Does improving offense make it harder to be a great defense?

[patriotsheatyan]

Usually we think of it as the opposite. 

But looking at most historically good defenses, they typically have awful offenses, or at most a slow grinding ball control offense. Many games featuring great defenses, have great defensive play early on in a low scoring affair, but once one offense starts moving it and scoring it seems like the other team does as well.

Look at this years Vikings, for instance.

Does having your offense pick it up in game, or in the offseason, significantly change the mindset, readiness, or game plan of a defense that much? Or is this entirely offbase?

[megatechpc]

With the rules in place (salary cap, roster spots, draft order, etc) its always been extremely difficult for teams to assemble All-Star talent on BOTH offense AND defense, which is why teams are usually either/or, or are just "good" on both.  The rare dynasty teams are the ones that have managed to put both sides of the ball together the best, the Pats being the most recent example.  BB has always excelled in defensive schemes and finding defensive gems to run those schemes.  But also having Brady on the other side of the ball is what has made the Pats what they've been the last 15 years.

Its the same for other dynasty teams.  The 90's Cowboys had Aikman and Co on offense, but their defenses were nasty as well.  Ditto the 80's Niners, etc.  Its just extremely rare for a team to be that good on BOTH offense and defense in the same year.

[Jakuvious]

Statistically, it absolutely does. The Chiefs this year, for instance, have allowed 5.3 yards per play in the 1st quarter, and only 3 points. The Chiefs have then exited the first quarter of each game with a 2 (or more) score lead, the opposition gets super aggressive, passes substantially more, and has more success the remainder of the game. Statistically and analytically, most teams should really be passing far more than they do, and it's generally just harder to defend against even when you know it's coming, so it definitely gets harder to field a successful defense from a statistical perspective when your offense is performing well, as the other team's hand is forced and they're going to be passing more than running, generally speaking. Even the best defenses in recent history allow around 6.0 yards per pass. Your league best pass defense is still less successful against the pass than the league worst run defense is against the run. Defenses also definitely do start to soften up when they have a lead, as well. Even the best coaches get guilty of playing against the clock instead of the opposing team, in terms of allowing easy yards in a high scoring game late.

(And to clarify, none of this is to say our D would be good if our O wasn't great, our D would still be subpar, KC is just the most familiar example to me.)

[Ryan_W]

I think if you hit with your O or D coach it pays like a slot machine.

if your HC can do both, see above

in terms of stamina; if your O marches down the field and puts 7 points up every 3minutes your D could be on the field a looooooong time

[Johnny Nix]

It certainly seems as though the NFL wants offenses to be the focal point of their product. With the decline of quality offensive line play across the league, coupled with the new rule changes, and the demand for fantasy football stars to put up crazy numbers, an argument could be made the NFL is doing everything it can to make it impossible for defenses to stop an offense. Looking at the scores across the league each week reflects that. Maybe I’m wrong but it seems like the scores are much higher and there are hardly any “defensive games” anymore. The rule changes are the biggest detriment I’ve seen. Something as simple as changing a 3rd down sack to an automatic first down can be all it takes to get an offense going and wear a defense out, and I think we are seeing the effects of that each week. 

[tom cody]

I think so. You can make adjustments of course but even with those adjustments would come offensive adjustments.