HawkShack.com

I didn't realize this was so significant- we're the best scoring D in the NFL for the 4th year straight, and that's *never* been done before?

Wow.

However this year ends, we're truly in some of the glory days of Seahawk football here.

It was so up and down for the first 9 weeks that it'd be easy to overlook.
That is quite a stat.

Zorn76 wrote:It was so up and down for the first 9 weeks that it'd be easy to overlook.
That is quite a stat.

Agreed- Sherm would shame us.

It's easy (as fans) to get disgusted, but man...

As we all know, the NFL can change drastically from week to week, lol.

Really hoping that our D can ride this momentum into the playoffs. Can't assume we're gonna crush teams in the post season, but we match up well with any offense we're gonna face. Conversely, our O really got back on track today. Putting our D out on the field with a nice lead makes things so much easier. it does for any team, naturally, but especially ours.

Just grateful we have some good momentum moving forward.
Be confident but not cocky.
We see what can happen when teams assume too much.

I think the record is for "Super Bowl Era", I think the Browns did it back in the 30's (when there were only like a dozen teams in the NFL so it was much less impressive).

c_hawkbob wrote:I think the record is for "Super Bowl Era", I think the Browns did it back in the 30's (when there were only like a dozen teams in the NFL so it was much less impressive).

The Browns weren't around in the 30's. They were originally part of the All American Football Conference in the 50's and entered the NFL when that conference broke up.

But your point is valid.

c_hawkbob wrote:I think the record is for "Super Bowl Era", I think the Browns did it back in the 30's (when there were only like a dozen teams in the NFL so it was much less impressive).

Yeah, I'm sure you're right about that.

RiverDog wrote:The Browns weren't around in the 30's. They were originally part of the All American Football Conference in the 50's and entered the NFL when that conference broke up.

But your point is valid.

Thought sure the Browns is who they (I can't recall which talking head) said it was ... maybe it was the bears ... but i am sure it was the 30's.

That accomplishment tells us a number of things considering the turnover of DCs that have been here.
In no particular order and undoubtedly an incomplete list:
This is Pete's Defense and he's a great evaluator of coaching talent.
He and his D coaches work very well together and have to be on the same page.
The coaches know how to best use the players and know how to develop them.
John Schneider has provided the types of players that work well within not only the Defensive scheme, but have the drive to be the best every day.

c_hawkbob wrote:Thought sure the Browns is who they (I can't recall which talking head) said it was ... maybe it was the bears ... but i am sure it was the 30's.

Paul Brown established the Cleveland Browns after the war, only team named after it's coach/owner. Willing to bet you a beer.

It was probably the Bears or Giants you were thinking of.

http://www.nfl.com/history/randf/records/def/scoring

Looks like Cleveland 53-57, 5 years

I said it two years ago, and nothing has changed my mind. Best defense in HISTORY. Period. There is really no viable debate. The Seahawks have done it better, and longer, in a more difficult time frame, with all the Cards stacked against them.

HumanCockroach wrote:I said it two years ago, and nothing has changed my mind. Best defense in HISTORY. Period. There is really no viable debate. The Seahawks have done it better, and longer, in a more difficult time frame, with all the Cards stacked against them.

Pure statistics, yes, there is no argument. But you can make an argument based on the number of championships/Lombardi'/SB appearances our defense has to our credit vs. the Steelers, Dolphins, Giants, et al. After all, that is what counts most, isn't it?

I don't know River for ONCE, I have to agree with Human, the 85 Bears only won one title, but is ranked as one of is not THE best Defenses of all time.

OT I wonder what Human's real first name is anyway?

obiken wrote:I don't know River for ONCE, I have to agree with Human, the 85 Bears only won one title, but is ranked as one of is not THE best Defenses of all time.

I wasn't thinking of the '85 Bears. I was thinking of the Steel Curtain, the No Name Defense, and some of the great Giant defenses. Those teams won multiple Lombardi's/NFL Championships.

It depends on what you use as a yardstick. If you use comparative dominance within peers, we take it hands down. But if you use trophies, SB appearances, or other team goals as a metric, we have a ways to go.

NO doubt in the end you have to win SB's to be remembered and more than one to be one of the elite's.
My best friend in Cleveland, who is totally dispassionate on NFL football, asked me what is the matter with Seattle's Defense. He feels it just doesn't compare to the last 3 years. What I said is depth. We have lost Red Bryant, Malcolm Smith, Walter Thurmond III, Byron Maxwell ect ect. Do you think we are the same River??

My best friend in Cleveland, who is totally dispassionate on NFL football, asked me what is the matter with Seattle's Defense.

Well, *you* watch the NFL regularly, don't you? If so, why couldn't you tell him they started slowly for a variety of reasons but now appear to be virtually as dominant as they ever were?

NO doubt in the end you have to win SB's to be remembered and more than one to be one of the elite's.

So you don't remember/consider elite the Purple People Eaters, the '85 Bears, or the 2000 Ravens??

To make your point from ESPN. Reagan said there are lies, damn lies, and Stats.
Passing Yards 20th
236.9

Rushing Yards 3rd.
141.8

Points For tied for 4th.
26.4
Points Against 1st

17.3

How did we lose 6 games???

obiken wrote:How did we lose 6 games???

Because the offense sucked. Dead last by a long shot in red zone efficiency, near the last in points production (minus D and ST), near the last in first downs...through the first 9 games.

The defense has never been horrible, just that the offense never picked up the slack when the D wasn't playing top notch football. Now they are, and we're arguably the hottest team in the league.

Ok, thanks!

Pure statistics, yes, there is no argument. But you can make an argument based on the number of championships/Lombardi'/SB appearances our defense has to our credit vs. the Steelers, Dolphins, Giants, et al. After all, that is what counts most, isn't it

?

Sorry. No. No matter how good a defense is, Lombardi's require more than simply a good defense. You know it, as well as I do, or have you misplaced the guys like Swann, Harris, Bradshaw et el, perhaps Morris, Czonka etc ring a bell? Maybe not. Even IF I were to be inclined to ignore that stuff ( which I'm not) there's that whole "cards stacked against them thing" in regards to the way defenses have to play ( as well as the insane complexities of current offenses) PLUS the "added" bonus of free agency AND a salary cap... Truthfully, dismissing it, is almost offensive to me at this point. They accomplished something NONE of those defenses accomplished, while fighting the cap, penalties, better competition, attrition, longer seasons ( meaning more injuries, and even more attrition) a loss of two coordinators in a point and pass happy league, and still it's debatable? Nope. Not even close in my eyes, not remotely.

HumanCockroach wrote:Sorry. No. No matter how good a defense is, Lombardi's require more than simply a good defense. You know it, as well as I do, or have you misplaced the guys like Swann, Harris, Bradshaw et el, perhaps Morris, Czonka etc ring a bell? Maybe not. Even IF I were to be inclined to ignore that stuff ( which I'm not) there's that whole "cards stacked against them thing" in regards to the way defenses have to play ( as well as the insane complexities of current offenses) PLUS the "added" bonus of free agency AND a salary cap... Truthfully, dismissing it, is almost offensive to me at this point. They accomplished something NONE of those defenses accomplished, while fighting the cap, penalties, better competition, attrition, longer seasons ( meaning more injuries, and even more attrition) a loss of two coordinators in a point and pass happy league, and still it's debatable? Nope. Not even close in my eyes, not remotely.

Like I said, it depends on what measurement you use. Which offense was better, Air Coryell or Walsh's West Coast Offense? I would argue that Walsh had better offenses simply due to the fact that they won Lombardi's and Coryell didn't win squat. Who was the better quarterback, Dan Marino with the better stat line and NO Lombardi's or Joe Montana with 4 rings and 3 SB MVP's? I would argue Montana. IMO you can extend that argument to top defenses as well. The Purple People Eaters were not as good as the Steel Curtain because Pittsburgh won Lombardi's and Minnesota didn't.

We have a tremendous defense, no question. We compare favorably with the best defenses the game as ever seen no matter what metric is used. We've already one 1 Lombardi, appeared in two SB's, made the playoffs 4 years in a row and 5 out of the last 6, had the best regular season record over the past 4 years, and we've done it with a pretty pedestrian offense. But we have one more step to take, and that step is multiple Lombardi's.

Can anyone enlighten me?

Sure: when "scoring" and "defense" are used together, it most commonly refers to a "defense's" success in keeping the other team from "scoring"- because that's what defenses do and all that.

Is the OP really the first time you've seen the phrase?

Old but Slow wrote:Stupid question time. As I understand it we have allowed the fewest points in the NfL for 4 years, and that is a record. Beautiful, and true. But, the OP states the 4th year as the best scoring defense. Did our defense score more than anyone? With pick 6's, fumble recoveries, blocks and the like? I am voting for a misstatement, because I have seen nothing to indicate that our defense scored more points than any other team, either this year of any other. Can anyone enlighten me?

Scoring defense, or scoring offense for that matter, is the total points scored for or scored against, which includes special teams. It can be deceptive if applied to only one part of the team. For example, our scoring offense had us scoring at about a 16-17 points per game clip in the first 9 games this season, but that stat was pretty deceptive as our defense scored several touchdowns and Lockett returned both a punt and a kickoff for a touchdown. Factor out D and ST scoring and that number quickly went below 12 points.

It also does not take into account starting field position. An offense that is consistently given good field position by the defense and special teams and rings up a lot of points as a result of scoring opportunities being handed to them on a silver platter may not be overall as effective as offenses that have to get their points the hard way by driving 80+ yards for their scores. The same is true on defense. It is hardly fair to "penalize" the defense for giving up a touchdown after a fumbled punt inside their own 5.

It's not a completely accurate method of evaluating an offense and defense, but neither is total yards or yards per game, and demonstrates one of the reasons why I'm so fixated on W/L records, playoff appearances, SB appearances, and Lombardi's vs. statistical analysis when it comes to ranking or making value judgments on team performance. Stats do tell a story, but seldom do they tell the whole story.