 |
| While increasingly undervalued in today's NFL, defense is an essential component of any Superbowl Winner |
During one of my many browsing sessions through the endless realms of sports related internet content when I stumbled upon this quote from Greg EasterBrook:
The New England coach is nothing if not analytical, and realized -- especially with the past decade of rule changes intended to favor offense -- that defense-oriented teams sometimes win but high-scoring teams almost always win. There are coaches who strategize to come out ahead in a low-scoring defensive struggle. For the past five years, Belichick has been strategizing to spin the scoreboard. The Patriots under Belichick are now 62-3 when scoring at least 30 points. A high-scoring team almost always wins, so Belichick has undergone a religious conversion, from defense to offense
From a purely observational standpoint, I say this is complete and utter bullshit. Not the bit about Belichick being analytical and adjusting as the situation warrants. But I do have massive problems with the statement that “Offense always wins.” That statement should be re-defined to “Offense almost always wins during the regular season, but relying on it entirely will not work in the postseason.” My beloved Patriots, who have enjoyed immense success for the past decade, recently have delved into the realm of post season futility, losing their last three “second season” games. Underlying theme of those games? Patriots offensive prowess was limited to 14 points, 14 points, and 21 points in those matchups. You know why? Despite the shift towards making sure the offense is a well oiled machine, a good defense, especially when points are so crucial in the playoffs, is absolutely necessary is you want to bring home the Lombardi. Instead of relying on my potentially biased New England homer opinions, it’s time to bring some validation to my assertions in the form of “Statistics”
Here are the offensive/defensive stats per game during the regular season of the last 10 Super Bowl Winners just to ensure we cover the gamut of this alleged “Offense Wins” era football.
2010 Green Bay Packers
Offense: 9th overall, 24.2 pts/gm, 358 yds/gm, 3rd down % -.42, T/O diff. +10
Defense: 5th overall, 15.0 pts/gm, 309.1 yds/gm, 3rd down %, 36, Int/Fum rec=24/8, Sacks= 47
2009 New Orleans Saints
Offense: 1st overall, 31.9 pts/gm, 403.8 yds/gm, 3rd down %= .45, T/O Diff. +11
Defense:25th overall, 21.3 pts/gm/ 357 yds/gm, 3rd down %= .38, Int/Fum rec. 26/13, Sacks= 35
2008 Pittsburgh Steelers
Offense: 22nd overall, 21.7 pts/gm, 311.9 yds/gm, 3rd down %= .41, T/O Diff. +4
Defense: 1st overall, 13.9 pts/gm, 237.2 yds/gm, 3rd down %= .31, Int/Fum Rec. 20/9, Sacks=51
2007 New York Giants (Fuck, that is still painful to write)
Offense: 16th overall, 23.3 pts/gm, 331.4 yds/gm, 3rd down %= .42, T/O Diff. -9
Defense: 7h overall, 21.9 pts/gm, 305 yds/gm, 3rd down %= .35, Int/Fum Rec. 15/10, Sacks=53
2006 Indianapolis Colts (One of the rare instances a shitty defensive team actually wins it all)
Offense: 3rd overall, 26.7 pts/gm, 379.4 yds/gm, 3rd down %= .56, T/O Diff. +7
Defense: 21st overall, 22.5 pts/gm, 332.2 yds/gm, 3rd down %= .47,Int/Fum Rec. 15/11,Sacks=25
2005 Pittsburgh Steelers
Offense: 15th overall, 24.3 pts/gm, 321.8 yds/gm, 3rd down %= .35, T/O Diff. +7
Defense: 4th overall, 16.1 pts/gm, 284 yds/gm, 3rd down %= .40, Int/Fum Rec. 15/11, Sacks=47
2004 New England Patriots
Offense: 7th overall, 27.3 pts/gm, 357.6 yds/gm, 3rd down %= .45, T/O Diff. +9
Defense: 9th overall, 16.2 pts/gm, 310.8 yds/gm, 3rd down %= .39, Int/Fum Rec. 20/16, Sacks=45
2003 New England Patriots
Offense: 17th overall, 21.8 pts/gm, 314.9 yds/gm, 3rd down %= .37, T/O Diff. +17
Defense:7th overall,14.9 pts/gm, 291.6 yds/gm, 3rd down %= .34, Int/Fum Rec. 29/12, Sacks=41
2002 Tampa Bay Buccaneers
Offense: 24th overall, 21.6 pts/gm, 312.6 yds/gm, 3rd down %= .36, T/O Diff. +17
Defense: 1st overall, 12.2 pts/gm, 258.2 yds/gm, 3rd down %= .34, Int/Fum Rec. 31/7, Sacks=43
2001 New England Patriots
Offense: 19th overall, 23.2 pts/gm, 305.1 yds/gm, 3rd down %= .41, T/O Diff. +7
Defense: 24th overall, 17 pts/gm, 334.5 yds/gm, 3rd down %= .37, Int/Fum Rec. 22/13, Sacks=41
The trends I noticed? Despite the fact Superbowl winning teams have very good to superior offenses, it was essential to have a defense that EXCELLED in a particular aspect. Those teams that had the entire package (’05 Packers, ’02 Bucs) offset their limited offenses with absolutely insane defensive metrics by forcing a ridiculous number of turnovers and generating consistent pressure on the quarterback with each having 43+ sacks. With the exception of the 2006 Colts, every single Superbowl Winning team in the “Era of Offense” NFL, has had one or two dimensions to their defense that excelled at what they did. Maybe they gave up a lot of yards, or weren’t able to get off the field on third down, but the 2007 Giants had a DOMINANT pass rush and the 2009 New Orleans Saints had a very opportunistic, turnover generating defense that gave their dominant offense additional opportunities on the field.
By no means am I saying having a great offense is something to be ignored or discounted. What I am saying as that the overemphasis on that side of the ball often leads to massive deficiencies on defense, an ESSENTIAL component if you want your hometeam to bring home the hardware in February. It may serve a number of teams (This years Patriots, Bills, and Raiders) to note that a reduced focus on your offense in order to shore up your defense, while perhaps forgoing present success, would ultimately serve your franchise well when it comes time to perform in the playoffs.
