Reply With Quote
K.C. by the widest of margins
Discuss, tbh..
K.C. by the widest of margins
bucs, its not really tanking unless you blow a 21 pt lead
Kansas City, with Carolina as a close second....
Carolina tbh
the kansas city reids, tbh. their defense scores more points than their offense.
This, they've scored over 30 once this season. (vs the Giants)
Then there's the second tier (Carolina, SF, Seattle) out of which Carolina has the most inconsistent offense. Runningback by committee with no one really that great, Cam relatively inconsistent, Old Steve Smith and injured Greg Olson being their receiving corps. SF/Seattle pretty comparable, so I don't care who's next out of them.
No one cares about the next tier (Bungles, Browns, Jets)
Statistically, KC is 1st with Carolina close behind..nobody else is close, tbh..
Based on what? I could see an argument for Seattle over Carolina.
Seattle has more close games/wins than Carolina does. The Panthers have blown out 5 of their last 6 opponents. Most of the Seahawks' wins have been low scoring, they've only had 3 or 4 blowouts all year.
SRS differential..
Carolina's defensive SRS is 8.9 and their offense is 0.7
KC's is 8.2 vs. -1.3
Seattle, for example, is 5.1 vs. 3.4..
Carolina and KC are by far the most reliant on their defense, with Cinci being next but well below the formers..
Why use SRS differential for this? Wouldn't that just be how much better a defense is than their offense? We already know the Panthers and Chiefs have horrible offenses compared to their defenses, we don't any advanced stats to tell us that.
The Panthers could have had a slightly better than average D the past few weeks and still won every game they have. (Except for this week, but I'm guessing that hasn't been included into the SRS rankings you noted.) Meanwhile if the Seahawks' defense was even a little worse, they'd have a lost a few.
Ex: The Panthers holding the Giants to 0, Atlanta to 10, Vikings to 10, etc created a big differential that really had no impact on whether they won or not. They were never "reliant" on their D being so good in those games.
exactly. kc has such a ty offense that their defense is forced to overcome and score for both of them if you will.
Definitely Kansas City, with Carolina a close second and Seattle and San Fransisco a distant third. While all four would be middle-of-the-pack to basement dwelling teams without them, San Fransisco and Seattle have holes at QB but are stacked elsewhere on offense; both are also playing through serious injury depletion. Even at full strength Carolina is about even with both. Kansas City, meanwhile, would be unable to put up enough points to compete with anyone if they didn't have their D.
It's Arizona. The goddamn offense give two or three possessions a game to its opponant where they are already in FG range.
Minutes before halftime vs. San Francisco the defense hadn't given up a 1st down, but trailed because of turnovers already in scoring range.
They probably lead the league in defensive possessions started within own 35.
Also, I can think of four drives where Arizona cost themselves points by turning the ball over in the redzone, and a few others just beyond the 20 but still in FG range.
They are on the field too much with too many possessions starting in scoring territory to be a top statistical defense, but I dare you to watch them and say anything other than "wow!"
Two of the three touchdowns they gave up were perfectly defensed, official reviewed plays made by Andre Johnson going full re and doing things almost unthinkable.
Also, those two possessions were off own-35 turnovers.
I haven't seen enough of KC, but AZ beat Carolina with defense.
I just can't say enough. They have been one of the best defenses for years. If they only had an offense. Even an average one.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
