AFlaccoSeagulls Posted October 3, 2019 Share Posted October 3, 2019 1 hour ago, SmittyBacall said: Patriots vs Rams. Patriots weren't the #1 defense last year. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SmittyBacall Posted October 3, 2019 Share Posted October 3, 2019 Just now, AFlaccoSeagulls said: Patriots weren't the #1 defense last year. True, but close enough. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heinz D. Posted October 3, 2019 Share Posted October 3, 2019 8 hours ago, diamondbull424 said: What’s more the Ravens defense last season was about as good as the Bears defense is this season and Kansas City dropped about 30 on them. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AFlaccoSeagulls Posted October 3, 2019 Share Posted October 3, 2019 23 minutes ago, Heinz D. said: Ravens fan here. Totally agree with you. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mizter_Clean10 Posted October 3, 2019 Share Posted October 3, 2019 I just feel like the rules favor offense so if talent wise its a draw then Chiefs due to how the game is officiated. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jakuvious Posted October 3, 2019 Share Posted October 3, 2019 On 10/2/2019 at 3:10 PM, AFlaccoSeagulls said: How many times have we seen the "#1 offense vs. #1 defense" thing and the defense shreds the offense to pieces? The question becomes can the Bears' offense put any points on the board, and IMO unless Trubiski is taken off the field, I don't think they can. Recent history actually favors the offense. Since 2006, the #1 offense is 5-1 against the #1 defense, and has scored at least 27 points each time. https://www.espn.com/blog/nflnation/post/_/id/289033/top-offense-vs-top-defense-matchups-history-favors-the-chiefs Superbowl history favors the defense, which is why many feel the way you do or believe that it heavily favors the defense. Seattle/Denver really sticks in people's minds as well, which is a big part of it. Seattle/Denver in the superbowl is a little more memorable than, say, Broncos/Chiefs in 2013. But anyway, in superbowl history the #1 offense is 1-7 against the #1 defense. https://www.foxsports.com/nfl/gallery/super-bowl-51-new-england-patriots-atlanta-falcons-number-1-defense-vs-offense-matchups-49ers-seahawks-packers-steelers-chiefs-giants-020117 The real trouble though of making a conclusion from either of these bits, is the sample size is just small. So 5-1 for the offense since 2006 maybe means that things are tilting towards the offense in the modern era. Maybe it's just an anomaly. 6 games is not really an adequate sample size. Neither are the 8 superbowls. These games just don't happen enough to claim that there's a trend, statistically. And there are so many variables, too. I'd argue that 3 of those 7 superbowl losses by the offensive team were really just slaughters. Superbowls 1, 19, and 24 were all around mismatches, they weren't a defensive team beating an offensive team. And then a 4th was the Scott Norwood Bills game. And then again on the flip side, I'm not sure the 2013 Broncos beating the 2013 Chiefs is a statement of offense over defense so much as a statement that our defense wasn't as legit as it looked leading up to those games. And in some of these cases we're maybe talking about a generational defense versus just a great that year offense, or vice versa. Just a lot at play with the individual matchups that make the trends that do seem to be there with the small sample sizes still not overly helpful. So really, this is just a long post to say that there's not really a good trend or answer for the whole #1 O versus #D thing. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jakuvious Posted October 3, 2019 Share Posted October 3, 2019 As for the thread title, I think KC's offense "wins," as it were. It would depend a little bit on how we want to describe a win, but I think they do enough to get the better of the matchup. Honestly the only thing that has stopped this offense so far this year is when Pat isn't in sync with the receivers, or when he's a little high on ball placement. That'll happen for stretches, but not full games. The other thing that struck me when I was watching Chicago/Minnesota, is just the make up of that Chicago team, with how much that offense is struggling, they give the opposition a lot of drives, it feels like. The VIkings got like 7 or 8 drives in the second half, if I recall, because the Bears just could not move the ball. Our D isn't as good as Minnesota's, but it felt more like Chicago failing than the Vikings D succeeding. And if they give Pat that many chances, he will get his. Just kind of the way the offense/defense dynamic works, the offense can fail most of the time and still come out ahead, effectively. If we get 10 drives, but a TD on 30% of them, that probably constitutes a win in that matchup, honestly. It's sort of like a CB/WR matchup. It doesn't matter if a CB wins 90% of the time if the 6 - 7 snaps they lose all wind up being big plays. But I think we would still hit that 26 point threshold that we have like a 20+ game streak of or whatever. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
patriotsheatyan Posted October 3, 2019 Author Share Posted October 3, 2019 28 minutes ago, Jakuvious said: Recent history actually favors the offense. Since 2006, the #1 offense is 5-1 against the #1 defense, and has scored at least 27 points each time. https://www.espn.com/blog/nflnation/post/_/id/289033/top-offense-vs-top-defense-matchups-history-favors-the-chiefs Superbowl history favors the defense, which is why many feel the way you do or believe that it heavily favors the defense. Seattle/Denver really sticks in people's minds as well, which is a big part of it. Seattle/Denver in the superbowl is a little more memorable than, say, Broncos/Chiefs in 2013. But anyway, in superbowl history the #1 offense is 1-7 against the #1 defense. https://www.foxsports.com/nfl/gallery/super-bowl-51-new-england-patriots-atlanta-falcons-number-1-defense-vs-offense-matchups-49ers-seahawks-packers-steelers-chiefs-giants-020117 The real trouble though of making a conclusion from either of these bits, is the sample size is just small. So 5-1 for the offense since 2006 maybe means that things are tilting towards the offense in the modern era. Maybe it's just an anomaly. 6 games is not really an adequate sample size. Neither are the 8 superbowls. Some of those were just mismatches (I'd argue that superbowl 1, 19, and 24 were just one team being all around greater than the other.) But point being, these games just don't happen enough to claim that there's a trend, statistically. And there are so many variables, too. I'd argue that 3 of those 7 superbowl losses by the offensive team were really just slaughters. Superbowls 1, 19, and 24 were all around mismatches, they weren't a defensive team beating an offensive team. And then a 4th was the Scott Norwood Bills game. And then again on the flip side, I'm not sure the 2013 Broncos beating the 2013 Chiefs is a statement of offense over defense so much as a statement that our defense wasn't as legit as it looked leading up to those games. And in some of these cases we're maybe talking about a generational defense versus just a great that year offense, or vice versa. Just a lot at play with the individual matchups that make the trends that do seem to be there with the small sample sizes still not overly helpful. So really, this is just a long post to say that there's not really a good trend or answer for the whole #1 O versus #D thing. That 5-1 stat doesn’t seem to actually involve the best defense in the NFL. It seems to just be about who was the number one scoring defense after week ten without any additional qualifiers. I don’t know if any one of those six defenses were regarded as the best in the league at that point in the season, and not one of them was regarded as the best at the end of the season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jakuvious Posted October 3, 2019 Share Posted October 3, 2019 1 minute ago, patriotsheatyan said: That 5-1 stat doesn’t seem to actually involve the best defense in the NFL. It seems to just be about who was the number one scoring defense after week ten without any additional qualifiers. I don’t know if any one of those six defenses were regarded as the best in the league at that point in the season, and not one of them was regarded as the best at the end of the season. It's going off of ranking at time of matchup, so that the matchup itself doesn't impact those rankings. So the 2012 49ers, for instance, were the #1 defense at the time they played the Pats in week 15. Allowing 34 points to the Pats dropped them to #2, where they ended the season at. But they were #1 at the time. Same deal with last year's KC/BAL game. At the time each were #1. The Ravens allowed 17.3 points per game, in games not involving the Chiefs. Allowing 27 points to the Chiefs moved them to 17.9 points per game, the difference between first and second. So he went with ranking at the time. May or may not be the ideal method, but it's as relevant as anything is for this kind of discussion. The Bears and Chiefs play week 16. At the time it's very possible both are #1 in defense and offense respectively. It's also possible the Chiefs score 40 and drop the Bears to #2. Or that the Bears shut the Chiefs out and drop the Chiefs to #2. Same kind of thing with when the Pats meet the Chiefs, if they're still first instead. It's moot anyways to my overall post because the point was that the sample size is too small to conclude from, not that offense has trumped defense. If you went with teams that ended #1 instead of teams that were #1 at the time, it's not going to make the sample size noticeably bigger. You still wind up with a handful of games per decade which isn't a sufficient data pool. You maybe get enough games all-time but then we're factoring in stuff that happened in completely different NFL landscapes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JaguarCrazy2832 Posted October 3, 2019 Share Posted October 3, 2019 13 hours ago, AFlaccoSeagulls said: How many times have we seen the "#1 offense vs. #1 defense" thing and the defense shreds the offense to pieces? The question becomes can the Bears' offense put any points on the board, and IMO unless Trubiski is taken off the field, I don't think they can. Exactly. The defense prevails more often than not The question becomes who would win in the matchup. The Bears defense might hold KC down more than anyone in the league but as far as winning the game it comes down to Chicago actually scoring Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malik Posted October 3, 2019 Share Posted October 3, 2019 Chiefs track and field team because they can score in 90 seconds on 2-5 plays from anywhere on the field. I don't know how great the Bears safeties are but there are a bunch of guys on the Chiefs that can get behind anybody and Mahomes has consistently connected on those balls. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
diamondbull424 Posted October 3, 2019 Share Posted October 3, 2019 12 hours ago, Heinz D. said: Yes. 2018 Ravens gave up the least amount of yards on the season and gave up just as few yards per play as the 2018 Bears. The only difference between the 2018 Bears were they created more turnovers. This season the Bears secondary has showed more flaws and the turnovers don’t seem to be as high as they were last season around this time. Hence why I compared them to the 2018 Ravens defense. Or are you somehow mistaking the 2019 Bears defense with the 2000 Ravens defense or something? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SBLIII Posted October 3, 2019 Share Posted October 3, 2019 25 minutes ago, diamondbull424 said: Yes. 2018 Ravens gave up the least amount of yards on the season and gave up just as few yards per play as the 2018 Bears. The only difference between the 2018 Bears were they created more turnovers. This season the Bears secondary has showed more flaws and the turnovers don’t seem to be as high as they were last season around this time. Hence why I compared them to the 2018 Ravens defense. Or are you somehow mistaking the 2019 Bears defense with the 2000 Ravens defense or something? Turnovers are a huge part of it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AFlaccoSeagulls Posted October 3, 2019 Share Posted October 3, 2019 1 hour ago, diamondbull424 said: Yes. 2018 Ravens gave up the least amount of yards on the season and gave up just as few yards per play as the 2018 Bears. The only difference between the 2018 Bears were they created more turnovers. This season the Bears secondary has showed more flaws and the turnovers don’t seem to be as high as they were last season around this time. Hence why I compared them to the 2018 Ravens defense. Or are you somehow mistaking the 2019 Bears defense with the 2000 Ravens defense or something? https://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/teamdef/2018 Bears were #1 in DVOA by a country mile. We were #4. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
diamondbull424 Posted October 3, 2019 Share Posted October 3, 2019 3 hours ago, AFlaccoSeagulls said: https://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/teamdef/2018 Bears were #1 in DVOA by a country mile. We were #4. This this supposes that I’m a fan of DVOA. It places too much value on who you perform against and “when” you generate impact. Teams can only play who is in front of them. And teams change year in and year out. I understand the difficult in formulating DVOA and all, but while it may seem that a clutch 4th quarter interception is better than a 1st quarter interception or a clutch 4th quarter TD pass is worth more than a 1st quarter one... I don’t agree. You win the game by scoring more than your opponent or causing them not to score. I’m not going to penalize a player or reward a player very heavily based off the conditions of when they perform. DVOA reminds me too much of CFB strength of schedule. For instance the 2000s Ravens defense was penalized for not facing more “top offenses” but when they faced a top offense in the Super Bowl they obliterated it. Same with opposing teams in the playoffs. Yet that defense was penalized because the schedule makers decided to not feature them against more top units. But anyways... I’ll stop since I’m really not as invested in this subject as my keyboard would otherwise pretend. So I’ll concede the argument while still maintaining my opinion about the Chiefs “winning” against the 2019 Bears defense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.