Cutler, Brees & Warner
by axthelm on Nov 17, 2009 10:53 AM CST
Email
PrintA cursory look at last season's passing leaders will show guys like Cutler, Brees and Warner in the top ten in most catagories.
For example,regarding passes completed and passing yardage they are 1-2-3 (Brees, Warner & Cutler). And so on.
They also had three of the worst defenses in the NFL last season (Saints - 26th, Cardinals - 28th and the Broncos - 30th).
Their team records in 2008?
Saints: 8-8.
Broncos: 8-8.
Cardinals 9-7.
Almost identical. Three of the best passers in 2008 with three of the worst defenses in 2008. Great passing/terrible defenses averaged out to almost identical,average type (8-8, 9-7) records.
By contrast Warner now has the #14th ranked defense (up 14 spots from last season) and is now 6-3. Brees has the #17 ranked defense (up 9 spots from last season) and is now 9-0.
It's pretty simple. The problem with the Chicago Bear is their defense.
They went from being ranked 3rd in 2006, to 16th in both 2007 & 2008. They are currently ranked 19th. Needless to say, they are going in the wrong direction here. Obviously.
Last season the 5 teams with the best winning records in the regular season (Tennessee, Pittsburgh, NY Giants, Indianapolis and Carolina) were ranked #2, #1, #5, #7 and #12 in team defense.
The 4 teams with the next level of best records in 2008 (all 11-5) were Baltimore, New England, Miami and Atlanta. Those teams ranked #3, #8, #9 and #11 in team defense in 2008.
The 9 teams with the best records in 2008 ranked from #1 - #12 in team defense.
75% of the teams in the top 12 in defense in 2008 had the best records (ranging from 11-5 to 13-3) in 2008. That's not a coincidence.
34 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Cutler is not with the same team.
Or the same O-line. The Chicago Bears have more problems than their defense.
-------
"Newbie, if the next two words out of your mouth aren't 'See ya' then the third word will be 'Oh my god. My crotch. You've punched me in my crotch." - Dr. Percival Ulysses Cox
Warner had an
average O-line and the worst rushing attack in the league in 2008.
I’m not saying that the Bears don’t have problems beyond their defense. They do.
But my point was crystal clear:
75% of the teams with a top 12 defense had the best records (11-5, 12-4, 13-3) in the NFL last season. That includes teams with QB’s like Kerry Collins, Jake Delhomme, and Chad Pennington. Also two rookie QB’s (Ryan & Flacco) and a QB (Cassel) who hadn’t ever started a game in college or the NFL before 2008.
The only top-flight QB’s in those nine teams would be Peyton Manning, Ben Roethlisberger and maybe Eli Manning.
Conversely, three of the best QB’s statistically in 2008 (Cutler, Brees and Warner – with three of the worst defenses) were 8-8 and 9-7.
Conclusion? An excellent defense and an average QB (like Collins, Delhomme) or rookie QBs (like Ryan, Flacco and Cassel) will take you further than excellent QB’s (like Brees, Warner & Cutler) with bad defenses.
I'm a fan of Jay's.
but you’re cherry picking stats to prove a point.
Can it be safe to say that because the defenses were bad, that Warner, Brees and Cutler had to throw more? Therefore allowing them to boost their stats “regarding passes completed and passing yardage.” Don’t get me wrong, they still had to complete them, but still.
And yeah, I think it’s pretty safe to say that an excellent defense would take you further than a bad defense. If a team can’t score against you, you only need so much production from your offense.
How many “excellent” or “top-flight” QB’s do you think there are in this league?
P. Manning
T. Brady
D. Brees
B. Roethlisberger
K. Warner – maybe
E. Manning – not in my opinion
P. Rivers – I don’t like him, but he’s good
Maybe seven, even though I don’t think Eli is top-flight QB material. And out of those seven, five were in the playoffs, two were in the SB, and one (maybe the best of them all) was hurt.
Although, none of this is really my point. My point is what are Jay’s numbers THIS year? Does he STILL fall in line with Warner and Brees as 1-2-3? Last year is irrelevant in comparing the two because he played on two different offenses on two different teams.
And the defense has played extremely well at times and terrible at others. I get what you’re saying, but I just don’t understand the why, I guess.
-------
"Newbie, if the next two words out of your mouth aren't 'See ya' then the third word will be 'Oh my god. My crotch. You've punched me in my crotch." - Dr. Percival Ulysses Cox
by David Taylor on Nov 17, 2009 12:09 PM CST up reply actions
K. Warner - maybe
He’s a HOF QB. He has the three most passing yard games in Super Bowl history.
Since QB’s are paid to throw the ball (as opposed to handing off, running the ball or playing defense) that’s almost all you can ask out of a QB.
Have you ever watched Arizona’s great WR’s with Leinart in there, as opposed to Warner? Not so great.
As far as guys like Brees having to throw more cause the defense was bad if one looks at things like completions/attempts/TD’s and INTs Brees is basically on a similar pace to last season.
2008: 413 completions. 636 Attempts. 34 TD’s and 18 INT’s.
2009 199 completions. 291 Attempts 19 TD’s and 9 INT’s.
That’s in just over half the games. If you double those numbers you have roughly the same stats.
The why? of my post?
Simple. Speaking strictly from last season it’s clear that a defense that was in the top third in the NFL accounted for 75% of the best records in the league. Those teams had top-flite QB’s (like Peyton & Roethlisberger) and rookie QB’s (like Ryan, Flacco & Casssel) and not-so-great vets like (Collins and Delhomme).
It would probably be much more accurate to say that the common denominator of those teams was above average defense, not QB’s.
Conversely three of the best passing QB’s in the league (Brees, Warner & Cutler) were saddled with three of the worst defenses in the NFL and led their teams to roughly 500 records.
Maybe that’s why all three of those teams have new defensive coordinators this season.
All three.
What that tells me (maybe not you or anybody else) is that a team is better off with an excellent defense and even a rookie QB than with a great passsing QB and a terrible defense.
In 2008.
You would be free to disagree.
I don't agree
or disagree completely either way. There’s just so many variables to go by and stats like those don’t typically tell the whole story, that’s all.
I do know this, that the Bears issues are much stronger than the defense. Like I said above, at times they’ve actually been a bright spot. And at at times our offense has been putrid. And vice-versa. The team, as a whole, has been inconsistent and it’s hard to just lay blame at one aspect.
But interesting take, none the less.
-------
"Newbie, if the next two words out of your mouth aren't 'See ya' then the third word will be 'Oh my god. My crotch. You've punched me in my crotch." - Dr. Percival Ulysses Cox
by David Taylor on Nov 17, 2009 1:40 PM CST up reply actions
No one set of stats can tell the whole story
However, they are oftentimes very revealing.
Since Ken Whisenhunt took over in Arizona , as of a few weeks ago Arizona was 18-0 when they had less turnovers than the opposition and 1-17 when they had more.
There’s a lot more that goes into games than turnovers, but there’s no denying a stat like that.
Nobody is laying blame just at the defense. And you are correct. They are inconsistent. When they play well, the offense often struggles. And vice versa.
In 2006, when the offense played horribly they could often rely on their defense and/or special teams. The Cardinal game was a perfect example of this. Two defensive TD’s and Hester’s TD to offset a horrible offense.
But there’s no denying this: Their defense has been backsliding since 2006 and so has their record. Whether it was Rex, Kyle or Cutler in there. In 2005 they went to the playoffs at 11-5. #1 ranked defense. #27 ranked offense with rookie Kyle Orton.
As the defense goes . . . so goes this team. It’s really not unusual.
Of all the playoff teams in 2008, the Cardinals were 28th in team defense. Every other team was rated 15th or higher.
11 out of 12 playoff teams were in the upper half in team defense in 2008.
When 75% of the top 12 teams with the best defense also have the best records, there’s no denying that stat.
chicken and the egg
Is it also possible that since the offense is not playing so well (interceptions etc.) that the defense ends up on the field more often which increases the yardage given up and the chance to give up more points?
by LT on Nov 18, 2009 8:02 PM CST up reply actions
yes and no
Just look at teams like the Redskins. If you’re commenting on the Bears defensive woes, consider that the Bears defense allowed 31 points in the first HALF of the Bengals and Cards games and 21 first half points to the Lions (the friggin’ Lions!). The lack of production from the running game to eat the clock is not to the D’s advantage, but those stats should tell you we have bigger problems.
Warner
also had the best receiver in the nfl and one of the best, along with a #3 WR with over 1000 yrds receiving. We have none of that.
Who said or even implied that we did?
Certainly not me.
When you post:
“It’s pretty simple. The problem with the Chicago Bear is their defense.” it is clear you discount the Bears’ very weak receiving corps and even weaker O-line. I am not saying the Bears’ defense is fine, but if the defense was no better but the O-line and receivers were playing better, Cutler’s numbers (and the Bears’ win/loss record) would be a lot better.
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Nov 18, 2009 4:50 PM CST up reply actions
you forgot to mention
how the cardinals d picked it up tremendously in the playoffs they played awesome.
and warner has some guys named boldin fitzgerald and breaston and all three kinda had you know 1000 yard seasons that kind helps dont you think? =)
Well
I was talking about the regualr season. There was no mention of post season games in my post.
Since all teams play regular season games but not all play post season games, that’s what I was doing: evaluating the regular season.
That’s why when they throw out stats( for example: who led the NFL in TD passes? Or TD catches? etc) they are always only talking about the regular season. Those stats never include the post seasn. There’s a separate catagory for that (post season stats).
As far as Fitzgerlad, Boldin and Breaston, head coach Ken Whisenhunt named Matt Leinart the starter in both of his seasons there (2007/2008). Unfortunately for Leinart the offense didn’t click nearly well enough with him as it did with Warner.
Same players on offense. They moved the ball much better under Warner as opposed to Leinart.
Now, back to my original point and post. What do your comments have to do with that?
while the defense/running game sucked in the regular season
both had a turn around in the post season and i think that has to be remembered. as far the three wide outs go along with warner they helped pick up the slack for the struggling defense and running game.
that would be my response to the orginal post my man
Again the post had nothing to do with
running games or defenses picking it up in the playoffs.
It was about two things:
1. The (75%) correlation between top rated defenses and teams with the best records.
2. The correlation between top rated passers like Brees, Warner and Cutler, saddled with terrible defenses, producing only 500 type of records.
Again, not a word about the running game or playoff games.
I’m sorry that you can’t stay on topic here.
Perhaps you should write your own post about teams picking it up in the playoffs.
The biggest problem the Bears have now is their O-Line
Forte has no room to run, and Cutler has no time to throw unless he runs of his life on every play and hopes he can find an opening to throw the ball at a receiver.
When Cutler isn’t being pressured all the time, he makes good throws.
Lifelong Arizona Cardinals/Chicago Bears fan.
No band-wagoner fans allowed, pick a team and stick with em, throughout the good and the bad.
I think you're missing a key point...
Receivers and/or O-line.
In each of the three cases from 08 with Brees, Warner, and Cutler all had either good to great WR’s and/or a solid O-Line. In Cutler’s case in Denver he had arguably both although Royal has not done as well this year.
Point being, it’s not the defense (even though the Bears D is not at all what it used to be). It’s the fact that our O-line sucks and we have a bunch of #3’s at WR.
by Ortons Neckbeard on Nov 17, 2009 2:46 PM CST reply actions
You're missing my point (seriously)
I wasn’t talking about the quality of the offensive weapons on those teams. We all know that.
I was simply stating that with all of that quality on offfense (QB, O-LIne, WR’s) they were still only 8-8 / 9-7.
Why? Most likely cause the defense sucked.
Conversely, the team with the best record in 2008 (Tennesse – 13-3) had a journeyman QB and no WR’s. They did have the second best defense in the NFL last season.
I’m not sure why some people have trouble understanding the point of this post. It’s clearly written.
Nope
A team would much rather have a solid/good O-line over good WRs any day of the week. A good O-line means those average WRs have more time to get open, thus allowing the QB the needed time to complete intermediate and deep throws.
I’d rank them like this-
1. Good defense
2. Good O-line
3. Good WRs
"Those guys were the suckiest bunch of sucks that ever sucked" - Homer defines the Bears '09 season in less than 12 words.
I wasn’t saying WR’s more important that O-line, I was just saying you need one or the other. O-line imho is more important as well.
by Ortons Neckbeard on Nov 18, 2009 9:57 AM CST up reply actions
its like a house of cards
(at the risk of sounding like Forrest Gump)
Sure the D is a huge factor, but the cascade started when Brown was lost and we had no legit safety to fill in, then you had Harris with a bum knee and a bum brain, and this season Urlacher goes down with a freak wrist injury. We had to mortgage the farm to get Cutler on the gamble that our O line would be good enough. Gamble was lost.
On and on and on. A series of accidents, injuries and miscalculations. My wife says that we make our own luck and I am believing her more each day – and you can read what Pasteur said in my quote under my name. The Bears coaches and management have taken chances and come up losers in a lot of key areas. I think axhelm is right but kind of like the three blind men and the elephant, each feeling a separate part of the beast and having a totally different opinion of what they were confronted with. Got to see the big picture and it looks grim. What concerns me most is the lack of draft picks next year. That is huge.
"Chance favors the prepared mind." - Pasteur
by Maelvampyre on Nov 17, 2009 3:19 PM CST reply actions 2 recs
I rec'd that, Mael
Just for the elephant/blind man analogy.
My Dad used to use that one when my brother and I argued.
I get your point xthelm…MAelvamp put it well with the elephant thing.
Here’s how I think about it:
If you could wave a magic wand and fix/drastically improve ONE aspect of the Bears right now (sorry, “coaching” isn’t one of the choices…haha), with these choices:
1. O-line
2. D-line
3. Secondary
4. WRs
5. Special Teams
Which would it be? By “improve”—let’s say the would magically jump to the level of ranking 1st in the NFL in that aspect. (I know this is all hypotheical hogwash, but it’s an exercise to help us figure out which part of the elephant, precisely, we’re feeling up …)
As tempted as I am to say o-line, I think the D-line would win out.
Fixing the D-line would be akin to fixing the entire defense. And if our entire defense shows up, then we’re competeitive in every game.
If the O-line sucks, we can still compete. FGs, special teams, screen plays, and so on. We can SURVIVE.
Without an offense, we get near misses like SF.
Without a defense, we get games like Cincy and Arizona.
WE (purportedly, supposedly) ALREADY have the talent, and the coaching, in place for the defensive line…so where is it? Where has it been? And why can’t it STAY there after those moemnts when it does (briefly) show up?
As I said in another post, the Bears have been playing a shell game this year—showing up for half of a game, but not the other half. Having half the team show (offense) in one game, only to have the other totally tank. Then the next game it will switch.
If, by some crazy miracle, both sides of the ball can show up for the same game, for BOTH halves, I still (perhaps foolishly and naively) believe there is enough talent on the team to compete with any other team in the NFL.
But fecal-reeking coaching has failed to inspire the players, has failed to gameplan intelligently or approrpriately, it has cultivated an undisciplined climate where STUPID penalties are the norm, and turnovers are common.
That all goes back to caoching.
I do agree that the o-line is atrocious, and that the lack of draft picks in the near future is both scary and depressing.
But if the team can develop COACHES CAN INSTILL a little discipline to reduce and eliminate penalties, and the play-calling can get more creative and play into our strengths instead our weakness, while the defense regains even SOME of its moxy, we might be able to be meaningfully competitive again.
Alex Brown, after the Arizona game
made a comment that the problem was the players. Not the coaching. Not the scheme
He couldn’t understand why the Bears were able to have consecutive three-and-out against the Cardinals late in the 3rd quarter, after being human turnstyles up til then. He couldn’t understand why they couldn’t play that way from the beginning.
Alex is confused. Yes the players have to make the plays but maybe the coaches should get in their faces a little. Get on their asses.
Mike Ditka lost his fair share of games as the head coach in Chicago. Suffered his share of blowouts. But he rarely had games when his team looked like it was sleepwalking out there.
Cutler also said
after the Arizona game: “I need to do more” and I thought—uh oh—that’s going to be trouble for next game. Sure enough…
But to your point: I agree—it is the COACHES’ jobs to properly inspire/fire up/motivate/prepare the players. I don’t care what they make, or what’s at stake. The in-game attitude is more than that.
There’s an immediate pre-game mindset of confidence/swagger/aggression (or, worst case scenario, resilience) that used to always be there, but isn’t now.
In the past, we’ve had the emotional leadership from Urlacher, Mike Brown, Kreutz and Ayanbedejo (miss that guy, too).
Now only one of those guys is on the field, and he’s probably too emabarrassed with his own play and his own unit to talk to anyone else.
Last week Vernon Davis motivated the defense—but they won’t get that every week. And it’s not coming from Lovie, and apparently stopped coming from Sgt. Rod after the 2nd week, so who—if anyone—will step up in that capacity?
Right
And that’s a good point.
They don’t get it from the coaches and now there’s only player that fits that bill (I was just reading something recently about Kreutz firing up the team down 20-0 at halftime of the 2006 Cardinal game).
Beyond any issues regarding talent and other things on this team, there’s virtually no leadership.
Explain this to me like I'm a two year old ....
…. what does your defensive rank have to do with your passing game exactly ?
by Irish Bears Fan on Nov 17, 2009 9:05 PM CST reply actions
It has nothing to do with it.
I never said it did. Unfortunately some people misunderstand my point.
My point was that the most of the top defensive teams had the best records in 2008. Whether they had great QB’s, mediocre QB’s or rookie QB’s.
On the other hand, great prolific passing offenses with the likes of guys like Brees, Warner and Cutler lighting it up, only had average records (probably in large part cause they had terrible defenses).
If you look at 2008 it’s pretty clear. If you didn’t have a top rated defense you probably didn’t do very well in the regualr season. This probably applies most, if not all seasons.
People trying to make a correlation between defensive rankings and the passing game aren’t understanding the post.
The only connection I made between the two was this. High octane offenses, with terrible defenses might have been good for fantasy owners but were roughly 8-8 in 2008.
Those teams weren’t 8-8 and/or 9-7 because they passed the ball effectively. They had those type of records cause their defense was pretty bad.
herein lies the problem
Ax, you posted:
“It’s pretty simple. The problem with the Chicago Bear is their defense”
That is a pretty absolute statement and it kind of messed up whatever else you were trying to say in your post because, clearly the ONLY problem with the Bears ISN’T the defense. There are multiple problems with the Bears organization. If you were speaking in general and not with respect to the Bears, then your statement above clouds that delineation. Maybe I missed the point here, but clearly the writer bears (no pun intended) some responsibility for the precise thought he/she is trying to convey. I’m still not clear what you intended to say and I will move along now, and look forward to your next post.
"Chance favors the prepared mind." - Pasteur
by Maelvampyre on Nov 18, 2009 12:36 PM CST up reply actions
yup.
-------
"Newbie, if the next two words out of your mouth aren't 'See ya' then the third word will be 'Oh my god. My crotch. You've punched me in my crotch." - Dr. Percival Ulysses Cox
by David Taylor on Nov 18, 2009 12:43 PM CST up reply actions
Well I am assuming that people aren't into 'absolutes.'
Only a clueless person would suggest that they are struggling on defense and yet have no problems on offense.
I wasn’t saying that. Of course they have problems on offense. I was talking about the role of the defense on the team, not the offense.
My point is this.
2005: #1 in defense. Playoffs.
2006: #3 in defense. Super Bowl
2007 & 2008: #16 in defense. No playoffs.
2009: Currently #19 in defense. Almost no shot at the playoffs.
Nobody would consider them to have ‘great’ offenses in 2005 & 2006.
The fact of the matter is this: Having a top rated defense helps cover up a lot of sins on offense.
What I intended to say is simply this. I don’t think it’s a coincidence that 75% of the teams with the best records in the NFL in 2008 had defenses rated from #1 – #12.
9 of the 12 teams in the top 12 in defense in 2008 not only went to the playoffs but had the best records (11-5 to 13-3). The other 3 teams in the top 12 in defense were these: Eagles, Redskins & Bucs.
The Eagles went to the playoffs. The 9-7 Bucs & 8-8 Redskins didn’t.
Clearly, no team with a defense rated from 1-12 was under 500. All were 500 or above.
9 of them had the best records in the league.
Also, as I said earlier, the tea, with the best record (Tennessee – 13-3) was pretty anemic on offense (ranked #14).
A cursory look at those rankings tells me that having a better defense might be more important than a better offense.
I certainly think it has been in the history of the Bears.
If they had a consistently above average/excellent defense their problems on offense would be much less magnified.
Look at teams like Baltimore & Pittsburgh. Players and coaches come and go and yet they are always near the top on defense.
I agree
I think it’s a pretty safe generalization to make, when it comes to success in the NFL:
defense > offense
With a sound defense, you can theoretically compete in EVERY game.
Team like the Ravens, Miniscrotum BiQueens, and Bears have epitmozed that over recent years, where they reminaed competitive while struggling to find viable QBs/offensive weapons.
We are all also familiar with the cliche: “Defense wins championships”.
Or recent examples such as Giants d-line over the Patriots offense, Steelers defense over the Cardinals offense, etc.
Naturally, there are exceptions (there always are: exception is the only absolute), but I think it’s a generally true statement.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Community Guidelines
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Shutdown Corner - NFL - Yahoo! Sports
- Boston (in) Common: Kevin Youkilis set to marry Tom Brady’s sister
- Giants to be honored with commemorative NY license plate; some would rather see a 9/11 plate
- The hidden play of Super Bowl XLVI: Justin Tuck’s third-quarter sack
- Report: Chad Ochocinco will become Chad Johnson once again
- Video: Bill Belichick implores his defense to make the Giants throw to Mario Manningham
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
