Behind the Steel Curtain: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Sports blogs for fans, by fans.
Around SBN: Cal RB Jahvid Best Seriously Injured, Carted Off Field

A Statistical Analysis on the Greatest Defenses in NFL History

Some of you who have been on the site for a while remember my statistical analyses on QBs, RBs (Part 1, Part 2), and WRs from last year. Well, recently, we had a Ravens fan arguing that the 2000 Ravens unit was the greatest defense in the history of the National Footall League. Sure, that's to be expected of partisans of Baltimore much like there was plenty of talk amongst Steelers faithful this year that the 2008 Steelers defense was the greatest to ever take the field. And if you were a fan of the Chicago Bears, particularly one who was old enough to vividly remember the dominating fashion in which the 1985 defense suffocated opponents, then your vote probably would go there. And on and on.

That got me interested in looking into a comparative analysis of a number of the greatest defenses in NFL history. If there was ever a time to do it, now is the time considering the great performance this year's Steelers defense registered. There are a handful of defenses that are generally argued as the greatest defensive statistical seasons, so I thought I would focus on those. I also wanted to include a couple of other great defensive seasons to add depth and context to the comparative analysis.

Mag_081218_steelersd_1__medium

The best ever? Let's try to find out after the jump.

Star-divide

The seasons that I will analyze in this post are:

  • 1973 Los Angeles Rams
  • 1976 Pittsburgh Steelers
  • 1977 Atlanta Falcons
  • 1985 Chicago Bears
  • 1991 Philadelphia Eagles
  • 2000 Baltimore Ravens
  • 2008 Pittsburgh Steelers

Steelers_front_four_1__medium
I think it's fairly obvious to most NFL fans that the '76 Steelers, '85 Bears, and '00 Ravens are the defenses most commonly discussed by pundits as the contenders for the greatest ever. However, I also included the '73 Rams and '91 Eagles because they were the teams that were mentioned throughout the course of the 2008 season as the Steelers continued to hold opposing offenses under 300 yards of total offense for the first 14 contests of the regular season. The '73 Rams were the only team to hold every last opponent under 300 yards each week (14 games), while the '91 Eagles were the last to hold 15 of 16 opponents below 300 yards total offense prior to Dick LeBeau's defense doing so in 2008.

I also included the '77 Falcons because they only gave up 129 points that season. I had never heard of this season until the NFL Network had a show that included the '77 Falcons "Grits Blitz" defense as one of the top defenses in NFL history. But, I believe they had the fewest total points allowed in a 14 game season, which obviously merits their inclusion in this analysis.

To begin, it makes the most sense to look at the raw numbers of each of these defenses. The following chart is not an exhaustive list of statistics, but rather, it includes what I thought were the most pertinent statistics. Sacks are not included because the league did not officially track them for all of these years, and more importantly, they were not included in the data that I got from pro-football-reference.com.

 

RAW DATA OF BEST SINGLE SEASON DEFENSES
YDS PTS TOTAL TOTAL PASS PASS PASS RUSH RUSH TOTAL
TEAM Rank Rank G Points Yards Yds TD Int Yds TD FR
1973 Los Angeles Rams 1 4 14 178 2951 1681 10 20 1270 5 18
1976 Pittsburgh Steelers 1 1 14 138 3323 1866 9 22 1457 5 24
1977 Atlanta Falcons 2 1 14 129 3242 1384 9 26 1858 5 22
1985 Chicago Bears 1 1 16 198 4135 2816 16 34 1319 6 20
1991 Philadelphia Eagles 1 5 16 244 3549 2413 16 26 1136 4 22
2000 Baltimore Ravens 2 1 16 165 3967 2997 11 23 970 5 26
2008 Pittsburgh Steelers 1 1 16 223 3795 2511 12 20 1284 7 9

1064_tham_1__medium
It's nice to have all this data in one place, but it's far too early to make any sort of conclusions based on it. Basically all this tells us is that the defenses we're looking at are good. Very good. Those pass and rush TD numbers are ridiculous in most instances. Still, beyond the simple truism that these Ds were stingy, it's hard to make any sort of insightful and convincing comparisons, primarily because three of the teams played 14 game schedules, while the other four played 16 game schedules.

And that's before mentioning changes in the way the game has been played on the offensive side of the ball, and the rule changes facilitating a trajectory towards more entertaining, offensive-oriented contests. For that reason, I wanted to look at the data on a per game and per play basis. You can see that data below, as well as the Offensive Ranks for each of these teams. I included the Offensive Ranks because the efficiency of a team's offense (particularly rush offense) is widely believed to impact the defense. A good offense keeps the defense off the field more, which keeps the defense fresher and limits the opposing offenses' opportunities with the ball.

 

PER GAME AND PER PLAY DATA 

WITH TEAMS' OFFENSIVE RANKS ADDED

TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL PASS PASS RUSH RUSH O_Rank O_Rank O_Rank O_Rank
TEAM Pts/G Yds/G Yds/Play INT/G TD/G Yds/Rush TD/G Points Total Pass Rush
1973 Los Angeles Rams 12.7 211 4 1.43 0.71 3.5 0.36 1 1 13 2
1976 Pittsburgh Steelers 9.8 237.4 3.8 1.57 0.64 3.2 0.36 5 9 22 1
1977 Atlanta Falcons 9.2 231.5 3.7 1.86 0.64 3.7 0.36 25 25 27 17
1985 Chicago Bears 12.4 258 4.4 2.13 1 3.7 0.38 2 7 20 1
1991 Philadelphia Eagles 15.25 222 3.9 1.63 1 3.0 0.25 18 26 22 21
2000 Baltimore Ravens 10.3 248 4.3 1.44 0.69 2.7 0.31 14 16 22 5
2008 Pittsburgh Steelers 13.9 237 3.9 1.25 0.75 3.3 0.44 20 22 17 23


As in my previous statistical comparisons, I have sorted the teams according to each of the per game and per play statistics as well as for their team's offensive rank. For interceptions and fumble recoveries per game, I sorted so that defenses with higher numbers would rank higher. For Pts/G, Yds/G, Yds/P, TD/G, and Y/A, I sorted so that those defenses with higher numbers would rank lower. The idea being that defenses that give up more yards are worse, but those with more fumble recoveries and interceptions are better. I also sorted the offensive rankings for each team so that a defense with a higher offensive ranking would be given a lower ranking in this table. Again, the idea here is that a defense with a better offense does not have as hard of a job, but a defense with a worse offense would have a harder job. (Please Note: This table is not saying that the 2008 Steelers had to top rated rush offense. It is saying that the defense is ranked 1st in terms of having the worst ranked rush offense of any of the defenses in this analysis) Again, as in my other posts, I took an average of the teams' rankings to see each defense's average ranking. The table is shown below.

DEFENSES' RANKINGS: PER GAME, PER PLAY AND OFFENSIVE RANKINGS

TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL PASS PASS RUSH RUSH Pass+Rush Offense Offense Offense Offense
Team Pts/G Yds/G Y/P TD/G INT/G TD/G Y/A FR/G Pts Total Pass Rush Average Ranks
'73 Rams 5th 1st 5th 4th 6th 5th 5th 5th 7th 7th 7th 5th 5.17
'76 Steelers 2nd 5th 2nd 1st 4th 4th 3rd 1st 5th 5th 3rd 6th 3.42
'77 Falcons 1st 3rd 1st 1st 2nd 3rd 6th 3rd 1st 2nd 1st 3rd 2.25
'85 Bears 4th 7th 7th 7th 1st 6th 2nd 6th 6th 6th 5th 6th 5.25
'91 Eagles 7th 2nd 3rd 6th 3rd 1st 7th 4th 3rd 1st 4th 2nd 3.58
'00 Ravens 3rd 6th 6th 3rd 5th 2nd 1st 2nd 4th 4th 2nd 4th 3.50
'08 Steelers 6th 4th 4th 5th 7th 7th 4th 7th 2nd 3rd 6th 1st 4.67

Based on just this data, we would conclude that the rankings of these defenses should be as follows:

  1. 1977 Falcons
  2. 1976 Steelers
  3. 2000 Ravens
  4. 1991 Eagles
  5. 2008 Steelers
  6. 1973 Rams
  7. 1985 Bears

Nobis_falconshistory_1__medium However, now we're getting into what I think is the most important data in this analysis. I have compiled the offensive rankings of each of these teams' opponents, and then I created a table showing a distribution of the strength of offenses that each of these teams have faced. As shown below, the table gives a count of the number of top 3, top 5, top 10, top half, bottom half, bottom 10, bottom 5 and bottom 3 offenses that each defense faced in its season. I decided to break it down by top half and bottom half (as opposed to, say, top and bottom 15) because the number of teams in the league has increased at various times. The 2000 Ravens were the only team that had an odd number, so I gave them the benefit of having anything in the top 16 out of 31 being a top half offense.

 

 

DISTRIBUTION OF OPPONENTS' OFFENSIVE RANKINGS
1973 Rams 1976 Steelers 1977 Falcons 1985 Bears 1991 Eagles 2000 Ravens 2008 Steelers
Pts Yards Pts Yards Pts Yards Pts Yards Pts Yards Pts Yards Pts Yards
Top 3 Offenses 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 3 2 0 0 1 1
Top 5 Offenses 1 1 2 1 2 3 2 2 4 4 0 0 2 2
Top 10 Offenses 4 4 5 6 3 4 4 5 7 6 2 2 4 4
Top Half Offenses 4 4 8 8 4 6 7 8 7 7 5 6 8 7
Bottom Half Offenses 10 10 6 6 10 8 9 8 9 9 11 10 8 9
Bottom 10 Offenses 8 7 5 4 7 8 6 6 7 6 8 8 6 4
Bottom 5 Offenses 5 6 2 3 3 3 1 2 3 4 5 5 5 4
Bottom 3 Offenses 3 3 1 1 2 2 1 2 3 3 5 4 4 4

Just a cursory review of this data seems to favor the '76 Steelers, '85 Bears, '91 Eagles, and '08 Steelers because the other three teams faced 10 or more opponents in the bottom half in either points or yards, or both. But, it's still hard to draw really solid conclusions from the data. So, I decided to borrow an idea (or at least something similar to it) that I've seen at pro-football-reference.com's blog. I decided to develop what I'm calling the Opponent Offensive Factor. It is nothing more than the equation shown below.

T3*10 + T5*5 + T10*2 + TH - BH - B10*2 - B5*5 - B3*10

where

  • T3 = Number of Top 3 Offenses Faced
  • T5 = Number of Top 5 Offenses Faced
  • T10 = Number of Top 10 Offenses Faced
  • TH = Number of Top Half Offenses Faced
  • BH = Number of Bottom Half Offenses Faced
  • B10 = Number of Bottom 10 Offenses Faced
  • B5 = Number of Bottom 5 Offenses Faced
  • B3 = Number of Bottom 3 Offenses

Scan0011_1__medium
The resulting numbers don't really have a quantifiable defined meaning, but what they do give us is an idea of how tough each defense's overall offensive schedule was relative to the other defenses. Because of the multipliers, the number of top 3 offenses has a weight of ten times that as the number of top half offenses. This means that top 3, 5 and 10 offenses are counted more than once, but that's fine, because it is the same for every defense that is being analyzed here.

So, using this simple equation, I came up with the following Opponent Offensive Factors for each of these defenses (both for offensive points rankings and offensive yards rankings).

 


OFFENSIVE OPPONENT FACTOR
Points Yards Points Yards Points Yards Points Yards Points Yards Points Yards
Points Yards
'73 Rams '76 PIT '77 ATL '85 CHI '91 PHI '00 BAL '08 PIT
Opp Offensive Factor -54 -67 2 -4 -39 -20 -11 -12 3 -12 -93 -81 -49 -42

Based on these numbers, we can rank the teams in terms of which had the toughest offensive schedules, as determined by the final offensive ranks that each team played. The rankings are:

  1. 1976 Steelers
  2. 1991 Eagles
  3. 1985 Bears
  4. 1977 Falcons
  5. 2008 Steelers
  6. 1973 Rams
  7. 2000 Ravens

Forourjennings_1__medium  

Also, if we were to group those defenses who played similar levels of offensive schedules, it would make sense to me to break them up into 4 different groups:

  1. '76 Steelers and '91 Eagles - These are the only two defenses with a positive Offensive Opponent Factor, indicating that they are the only teams with at least as many good to really good offenses on their schedule as bad to really bad offenses.
  2. '85 Bears - I almost included them in the first group, but they didn't have a positive Points Offensive Opponent Factor in either yards or points, unlike those in group 1.
  3. '77 Falcons, '08 Steelers, and '73 Rams - Each of these teams had Offensive Opponent Factors significantly below zero, which indicates that either most of their opponents were in the bottom half offensively (Rams) or they had more teams in the bottom 3 and bottom 5 than the in the top 3 or top 5 (Falcons and Steelers)
  4. '00 Ravens - This indicates that for the Ravens, most of their opponents in the bottom half and they had more teams in the bottom 3, bottom 5, and bottom 10 than in the top 3, top 5 or top 10.

 
At this point, looking at the ranking lists that we have so far, the front runner for greatest defense of all time appears to be the 1976 Steelers. Their composite ranking in per game, per touch, and offensive statistics is second to the 1977 Falcons, but they also had more games against better offenses than the Falcons. Also, as we're getting ready to see, they played in a tougher average offensive season than the Falcons.

Before I end the analysis, I also wanted to look at one more thing: the average offensive stats for each of the years that we are looking at. The table with those statistics is shown below.

 

 

AVG OFFENSIVE STATS FOR RELEVANT YEARS
Year Games Points Pts/Game Yards Yds/Game Plays/Game Yds/Play 1stDown/G
1973 14 272.3 19.45 3994.3 285.31 62.2 4.6 16.57
1976 14 268.1 19.15 4237.9 302.71 65.67 4.6 17.66
1977 14 240.5 17.18 4000.7 285.76 64.77 4.4 16.88
1985 16 344.5 21.53 5271.1 329.44 65.55 5 19.18
1991 16 303.8 18.99 4908.6 306.79 60.76 5 17.75
2000 16 330.8 20.68 5110.8 319.43 62.96 5.1 18.42
2008 16 352.5 22.3 5235.8 327.24 61.87 5.3 18.42

To make it a little easier to analyze, I ranked each of the years in each category. The resulting table is shown below.

 

RANKING OF AVG OFFENSIVE STATS
Team G Pts P/G Yds Y/G Plays Y/P 1stD AVERAGE RANK
1973 Rams 14 5th 4th 7th 7th 7th 6th 7th 6.14
1976 Steelers 14 6th 5th 5th 5th 5th 5th 5th 5.14
1977 Falcons 14 7th 7th 6th 6th 6th 7th 6th 6.43
1985 Bears 16 2nd 2nd 1st 1st 1st 3rd 1st 1.57
1991 Eagles 16 4th 6th 4th 4th 4th 4th 4th 4.29
2000 Ravens 16 3rd 3rd 3rd 3rd 2nd 2nd 3rd 2.71
2008 Steelers 16 1st 1st 2nd 2nd 3rd 1st 2nd 1.71

 
As we would expect there is a trend showing increases in offensive numbers as the years go by. One thing that is especially interesting, though, is that there appeared to be a peak in offensive production in the mid-'80s, as the year 1985 ranks in the top 3 in all offensive categories, with the highest average offensive rank of any of these years. There was a decline in offensive production in the '90s, followed by a resurgence of offense in the '00s.

Glan_medium
At first that surprised me, but then I thought back to the '80s, and I remembered the Bill Walsh offenses, the Dan Marino Dolphins, and the Run and Shoot offenses that the Oilers and Lions used. That would explain the offensive peak in the '80s. The year 1985 was also the one with the most plays, which would also fit in with the style of Marino and the Run and Shoot teams. In addition, the NFL made some rules changes in the '90s to shorten the game, which resulted in fewer plays per game. They also made rules changes to favor offense, and have continued to do so, in the '90s and '00s. The resulting increases in points, yards, yards/play, and first downs after the '90s are to be expected. The resulting decrease in number of plays is also to be expected with the rules changes intended to keep most games under 3 hours.

Now, back to the defensive analysis. Based on these numbers, offensive production clearly increased in the '80s, '90s, and '00s. In particular, the years 1985 and 2008 are very similar in overall offensive production. In the '80s, it was probably more due to innovations brought on by the rules changes of 1978 (the 5 yard contact rule). In the '00s, it was probably more due to the continued rules changes to favor WRs over DBs. Not only has the NFL continued to change rules to favor the offense since 2000, they have also continued to increase the emphasis of calling pass interference to officials with each offseason. Anyway, regardless of the reasons, it's clear that 1985 and 2008 are the two years from our analysis in which offensive productivity were the greatest.

If you made it this far, I'm sure you're wondering what conclusion can we really draw from all of this data? Pure defensive numbers combined with the strength of offensive opponents gives the edge to the 1976 Pittsburgh Steelers. But, when looking at the average offensive statistics from each year, it's clear that offensive production as a whole has been higher since the '80s. Of the '70s, 1976 was the highest in terms of average offensive output, which means we can safely conclude that the 1976 Steelers were the best defense of the '70s. But were they the best of all time? 

Having eliminated the '73 Rams and '77 Falcons from the discussions, let's see if we can determine which of the post  '70s teams can be eliminated as well. Of the remaining teams, the 2000 Ravens had the best raw numbers. But, IMO, their argument for best defense of all time is severely weakened by the extreme weakness of their offensive opponents. Their one clear argument for best defense is points given up in a season (33 fewer than the next closest 1985 Bears). But, looking at their Opponents Offensive Factor, they played the worst offensive schedule of the 4 remaining teams, by far. So, I would eliminate the 2000 Ravens from consideration.

Next in the raw numbers statistics comes the 1991 Eagles. They have many arguments to support them as the best of the remaining 3 defenses. They were the only defense (post '70s) to have a positive Opponent Offensive Factor. In fact, not only did they play a very balanced schedule in terms of top half and bottom half offenses, but they played 3 games against top 3 scoring offenses and 4 against top 5 offenses (both scoring and yards). Both of these are more than any other defense.

Reggiewhite_1__mediumAdd to this the fact that the 1991 Eagles offense ranked 26th in yards and 21st in rushing yards, and the 1991 Eagles accomplishments become even more impressive. The only possible knock on them in this analysis is that the year 1991 had the 4th overall average offensive statistics.

That brings us to the 1985 Bears and the 2008 Steelers, 7th and 5th place, respectively in terms of raw statistics. But, they also played in the top 2 seasons in terms of average offensive output (1985 1st and 2008 2nd). The Bears had a better Opponent Offensive Factor, which means that they faced a tougher offensive schedule than the Steelers. But, they also had the number 1 ranked rushing offense for their season, while the Steelers rushing offense ranked 23. As discussed earlier, this means that the Steelers offense was less likely to provide the defense with help in terms of limiting the opposing offenses' opportunities. So, it seems that for every reason to argue for one, there is a counter-argument to argue for the other.

Having looked at everything, and kicked it around for a while, I would say that the two greatest defenses of all time are the 1976 Steelers and the 1991 Eagles. Neither team won a championship that year, which of course is going to be a knock on them, but both played considerably tougher offensive schedules than the others, based on the Offensive Opponent Factors. And being that it was the days before the 1993 Collective Bargaining Agreement that brought Free Agency to the game, the Steelers defense did win championships with many of those 1976 defensive players.

Regardless, I would actually give the '91 Eagles the nod, because they had a much less competent offense to complement them, particularly rushing the football, the safest and most tested way to keep your defense fresh, off the field, and limited in their exposure to the extremely capable offenses of professional football. Even though they gave up the most points per game in this analysis, their rush offense was terrible. Given the number of top 5 offenses that they faced, and their lack of a good rushing attack to keep those offenses off the field, the fact that they gave up the most points in this analysis doesn't bother me much.

Jack_lambert_oi17_1__mediumIn fact, after checking, I discovered that their offense had 43 giveaways that season. So, not only did the offense not help in terms of limiting offensive opponents' opportunities, it actually gave the opponent's more offensive opportunities. I was not able to find how many of them lead directly to points, but when you turn the ball over that often, it's amazing that they only allowed 244 points.

After looking at all of this, although I would favor the Eagles in this analysis, there are so many valid arguments for the 1976 and 2008 Steelers, as well as the 1985 Bears, that I would not argue strongly against any of them. I do believe, though, that the data does pretty well rule out the 1973 Rams, 1977 Falcons, and 2000 Ravens. All three played over half their schedules against bottom half offenses. Granted, the Offensive Opponent Factor for the 2008 Steelers was among the bottom three. But, when reviewing the data more closely, there are several points that argue in their favor.

  1. First, they played in one the top two seasons in terms of average offensive performance, second only to 1985. 

  2. Second, while their Opponent Offensive Factor was low because they had an above average number of bottom 5 and bottom 3 offenses, they also had an above average number of top half offenses and average numbers of top 10, 5, and 3 offenses.

  3. Third, like the 1991 Eagles, they had a bottom 3rd rush offense. And, as we Steelers fans were well aware this season, the offense often went through long periods of stagnant production.

  4. Finally, I think we can safely say that 2008 was a season in which officiating and rules favored the offense over defense more than any other year in history. So, the 2008 Steelers defense certainly had several obstacles to overcome.

With all of that said, I'm certainly interested in hearing any feedback you have.

8 recs  |  Comment 152 comments  |  Add comment |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

I am bias

But the memory of that 76 Steeler team is downright legendary. After “finding themselves” early in the season, that defense gave up 28 points in the last nine games, an average of three per game. Those five shutouts were unbelievable. The Ravens and Bears were really good and win the silver and bronze in my book. Great effort here. This is a masters degree of work.

Thoughtful discussion with a sense of history

by maryrose on Mar 10, 2009 9:25 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Great Stuff Wolfpack & Blitz, I think this is the best one of your analysis.

A defense may be great from a stastical standpoint, but I don’t think any defense will ever be truley thought of as great by the masses if they don’t have a Super Bowl Ring.

The 1991 eagles didn’t make the playoffs, and Mike Golic (from mike & mike in the morning) was a member of the 1991 eagles defense. He said that his team cannot truley be considered one of the greatest because they didn’t achieve the ultimate goal of a superbowl. As you stated in your article though the eagles offense was terrible after Randall Cunningham went down due to injury. They had a quarterback by committee that struggled to keep the team in the game.

I'll drink your Milkshake, I'll drink it up!

by drinkyourmilkshake on Mar 10, 2009 9:27 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Regardless of the strength of schedule, that Falcons defense is ridiculous. Fewest yards per play AND points per game with the worst offense of the group. It’s crazy that I’ve never heard them mentioned.

I also didn’t realize that the Ravens had such a ridiculously easy schedule in 2000. Maybe we’ll see something like that with our 2009 schedule.

charity standing orders

by BadMaafala on Mar 10, 2009 9:30 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Actually, our 2008 schedule was relatively easy

with regard to the weak offenses we faced. What made it tough was playing a top 10 defense nearly every week. The 2009 schedule actually includes some good offenses, but the number of tough defenses is much less. I predict that the Steelers offense will look much better next season if only because of the quality of the opposing defenses.

by Steelin on Mar 10, 2009 12:35 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

If our Defense repeats #1 rankings in 2 out of 3 categories this year, it will go down as the best D for the decade. It may not meet statistical standards, but any team that can achieve such a feat two years in a row will own a spot in history.

by Varmint on Mar 10, 2009 12:43 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

'rose, 'shake, and Bad

I agree with the points that each of you made.

As, I looked at all of the numbers, I could see solid arguments for or against each of the defenses that you mentioned. So, it was hard for me to conclude that one is clearly the greatest defense over the others.

I appreciate your comments.

by WolfpackSteelersFan on Mar 10, 2009 10:28 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

I think that is part of the fun of a post like yours...

You did all the research and hard work and we can simply make a few sweeping blanket statments and pretty much tell you why you are wrong or right.

To me football is less of a statistically driven sport than some others, espicially more so than Baseball. Football is the ultimate team sport and all areas of the game are intertwined and related. If your defense is horrible your offense may be forced to score more points (IE: New Orleans Saints this year), but does that mean that your offense is truley that good or are they just always forced to throw the ball and put points on the board.

Was part of the reason our offense in 07’ was much better than our offense in 08’ becuase our defense was so much better in 08 and the offense was asked to score much less?

I'll drink your Milkshake, I'll drink it up!

by drinkyourmilkshake on Mar 10, 2009 10:39 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

I agree

One thing about stats in football is that they ignore game situations and strategies to win the game. For example, if a team has a great defense and the lead in the second half, they are more likely to go conservative and, perhaps, gain fewer yards or score less points than they might. Because the object is to win the game, not gain as many yards as possible or even score as many points as possible. Also, in baseball, a team will try to score as much as possible, because, although unlikely, the opposing team can make up an enormous deficit in just one inning. In football, if you’re up 3 scores with 2 minutes on the clock, it’s over.

by WolfpackSteelersFan on Mar 10, 2009 11:16 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

This is why I come here

Great post.

I’d like to see how all the team’s compare when you take into account the turnovers by their respective offenses, and likewise the points off of those turnovers. I feel the 08 Steelers PPG were greatly inflated by this.

Also, ST stats should also play a significant part in defensive effectiveness. I know the 2000 Ravens had a great ST unit. The 08 Steelers, not so much, though we did get 3 huge PRs from Santonio this year.

by JHolmes on Mar 10, 2009 10:54 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Offensive and STs stats

I agree that those details would be useful. Maybe in a future analysis, I’ll take a look at that info. I think, for now, there was enough data in this post to drive me crazy. :)

by WolfpackSteelersFan on Mar 10, 2009 11:21 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Great Post

All that math makes my head hurt but I really enjoyed the analysis. I agree with some of the previous posters that you can’t mathematically define the best defense ever. There are simply too many variables (rules, schemes, weather, etc…).

If I were to add a category to the analysis, it would be Hall of Famers. Although it doesn’t lend itself to a single season, the number of players from that season who made the Hall of Fame speaks volumes about the caliber of it’s players. And if that’s the case, then the 76 Steelers win easily.

by Steev1705 on Mar 10, 2009 11:00 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

ehhh

Not sure I agree with you on that,

Let’s say Brett Farve is a hall of famer, if you were analyzing the Jets of this season would it be signifigant that Farve played for the team this year?

I'll drink your Milkshake, I'll drink it up!

by drinkyourmilkshake on Mar 10, 2009 11:37 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Okay, I admit

my rationale is flawed. I just knew the Steelers had more HOF’rs and wanted it included!

by Steev1705 on Mar 10, 2009 9:20 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Big difference, though

The major difference is that the 1976 Steelers had several future HOFers in the prime of their careers (or at least in a period where they were still very productive). That’s not really comparable to the Brett Favre on the Jets scenario (in his last year, clearly not the same in the final 3rd of the season).

by WolfpackSteelersFan on Mar 10, 2009 10:05 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

your right...

I was just playing devils advocate in that judging hall of famers’ is an subjective excersice, while all the facts and figueres is objective.

I'll drink your Milkshake, I'll drink it up!

by drinkyourmilkshake on Mar 11, 2009 7:19 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

awesome post

I agree that it’s impossible to reach any conclusion from statistics, but there’s still clearly a lot of value in this analysis. That being said, I’d love to see opponents starting field position factored in. I can recall some awful punting and opponents getting a couple of 3 and out field goals this year.

by HereWeGo on Mar 10, 2009 11:16 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Drives

I agree, it would be interesting to see the info on scoring drives and ST., but this is a great post. Nice job.

by 13thieves on Mar 10, 2009 11:28 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

great defenses

I think 08 was best because the 08 offense was poor and could not run the ball. This defense saved game after game. Many times after 3 and outs by our offense.
Ben getting sacked etc. The 76 team did have Kruzcek at QB for a while. But this team this year was lights out

by royhobbs9 on Mar 10, 2009 11:59 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

I voted 85 Bears

Not just cause I’m a semi-fan. For one I’m somewhat convinced by many of the arguments that the wolfpack described. Second, something you didn’t stress was TO’s by the defense. 54 turnovers by that d! That’s helping your team win just as much keeping points off the board.

And I would agree that winning has to factor in to the greatness equation. It’s awesome to have good stats but if that does not translate into winning then it’s moot in my opinion.

by Chicago Steeler on Mar 10, 2009 12:10 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

TO's

Good point. I didn’t really think about it until you mentioned it. Most of these D’s had over 45 takeaways, though, so they were no slouches when it came to taking the ball away. That would, in fact, be a knock on the 2008 Steelers, who only had 29 takeaways. The 1973 Rams were next lowest with 38. All others had more than 45.

by WolfpackSteelersFan on Mar 10, 2009 12:25 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Of course, to put it in context you’d have to do the average turnovers in those years by the offenses, and potentially rank the teams they played in terms of turnovers.

Don't worry about the haters. Haters only hate.

by steelguy99 on Mar 10, 2009 12:27 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Yeah

There are a lot of other considerations that could be brought into. I think I’d need a database program like the one the guys over at pro-football-reference.com have. I did all of this in Excel

by WolfpackSteelersFan on Mar 10, 2009 12:32 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Can't rank a defense on winning

Winning is a team statistic. A great defense paired with a lame offense may not win as much as a good defense paired with a good offense. Also, late-season injuries can factor in. The 1976 Steelers did not advance to the Super Bowl because of post-season injuries to both Franco Harris and Rocky Bleier, but that does not make the defense any worse.

by Steelin on Mar 10, 2009 12:32 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

I disagree

A great defense should be able to overcome a bad offense. I think there were multiple games this season when the defense ‘won’ the game. Same same for the 2000 Ravens. There were games that D won in spite of the offense.

by Chicago Steeler on Mar 10, 2009 1:41 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

I don't know

The 2008 Steelers would be the only team you can point to that being true. The 2000 Ravens offense was really not as bad as it’s made out to be. They had a 5th ranked rush offense that season. So, I would say their defense was mediocre, not horrible. And, I seem to remember Trent Dilfer having a pretty darn solid SB against a stout Giants D.

by WolfpackSteelersFan on Mar 10, 2009 2:01 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Well

I guess I don’t make a convincing argument! :) Only one other person voted for the Eagles besides me.

by WolfpackSteelersFan on Mar 10, 2009 12:26 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

You make a great argument for the 1976 steelers vs. 1991 eagles, maybe the best factually based argument for them ever. After that the case isn’t strong enough to overcome the homerism that I proudly subscribe to.

If you can factor in turnovers and other important points that might be mentioned by ours and other fans this could be a definitive guide to judging the all-timers. People can complain about your formula which can easily be tweaked to give one team an advantage over another, but whatever, they can make their own.

Don't worry about the haters. Haters only hate.

by steelguy99 on Mar 10, 2009 12:29 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Your argument was convincing

but I voted before I read it.

by JHolmes on Mar 10, 2009 4:18 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Love the math

Here is a way to compensate for both strength of schedule and changes in the game over the years: you can normalize the statistics versus the average team for that year.

For example, the average yards-per-game by the 16 offenses that played against the 2008 Steelers was 317, compared to the league average of 327. If you subtract their games against the Steelers, these offenses averaged 322 ypg. So the 2008 Steelers defense, at 237 ypg, caused their opponents to average 85 ypg (26%) less than their season average.

On the other hand, the 1976 Steelers played a set of tough offenses that averaged 311 ypg in their other games (not against the Steelers), versus a league average of 302 ypg. So even though the league average was much lower that year than in 2008, the gap between the 1976 Steelers opponents and 2008 Steelers opponents was only 11 ypg. Still, that means the 1976 Steelers held their opponents to 74 ypg (24%) less than their season average, slightly worse than the 2008 Steelers.

I’m too lazy to work this out for the other defenses on the list, but maybe Wolf can work on it?

by Steelin on Mar 10, 2009 12:28 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Suggestions

I’ll have to go through the suggestions on here and I may take them and try to do some more analysis. It will be a little while though. This one took more time than I really had, so I’ll have to catch up with my other work.

by WolfpackSteelersFan on Mar 10, 2009 12:36 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Great Googly Moogly

This is amazing work. I agree with some of the critiques regarding special teams and situational play, but not so much that I’m willing to correct it myself. Thank you for putting the time into this.

Rec’d.

by Varmint on Mar 10, 2009 12:38 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Cripes man,

how long did it take you to do all this? This is amazing. Great stuff.

by steelerark on Mar 10, 2009 12:50 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

About a week, or week and a half

It took Blitzburgh all weekend to get the tables set up for me.

Thanks! I’m glad you like it. :)

by WolfpackSteelersFan on Mar 10, 2009 1:22 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Glad to see someone else piling on poor Blitz

Thoughtful discussion with a sense of history

by maryrose on Mar 10, 2009 6:21 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

I bet you used nfl.com didn't you?

They have every stat you would ever want. It still takes a long time going through all of that. I posted a small portion arguing with that Ravens fan on one post and that took a while so I know this took a long time.

"The team that scores the most points wins."
John Madden
(Master of the obvious)

by PixburghArn on Mar 10, 2009 1:10 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

pro-football-reference.com

No, I used pro-football-reference.com. I actually found that site because I wanted to look at all time leaders rankings for players. I was huge fan of Jerry Rice, so I enjoyed checking out how far he was outpacing all WRs before him. :) Maybe odd for a Steelers fan, but to me, he was for WRs what Walter Payton was for RBs: the guy who owned all the records and was a class act as well.

by WolfpackSteelersFan on Mar 10, 2009 1:25 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Oh yeah!!

That’s a good one too. I used that for individual game stats.

"The team that scores the most points wins."
John Madden
(Master of the obvious)

by PixburghArn on Mar 10, 2009 1:39 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

They've expanded too

A month or two ago, I saw that they added Super Bowl stats. I was hoping I could get playoff stats, because I wanted to see where Hines Ward ranks in career playoff numbers.

by WolfpackSteelersFan on Mar 10, 2009 2:03 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

They really stepped it up

That’s a nice sight.

"The team that scores the most points wins."
John Madden
(Master of the obvious)

by PixburghArn on Mar 10, 2009 2:14 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Playoffs matter too

Wow, really great stuff here. I never heard about the Atlanta Falcons of 1977, but they had the best points per game and yards per game total. I think you dismissed them as best defense ever way too easily.

I also think that performance in the postseason matters. IMO, the Steelers defense of 2008 took a hit because they performed worse in the playoffs. Rivers and Warner had more than 300 yard passing games. The defense let up 14 points in the final 10 minutes of the Super Bowl and nearly blew that game. I know that Silverback had one of the best plays ever, but I have a tough time arguing for best defense ever with the 4th quarter SB performance. On the other hand, the Ravens defense of 2000 totally dominated that Super Bowl. I can’t remember what they did in the rest of the playoffs, but they certainly left a lasting impression.

by Steezbro2 on Mar 10, 2009 3:49 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Good points

But, given the 1976 Steelers superiority in both ranking of offensive opponents and average offensive output for the year, can you really argue the ’77 Falcons over the ’76 Steelers? I agree, though, I thought I may have been too quick to dismiss the ’77 Falcons, but based on those two facts alone, I felt that the ’76 Steelers were clearly superior. They faced the overall toughest offensive schedule while the Falcons face 10 bottom half opponents (this in a 14 game season).

As far as the postseason argument between the ‘08 Steelers and ’00 Ravens, for an analysis like this, I would put more emphasis on the regular season numbers, as they give you a larger pool of data. If that Ravens team had won multiple championships, we could start to compare them vs. the Steelers of the 70s, but only 3 playoff games for each team, it’s hard to argue one over the other. The 2000 Ravens defense is argued as one of the greatest of all time based on the fact that they won a SB and they gave up the fewest points in a 16 game season. If they hadn’t set the record for points in a 16 game season, they’d be viewed in the same way as the ’02 Buccaneers defense. Does anyone really consider the ’02 Buccaneers defense one of the greatest of all time? Great, yes. But, not greatest of all time.

by WolfpackSteelersFan on Mar 10, 2009 4:50 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Mike Tomlin might?

I'll drink your Milkshake, I'll drink it up!

by drinkyourmilkshake on Mar 10, 2009 4:52 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

True :)

He might at that.

I suspect he’d give the nod to the 2008 Steelers, though, since he was the HC.

by WolfpackSteelersFan on Mar 10, 2009 5:00 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Good News All -- CB/KR/PR Chris Carr visiting the South Side Tomorrow!

Check it out below:

Titans cornerback to visit Steelers tomorrow
Tuesday, March 10, 2009
By Gerry Dulac, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

Tennessee Titans cornerback Chris Carr, who is one of the top return specialists in the American Football Conference, will visit with the Steelers tomorrow — the second unrestricted free agent to interview on the South Side this week.

Carr was a backup with the Titans last season after spending the previous three seasons with the Oakland Raiders. He finished third in kick returns (28.1-yard avg.) and eighth in punt returns (10.1 avg.) in the AFC last season.

The Steelers are looking for an extra cornerback after losing Bryant McFadden to the Arizona Cardinals in free agency. Carr has also visited with the Cleveland Browns and Detroit Lions and has not ruled out returning to the Titans.

 - Guys, is it just me or do the Steelers need to really get this one done?

Thoughts?

by datruth4life on Mar 10, 2009 5:04 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Carr sounds good to me

I’d like to see them get him signed tomorrow, for sure.

by WolfpackSteelersFan on Mar 10, 2009 5:12 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

I agree

I think Carr would be a great pickup, he has experience and could help us out in tight situations. He’s also much more reliable than any CB we draft IMO, and amazing post Wolfpack, really appreciate the work you and Blitz put into it, thanks.

This is Pittsburgh Steeler Troy Polamalu getting knocked around by the Pacific Ocean in Hawaii yesterday...
Minutes later, Troy caught the ocean going over the middle and smacked it right in the mouth. The ocean fumbled, Troy recovered and ran it into the endzone. The ocean never messed with Troy again.

by paulamalu on Mar 10, 2009 7:20 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

I would like a new Carr

Funny, BMac signs and the Steelers start inviting in FA’s. Makes me think they were serious about trying to resign him, but only at the the right price as always.

by SteelBuckeye on Mar 10, 2009 5:31 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

For ten games.

I think for us older guys, what left the biggest impression in our minds was the spectacular stretch of ten games made by the 76 Steelers defense. Their performance during that stretch of 10 games was amazing, the way they totally dominated the opposition could only be compared to the way the Patriots offense dominated defenses for their first 10 games of 2007.

But when you incorporate the stats of their first 4 games, I agreed you can always have this argument of which was the best historical defense.

But in our minds that stretch of games will always make the 76 Steelers defense the best of al times. And I know this wrong, but I have never seen a defense even get close to that defense.

by mikemex on Mar 10, 2009 5:10 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Yeah

I don’t think any other team has had such a dominating 10-game stretch, that is certainly true.

by WolfpackSteelersFan on Mar 10, 2009 5:12 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Just great stuff Wolf

Thanks for putting in all the work Wolf and Blitz. It is funny to be a Steeler fan on a Steeler site, and what I want to do now is read up on the 77 Falcons. I was never a fan of the idea that you had to win the super bowl to be remembered as great, but I have never heard of that team in any conversation.

I am still going to vote for the 76 Steelers. Numbers wise I am on the fence. Though I feel the greatest defense over a period of time is the Steel Curtain, and if they feel their best defense was in 76, I have to vote that way. :)

I know it is really hard if not impossible to really compare eras, but it makes me wonder how good the Steeler’s 08 team stats would have been with 76 rules.

by SteelBuckeye on Mar 10, 2009 5:23 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Great Post

I voted the 76 Steelers. 5 shutouts in the last 9 games. Unfreakinbelievable. Scary good. That defense won 2 straight titles and were cheated out of a three peat by injury. The front four made the cover of TIME. The LB were the best 3 ever. 2 were HOF! The secondary was led by HOF 47 and had several other HUGE hitters.

Have to admit the 85 Bear defense and the 00 Raven defense were also very scary, impressive and they actually won the big game. That said, the consistency of the 74-76 Steelers defense was amazing and we will NEVER see anything like that again.

When You Run The Ball Good Things Happen

by 5020 on Mar 10, 2009 10:43 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Congrats Wolf

That was a masterpiece of research and analysis. I also really appreciated your inclusion of some little known but great defenses in that group. Along with most others I voted for the ’76 Steelers but as someone who watched that entire era, my evaluation is biased by the overall body of work of the Steel Curtain dynasty. That stretch of games in 1976 was the best defense I have ever seen, but it was just the visible peak of a massive iceberg of dominating defense for 4-5 years.

As for your pick of the Eagles, I think they gave up too many points (significantly more than the other teams on your list) for the strength of schedule and their own team’s poor offense to act as enough mitigation. At some point a truly great defense has to shut the door in key games. That’s why I would consider the 2000 Ravens better than the Eagles and better than all but the ‘76 Steelers and perhaps the 85 Bears on your list. The Ravens’ post-season performance against four good teams (which scored a total of 23 points, not sure if any of those points were on ST or defensive scores) was remarkable, very similar to the 85 Bears’ post-season run (10 total points in three games). Admittedly you didn’t analyse the post-season games so that’s an unfair criticism of the purpose of your study, but a missing piece of the puzzle in my opinion. Another aspect of the Ravens’ 2000 regular season is that they gave up 36 points (nearly a quarter of their season total) in one game early in the season. Opponents scored more than 10 points in only five of their 20 total games that year. Again, those stats are very similar to the 85 Bears. This past year, by comparison, the Steelers gave up more than 10 points 11 times in 19 games including all three post-season games. It’s a toss-up between the 85 Bears and 2000 Ravens for the No. 2 defense but that’s an opinion based on impressions of performance in key games, which is far more subjective than your exhaustive research.

So much of football defies statistical analysis but your work provides a much more accurate perspective of the whole picture than anything else I’ve read in a comparative study of different eras. Fantastic job!!!

by steeler.lifer on Mar 10, 2009 11:29 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Thanks

Thanks for the great complements.

Obviously, I disagree with you re: the Eagles vs. the Ravens. But, that’s fine. I guess the main difference in how we view this is that I give a lot of emphasis to the weakness of the Ravens’ offensive schedule. That one game that they gave up 36 points came against the one top 10 offense that they faced all year. They played the Jags a second time, and held them to 10 points, but had the Bengals and Browns the two weeks prior to holding the Jags to 10 points (basically two bye weeks from that year). Yes, they had a dominating playoff performance, but then, so have other teams in NFL history that no one is calling the greatest of all time. My point is that if the 2000 Ravens had faced an offensive schedule like the 1991 Eagles (4 games against top 5 offenses, 7 against 10 offenses), and their offense had 43 turnovers (17 more than the 2000 Ravens), I would be shocked if they didn’t give up around 250-300 points that year. They benifited from one of the weakest offensive schedules I can remember. They have 5 games against bottom 3 offenses in points/game. And 2 of those games were against a first or second year expansion Browns team. So, yeah, the Ravens got hot in the playoffs and shut down some really good offenses. But, could they have done that if they had played a solid offensive schedule?

by WolfpackSteelersFan on Mar 11, 2009 12:23 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Well its a good debate

A good debate is what these studies should always provoke and defending the Ravens is the last thing I want to do!!!! But I think they deserve it in this case. The Ravens that year did much more than “get hot in the playoffs” … Aside from that one early-season game vs. the Jags they did it all year. If you throw away the first Jags’ game as a performance outlier, and add in the four playoff games to create a wider database (and thus also raise the overall quality of opponent by adding four playoff teams to the equation, including the two highest-scoring AFC teams), the Ravens gave up an average of 8.0 points per game (19 games). In a broader perspective they were No. 2 in yards allowed per game for three consecutive seasons (1999-2001) suggesting that 2000 was not unusual, just a peak performance that to some degree was affected by the quality of opponent. The extra evidence of playoff games would suggest that the quality of opponent offense made very little difference to the Ravens’ performance that season.

Very difficult to compare from era to era. Even in 2000 there was a huge difference to today, in that the AFC Central was a six-team division and by far the most physical and defensive dominant division in the league. Playing 10 games in the AFC Central had a negative impact on every team’s offensive ranking and certainly played a large part in the Browns and Bengals being the league’s two worst offenses.

by steeler.lifer on Mar 11, 2009 3:45 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Ok, removing the AFC North Opponents

The Ravens non-divisional opponents that year had an average offensive ranking (pts) of 23.6 out of 31. That would at least minimize the impact of the AFC North, defensive dominating effect, you mentioned. Broken down those ranks were 16, 24, 23, 26, and 29. In fact, their best offensive opponents’ ranking (pts) came from the AFC North (Jags – 8, Titans – 13).

Again, extrapolating, as you did, on the years from 1999 – 2001, they gave up 277 points in 1999 and 265 in 2001. So, based on those two seasons, facing a more normal slate of offensive opponents, it’s certainly reasonable to believe that the 2000 was the outlier based on an extremely weak regular season offensive schedule.

The playoffs are the only example one can give of them dominating top offenses, and teams have been known to step up their play for the playoffs (e.g. the 1989 49ers, who were overall dominating in the regular season, but seemed to be “in the zone” throughout the playoffs that year).

by WolfpackSteelersFan on Mar 11, 2009 4:09 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

This is a fun discussion :)

You made me want to go back and get the data for the 1999 and 2001 Ravens D’s. The 2000 team’s opponents had an average offensive rank of 20.9 (pts) and 20.25 (yds). The 1999 opponents’ average offensive ranks were 16.69 (pts) and 16.5 (yds), while the 2001 opponents’ averages were 16.31 (pts) and 16.56 (yds).

The 2000 team played 2 games against top 10 offenses in pts and yds, 0 top 5 or top 3. The 1999 team played 6 games against top 10 offenses (pts), 3 against top 10 (yds), and 1 game against top 3 or top 5 ranked offenses in both pts and yds. The 2001 team played 4 games against top 10 offenses (pts), 6 against top 10 (yds), 2 against top 5 (pts), 3 against top 5 and top3 (yds), and 1 against top 3 (pts).

So, that would seem to bear out my expectation that if the 2000 Ravens played a more balanced offensive schedule, they’d have given up more than 250 points in that season. Certainly, no one knows, but, I’m just saying . . . .

by WolfpackSteelersFan on Mar 11, 2009 4:51 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Good conjecture

It’s all good and I’m not saying your conclusions are off-base about what MIGHT have happened in 2000 had the Ravens played a stronger schedule. Undoubtedly a few more non-divisional games against strong offenses would have likely added to the points they surrendered. How much more, that’s the question. To me the most relevant indicator for that speculative conclusion is how they played in the playoffs that year, not how many points they gave up the year before or the year after against a different set of opponents in different circumstances.

Yes this also got me looking more into those decade old seasons too and I was wondering how the hell the Jaguars scored 36 points in that game!! Answer: Jimmy Smith caught 15 passes for almost 300 yards and three TD catches over 40 yards … from Mark Brunell!!! Anyway, again a great breakdown and analysis in trying to identify contributing factors to team performance. The beauty of the game is that no single aspect of team performance exists in isolation, so it is left to inconclusive debate about the impact other areas have on a single set of statistics, with the importance of doing what it takes to win a game as a team having an overriding impact on every single specific measurement of performance.

by steeler.lifer on Mar 11, 2009 5:36 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Jags offense

There for a little while, the Jags had a pretty darn good offense. Brunell was solid and Jimmy Smith and Keenan McCardell were a legitimate number 1 and number 2 WR pair. If they didn’t play in the same division as the Steelers, and if they weren’t always being compared to the Panthers (I was in NC when the Panthers joined the league), I might have enjoyed watching that offense.

Good stuff. Thanks, lifer! :)

by WolfpackSteelersFan on Mar 11, 2009 5:51 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

thanks

this was interesting. I liked that the 77 falcons were a really damn good d, and many never heard of them before. I suppose your strength of opponents’ offense argument didn’t completely win me over, cause i voted for those falcons, amazing numbers…. then again, I totally agree about ravens soft schedule that year… maybe if i could vote again, i’d go iggles or one of the steelers teams.

by tkired on Mar 11, 2009 2:05 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Team with the Greatest NFL Defense

Great discussions! I believe I have found my home. I am living in Dallas, Texas as an avid NFL fan and a diehard Steeler fan. I just can’t find anyone in Dallas who can discuss NFL football as well as I am finding at this site. Please allow my 2 cents on the subject of which team has the Greatest NFL Defense. The data presented by Wolf is excellent data and analysis. I think we all agree that more variables could be added but the ruff cut work is all there and additional variables would not significantly change the outcome of his work. The one variable most everyone is struggling with, including myself, is “TIME”, e.g., Wolf logically chose a single season to measure the team’s defenses. He even went so far as to normalize the seasons that had a different number of games. A defense could be great for the time period of a single play and that would let a whole lot of teams in the door for analysis. As we stretch the time period to measure the Defense to a series of plays, a quarter, a half or an entire game the number of potential Teams with the greatest NFL Defensive starts to drop out of the running. Most of the posts listed look to be measuring the time period as one year although I saw one look at a 10 game series, some included post season games and some looked at multiple seasons. My point is the longer the measurement time period is the more difficult the accomplishment to be the Greatest and the more teams drop out of the running. This type analysis is similar to making the NFL Hall of Fame. A football player (or coach/commissioner) is measured over his entire career for selection into the Hall as one of the best. The same goes for selecting the Team with the greatest NFL Defense, i.e., the Defense must stand the test of time. I contend that one season is not long enough to measure the greatest NFL defense. So, in my humble opinion, if one wants to be the greatest at anything one must stand the test of time. With that said, my vote for the Greatest Defense in NFL history is the Pittsburgh Steelers Defense represented by the 1976 Steelers.

by NTS on Mar 11, 2009 2:33 AM EDT reply actions   1 recs

Welcome!

I'll drink your Milkshake, I'll drink it up!

by drinkyourmilkshake on Mar 11, 2009 7:21 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

yup, good stuff, welcome indeed NTS

I think your point is valid pre Free Agency. Or pre 1993 Collective Bargaining Agreement.

But today, players change teams every year so not sure how to account for that.

One thing I do think I might do or help Wolf with if/when he might want to take this a bit further is to look at special teams and where possible, penalties and starting field position.

by Blitzburgh on Mar 11, 2009 8:11 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Teams with the best defense

I took a little different look at some long term data to see who puts the best defenses out there year in and year out over the last 39 years. Not exactly what we are discussing but, I was pretty sure of the outcome and wanted to see if my guess was correct. Using the yards/game metric (all the stated drawbacks of a single metric apply) since the 1970 merger and ranking the defenses with fisrt place getting 1 point and second place getting two points and so on…and then averaging the teams points for the number of years the team existed since the 1970 merger, you get the following ranking:

Team/ Avg Defense Rank over Team’s Life/ # SB’s Won
Pittsburgh /8.21 /6
Baltimore Ravens /9.85 /1
Dallas /9.87 / 5
Tampa Bay /12.67 / 1
San Francisco / 12.95 / 5
NY Giants /13.08 / 3
Denver /13.18 /2
Chicago /13.23 / 1
Philadelphia /13.33
Green Bay /13.41 / 3
Miami /13.54 / 2
Washington /13.69 / 3
Jacksonville /13.71
Oakland/LA /13.87 / 3
Minnesota /14.41
Buffalo /14.51
Houston Oilers / 15.15
New England / 15.36/ 3
Carolina /15.71
New Orleans / 15.90
Tennessee /16.08
Cleveland #1 / 16.46
Detroit /16.69
Kansas City / 16.72 / 1
San Diego /16.87
NY Jets /17.82/ 1
Cincinnati /17.85
Baltimore Colts / 17.86/ 1
LA Rams /18.13 /1
Indianapolis / 18.20/ 1
Arizona /18.79
Atlanta /19.49
Seattle /20.33
St. Louis /20.42
Cleveland #2 / 22.90
Houston Texans / 25.38


So the way to read this data is “The Pittsburgh Steelers average defensive rank over the last 39 years is 8.21 with 6 super bowl wins” based on average yards given up per game.

Agian, this is just data but…

by NTS on Mar 12, 2009 12:13 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

A potential issue with this is that a team like the ravens has only been fielding quality defenses for 10 years. I’d like to see what happens over the next 10 years. On the flip side, they have had a defense over some of the largest yardage years since the merger.

Don't worry about the haters. Haters only hate.

by steelguy99 on Mar 12, 2009 9:52 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

True enough

Let me add my welcome as well. Thanks for the good comment.

I agree with Blitz in reference Free Agency, though. I think it’s certainly safe to say that no team will ever have the sustained defensive excellence of the Steel Curtain of the ’70s.

by WolfpackSteelersFan on Mar 11, 2009 12:29 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Agreed! And if Time is considered an important factor

It is Yet To Be Determined how great this 2008-2009 version of the Steelers Defense will prove to be. With much of the defense still intact next year (& hopefully for many more years to come), perhaps this version of the Steelers D may hope to rival that amazing late-70’s Steel Curtain and go down in infamy just as well! We shall see…!!

by TheHumbleOne on Mar 11, 2009 3:36 AM EDT reply actions   1 recs

yup

2009 we could be even better. Need to catch a break or two injury wise, just like every year though. We could still see the best! Definitely think Woodleys going to improve, same with Timmons. No reason to think Harrisons going to slow down any. We know what Ike is. Same with Clark. Need he and Polamalu to stay healthy though. Welcome as well HumbleOne.

by Blitzburgh on Mar 11, 2009 8:12 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

agreed

Anyone else already ready to watch this defense and enjoy the man, the myth, the legend that is Dick LeBeau coach it up during his 51st year in the league? Ha, that man’s been in the NFL twice as long as I’ve been alive. lol. Incredible.

by Blitzburgh on Mar 11, 2009 8:22 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

your comments

on the bear defense are way off. No coverage lb? Wilbur Marshall was a fantastic cover lb and actually was stuck covering wr on many occaisions in different packages. Singeltary was a very good coverage mlb and Wilson was an outstanding pass rush and run support lb. One of the top ten all time voted ny NFL network. No team dominated the playoffs as the 85 Bears. Dominated the Giants who won the superbowl the next year, shut down the rams completely, and at that point had the largest margin of victory in a superbowl ever. If you add regular season and playoffs no one touches the Bear Defense. All this in one of the greatest offensive years in NFL history. Would have been interesting to see the 76 steelers in that offensive era and at what level they would have performed.

by tfrabotta on Mar 11, 2009 11:14 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Yeah but

The 76 Steelers gave up a total of 28 points the last 9 weeks (22 in the last 8) of the season including 5 shutouts. That’s about 3 points a game. In that periosd they gave up single digit 1st downs 4 times and no 300 yard games.

Who did the Bears lose between 85 and 86. Curious.

"The team that scores the most points wins."
John Madden
(Master of the obvious)

by PixburghArn on Mar 11, 2009 11:34 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

He means players. I’m his mind-reader.

Don't worry about the haters. Haters only hate.

by steelguy99 on Mar 11, 2009 12:24 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Thank you sir

and get out of my head.

"The team that scores the most points wins."
John Madden
(Master of the obvious)

by PixburghArn on Mar 11, 2009 12:30 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Because they lost no players right?

"The team that scores the most points wins."
John Madden
(Master of the obvious)

by PixburghArn on Mar 11, 2009 12:39 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Don't remember

They may have lost a player or two, but this was before unrestricted free agency, so they wouldn’t have lost too many players. In fact, I believe they had two guys holding out all of the 1985 season. But, they lost Buddy Ryan to the Eagles, and the team was great for several years, but never could quite get over the hump again.

by WolfpackSteelersFan on Mar 11, 2009 12:42 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

1985

Bears were without their starting strong safety(Bell) and their defensive end (Harris) who held out. The first big name the defense lost was Wilbur Marshall I think a year later who signed at the time a huge contract with the Redkins. It was shame as he could have been one of the greats if he stayed in the bears scheme but got lost in the shuffle in the redskins D. The 1986 team (14-2) got derailed in the playoffs because they went through 4 qb’s due to injury and so on. The defense at the time set the 16 game record for fewest points allowed in a season until the Ravens beat that mark in 2000.

by tfrabotta on Mar 11, 2009 2:01 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Marshall

Yeah, he was good. I don’t that he got lost in the shuffle, though. He did win a SB with the Redskins in ‘87. Maybe he just didn’t live up to expectations, though.

by WolfpackSteelersFan on Mar 11, 2009 3:18 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

He was a stud

The bears should have never let him go. He could do it all great tackler, great blitzer, could cover all positions in coverage he was that fast. That was the start of the downslide of that Defense. He was just dominating in that scheme.

by tfrabotta on Mar 11, 2009 3:45 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

They lost the Super Bowl Shuffle. They should have made an album every year from the moment that gem was created. There was magic in that song.

by Chicago Steeler on Mar 11, 2009 2:01 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

LOL

whatever works…

by tfrabotta on Mar 11, 2009 2:25 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

right

replaced with Vince Tobin.

by tfrabotta on Mar 11, 2009 2:01 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Great comments

The only point that I would make, which relates to what Blitz said, is that overage, players are much bigger, faster and stronger today than they were in the ‘70s. The ’70s Steelers players were bigger, faster and stronger than most of the league (at least guys like Greene and Blount), while these days, they’d be average sized.

by WolfpackSteelersFan on Mar 11, 2009 12:50 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

certainly a great first comment on the site. ill rec that

Convincing argument. I know some of the long timers here that were around then to witness the games analytically would agree.

The only thing that really gives me pause and makes me skeptical is just how mediocre and unimaginative NFL offenses were. This was pre-film session marathons week in and week out, no? And you don’t have to look much past the passing statistics to see that big statistical seasons were what are considered average ones today. There’s just so much more sophistication and precision and variability with well executed NFL offenses these days.

And, most importantly perhaps to me, is perfect offense beats perfect defense 100% of the time, and the offenses to me seemed pretty darn mediocre and unimpressive compared to what we see from the top 5-10 offenses in the league today. I dunno, maybe not entirely. There were some pretty amazing RBs back then too.

by Blitzburgh on Mar 11, 2009 8:20 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Don't ever put crap like this up ever again

the 76 steelers were a bunch of juiced up freaks. the 2008 steelers played in a weak division. this is nothing but biased propaganda.

OH! STEWIE!! GET OUT THE WAY BOY! GET OUT THE WAY!
-Stacey King

by ifuwannacrownem on Mar 11, 2009 9:00 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Dennis Rodman is that you?

"The team that scores the most points wins."
John Madden
(Master of the obvious)

by PixburghArn on Mar 11, 2009 9:04 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

True, very very biased, which is why the author decided the 1991 eagles were the best defense ever you idiot.

Don't worry about the haters. Haters only hate.

by steelguy99 on Mar 11, 2009 9:44 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

he got it from the bears blogger

who didnt even bother to read the post, just said, ‘what do you know, a vote for the best defense on a steelers site is being won by the 76 steelers.’

thats why i took the poll down. for those with the attention spans of lamp posts.

by Blitzburgh on Mar 11, 2009 10:03 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

I checked the users history. “First posts” like this drive me insane.

Don't worry about the haters. Haters only hate.

by steelguy99 on Mar 11, 2009 10:42 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

haha, ya right...

you feed off those posts like a rat on cheese

I'll drink your Milkshake, I'll drink it up!

by drinkyourmilkshake on Mar 11, 2009 12:05 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Cheese with insane sauce.

Don't worry about the haters. Haters only hate.

by steelguy99 on Mar 11, 2009 12:24 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

OH! OK! another pennsylvania team

makes much more sense now.

OH! STEWIE!! GET OUT THE WAY BOY! GET OUT THE WAY!
-Stacey King

by ifuwannacrownem on Mar 11, 2009 12:49 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Dude, lighten up

I actually said that the Bears are clearly in the argument for many reasons. I expected this kind of response from Ravens fans. ;)

by WolfpackSteelersFan on Mar 11, 2009 12:53 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Bears fans are a little on edge

They were the first to let a Manning win a Super Bowl and they haven’t done anything worth defending since 85.

"The team that scores the most points wins."
John Madden
(Master of the obvious)

by PixburghArn on Mar 11, 2009 1:05 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

LOL

Good point.

For a while, early in Cowher and Wannstadt’s tenures, it looked like both had made good choices of HC’s (and they even looked similar). It wasn’t too long before their careers diverged.

I just remember talking with a college friend about that who was a Bears fan.

by WolfpackSteelersFan on Mar 11, 2009 1:28 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Interesting

Later both were coaching in Pittsburgh at the same time on the same field

"The team that scores the most points wins."
John Madden
(Master of the obvious)

by PixburghArn on Mar 11, 2009 1:37 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

You make a good point – Pittsburgh fans and Philly fans are like family.

Or alternately, we can exist in a dimension close to reality.

Don't worry about the haters. Haters only hate.

by steelguy99 on Mar 11, 2009 1:15 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Thanks, but...

Blitz, thanks for the kind words.

To younger Stillers fans who agrue current day Stillers teams or players over 70s teams and players, or your particular argument regarding current day offenses over heyday defenses, I usually simply point to their rearing as the problem. That is, I blame their parents for not having properly versed them in the history of the game.

PLEASE don’t take offense to that comment. It’s a little bit tounge-in-cheek and meant to be funny.

It’s also meant to make a point.

The game changed in the 70s. 70s and beyond teams could actually play with current day teams. 60s and prior teams could not.

Why? Speed and size.

The best teams of the 70s – though undersized by today’s standards – could actually play with AND beat current day teams. Put them in current day sizes, along with their skills and wills, and it really wouldn’t be much of a game.

Don’t believe me?

Pop in the DVDs of the original broadcast of SB IX or X – I trust that you own them. Note the speed of the game. Note the incredible speed and power of the Stillers “Half a Ton of Trouble.”

SB IX is the most revealing. That was a very worthy Vikings OL that was simply swallowed up by the Curtain.

Or more specifically to address your argument – on three of the biggest stages in the 70s, SB X, SB XIII and SB XIII1/2 (as SI dubbed it), the Stillers three times beat the Cryboys, the most prolific, inventive and ground-breaking offense of its day.

Would love to add more but gotta get to my day job and you need to watch some film.

by Fats Holmes on Mar 11, 2009 10:04 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

i admit im no historian of the game

Dad played college hoops. Raised me on that game.

I veered to football but admittedly don’t know the history of the game that well. It’s why I don’t write about it much and instead stick to what I see and can comment on intelligently.

So, no, I don’t own those DVDs. Unfortunately, one of the downsides of doing this website is I don’t get to enjoy lots of the things I otherwise might like to do with some of my spare time amidst work and school. Read other sites, watch DVDs, scour the ‘net for music, keep up with crap I’m interested in the world of technology, etc.

That’s the honest answer. But again, and I’m not ashamed of it, more proud, or rather, happy to admit, that I don’t try to speak authoritatively on things I know I’m not well versed in.

by Blitzburgh on Mar 11, 2009 10:09 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

that said

I have seen those SBs :)

Just don’t own them. And beyond seeing lots of those 70s Steelers teams, I haven’t seen tons else.

by Blitzburgh on Mar 11, 2009 10:11 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

I'll have to agree

In my opinion Jim Brown wouldn’t have done what he did in the 60’s against the 70’s Steelers.

"The team that scores the most points wins."
John Madden
(Master of the obvious)

by PixburghArn on Mar 11, 2009 10:18 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Backatchyinz

Blitz: When I have time later today, I’ll get back to you on a few comments/questions/corrections(?) to your 2009 CAP numbers.

Your work on the Stillers CAP is GREAt and I REALLY appreciate it.

Also BTW, GREAT Web site!

And again, please don’t take the rearing quip the wrong way- it’s one of my standing jokes that I routinely level on young Stillers diehards. You are clearly one of the best I’ve come across recently.

PixArn: Not sure about Jim Brown, the guy I regard as one of the top five players of all time and perhaps the best. He was a unique beast of a player that I wouldn’t deny anything to. If I would deny him anything though, it would be the ability to crease the Curtain.

by Fats Holmes on Mar 11, 2009 10:26 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Yep That's what I'm saying

Not taking anything from him, but Jim Brown (IMHO) would not do against the 70’s Steelers, what he did against those undersized and (seemingly) awkward defenders.

"The team that scores the most points wins."
John Madden
(Master of the obvious)

by PixburghArn on Mar 11, 2009 11:01 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

No RB would have torn up the Curtain defense

A little unfair to single out Brown, because no RB had much success against the Steel Curtain in its prime, and none since then would have either. The game has evolved but Jim Brown, at his size and speed, would have been a dominant RB in any era. Great players are great players. Brown is a rare one whose physical attributes from half a century ago still compare favorably to today’s best power-speed backs. Adrian Peterson is 6-1 220, Jim Brown was 6-2 230 and could outrun 90 per cent of the league’s defensive backs.

by steeler.lifer on Mar 11, 2009 2:14 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Just don't mention OJ

Oops sorry I did.

"The team that scores the most points wins."
John Madden
(Master of the obvious)

by PixburghArn on Mar 11, 2009 2:33 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

PixburnArn takes off the (black) gloves.

Don't worry about the haters. Haters only hate.

by steelguy99 on Mar 11, 2009 3:29 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

They don't fit

"The team that scores the most points wins."
John Madden
(Master of the obvious)

by PixburghArn on Mar 11, 2009 4:27 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Lol, the example does fit !!!

Yep O.J. had some great moments, acknowledged. Leaving aside all the other stuff, the O.J., Barry Sanders, Jim Brown debate can be saved for another day.

by steeler.lifer on Mar 11, 2009 4:53 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

No mention of willie parker?

That’s the pot being stirred.

Don't worry about the haters. Haters only hate.

by steelguy99 on Mar 11, 2009 5:23 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

LOL

Give him about 5 more years of producing like he was in 2007, then maybe he could enter that conversation. :)

by WolfpackSteelersFan on Mar 11, 2009 5:29 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

The FWP debate brings up an issue regarding RBs though that we discuss frequently here as of late due to our line.

The line debate really should enter into the equation for the analytical study of the RBs. Unfortunately it’s impossible to have a good statistical data-point for “push” from the line, especially looking historically. You can’t really take the line and compare them with how they blocked for another RB.

I’d say that the O-line blocking is probably more statistically important to RBs than the opponents offensive record is important to the defensive debate. Just too hard to measure, but I think that if the O-line IS a large data-point but cannot be quantified than the whole RB debate becomes even cloudier than it normally is.

The other minor data point that is time-consuming to collect would be the defensive ability against the run that opponents exhibited. A current contention regarding FWP and this line is that they spent a lot of time competing against very good defenses. If historically a RB was placed in a division with a penchant for stopping the run (like the poor browns/cincy RBs are) their performance over the course of the career should be worse than a similar performance from a RB in a cruise-division.

Ah, the data…

Don't worry about the haters. Haters only hate.

by steelguy99 on Mar 11, 2009 5:38 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Oh, yeah, absolutely

That was certainly a tough debate, to really say one was better than another. And, as you say, how would one analyze the quality of every great RB’s OL?

We discussed trying to go back and look at the quality of the different OLs, but never really got to it. I don’t think there is really a way to do that. The best you could do is find out how many HOFers each RB ran behind.

by WolfpackSteelersFan on Mar 11, 2009 5:57 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

And then you run into the HOF debate.

And then Bears fans hop on and job you.

Don't worry about the haters. Haters only hate.

by steelguy99 on Mar 11, 2009 6:02 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Haha

which is funny because I loved the ’85 Bears. I loved Payton, the Fridge, McMahon. That was a great, fun team to follow, especially for a 12 year old boy.

by WolfpackSteelersFan on Mar 11, 2009 6:47 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

He put 200+ up on the Steelers

in one game. That’s something

"The team that scores the most points wins."
John Madden
(Master of the obvious)

by PixburghArn on Mar 12, 2009 6:46 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

OJ did

"The team that scores the most points wins."
John Madden
(Master of the obvious)

by PixburghArn on Mar 12, 2009 6:47 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

da Bears

One of my best buddies is (much to my dismay) a Bears and Cubs diehard. Even he admits the Bears LBs were sub-par in coverage. Knowing him as I do, that comment translates to me to mean they were not very good at all. Besides him though, this is commonly noted by many talking heads when they discuss any weaknesses in the 85 Bears D. It’s the given. Shame on you for arguing otherwise. (BTW, NFLN is this week running a Bears-Packers game from mid-1985. Those LBs don’t look so good in coverage to me in that game.)

Again, if you saw the MNF classic against MIA, you saw those LBs badly exposed by a constant barrage of underneath crossing routes. It looked as if there were 8 MIA WRs on every play and Marino had to pick and chose which totally open guy to hit.

Regarding the 85 Bears post-season, you missed my point entirely. Let me try again.

The truly great ones (teams, players, organizations) are measured against other truly great ones. The old, “Ali had Frazier and Frazier had Ali.”

The 70s Stillers were blessed to have several great oppponents like the 70s Raiders, 70s Cryboys and the 78 and 79 Oilers. Yes, the Oilers probably win two SBs XII and XIV if not for the Stillers.

The 85 Bears, much to their misfortune, will never be able to be regarded as truly the Best Defense Ever because they played CRAP teams in the post-season.
  
The Giants did win it all in 86 but they were lucky to even be in the playoffs in 85 at 10-6. Unfortunately they took down the Niners in the WC Game. Simms came into his own in 86, not 85.

Who besides me and a few LA Rams fans even remembers the name Dieter Brock or that he actually QB’d a team in an NFC Title Game?

Who will ever forget the debacle that was the Grogan-Eason-led Patsies? Again, too bad they took down MIA. Super Bowl XX should have simply been forfeited.

Again, had the 85 Bears played SF and/or MIA in the post-season, this debate would not have to haunt Stillers fans for the rest of our lives.

I think the most telling comment about the mid-to-late-80s Bears comes from Singletary himself. While discussing the great teams and what makes them truly great, and how the Bears rank in that discussion,

(paraphrasing) “We f*#d up! We had the chance to win multiple Super Bowls and be considered among the greatest of all time, but we blew it.”

by Fats Holmes on Mar 11, 2009 12:10 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Bears

held the vaunted 49er offense to 10 points, redskins 7, cowboys 0 during the regular season. Based on your argument, the 76 steelers gave up 30 points in a loss at NE?? So in your logic the Patriots were better then them that year? And by the way to share with your Bears friend, the lb’s had 9 interceptions in 85 and 8 in 86..not too shabby.

by tfrabotta on Mar 11, 2009 2:18 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Not sure what I understand

about you’re paraphrasing with the singletary comment. What he meant was they should have won it again in 86 but injuries to the QB position derailed their playoffs. 87 was the strike year..

by tfrabotta on Mar 11, 2009 2:24 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Hard to separate one year from the era

Agree with you Fats about the quality of opponents helping to identify greatness. “Iron sharpens iron,” to quote a SB winning head coach. However, that makes it difficult to separate specific years from the era of domination. We know how well the Steel Curtain played against great opponents over the years and the defensive play in 76 was particularly noteworthy. I have no problem calling the Steel Curtain the greatest defense of all time and I’m sure it’s not even much of a debate among football fans. But the Bears’ performance specifically in 85 was outstanding. At some point in the season they played and beat all the other five NFC playoff teams, by a combined score of 160-20!!!! That’s freaky and yes also a sign the Bears lacked a great opponent, but still you got to give them some props for that. The Bears had already beaten San Francisco once that season in San Francisco by 16 points. The 49ers couldn’t score a TD in New York in the playoffs, so how were they gonna beat the Bears? And Dan Marino beating them in the Super Bowl? Are you kidding? Marino never won the big game and crapped the bed against the Patriots in the AFC championship when his team was good enough to make it. The Bears would have eaten him for lunch given a chance to avenge the regular season game. Bears were good, just not as good as the Curtain in their heyday.

by steeler.lifer on Mar 11, 2009 7:09 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Steelers in the 70's had big-time ballers

Guys, I have been a person who have found tapes and CD’s of the great Steelers games in the playoffs and Super Bowls in the 70’s and one of the things that stand out to me is how athletic, quick and fast those Steelers defensive players were. Lambert and Jack Ham could close on ballcarriers like nobody’s business. They played just as well in pass coverage as they did the run, which is what you don’t see that much of today.

Mel Blount tormented receivers and flung them around like they were rag dolls. All of those guys wouldn’t have a problem playing for this team today. Joe Greene pretty much did whatever he wanted to do. Free Agency has pretty much ruined a repeat of that happening again. Now, you just can’t keep that type of talent together for long.

Thoughts?

by datruth4life on Mar 11, 2009 12:31 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Agreed

There is no way, with today’s FA, that you would have been able to keep Greene, Blount, Franco, Lambert, Ham, Swann, Stallworth, Bradshaw, Webster, etc. all together for a 6 year period, especially considering those that were drafted from ‘69-’73. Just when the team was beginning to gel, you’d have had to pay Greene and Blount, forcing you let someone else go (or multiple OL). Or, White, Holme or Greenwood would be wanting their money and leaving.

by WolfpackSteelersFan on Mar 11, 2009 12:48 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

datruth

dat’s da truth. Would be truly Remarkable if the Steelers can keep the D intact another couple of years.

by TheHumbleOne on Mar 13, 2009 6:31 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Your analysis is great but...

You are being very thorough with yards and points, but you don’t seem to spend much time on turnovers, sacks, and points scored by the defense. Those are big for any defense. To completely evaluate a defense, you need to add in these factors as well. I think playoff performances should be included as well.

by MuleTrain on Mar 11, 2009 12:59 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

He did say the reason he discounted sacks was because their was not way to measure them as they were not an official sack until sometime in the 80’s. They other two are importent but I don’t think they would change the overall assement that much as their has been discussion in the comments about the turnovers.

I'll drink your Milkshake, I'll drink it up!

by drinkyourmilkshake on Mar 11, 2009 1:09 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Well

‘shake already covered the question about sacks. The turnovers were included in the analysis. If you go back and look, you’ll see that interceptions and fumble recoveries were shown in the tables.

I did not account for points that were scored by the opposing defense or STs. I didn’t see any location where that was readily available, and I didn’t feel like going through game by game for each of these teams.

One other thing. I thought about the things that you mentioned, but in the end, I figured that the bottom line was how many points and yards do a team give up and against what level of competition? The sacks are indirectly incorporated into the data, due to lost yardage. I know that’s not as good an answer as we’d like, but I think it’s credible.

by WolfpackSteelersFan on Mar 11, 2009 1:35 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

i got ya back

you don’t have to defend yourself at all, you put a lot of time in this, if they want to add something tell them to go do their own independent study

by tannofsteel84 on Mar 11, 2009 1:36 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Thanks

I thought about saying that, but I also recognize that there are valid points. And, I won’t get defensive with someone who complements the work that I did. :)

Thanks for having my back, though!

by WolfpackSteelersFan on Mar 11, 2009 3:23 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

I'm not criticizing your work at all...

I think it’s a great and credible statistical analysis. My point is that turnovers (it is discussed in the thread) are very significant to preventing the other team from moving the ball and scoring (the defense’s job). Scoring on defense (not ST) also should be considered to get a complete picture; to really determine who’s the best of all time.

Your breakdown clearly indicates and confirms who makes up the top defenses, so hats off to you. But when you make your judgement of who is the best of all time, one of your arguements for Philly ‘91 is because they had to overcome a bad offense (rushing and giveaways). Shouldn’t the arguement be they (or Bears 85or Steelers 76) are better because not only did they statistically give up fewer yards/points, but they took the ball away (Phil91-48x, Bears85-54x , Steel76-46 times) and scored some points of int’s and fumbles (Phil91-4tds ,Bears85-5tds, Steel76-0tds). I think the stronger arguement for who is better is to focus on what the defense did, not what their own offense did or didn’t do.

One other factor that might skew the overall results would be garbage time yards and stats. For instance, take the Steelers 1st game against the Texans (38-17final). The score is 38-10 with 5 minutes to go. The next touchdown and yards given up really don’t reflect at all on the Pitt D. That’s just 1 example. I’m not asking you, nor will I, actually go through each game and take out those yards and points. Just 1 more thing to think about when evaluating the overall effectiveness and greatness of a defense.

by MuleTrain on Mar 11, 2009 4:28 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Good points

Like I said, I wasn’t offended or anything. If this were my job, instead of just a hobby (I’ve only done 4 or 5 the last year), I probably would have taken more time to incorporate those things. I was trying to get it done quickly as well. Of course, if this were my job, I may not have as much time as to work on it as I think, from what Blitzburgh has said. :)

by WolfpackSteelersFan on Mar 11, 2009 4:39 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

It would be an awesome job though wouldn't it?

I appreciate you putting this together. I bet many people will reference it when stating their case for time to come.

"The team that scores the most points wins."
John Madden
(Master of the obvious)

by PixburghArn on Mar 12, 2009 9:06 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

no offense

I was just seeing a bunch of people take jabs, like you should have included this or that, while those things are good, i think people don’t realize how much time it took to do what he did. Saying well you should add this is a slap in the face in my opinion. I understand where you coming from and they are valid points but I just thought there was a better way of saying it than well you should add ….. But I also just wanted to get a chance defend my Wolpack buddy. Gotta beat maryland tonight.

by tannofsteel84 on Mar 12, 2009 8:52 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Eh, we understand how much time it took. I’ve dug through stats, it takes a lot of effort.

Maybe some of us don’t view this as a definitive guide though, but it WOULD be a definitive guide if it had X. If wolfpack has already put in Y hours and adding X only takes Y * 1/10 time, it is something to consider.

You can appreciate the body of work while pointing out small improvements. I sincerely hope Lebeau doesn’t sleep next year because his work is “done”.

Don't worry about the haters. Haters only hate.

by steelguy99 on Mar 12, 2009 9:56 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Lebeau

doesn’t sleep, he’s immortal lol.

by tannofsteel84 on Mar 12, 2009 1:36 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Appreciate it, man!

Yeah, Go State, beat Maryland! :)

by WolfpackSteelersFan on Mar 12, 2009 10:21 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Beating Up da Bears (Again)

steeler.lifer said:

“And Dan Marino beating them in the Super Bowl? Are you kidding? Marino never won the big game and crapped the bed against the Patriots in the AFC championship when his team was good enough to make it. The Bears would have eaten him for lunch given a chance to avenge the regular season game.”

No, I’m not kidding about Marino beating them in the SB. He was in the big dance once (the prior year, 1984) and lost to perhaps the best QB of all time, Montana.

I look at two main factors in the 1985 scenario:

(1) Marino absolutely torched the Bears 38-24 in the MNF classic and that alone would have given him and the Fins a HUGE amount of confidence in the SB. The Bears had absolutely no answer for Marino that night and may have had no answer for him in the SB. The Bears would have been out for revenge but can anybody just simply assume they would have gotten it? I think not.

(2) If you look at the list of 43 starting and losing SB QBs, you will find a definitive trend – the team with the better QB better wins WAY MORE OFTEN than they lose. Between 1966 and 1989, they ALMOST ALWAYS won. I know McMahon had a dream season in 85, but he can’t even be mentioned in the same breath as Marino. The Fins had knocked on the door in 1984 and unfortunately ran into the Niners and Montana. In 1985, McMahon was standing in their way. Yeah, yeah, so was the Bears vaunted D. But if the Fins get up early in that game and Marino is lighting up the board, McMahon had only Willie Gault to bring them back. Ain’t happening.

On your other main point, I know the Bears beat the Niners in the regular season in 85 and ran off a string of HUGE wins over their stiffest foes – I hear that at least once a month from one of my three Bears buddies. I also know that they slithered by the lowly Bucs (2-14), Packers (8-8) and Colts (5-11) that same year.

To assume the Bears would have beaten the Niners in the NFC Title Game is just that, an assumption. The Niners (like the Stillers in the 70s) were capaple of winning the SB EVERY YEAR in the 80s, and did win it in 81, 84, 88 and 89. Had they made it to the NFC Title Game against the Bears in 85, I would have had my money on the defending SB Champs – back to that whole QB thing, I’ll take Montana over McMahon every time in a BIG game.

As footnotes to all of this…

I’ve fought this war of words for 24 years now and I won’t stop fighting it until I die. I owe it the Stillers. I owe it to all of the “historians” who are blinded by one glorious season.

I owe it to all of the obnoxious Bears fans I’ve encountered over the years. Like the guy above who lamely tried to put a diffrerent spin on Singletary’s heart-felt admission of his team “blowing it” post-1985. Singletary meant what he said. The Bears were full of themselves. They thought they were going to prance right into the history books and be remembered as at least multiple SB Champs if not a dynasty. Instead, they won one stinking SB and must take their rightful place in history as a team that should have won several but blew it. Mike knows it and deep down every Bears fan alive knows it. That’s part of why they cling to 85 so profoundly – it’s all they got and it helps ease the pain of letting a dynasty get blown away.

by Fats Holmes on Mar 13, 2009 12:18 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Coming from an Eagles fan: Great write-up.

by Ben16 on Mar 13, 2009 4:04 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Adding 2 cents here

Just finished watching some of the 1978 AFC Championship game Houston Oilers @ Pittsburgh Steelers posted on YouTube, and I gotta say that Defense of the Steelers was awesome! All-Stars at just about every position. Not to take anything away from today’s version 30 years later, but back then they dominated like none other…

by TheHumbleOne on Mar 13, 2009 6:29 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Other teams each of those years shouldn't be ignored

Trying to be honest, but you shouldn’t be so quick to write off the 2000 Ravens Defense simply because they don’t seem up to snuff.

An in depth look at that year has the Ravens and the Titans – Two undeniable top 10 defenses – in the same division that year shutting down 4 other teams twice that season, and sharing 2 more games after that.

Of these 10 Ravens games, you had 2 teams doing above average for their season in yards and 1 in points. And the Titans games? 9 for 10 offensese doing under par for yards and for 10 for points. So obviously it’s not just a case of bad offenses that year.

The 2008 Steelers saw 3 teams twice, and while the same division once again shared the top 2 defenses, this would only have a large impact on 2 teams, as opposed to 4. And the Ravens were no Titans to the Steelers’ Ravens, if you follow. You’ve written that off, and yet, it’d have a huge effect on the Jags and Steelers, who did well in spite of that, would have moved the Bengals out of the basement, and would have put the Browns in a realm of Comparison to our fair Falcons.

Basically, you should try to see how well their defense SHOULD have done before considering how well it did do. Where does each team they played go if they didn’t exit that year? You make next to no effort in determining how good each of the teams they played are, and that’s where the comparison loses a lot of it’s force.

And you should also be using more than 7 teams.

by killerflames43 on Mar 16, 2009 2:04 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Ok, in this one I will say it

Go ahead and do one yourself with all of your suggestions. I’d be interested in reading that. This sucker was a ton of work as it is, so if you can expand upon that, feel free to do so.

I guess I’d be less knee-jerk in my response if your post wasn’t just a list of criticisms.

by WolfpackSteelersFan on Mar 19, 2009 5:23 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Thoughts on another definition of "best defense ever"

I have a relative (sadly a Pats fan) who believes that the true definition of a “Best Defense” should rely solely on points-allowed. I don’t agree for many of the statistical and logical reasons mentioned in your post, but from a 30,000 foot level, the points-against argument has some validity.

Thoughts?

by steelcurtain1 on Mar 16, 2009 5:19 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Sure

People make that argument alot, but generally whenever someone refers to the “top-ranked defense” for a given year, it’s for yards allowed, not points. I’m not totally sure, but I’d say the main reason is that the defense didn’t actually give up points scored by the opposing defense or STs (i.e. KR or PR for TDs), whereas, they clearly gave up all of the yards that opposing offenses scored.

by WolfpackSteelersFan on Mar 19, 2009 5:26 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

The 2008 Steelers saw 3 teams twice, and while the same division once again shared the top 2 defenses, this would only have a large impact on 2 teams, as opposed to 4. And the Ravens were no Titans to the Steelers’ Ravens, if you follow. You’ve written that off, and yet, it’d have a huge effect on the Jags and Steelers, who did well in spite of that, would have moved the Bengals out of the basement, and would have put the Browns in a realm of Comparison to our fair Falcons.I think they are taking viagra or probably zimulti.Hope for the best

by harman on Mar 26, 2009 9:40 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

best defence

what about the 02-03 bucs defense! 10 Passing td’s 8 rushing td’s 4044 total yards allowed and 198 points aloud. that tops some of the ones you listed : )

by d2jspcalves on Jun 8, 2009 4:24 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

wow

Ok, so I am joining in kinda late, but i just discovered this site and the high intellect it purports…so thanks, and hello all.

Let’s add a little-recognized stat that reflects on a defense’s component nature, how many of its individual players attained Hall of Fame status…not a true “team” stat that carries very much weight except for how post-career analysis allows history to also have a clearer input as to how good someone was in comparison to others. Yes, it’s somewhat trivial to cumulatively add HOF members from each defense, but if we’re looking for tie-breakers, maybe this has marginal merit.

1973 Rams – 2 HOF members (Olsen, Yungblood)
1976 Steelers – 4 HOF members (Greene, Hamm, Blount, Lambert)
1977 Falcons – 0 HOF members
1985 Bears – 2 HOF members (Singletary, Hampton)
1991 Eagles – 1 HOF member (White)
2000 Ravens – 1 HOF member (Woodson)
2008 Steelers – 0 HOF members

Obviously, the 2000 Ravens and 2008 Steelers have not reached the point where their defensive players have ended their careers, so inclusion into the HOF precludes both being measured this way. Ray Lewis seems like a lock, and Siragusa a strong maybe, while James Harrison and Troy Polamalu are still defining what could be HOF careers.

As a tie-breaker, this may settle a few things, but it will definitely add fuel to many-a-fire… just more fodder for your heads…

by DaveHersh28 on Jul 30, 2009 11:34 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Some factors that should be looked at

1. How many all time great teamsvdid the defense play? For example the 1990 New York Giants played two of the great offenses that ever played – the 49ers (played them twice that year) and Bills. The ‘89 Niners were considered one of the best offenses ever and they weren’t much different in ’90. And the 1990 “no huddle” Bills were one of the most high powered offenses ever. So how did the Giants fare in these games? They allowed 7 & 13 points against the 49ers and 19 points against the Bills and won the Super Bowl.

2. How did they perform in the Playoffs / Super Bowl as compared to the regular season? Great teams have the ability to turn it up a notch when the chips are on the table which reveals the “true talent”, while over-rated units get exposed.

3. What was the defensive scheme & philosophy? Taking the 1990 Giants again as an example they purposely allowed small chunks of yards – playing a “bend but don’t break” defense that basically waited for the offense to kill themselves with penalties, turnovers, sacks or poor execution, and if the offense got into Giants territory they ensured to only allow field goals. Combined with their offense that ran the ball and chewed up huge chunks of time off the clock it was a lethal combination. Both offense and defense worked together to wear down their opponent, playing perfect ball control and field postion football. Am I saying the 1990 Giants were the best ever? No, but they should certainly get a look – as should the 2002 Bucs as they played a similiar style of defense allowing over 4000 yards but only 196 points.

4. How many Pro Bowl and All Pro players were on the team during that year? This data is available on ProFootballReference.com. It’s not the best thing to incude because some defenses had average players that played great as a team, but as a tie breaker this could help.

5. One of the best stats for OFF/DEF efficiency is yards per point. In 2008 the NFL average was 14.85. So this will tell you how many yards an offense had to gain before scoring one point, so the higher the better for defenses. Here are the numbers:

1977 Falcons 25.13
1976 Steelers 24.07
2000 Ravens 24.04
1985 Bears: 20.88
2008 Steelers 17.01
1973 Rams 16.57
1991 Eagles: 14.54

2002 Bucs 20.63
1990 Giants 19.93

by Louis Winthorp on Oct 5, 2009 4:49 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Another biased opinion from Baltimore

Although I absolutely love your research, to me the top three defenses of all time are the ‘76 Steelers, the ’85 Bears and the ’00 Ravens. If you want to put the ’08 Steelers among the top five or so, then I guess the ’08 Ravens can’t be far behind and to have them in say, the top ten of all time is not right, even from a Ravens fan. The ’00 Ravens might have faced lighter competition tha the others, but they also did what they were supposed to do and that is to shut them down and even out (four shutouts in ’00). therefore, penalizing teams for doing a great job is just wrong in your analysis.

That said, I’d accept any ranking of those top 3 in any order, as that is good enough for me.

aka 'Rexx'

by Bruce Raffel on Oct 29, 2009 3:32 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs


User Tools

Welcome to BTSC, a blog dedicated to the SIX-time world champion Steelers.

"Thoughtful discussion with a sense of history."

Art Rooney Jr.

"Level-headed thinking." Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

Start posting about the Steelers »

Join SB Nation and dive into communities focused on all your favorite teams.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

09_mc501_hemlet_105270_small
HSS Quarterly Draft Report #2: Late edition
Small
At The Half: The Steelers On The Back Stretch
Miketomlin-200_small
Familiar feel? & a look ahead
Steelers_small
Keystone Zebras Want You
Vaca_mexico_068_small
Ryan Clark, Denver, and Sickle Cell Disease

Recent FanPosts

Small
Law don't go around here Law Dog
Dsc00111edit_small
Ah, familiarity.
Dr
Knowing when to pull the trigger
Jester_small
Yinz Luv... Jim Shearer
Sidney_steelers_small
Look for Woodley to Emerge
Small
Biggest Concerns - Denver Broncos
Yeswecan_160_small
See "The Chief"
Small
Hurry up offense
Sidney_steelers_small
Bengals - Turning point for a franchise
Small
Denver game: Rookie-palooza

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

Latest NFL Headlines from SB Nation

Mile High Report
Scouting Terrence Cody
Battle Red Blog
Ryan Moats Will Start Against The Colts
Bleeding Green Nation
Harbaugh: Andy Reid has ruined the Cowboys' decade

SPONSORS


Site Founder & Editor

Mbean_small Blitzburgh

Steelers Historian

Steeler_small maryrose

Bringing You Your Daily Six Pack

Plainview_small drinkyourmilkshake