The NFL's # 1 Defense Thread

Originally posted by nothing03:
Don't forget that the current league right now are pass happy that made it more impressive.

It's very important, with this mentioned, to place certain records in their proper context. My friend loves to point out Moss's touchdown record: Rice put his mark in a shortened season, and I think the rules then didn't benefit the offense, like the rules do now. I also would have to take Brees's breaking Marino's record in the proper context.

Originally posted by okdkid:

Originally posted by Kolohe:

Originally posted by Snider8706:
Is this the best 49er defense ever??

I still think the '97 Defense was the best, 5 players with 3 or more INT's and 3 players with double digit sacks, Stubblefield with the most at 15 sacks. But I do think this is the best run-defense ever.

The 1997 49ers defense allowed 16.6 points per game. Our current defense allows 13.4.

Lets also not forget we were 5th in points on offense, which meant we also scored fast which put the defense right back on the field. Our Offense now, is based more run heavy than it was back then so we can control the clock more. And lets also not forget that 16.6 ppg was at seasons end, our 13.4 ppg is only through weeks 1-13. So aside on what the stats say right now, we were dominant at all positions back in '97.

Originally posted by Kolohe:
Lets also not forget we were 5th in points on offense, which meant we also scored fast which put the defense right back on the field. Our Offense now, is based more run heavy than it was back then so we can control the clock more. And lets also not forget that 16.6 ppg was at seasons end, our 13.4 ppg is only through weeks 1-13. So aside on what the stats say right now, we were dominant at all positions back in '97.

What's more impressive in your mind: a collection of "no-names" playing up to that level; or, a collection of future hall of famers playing at that level (Greene, Woodson, Doleman, etc.). I guess my question stems back to the "dream team" who hasn't played as a unit for 95% of the seasons

To me the most important stat is PPG and we are ranked number 1 I believe so we should be ranked 1 overall. But that's just me

Originally posted by ninersrule4:
To me the most important stat is PPG and we are ranked number 1 I believe so we should be ranked 1 overall. But that's just me

agreed. When we look at yardage, we have to think about field position, and game situation(s).

Update via NFL.com's "official" stats for our key front 7 players minus NT:

Through Week 13: Sacks, TFL, (QB Hits)
DL
Ray McDonald - 4, 5 (7)
Justin Smith - 4.5, 5 (14)

LB
Aldon Smith - 9.5, 8 (13)
Ahmad Brooks - 6, 8 (11)
Patrick Willis - 2, 7 (4)
Navarro Bowman - 0, 9 (2)
Parys Haralson - 2, 0 (4)

Team Sacks
Aldon Smith - 9.5
Ahmad Brooks - 6.0
Justin Smith - 4.5
Ray McDonald - 4.0
Parys Haralson - 2.0
Patrick Willis - 2.0

Originally posted by lssanjose:

Originally posted by Kolohe:
Lets also not forget we were 5th in points on offense, which meant we also scored fast which put the defense right back on the field. Our Offense now, is based more run heavy than it was back then so we can control the clock more. And lets also not forget that 16.6 ppg was at seasons end, our 13.4 ppg is only through weeks 1-13. So aside on what the stats say right now, we were dominant at all positions back in '97.

What's more impressive in your mind: a collection of "no-names" playing up to that level; or, a collection of future hall of famers playing at that level (Greene, Woodson, Doleman, etc.). I guess my question stems back to the "dream team" who hasn't played as a unit for 95% of the seasons

But our defense now isn't a collection of no-names, sure our players now weren't the star players we had back in '97, but that's not the question though.

The DBs are the weak part of the D but have been playing very well. Not sure how good they will be against Roethlesburger or Rodgers though. Pressure and more pressure needs to be applied. If Willis is still out for Pittsburgh his coverage skills will be missed. Grant did a good job in replacement againts the Rams with a back up QB.

Would be wonderful to see them shut out more teams, especially as they will be playing away for everyone except Pitts if I'm not mistaken.

Originally posted by okdkid:
13.4 points per game. Hard to dispute that.

For reference, the 1986 Bears allowed 11.7 points per game.

To match that average, we'll need to allow 26 points or less from here on.

With 3 NFC West teams still on the schedule......We might be able to beat it....

Seen a few blitzes today with the inside backers instead those slow ass safety blitzes. Front 7 was dominant.

The pass defense concerns me. Not so much our coverage but our pass rush. We have done what we needed to do vs the inexperienced QB's but we just can't pressure the experienced QB's quick enough or enough to the point where they begin to see our paint more than their own. The better QB's we play get the ball out quicker and with more accuracy but at the same time, we haven't rattled them.

I know we would like keep no more than 4 rushing, but we can't rely on coverage vs the better QB's. The best QB's get beat when they are heavily pressured. Brady and Manning get beat in the playoffs when the blitzes are heavy and they aren't allowed to sit there and scan the field.

I'm concerned that we don't have top level blitzers.

AJ Feeley fractured his right thumb in the game yesterday. http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/12/05/the-rams-could-be-down-to-tom-brandstater/

Originally posted by captveg:
AJ Feeley fractured his right thumb in the game yesterday. http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/12/05/the-rams-could-be-down-to-tom-brandstater/

Add him to the long list of pain-train (thread)

Aldon has 8 TFLs? wow

Our secondary is far from weak. We are top 5 in INT's, 3rd down conversions, and passes defended.