Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Football Forum (NFL) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Thomas M. who wrote (2722)	10/4/1999 12:20:00 PM
From: MakeAFuss	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 45644

Tom I agree but.....all those teams had much better than "adequate" defenses......not giving up 30 points a week....puts a lot of pressure on the offense..... foo foo

To: Thomas M. who wrote (2722)	10/4/1999 5:41:00 PM
From: Thomas J. Graf	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 45644

There are exceptions to every rule, and Defense winning championsips is one - just like you can't win in the NBA without a legitimate big man (Michael Jordan is the main exception there :) ). I think that Denver, Atl, and the Jets all had very good defenses last year. Minnesota didn't, but they didn't go to the Super Bowl even with the most potent offense ever. I think the reason that offense doesn't get you all the way through is a good offense relies on individual performances--if the star QB, RB, or WR has a really bad game, they are screwed. With defense, though, it's much more of a team thing. Yeah, there are superstars who can make a world of difference, but pound for pound I'd MUCH rather lose a star on Defense than on Offense. Just my two cents worth.