Anybody find the lack of Defense in the NFL boring?

[KW95 - JA17]

1 hour ago, Boyst62 said:

Completely. You can't play defense anymore and the whole event of QB's looking for easy PI's is also terrible.

 

It's drained me away from the game.  I watched 3 minutes of Pittsburgh Jax. That's the last NFL I watched for the year. I just didn't care to watch these overpaid babies play a soft pussified game to have the refs and commerical interests distract from the integrity of the game.

 

No one realizes it but defensive games draw viewers. 

 

Weren't you there for a 10-3 game in Jacksonville?  That defensive game was a gem wasn't it???  Moron!

[BADOLBILZ]

 

I don't think people miss the sound defense.........they miss the violence.........which was as much of what kept the score and completion % down as anything.

 

Despite the SB result defense actually had an uptick again this year.......and the average DB today is so much more talented than the stiffs they used to march out "back in the day" that it's almost hard to compare.   Most corners can actually cover close now without having to grab or beat up receivers in routes.

 

I really miss that violence though........the last great game of that era was the Seattle/SF title game.........what a wonderful violent game that was.

 

 

[Mikie2times]

10 minutes ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

I don't think people miss the sound defense.........they miss the violence.........which was as much of what kept the score and completion % down as anything.

 

Despite the SB result defense actually had an uptick again this year.......and the average DB today is so much more talented than the stiffs they used to march out "back in the day" that it's almost hard to compare.   Most corners can actually cover close now without having to grab or beat up receivers in routes.

 

I really miss that violence though........the last great game of that era was the Seattle/SF title game.........what a wonderful violent game that was.

 

 

Sine the chuck rule in 2004 passing TD's are up 13% compared to 1990-2003, points per game are up 1.67 which may sound small, but it's 428 points a year more on average. Elite QB's can take advantage of the rules the most. Brady does not have the career he has had without the chuck rule. That whole offense is timing. It just changes the game in the way teams are forced to find an elite QB because in doing so that can overcome elite running teams and defenses. Exceptions can be found, but that's exactly what they are, exceptions.  

[boyst]

20 minutes ago, KW95 said:

 

Weren't you there for a 10-3 game in Jacksonville?  That defensive game was a gem wasn't it???  Moron!

What's your point?  I was going to the game regardless. Royal with cheese promised me a hug... With his lips.

 

And, literally you have no point, ma'm

[Shaw66]

44 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

Yeah, who doesn't love 3 and outs and the punt game!!

 

Anyway, scoring has been pretty stable through the decades, despite the perception that it hasn't.

 

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/NFL/scoring.htm

 

Receiving TDs per team per game last year were the same as (oh, I'll just pick one) 1987.

 

 

 

And scoring is down for two straight seasons.  Defenses are figuring out.    

 

The STYLE of offense isn't very pleasing.   Lots of little gadget plays to squeeze out a few yards here or there.    

[KW95 - JA17]

Just now, Boyst62 said:

What's your point?  I was going to the game regardless. Royal with cheese promised me a hug... With his lips.

 

And, literally you have no point, ma'm

 

Thats always your response!  haha!  Go get your hugs....

[BADOLBILZ]

4 minutes ago, KzooMike said:

Sine the chuck rule in 2004 passing TD's are up 13% compared to 1990-2003, points per game are up 1.67 which may sound small, but it's 428 points a year more on average. Elite QB's can take advantage of the rules the most. Brady does not have the career he has had without the chuck rule. That whole offense is timing. It just changes the game in the way teams are forced to find an elite QB because in doing so that can overcome elite running teams and defenses. Exceptions can be found, but that's exactly what they are, exceptions.  

 

2010 was the key year IMO.   That year really doomed teams that didn't have franchise QB's to another decade of fail.

 

That's when defenses basically stopped being able to hit QB's in the pocket and WR over the middle.

 

That extended QB careers greatly and now you have QB's pushing 40 with the wear and tear on them that a QB used to have by their late 20's.

 

Hard to beat healthy QB's with 18 years of snaps under their belt...........it's kind've a losers game to try to..........and teams are learning that.

 

People who think Carson Wentz and Jared Goff were just franchise QB's descended from heaven are mistaken...........they were coached and schemed up and surrounded with overwhelming support talent.

 

That's what you have to do to have more than an outside chance to win and subsequently enough time to develop that QB.

[Buffalo716]

Definitely 

 

i love good , hard hitting football. They are seriously hurting the game with a bunch of stupid rules 

[Buddo]

I think with some judicious rule changes, you could bring back the idea of defense again. Mainly by not penalizing PI in the same way, and by allowing more of a challenge for the football, but also by calling a catch a catch, without half of the preconditions attached to it currently. 

You can get the best of both worlds then. DBs aren't over penalized, and there's less chance of QBs just chucking the thing up there and looking for a PI, while also letting the incredibly athletic WRs of today, make plays (i.e. catches), without everything being under the microscope of frame by frame. Just having one foot in, for example, could be an option.

Imho, a lot of the issues with the NFL these days, come back to an inflated rulebook, that is too open to interpretation, by people who aren't the best qualified to do so.

[Koko78]

I would disagree with the premise of this thread.

 

Let me ask those of you pining for defense, which game was more fun to watch: the 51-3 thumping of the Raiders for the Bills first Super Bowl, or the 10-7 championship game against Denver the following year?

 

What about the Bills/Browns game a few years back that was 6-3. Was it exciting football that was fun to watch from opening kickoff to final whistle? !@#$ no.

 

As for me, the best game I ever saw was the famous no-punt game between the Bills and 49ers. It was thoroughly entertaining watching both teams play offense.

[Mr. WEO]

48 minutes ago, KzooMike said:

Pretty lazy way of using data to fit an agenda. This decade compared to the 90's Passing TD's are up 29%. 

 

35 minutes ago, KzooMike said:

All passing metrics are up compared to years past as you would expect them to be. With the rules as they are, great QB's are better on average than great defenses. This leads to lack of balance in the product. You see exceptions, but you don't see many rules. In the early 90's a great QB against a great defense was a 50/50. It's just not that way anymore. 

 

Lazy?  Why did you just pick the 90's when you subsequently say "years past"?   

 

What the bolded statement even mean?  "50/50"....what?

 

In the 90's Favre, Moon, Bledsoe, Marino...even Scott Mitchell and jeff George were carving up defenses.

 

This has been a shift over time toward more passing TDs per game (even today's levels have been seen decades ago), but scoring has remained flat over decades.

 

All of the "rule changes" haven't resulted in a significant change in scoring.  That much is clear.  This means defenses have adapted to the changes in the offense, as they always have done over time.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Mikie2times]

1 minute ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

 

Lazy?  Why did you just pick the 90's when you subsequently say "years past"?   

 

What the bolded statement even mean?  "50/50"....what?

 

In the 90's Favre, Moon, Bledsoe, Marino...even Scott Mitchell and jeff George were carving up defenses.

 

This has been a shift over time toward more passing TDs per game (even today's levels have been seen decades ago), but scoring has remained flat over decades.

 

All of the "rule changes" haven't resulted in a significant change in scoring.  That much is clear.  This means defenses have adapted to the changes in the offense, as they always have done over time.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You picked this year, then randomly picked out a year of out a sample size of 50+ years that suited your argument. I "randomly" picked the 90's, you can also randomly pick the 80's or the 70's and get the same data. I also did it pre chuck rule and post chuck rule. So not exactly random. More of a factual way of interpreting information. 

 

Farve had a career completion % of 62%

Moon had a career completion % of 58.4%

Bledsoe had a career completion % of 57.2%

Marino had a career completion % of 59.4%

 

Only 1 out of the 4 above 60%, meanwhile this year 24 teams surpass that mark

 

Scoring is up. Not enough for your liking, but it's up. Maybe I should have titled the thread today's games are boring because QB is all that matters and diversity in elite rushing and elite defenses doesn't compete against elite QB's. That seemed a little long though.  

 

[jr1]

you can't even breathe on a receiver without getting flagged

[Buddo]

11 minutes ago, Koko78 said:

I would disagree with the premise of this thread.

 

Let me ask those of you pining for defense, which game was more fun to watch: the 51-3 thumping of the Raiders for the Bills first Super Bowl, or the 10-7 championship game against Denver the following year?

 

What about the Bills/Browns game a few years back that was 6-3. Was it exciting football that was fun to watch from opening kickoff to final whistle? !@#$ no.

 

As for me, the best game I ever saw was the famous no-punt game between the Bills and 49ers. It was thoroughly entertaining watching both teams play offense.

 

There's a lot of difference between good defense, resulting in a low scoring game, and inept offence, having the same effect. The Bills/Browns game was played in awful conditions, iirc, but also by two really bad offences. The playoff game was contested by two good Ds, yet the low scoring was as much a function of poor offensive play, than especially good defense. Which is why it also was a crap game.

[GreggTX]

Me too. I think we're in the minority, though. It's like when the AL decided that pitchers no longer had to take an at bat and they inserted the DH. It reduces the strategic element of baseball. In football, it has made TD's less exciting and FG's an absolute snoozer.

 

I remember when great defenses could get a shutout or 2 in a season. I love it when the Bills get one.

Edited February 24, 2018 by GreggTX

[Mr. WEO]

16 minutes ago, KzooMike said:

You picked this year, then randomly picked out a year of out a sample size of 50+ years that suited your argument. I "randomly" picked the 90's, you can also randomly pick the 80's or the 70's and get the same data. I also did it pre chuck rule and post chuck rule. So not exactly random. More of a factual way of interpreting information. 

 

Farve had a career completion % of 62%

Moon had a career completion % of 58.4%

Bledsoe had a career completion % of 57.2%

Marino had a career completion % of 59.4%

 

Only 1 out of the 4 above 60%, meanwhile this year 24 teams surpass that mark

 

Scoring is up. Not enough for your liking, but it's up. Maybe I should have titled the thread today's games are boring because QB is all that matters and diversity in elite rushing and elite defenses doesn't compete against elite QB's. That seemed a little long though.  

 

 

In the 15 years before '94 scoring averaged 20.4 PPG.  In the in the 15 years afterwards, it averaged 21.2.  That's it.  in the past 10 years, it has averaged 22.4 PPG--clearly an insignificant amount.

 

Your claim that QBs hovering at 60% (over their careers) doesn't help your 50/50 claim.

 

Elite QBs always dominate the NFL.  Nothing new.  

 

"Diversity in elite rushing"???  Go back and look at the rushing leaders in the 80's and 90's.  Pretty much Barry Sanders, Eric Dickerson and Emmett Smith at the top.  In the past 10 seasons, 7 different players have led the NFL in rushing.

[Bills Fan of St Augustine]

If the NFL had its way, all games would be played indoors and on carpet (retractable roof be damned). Yes, I miss the old days with a good balance between D and O. Purple People Eaters, Steel Curtain, Raven felons, 85Bears, Eagles early 90s, even No Name D as painful as it was... The only time defenses stand out is when the O is inept. "Modern" football is starting to be as boring as regular season NBA. Run and gun with no D sucks.

[oldmanfan]

Love defense.  And miss it a lot.

[Gigs]

6 hours ago, Logic said:

Meh. There are plenty of defensive slugfests out there. 

10-3 Jacksonville Buffalo was one of them.

Less Defense, more **** QB play

[Mikie2times]

4 hours ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

In the 15 years before '94 scoring averaged 20.4 PPG.  In the in the 15 years afterwards, it averaged 21.2.  That's it.  in the past 10 years, it has averaged 22.4 PPG--clearly an insignificant amount.

 

Your claim that QBs hovering at 60% (over their careers) doesn't help your 50/50 claim.

 

Elite QBs always dominate the NFL.  Nothing new.  

 

"Diversity in elite rushing"???  Go back and look at the rushing leaders in the 80's and 90's.  Pretty much Barry Sanders, Eric Dickerson and Emmett Smith at the top.  In the past 10 seasons, 7 different players have led the NFL in rushing.

I will concede it's not so much points allowed as it is the way those points are allowed. All QB stats are grossly inflated compared to the 90's. More of the games production has come in the air. The defensive battles seem to occur more from sloppy offensive play then good defense. Then you have the teams with QB's who resemble NBA teams which is a great analogy by Bills Fan in Maryland. We didn't need the chuck rule. The balance of power between QB and defense was perfect. Now it has become imbalanced and that's not something I enjoy. A lot of people think the measurements in a baseball were either intentionally or unintentionally altered ever so slightly and that has been whats led to the ridiculous HR totals after the 2016 All Star break. I see that as very similar to the current state of the NFL. I don't like baseball with a pitcher hitting opposite field HR's. 

Edited February 25, 2018 by KzooMike