PDA

View Full Version : Which do you prefer?


DJJasonp
10-17-2005, 02:55 PM
Watching KU's defense on Saturday fired me up....and got me thinking...

Which do you prefer?

An explosive offense (like the Chiefs from 2002-2004) with a crappy defense (like the Chiefs 2002-2005)?

OR

An amazing defense that barely allows any TD's....very little yardage, etc. with a crappy 3 yards and a cloud of dust offense (similar to the Dave Krieg/Harvey Williams/Bam Morris years)...?????

kepp
10-17-2005, 03:03 PM
Man, that's a tough one to answer. I voted that I'd rather have an amazing defense with a crappy offense because the opposite, as we've experienced, is just so frustrating.

Simplex3
10-17-2005, 03:07 PM
Give me the D any day. D wins championships, O makes for a really exciting regular season.

tk13
10-17-2005, 03:09 PM
Defense defense defense. And defense.

Extra Point
10-17-2005, 03:11 PM
That won the SB for Baltimore. (Nice job, Billick, getting rid of Dilfer for Grbac. We can't thank you enough....)

htismaqe
10-17-2005, 03:12 PM
Man, that's a tough one to answer. I voted that I'd rather have an amazing defense with a crappy offense because the opposite, as we've experienced, is just so frustrating.

So the Marty years weren't frustrating?

htismaqe
10-17-2005, 03:13 PM
Give me the D any day. D wins championships, O makes for a really exciting regular season.

Yeah, we won a ton of championships in the 90's.

htismaqe
10-17-2005, 03:13 PM
Neither.

Good teams have balance.

ChiefsOne
10-17-2005, 03:16 PM
Explosive offensive is more fun to watch, but the D really pisses me off.

Great D like we had in the early and mid ninties wins games, but not near as exciting to watch!

I'd be happy just winning more games than we loose and make it to the Superbowl.

onescrewleftuntwisted
10-17-2005, 05:04 PM
defence is where the game is won and lost

Dartgod
10-17-2005, 05:09 PM
Yes.

Count Zarth
10-17-2005, 05:12 PM
Neither.

Good teams have balance.

:clap:

Lurch
10-17-2005, 05:14 PM
None of the above. How about some of each?

HemiEd
10-17-2005, 05:17 PM
If we can not have both give me the offense, it is a hell of lot more entertaining.

NaptownChief
10-17-2005, 05:20 PM
Neither.

Good teams have balance.



Great teams do both well but most "good" teams come year end lean heavy on the defensive side of the ball....assuming you define "good" as making the playoffs and winning at least a game while there.

It is very rare that a bottom feeder defense wins a game in the playoffs but some bottom feeder offenses have.

It is ideal to do both but if you only have one and want a chance to make a run in the playoffs defense is the one that gives you a chance. All that said, if you don't do both at a decent level then odds are heavily against you no matter what.

Rain Man
10-17-2005, 05:29 PM
It seems like there should be other potential options, but when I go back and review the Chiefs of the past 20 years, I can't identify any.

Lurch
10-17-2005, 05:34 PM
It seems like there should be other potential options, but when I go back and review the Chiefs of the past 20 years, I can't identify any.

Mid 1990s with Marty, they had some of both. They just choked at inconvenient times. Damn.