Is It a better strategy to finish the Offense or build the defense

[LocimusPrime]

Also you can say NE defense stepped up, but at same time I could say Atl offense fizzed out, only 7 points in 2nd half just wasnt enough.
That put pressure on the Atl defense.
In OT the Atl defense was wore out after defending 90 plays and being on field for 40 minutes.

Yes sir. 7 pts in a half isn't gonna do it.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Actually we lost because we couldn't score more points than the opponent. The offense wasn't as good as Green Bay's offense.

If that is your opinion, then it's a poor one in my opinion. Any time you can put up 31 points in a playoff game, that should really be enough, especially when you have a 3rd and 20 with 12 seconds left to go. However, if that is your opinion, that's fine. It's not mine.

 

[GhostOfPelluer]

If that is your opinion, then it's a poor one in my opinion. Any time you can put up 31 points in a playoff game, that should really be enough, especially when you have a 3rd and 20 with 12 seconds left to go. However, if that is your opinion, that's fine. It's not mine.

Green Bay's defense was worse than ours. Atlanta's defense was worse than ours. They both went further in the postseason. Because their offenses were better.

There's more than one way to skin a cat. That's why you don't limit yourself to defense when it comes to trying to upgrade the roster. You look for the most cost efficient upgrades possible, whether that's in the draft - by picking the best player available within reason - or in FA.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Well if dallas scores a td instead of settling for a fg, they probably win that game, so you cant just say the defense lost that game.

And if the Defense is able to get pressure, AR doesn't have all day to complete a 31 yard pass to put them in FG range on 3rd down. We can play these games all day but the reality is that if we are able to get any kind of pressure, that play doesn't happen.

 

[CATCH17]

Its an offensive league but we already have an offensive juggernaut.

Draft and buy some defense.

 

[GhostOfPelluer]

And if the Defense is able to get pressure, AR doesn't have all day to complete a 31 yard pass to put them in FG range on 3rd down. We can play these games all day but the reality is that if we are able to get any kind of pressure, that play doesn't happen.

My point was never that the defense was great and doesn't need help. But that it's a team game and ignoring half of your team because of some preconceived notion that the offense is already set could be missing out on the chance to make a move that really does put the team over the top.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Green Bay's defense was worse than ours. Atlanta's defense was worse than ours. They both went further in the postseason. Because their offenses were better.

There's more than one way to skin a cat. That's why you don't limit yourself to defense when it comes to trying to upgrade the roster. You look for the most cost efficient upgrades possible, whether that's in the draft - by picking the best player available within reason - or in FA.

Green Bay's defense is not the point, nor is Atlanta's. The point is that you better be able to stop teams in 3rd and 20 with 12 seconds left. If you can't do that, then you can't win. You seem be confused here. There were no less then 27 teams who ranked worse then we did defensively and none of them went further then we did except one. New England. Interesting how that worked right? But we are not talking about defensive rankings here. We are talking about being able to bring pressure when you need it. We can not do that and anybody who watches this team can see it.

BTW, if your the cat, it doesn't really matter how many ways you get skinned. It only matters that you did right?

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

My point was never that the defense was great and doesn't need help. But that it's a team game and ignoring half of your team because of some preconceived notion that the offense is already set could be missing out on the chance to make a move that really does put the team over the top.

So if its a team game and we have a dominating Offense, how do you even make this argument? Clearly, the Defensive side of the ball needs to be addressed. You can talk around it all day but if you are on the field with 12 seconds left and you need to make a stop on 3rd and 20 and you can't do that, then there is one place you look.

Continue to make the Offense better if you wish but that's not the problem. The idea that you can win games with only Offense is the problem.

 

[GhostOfPelluer]

Green Bay's defense is not the point, nor is Atlanta's. The point is that you better be able to stop teams in 3rd and 20 with 12 seconds left. If you can't do that, then you can't win. You seem be confused here. There were no less then 27 teams who ranked worse then we did defensively and none of them went further then we did except one. New England. Interesting how that worked right? But we are not talking about defensive rankings here. We are talking about being able to bring pressure when you need it. We can not do that and anybody who watches this team can see it.

BTW, if your the cat, it doesn't really matter how many ways you get skinned. It only matters that you did right?

Actually, Green Bay and Atlanta did go further than we did. Bringing pressure is nice and is one way to win football games in this league. If we can make strides there, I'm all for it. But I'm not reaching for defense if the value is better at WR or tackle to upgrade TWill and/or Free. Because getting better offensively is another way to win football games in this league. If we scored 40 points against that crap Green Bay defense - like Atlanta did - then our lack of pass rush wouldn't have mattered.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Actually, Green Bay and Atlanta did go further than we did. Bringing pressure is nice and is one way to win football games in this league. If we can make strides there, I'm all for it. But I'm not reaching for defense if the value is better at WR or tackle to upgrade TWill and/or Free. Because getting better offensively is another way to win football games in this league. If we scored 40 points against that crap Green Bay defense - like Atlanta did - then our lack of pass rush wouldn't have mattered.

Apologies, that is true. I stated that poorly but the point remains, Offense doesn't win you championships and we, of all teams, should understand that. We've never one a championship when our Defense wasn't good.

If we had scored 100 points against that crap Defense, that would have been good to but we didn't. We didn't score 40 and we didn't score 100, against a crap defense. Think about that for just a second.

You don't need to score 40 and if that's the approach you are taking, to score 40 every game, then you are never going to win anything. You know how many times we scored 40 points last season? Once. We only scored more then 31 three times. Scoring more is not going to get you a championship but you don't have to take my word for it. Take Atlanta's. They didn't win a championship either, even though they have the best Offense in the league and a 19 point lead at half. They got beat by a team who could play defense and who could make stops.

 

[GhostOfPelluer]

Apologies, that is true. I stated that poorly but the point remains, Offense doesn't win you championships and we, of all teams, should understand that. We've never one a championship when our Defense wasn't good.

If we had scored 100 points against that crap Defense, that would have been good to but we didn't. We didn't score 40 and we didn't score 100, against a crap defense. Think about that for just a second.

You don't need to score 40 and if that's the approach you are taking, to score 40 every game, then you are never going to win anything. You know how many times we scored 40 points last season? Once. We only scored more then 31 three times. Scoring more is not going to get you a championship but you don't have to take my word for it. Take Atlanta's. They didn't win a championship either, even though they have the best Offense in the league and a 19 point lead at half. They got beat by a team who could play defense and who could make stops.

Atlanta got beat because of coaching, plain and simple. They have a championship caliber offense. Ours isn't quite to that point yet.

I've never said defense couldn't be part of the equation, but you conveniently keep skipping that part of my posts because you don't like that I've pointed out a hole in your logic big enough to drive a truck through. With Free's play quickly deteriorating and with no answer at WR2 it's not a stretch to think the Dallas offense takes a step back next season if unaddressed.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Atlanta got beat because of coaching, plain and simple. They have a championship caliber offense. Ours isn't quite to that point yet.

I've never said defense couldn't be part of the equation, but you conveniently keep skipping that part of my posts because you don't like that I've pointed out a hole in your logic big enough to drive a truck through. With Free's play quickly deteriorating and with no answer at WR2 it's not a stretch to think the Dallas offense takes a step back next season if unaddressed.

Atlanta got beat because they couldn't score 40. Isn't that the argument you just used with the Cowboys Offense? I will tell you that our Offense, IMO, is better then theirs. That is just my opinion, of course, but so what. That doesn't change the fact that we need to be better on the Defensive side of the ball.

In your mind, you've pointed something out. In my mind, your playing funny little games in your own mind. If the Offense takes a step back and our Defense is better, that may well be an improvement. if the Offense takes a step back and we still do nothing to improve the Defense, then the numbers tell the story. This is not rocket science. We could not stop GB from scoring late in the game, with the lead. That's not coincidental, nor is it unusual. It's basically the same thing that happened in 2015. Guess what we did? We addressed the Offense and made no major improvements to the Defensive Pass Rush.

 

[GhostOfPelluer]

Atlanta got beat because they couldn't score 40. Isn't that the argument you just used with the Cowboys Offense? I will tell you that our Offense, IMO, is better then theirs. That is just my opinion, of course, but so what. That doesn't change the fact that we need to be better on the Defensive side of the ball.

In your mind, you've pointed something out. In my mind, your playing funny little games in your own mind. If the Offense takes a step back and our Defense is better, that may well be an improvement. if the Offense takes a step back and we still do nothing to improve the Defense, then the numbers tell the story. This is not rocket science. We could not stop GB from scoring late in the game, with the lead. That's not coincidental, nor is it unusual. It's basically the same thing that happened in 2015. Guess what we did? We addressed the Offense and made no major improvements to the Defensive Pass Rush.

There is so much wrong here, where to begin?

1. Aside from 3-0, we didn't lead the rest of the GB game. And our defense actually held GB to six total points on their final four possessions - including two possessions without points. Had our offense not played its part in the 21-3 start, we win that game.
2. Just because our offense was better in your opinion doesn't make it true. Especially since statistically our offense was demonstrably not better than Atlanta's. In my opinion we could have beaten New England. But my opinion would be counter to all evidence that says otherwise - as yours is in this case.
3. In 2015, we tried signing Hardy and drafting Gregory. We all know how that worked out.
4. Also, what did we do to address the offense in 2015? And we ended up 4-12.
5. In 2016, we addressed the offense in a big way - Zeke and Dak, specifically - and improved by nine wins. With largely the same defensive cast as 2015.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

There is so much wrong here, where to begin?

1. Aside from 3-0, we didn't lead the rest of the GB game. And our defense actually held GB to six total points on their final four possessions - including two possessions without points. Had our offense not played its part in the 21-3 start, we win that game.

Or, if we just make a stop on third and 20 with 12 seconds left, rather then giving AR all day to throw, we win. I don't know if you are intentionally being obtuse or if this is just your way of trying to avoid the elephant that can not be avoided. It's not the entire defense and I never tried to say it was. It's pressure and our ability to bring it in critical situations. It's getting off the field on 3rd down. I have no idea what the percentages say about teams making a 1st on third and 20 but I'm going to go out on a limb and say it's pretty poor. Yet, we were unable to stop it.

2. Just because our offense was better in your opinion doesn't make it true. Especially since statistically our offense was demonstrably not better than Atlanta's. In my opinion we could have beaten New England. But my opinion would be counter to all evidence that says otherwise - as yours is in this case.

So another words, IMO, which is what I said in my previous post. Somehow, I don't see the need to argue what I have already pointed out but whatever. I believe our OL is better then Atlanta's and I believe if you can control the LOS, you are in a better position to dictate to other teams. I believe we had a rookie QB who is only going to get better and we still averaged over 26 a game. I believe we had a rookie RB who is only going to get better. Yes, I believe we have a better offense but that's only my own opinion. Do I need to say that again or do you want to go ahead and repost it again?

Just so we are clear, and if I've got this wrong, please let me know. You believe we need to improve our Offense and you use Atlanta and GB as examples of this?

GB got smoked by, in your words, Atlanta who has a weaker Defense then ours, by 23 points.

Atlanta got beat by the Patriots, who had a less potent Offense but a much better Defense, then did Atlanta. Atlanta, in spite of their "Demonstratively Superior" Offense could not beat the Pats who were not nearly as Potent on Offense. That's basically the case you've made in this thread.

How can you say, with a straight face, that Offense needs to improve when New England has shown you the way?

3. In 2015, we tried signing Hardy and drafting Gregory. We all know how that worked out.

Gregory was a guy that a lot of teams didn't like. He came into the league with a strike against him. He was always considered too lite. That's not an example of making a focused effort to try and improve the DL. That's an example of half measures. Hardy was an NFL Defensive MVP type player and he got released by Carolina. There is a reason for that. Only the Cowboys wanted to sign him, there is a reason for that. This is not an example of making a focused effort to try and improve the DL. This is an example of half measures.

4. Also, what did we do to address the offense in 2015? And we ended up 4-12.

I never said we did anything in 2015. I said we improved our Offense and clearly, as you well know, we did that in our last draft rather then going Defense. However, once again, you convolute the issue, which is Defensive Pressure and our inability and lack of effort to solve it.

What does 4-12 have to do with anything, other then the fact that we were so dependent on Offense that the loss of Tony basically exposed our inability to stop anything on Defense? How does that help the case of more offense?

5. In 2016, we addressed the offense in a big way - Zeke and Dak, specifically - and improved by nine wins. With largely the same defensive cast as 2015.

What is your definition of "largely the same" because this years Defense was not even close to the same as last years.

 

[GhostOfPelluer]

Or, if we just make a stop on third and 20 with 12 seconds left, rather then giving AR all day to throw, we win. I don't know if you are intentionally being obtuse or if this is just your way of trying to avoid the elephant that can not be avoided. It's not the entire defense and I never tried to say it was. It's pressure and our ability to bring it in critical situations. It's getting off the field on 3rd down. I have no idea what the percentages say about teams making a 1st on third and 20 but I'm going to go out on a limb and say it's pretty poor. Yet, we were unable to stop it.



So another words, IMO, which is what I said in my previous post. Somehow, I don't see the need to argue what I have already pointed out but whatever. I believe our OL is better then Atlanta's and I believe if you can control the LOS, you are in a better position to dictate to other teams. I believe we had a rookie QB who is only going to get better and we still averaged over 26 a game. I believe we had a rookie RB who is only going to get better. Yes, I believe we have a better offense but that's only my own opinion. Do I need to say that again or do you want to go ahead and repost it again?

Just so we are clear, and if I've got this wrong, please let me know. You believe we need to improve our Offense and you use Atlanta and GB as examples of this?

GB got smoked by, in your words, Atlanta who has a weaker Defense then ours, by 23 points.

Atlanta got beat by the Patriots, who had a less potent Offense but a much better Defense, then did Atlanta. Atlanta, in spite of their "Demonstratively Superior" Offense could not beat the Pats who were not nearly as Potent on Offense. That's basically the case you've made in this thread.

How can you say, with a straight face, that Offense needs to improve when New England has shown you the way?



Gregory was a guy that a lot of teams didn't like. He came into the league with a strike against him. He was always considered too lite. That's not an example of making a focused effort to try and improve the DL. That's an example of half measures. Hardy was an NFL Defensive MVP type player and he got released by Carolina. There is a reason for that. Only the Cowboys wanted to sign him, there is a reason for that. This is not an example of making a focused effort to try and improve the DL. This is an example of half measures.



I never said we did anything in 2015. I said we improved our Offense and clearly, as you well know, we did that in our last draft rather then going Defense. However, once again, you convolute the issue, which is Defensive Pressure and our inability and lack of effort to solve it.

What does 4-12 have to do with anything, other then the fact that we were so dependent on Offense that the loss of Tony basically exposed our inability to stop anything on Defense? How does that help the case of more offense?



What is your definition of "largely the same" because this years Defense was not even close to the same as last years.

If you have read any of my posts you will see that I never said we couldn't stand to improve our pass rush. So, you're basically arguing against a point I never made. My point was that the offense isn't without blame. In a league without a flawless team, all you have to do is be better than the rest. And there are multiple ways to do that. Improving the defense is one. Getting better on offense is another. Either could work and either is just as likely to work. I gave examples and you continue to act as if the offense doesn't need work and that the only way to win a championship is to improve the pass rush. It's one way, but not the only way. And since every team is looking for pass rush and we draft at the bottom of each round, our chances may be better if we try to improve other areas. It all depends on what is available to us and when. You can't just throw money at other teams' leftovers and reach for position in the draft and expect it to work out.

Atlanta was 25th in yards allowed and 27th in points allowed and they had fewer sacks than Dallas. And they were literally three running plays from winning it all. All their offensive coordinator had to do was call three running plays in the fourth quarter instead of pass plays and they win the Super Bowl. Hell, they could have knelt three times and won. Or, one missed block by a running back on a blitz.

There is more than one way to win a title. It does not have to revolve around pass rush.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

If you have read any of my posts you will see that I never said we couldn't stand to improve our pass rush. So, you're basically arguing against a point I never made. My point was that the offense isn't without blame. In a league without a flawless team, all you have to do is be better than the rest. And there are multiple ways to do that. Improving the defense is one. Getting better on offense is another. Either could work and either is just as likely to work. I gave examples and you continue to act as if the offense doesn't need work and that the only way to win a championship is to improve the pass rush. It's one way, but not the only way. And since every team is looking for pass rush and we draft at the bottom of each round, our chances may be better if we try to improve other areas. It all depends on what is available to us and when. You can't just throw money at other teams' leftovers and reach for position in the draft and expect it to work out.

Atlanta was 25th in yards allowed and 27th in points allowed and they had fewer sacks than Dallas. And they were literally three running plays from winning it all. All their offensive coordinator had to do was call three running plays in the fourth quarter instead of pass plays and they win the Super Bowl. Hell, they could have knelt three times and won. Or, one missed block by a running back on a blitz.

There is more than one way to win a title. It does not have to revolve around pass rush.

Lets just boil this down. What is the point you are trying to make? I believe we need to improve our Defense and we need to do that by means of upgrading our ability to apply pressure.

What is it that you feel the priority is?

 

[big dog cowboy]

Or, if we just make a stop on third and 20 with 12 seconds left, rather then giving AR all day to throw, we win. I don't know if you are intentionally being obtuse or if this is just your way of trying to avoid the elephant that can not be avoided. It's not the entire defense and I never tried to say it was. It's pressure and our ability to bring it in critical situations. It's getting off the field on 3rd down. I have no idea what the percentages say about teams making a 1st on third and 20 but I'm going to go out on a limb and say it's pretty poor. Yet, we were unable to stop it.

Correctamundo my friend.

Oh by the way...Good luck.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Correctamundo my friend.

Oh by the way...Good luck.

I thank you for the well wishes BDC but you and I both know that this is a race to the bottom. LOL.....

 

[DandyDon52]

And if the Defense is able to get pressure, AR doesn't have all day to complete a 31 yard pass to put them in FG range on 3rd down. We can play these games all day but the reality is that if we are able to get any kind of pressure, that play doesn't happen.

it can go either way, but if offense scores or coaches dont screw up time mgmt, rodgers never gets to that 3rd down play.

And yeah it would be nice to have a better defense , better pass rush, but it isnt just the
players it is marinelli too. just rushing 3 on that play allowed the time for rodgers and cook
to get deep.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

it can go either way, but if offense scores or coaches dont screw up time mgmt, rodgers never gets to that 3rd down play.

And yeah it would be nice to have a better defense , better pass rush, but it isnt just the
players it is marinelli too. just rushing 3 on that play allowed the time for rodgers and cook
to get deep.

I do not dispute that the Coaching Staff played it's part in this as well but fundamentally, this is not just one incident. We have a problem getting off the field in critical situations and we don't seem to be able to get pressure in those situations, all too often. You make a call as a coach and it may be right or it may be wrong but when you make a call and you can't execute it, that suggests a lack of talent.

JMO