The Dolphins Make Me Cry.com - Forums

just a question i wanted to ask, if you could have either one, what would you rather have (can't have both), A offense that could score avalanches of points or a defense that could shut down other offenses.

Defense wins championships.

QFT

Gimme a high powered offense. Without points, you don't win. 

Baltimore has a great D, I'll be VERY surprised if they win the whole thing with that weak offense.

Give me the ferocious clamp down point-miser defense, and I'll find a way on offense to scrap together the points I need.

I'll take both.

Great defenses can score on their own.

Great offenses are at the mercy of the clock.  Someone has to have the ball last.

Look at the teams still in the playoffs...

Pittsburgh
Tennessee
Carolina
NY Giants
Philadelphia
Baltimore
Arizona
San Diego

Now, let's look at the NFL Defensive rankings

1.) Pittsburgh
2.) Baltimore
3.) Philadelphia
4.) Washington
5.) NY. Giants
6.) Minnesota
7.) Tennessee
18.) Carolina
19.) Arizona
25.) San Diego

Do you think there's a coincidence that 5 of the top 7 defenses in the regular season are still alive in the playoffs?

I'll take St. Louis' offense the year they won, combined with Baltimore's defense the year they won, add in Tampa Bay's special teams the year THEY won....

And some popcorn.

Because that team would win 100 games back to back by a general margain of 174 to neg -8.

For a 1 year run at the super bowl,Bone crushing Defense,for long term success I want the great franchise QB,and high powered offense....

Of course Defense is the right answer.

However, the NFL is changing.  The rule set is becoming more and more tilted to high powered offenses.

They did do away with the force-out rule for this season, so that helped a bit. I also think the PI and illegal contact calls that we were getting ALL the time a few years ago have kind of died out a bit. I think the NFL realized they had gone too far with their new stricter interpretation and decided to ease off a bit. Kind of like with the "throwing the ball away" delay of game penalty last year.

I think getting rid of the force out rule actually leans the game toward defenders by taking away a lot of out routes and passes up the sideline.  All the corner has to do is shove a guy out of bounds where, if there force-out rule is in effect, they'd actually have to make a play on the ball.

I don't see how abolishing the force-out rule helps offense.

Which was my point.

I was providing a counter-example. There's NO question the force-out rule favored the offense (and so abolishing it favored defenses). I thought it was obvious enough not to require clarification... but I guess anything can be misinterpreted.

I don't disagree with the fact that defense is a foundation for championships, but 5 of the top 7 scoring offenses are also still alive in the playoffs.

 >:D

Sorry, I thought from the tone of your typing that you were agreeing with Dave that "The rule set is becoming more and more tilted to high powered offenses," and citing the force-out rule as an example...

Yeah, sorry, having a problem conveying the tone ;)

Why do you think Dan Marino never won a championship but Trent Dilfer did? Because a great defense will always beat a great Offense.

End of story. If you want to be great you NEED to be able to stop the run and shut down the passing game. 

On the other hand, Manning didn't have a great defense when he won his ring.

That's not entirely accurate.  The Colts defense was pretty respectable in 2006. 

It was horrible before then, and that cost him a couple more rings.

^^^ 23rd in the league in scoring defense, 21st in yards per game, Very good against the pass at 2nd, but pathetic against the run at last place. They still really were not even respectable.

I'd have to argue there,that the high powered offense of the Colts,beat the high powered Bears Defense that game...

How about the Rams/Titans SB? 49ers/Chargers SB? I'd say the winners there were more known for good offense rather than good defense....

I think,the level of "good" is what matters....and a little luck....

The Bears had a good defense that year but they lost a Key Pass Rusher in Tommy Harris which led to a decline in points scored overall by Teams.  Had a great Defense like the Ravens previously had played Peyton things might have turned out differently.  Its not a Lock that a great defense will show up every game.......but the odds show that a Great D will beat out a Great O most of the time.

Because the product had become very watered down by that point in time?

I dislike the "Marino never had a good defense" stance because it's not true.  1984 Miami's defense was one of the best in the league.

1984 they were +8, 2nd in point differential and 7th in points allowed.  They were first in points scored.  Miami simply ran into a buzzsaw in San Fran...in an error when the product wasn't as watered down.

Does anyone in their right mind think that 1984 San Fran team wouldn't rip the Ravens title winning team to shreads?  It wouldn't be pretty.

Maybe, but I think the '85 Bears defense would have been able to handle the '84 49ers offense.

Of course, the '85 Bears were also 2nd in the league in team offense, so that's not exactly apples-to-apples.

That's debatable.  The 2000 Ravens defense was like a brick wall.

Sorry but Dan put up Many Many 40 + point Games , only to lose because the defense let go 40 more + points. Happened several times.

Best ever.  Those guys were the Shit.  I still have a special place in my heart for Ray Lewis. He's stayed out of trouble and for my money is the Best NFL player , pound for pound in the last decade.

this board doesn't like facts does it?  he scored 40+ points 9 times and lost once.  i know  it is a lot easier to just make stuff up, but the downside is you look retarded when somebody takes the time to get the facts.

Sorry that your life is so sad and uneventful that you spent the whole day researching that just to try to make a point. I've got a bit more going on in my life so if it was actually a 36-38 point game........then I stand corrected.  ::)

Alls I know is that Dan Marino put points on the board. He is one of the most prolific passers in History and didn't hold every record for not scoring. FACT
Dan Never won a championship. FACT
 
So One can reasonable assume that no matter how many points he put up , His defense usually let him down.  ::) DUH  ::)

But Trent Dilfers did not.  Hence the little ring that he wears  while Dan has every other record in the book but no jewelry. ::)

You actually look more retarded because..........you are a fucking moron.  ::) ;) :D

Go back and research that............ :D

Yea, the Colts had a shit defense but they showed up in the playoffs and the Super Bowl and that's all it took.

I want Baltimore's defense.  They're so old but still get it done.

Dan Marino and his teams were not high powered offenses.  They were good, but not great.  Fiedlers had 7 40+ point games in his career, which wasn't as long as Marinos.

To answer the question in the original OP, you are going to win a lot of games and your share of Super bowls with either a true high powered offense or a stone cold defense.  Personally, I would rather watch offense than defense, so give me the high powered offense.  The Rams teams w/ Warner were fun to watch.

Fiedler's offense wasn't scoring forty points because of him--Marino's was.  If we got behind by 10 points in the Fiedler era, I remember thinking we were boned unless the D did something spectacular.  I remember him coming off the bench (after an injury) to replace Ray Lucas and having a good passing game but that's about it.  Anyone know which game that was?   

Right, he didn't play well against Dallas on Thanksgiving.   It was the orange jersey washington game.

Much better tone. You keep it down I will. become a dick again and I will Tea Bag you again.

Thats said............ 61,361 Total passing Yds. 13 - 3000+ Yd seasons, He had no running game but he could score at will , however his defense always let him down. Tom Olivdettii was a pimple on the Dolphin ass. I hope he gave Coach Shula good oral becuase he was USELESS.

http://www.thedolphinsmakemecry.com/rod-olivadotti.html

I rather have a bruising defense and a good offense thats able to put 21+ pts or more  a game

You can point to the Rams "Greatest Show On Turf" as an example, but that almost backfired.  They left enough time on the clock for the Titans to move the ball down the field and only a timely tackle by Mike Jones saved the game.

Absolutely. The Steelers will prove the point this year.

I would love to know where in the hell you got this stat. Fiedler didn't even sniff 7 40+ point games.

Following up on Phishfan's comment...

Fiedler has had exactly THREE 40+ point games as a starter. All of them for Miami. (He threw a couple passes in a two or three other 40+ point games).

Teabag84............I guess we do like facts huh?  :D

Yea, i didn't see that he didn't start some of the games.  Still marino only had 40+ points in 3.7% of the games he started and Fielder had 40+ points in 5%.  Not saying that Fiedler was a better quarterback, just that marinos teams weren't high scoring.

FYI, the Dolphins scored an average of 23.1 points in games where Marino started. The average for Fiedler-started games is 21.3.

On the other side of the ball, Marino's Dolphins allowed an average 20.3 points, whereas Fiedler's Dolphins allowed 17.2 points per game.

Not sure what, if anything, that tells us... ;)

(Brought to you by the power of NFL.com's game log database, Open Office Calc and 30 minutes I'll never get back)

Teabag84.............How the fuck can you take Fielders 5 years and average them against what Dan did for 17 yrs?  That's just a little lopsided no? And you call me a retart?

The dolphins rank in points scored. 


1984   1
1985   4
1986   1
1987   8
1988   17
1989   15
1990   14
1991   6
1992   8
1993   5
1994   3
1995   7
1996   13
1997   13
1998   16

Which shows they were a good offense, but not a true high powered offense.

In comparison the Colts while Peyton was playing.

1998   19
1999   3
2000   4
2001   2
2002   17
2003   2
2004   1
2005   2
2006   2
2007   3
2008   13