The ballad of Mike Zimmer

[BrAinPaiNt]

I've said all along they played ok, what the heck do you want me to say?

good job stopping the run...good job not giving up long pass plays...nice goalline stand in the 1st qtr

but again there's no pass rush to speak of whatsoever, and other than basically one half vs Washington there hasnt been one since the Seattle preseason game...you dont consistently beat good offensive teams and go far in the postseason if you cant rush the passer...instead you see what we've seen for years...there's more than enough talent for this defense to be better than this

today is fine, but the way they played defense wont work every week because we WILL be playing teams alot better than the Texans

David

Your one positive post on the defense is as follows...

I guess if the game plan was to eliminate long plays, they did that

 

[dbair1967]

Backed up for years, eh?

Zimmer has produced 4 top 10 defenses in 6 years as DC (Including the #1 defense in 2003), and his only truely bad year was 2004 when we had an injury at just about every position.

Next time, maybe do a little research

4 top 10 defenses eh?

how many of those top-10 defenses were at the top of the league in pts allowed?

how many of those top-10 defenses were in the top half of the leagues in sacks

how many of those top-10 defenses were in the top half of the league in turnovers

how many times did we have a lead going into the 4th qtr only to see that "top-10" defense blow it and lose the game?

spin away troll boy

David

 

[Bob Dole]

Backed up for years, eh?

Zimmer has produced 4 top 10 defenses in 6 years as DC (Including the #1 defense in 2003), and his only truely bad year was 2004 when we had an injury at just about every position.

Next time, maybe do a little research

Total defense rankings are, or the most part, a bunch of crap.

Did you ever get the feeling while watching that season, that the 2003 defense was the best one in the league? If you did, you're lying to yourself.

His defenses are all smoke and mirrors - if any of those defenses were getting after the QB and creating turnovers (or if they didn't choke at the end of most games), we might have seen more than one playoff appearence in the last 6 years.

 

[dbair1967]

Yes, it would be stupid to think sacks is what makes defenses great, especially considering that Zimmer has averaged a top 10 defense in his 6 years despite never having a great pass rush

he's the reason we dont have a pass rush

and his best defensive season was against arguably the easiest schedule this team has played in years, maybe ever

David

 

[The30YardSlant]

4 top 10 defenses eh?

how many of those top-10 defenses were at the top of the league in pts allowed?

how many of those top-10 defenses were in the top half of the leagues in sacks

how many of those top-10 defenses were in the top half of the league in turnovers

how many times did we have a lead going into the 4th qtr only to see that "top-10" defense blow it and lose the game?

spin away troll boy

David

You're bashing our team, and I'M the troll?



Wait, wait, wait....



Okay, I'm done....

 

[The30YardSlant]

Total defense rankings are, or the most part, a bunch of crap.

Of course they are, because they disprove your agenda. Must be nice to see the world through one way glass

 

[Bob Dole]

You're bashing our team, and I'M the troll?



Wait, wait, wait....



Okay, I'm done....

You've got no response for any of his points, so you completely avoid it with some lame smilies.

This is grown folks talk - you may leave now HeavyHitta.

 

[The30YardSlant]

how many of those top-10 defenses were at the top of the league in pts allowed?

The 2003 team was #2 and the 2000, 2001 and 2005 teams were in the top 10

how many of those top-10 defenses were in the top half of the leagues in sacks

None, that's the point

how many of those top-10 defenses were in the top half of the league in turnovers

The 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003 and 2005 defenses

 

[dbair1967]

You've got no response for any of his points, so you completely avoid it with some lame smilies.

This is grown folks talk - you may leave now HeavyHitta.

maybe he can astonish us with his football aptitude again with some more of that Randall Cunningham is better than Troy Aikman talk

David

 

[The30YardSlant]

You've got no response for any of his points, so you completely avoid it with some lame smilies.

This is grown folks talk - you may leave now HeavyHitta.

Oops

To think you've got it all figured out, only to realize you've owned yourself in an epic manner

 

[BigDFan5]

The 2003 team was #2 and the 2000, 2001 and 2005 teams were in the top 10



None, that's the point



The 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003 and 2005 defenses

thats gonna leave a mark

 

[The30YardSlant]

he's the reason we dont have a pass rush

and his best defensive season was against arguably the easiest schedule this team has played in years, maybe ever

David

Again, excuses, misinformed statements, and assumptions, the way of the uninformed agenda driven poster

 

[Bob Dole]

Of course they are, because they disprove your agenda. Must be nice to see the world through one way glass

Last season, Seattle finished 16th in total defense.

They led the league in sacks, and went to the Superbowl.

 

[The30YardSlant]

Last season, Seattle finished 16th in total defense.

They led the league in sacks, and went to the Superbowl.

Their offense had a little something to do with that

 

[dbair1967]

Again, excuses, misinformed statements, and assumptions, the way of the uninformed agenda driven poster

excuses? misinformed statement? huh?

go back and look it up man...its fact

David

 

[The30YardSlant]

thats gonna leave a mark

Got real quiet in here, didnt it?

 

[Bob Dole]

Their offense had a little something to do with that

Sure, but in the end getting at the QB is what ultimately will win games for you.

Which is why their Superbowl opponent was Pittsburgh, who was third in sacks.

Total defense is based off of yardage given up per game, making it unreliable to really read how good a defense is.

Green Bay finished 7th in total D last year.

Would anyone in their right mind argue that GB had a top 10 D last year? Or even a top 20 D? Not even the more homeristic Packers fan would make that argument.

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

I think it is fair that most would say Jim Johnson of the eagles is the superior DC.


Looks see what the Eagles did vs the Texans.

Carr had a 102 Rating
Carr threw 0 ints
The texans scored a TD and A FG
The texans had 19 first downs
The texans had 70 rushing yards
The texans had 208 yards passing
The texans had 27:09 time of possesion.
Philly had 5 sacks

Now the cowboys

Carr had a 37 qb rating
Carr threw 2 ints
The texans had 2 FGs 0 TDs
The texans had 12 first downs
The texans had 34 yards rushing
The texans had 198 yards passing
The texans had 24:46 in time of possesion
Dallas had 0 sacks

====

We did better than Philly against the Texans in every category except sacks. Yet we still won by a larger margin and gave up less points.

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

Sure, but in the end getting at the QB is what ultimately will win games for you.

Which is why their Superbowl opponent was Pittsburgh, who was third in sacks.

Total defense is based off of yardage given up per game, making it unreliable to really read how good a defense is.

Green Bay finished 7th in total D last year.

Would anyone in their right mind argue that GB had a top 10 D last year? Or even a top 20 D? Not even the more homeristic Packers fan would make that argument.

Turnover ratio is also a good indicator.

Too bad we have a qb who is a turn over machine.

 

[Bob Dole]

The 2003 team was #2 and the 2000, 2001 and 2005 teams were in the top 10

The 2001 defense was not in the top 10, and the 2005 defense was #11.

The 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003 and 2005 defenses

They were #11 in 2005, #14 in 2003, #12 in 2002.

Not sure where you're getting your stats from.