems.
But again, this is why I don't want to play Washington, because their aggressive nature and nothing to lose and nothing to win attitude in week 17 could spell disaster for us.
Games 1-4: 21.5
Games 5-8: 20.25
Games 9-12: 26.5
Games 13-15: 20.66
Defense is playing just about as well as we can ask for at the moment. I still maintain that this defense can get a lot better next year, but I think they're good enough to win if offense puts them in a good position.
Not a single game I would say that the Defense cost us the game. That says a lot to me. Even when the defense hasn't played particularly well, they haven't been the cause of us not winning.
49ers: 4 turnovers
Commanders: 2 turnovers (held to 17 in regulation)
Arizona: 2 turnovers, offense only scored 10 points, 7 came late.
Philly: 3 turnovers, couldn't stop the run
Philly might have been their worst defensive game of the year, but the 3 turnovers and lack of offensive production didn't help. I really didn't want Philly to make the playoffs, because while I think we match up well with them, I think they match up well with us as well if that makes any sense. I don't see many games going the distance between these two teams. I see a lot of blowouts based on how games get going. I do think that Philly is going to struggle against this Cowboys team going forward with an improved defense though.
We lost 4 games this year, and it hasn't been the defenses fault. That is a huge statement for Marinelli and why we can't let him go to Tampa Bay next year. You get this guy some legitimate upgrades, and it'll be very difficult to beat this team next year.
The reality is that Romo makes smart decisions because when he doesn't have to press and force the issue. As long as the defense isn't get gouged ala Denver 2013, he'll take what the defense gives him (which happens to be a lot when there are 8 in the box all day).
I think we've worried about this defense and its ability to defend against the pass, but I think that has been a bit misleading. We've played and beaten Russell Wilson, Drew Brees, and Andrew Luck. Hell those were some of the Defense's best games. This isn't to suggest that we're not going to face some difficulties in pass coverage, because we are; what it does say though is that I don't think this is a defense you're just going to get one dimensional against and have success passing the ball at will.
They have a defensive passer rating of 89.2. They might give up a lot of yards, they might not be able to get consistent and steady pressure, but they aren't letting teams just drive down and score on every drive either.
We've allowed 21 passing touchdowns, and we've intercepted the ball 16 times. That's pretty good. And we've become much better about not giving up the big play.
We're tied for 9th for least plays over 20 yards. That is 3rd best in the NFC, 2nd best in the playoffs in the NFC.
This defense isn't a juggernaut yet, but it has held its own consistently all year long. I don't think one dimensional teams are going to beat it.
Let me expand on what I'm talking about.
The Colts dropped a lot of passes and we didn't play Hilton, but they were #1 in passing yards going into that game, right now they're 21st in rushing yards (I'm sure having 1 yard didn't help), but my point is because we could focus on stopping the pass, they were able to make things difficult for the Colts.
Are there any teams with balance in the NFC?
Yes and no.
Seattle is somewhat balanced, but at the end of the day they don't have anything that scares me in their passing game without percy harvin. They will find it difficult to stretch the field consistently. If a team forces Wilson to beat them through the air, and shuts down that run. They'll lose. It might be a low scoring affair with their defense, but they'll lose.
Philadelphia was probably the next most balanced team, but the reason why I didn't want to play Philly whereas I'm not as worried about Seattle (the better team) is because Philly had big play ability. We have big play ability which is what I think puts us over Seattle. We can dictate to their defense in a way they can't to our offense.
Green Bay is somewhat balanced on offense, which poses somewhat of a threat, but their defense is much worse than ours. The numbers might not reflect it until you look deeper at who they've played and when they've struggled, but Green Bay's inability to stop the run is a major flaw when playing the Cowboys.
With all that said the nature of this argument changes in the playoffs, as the AFC have a host of much better balanced teams who have the offensive firepower to really impact our defense. New England, Pittsburgh... maybe Denver if the old Denver shows up... They all pose much bigger problems.
But again, this is why I don't want to play Washington, because their aggressive nature and nothing to lose and nothing to win attitude in week 17 could spell disaster for us.