2013 Defense, 4th Best All Time?

If were not the best ever, then there is the 2014 goal, always stay hungry, Legion of Boom.

Smelly McUgly":1rsnbobn said:

RolandDeschain":1rsnbobn said:

Didn't get the 2000 Ravens also get to play like four or five backup QBs in the regular season, too?

Click to expand...

I think so, but I think that's because they knocked out the starting QBs themselves.

Click to expand...

I think the fact that Kerry Collins and Trent Dilfer were the two starting QBs in the Super Bowl that year tells you everything you need to know about the caliber of offenses in 2000.

onanygivensunday":s8nfyxvb said:

Scottemojo":s8nfyxvb said:

However, I still would call the Ravens D that won a Bowl my number one of the cap era, followed by the '13 Hawks.

Click to expand...

I put together data (and posted it) comparing the two defenses. I normalized the stats for both the era difference (2000 vs 2013) and the level of competition difference (they faced different levels of competition in their respective years).

From a scoring standpoint, the normalized data supports the premise that the Hawks 2013 defense was better than the 2000 Ravens defense.

Some may argue that stats be damned... "I saw what I saw"... but stats are more reliable than peoples' perceptions, especially from 13 years ago.

Btw, no knock on you, Scotte.

And I did the same analysis on the '85 Bears... and after normalizing the data, they were statistically better than the 2013 Hawks D.

Click to expand...

Hmm, so let me get this straight then, the '85 Bears played against the best Quarterback to EVER play the game at that time in that Super Bowl?
I'm not buying the notion that the Seahawks MUST prove by playing several Years, for a comparison to those others and their SINGLE Super Bowl wins.

scutterhawk":23ow2px2 said:

onanygivensunday":23ow2px2 said:

Scottemojo":23ow2px2 said:

However, I still would call the Ravens D that won a Bowl my number one of the cap era, followed by the '13 Hawks.

Click to expand...

I put together data (and posted it) comparing the two defenses. I normalized the stats for both the era difference (2000 vs 2013) and the level of competition difference (they faced different levels of competition in their respective years).

From a scoring standpoint, the normalized data supports the premise that the Hawks 2013 defense was better than the 2000 Ravens defense.

Some may argue that stats be damned... "I saw what I saw"... but stats are more reliable than peoples' perceptions, especially from 13 years ago.

Btw, no knock on you, Scotte.

And I did the same analysis on the '85 Bears... and after normalizing the data, they were statistically better than the 2013 Hawks D.

Click to expand...

Hmm, so let me get this straight then, the '85 Bears played against the best Quarterback to EVER play the game at that time in that Super Bowl?
I'm not buying the notion that the Seahawks MUST prove by playing several Years, for a comparison to those others and their SINGLE Super Bowl wins.

Click to expand...

If you're referring to the analysis that I did, I looked at the whole regular season... not just one game.

The 2013 Seahawks D was statistically better scoring-wise then the 2000 Ravens D.

Lots of the teams listed in the article were before my time. I can't comment on the 1976 Steelers or earlier teams, since I wasn't fully cognizant of the NFL at the time. I remember the "Steel Curtain" D of the later years, when they were past their prime, and got shredded by the Cowboys in a Super Bowl. And that same Cowboys team boasted the "Doomsday Defense", which was another unit past its prime, and got shredded even more in return by the Steelers in that same game. Both those Ds were living on reputations of their past glories.

As for defenses that I actually saw, I remember the '85 Bears as being the most overwhelming, the most suffocating, the most intimidating. So putting them at #1 makes sense to me. But one thing about that '85 Bears defense is that in the game they lost, Dan Marino absolutely ripped them to shreds, racking up 38 points on them. That's more points than the 2000 Ravens ever gave up, and more than the 2013 Seahawks ever gave up, even in this high-scoring era. Something the 85 Bears and 2013 Seahawks have in common as that both Ds were #1 in fewest points, fewest yards, and most turnovers. No other D can say that from 1985 to now.

Statistically, the 1986 Bears D was even better than the 1985 one, but seemed less intimidating, maybe because the 46D was no longer new. And by 1987, teams had begun to figure the 46D out. I still smile when thinking back to the Seahawks 1987 game at Chicago. Chicago's defense was still highly regarded, but Seattle picked them apart to a 34-21 win. I remember particularly Dave Kreig faking a pitch right to Warner, which the Bears overpursued, then throwing the ball back to his left to a wide open John L Williams, who went for a 75-yard TD with nobody around him.

As for the 2000 Ravens, that was another great D, but they weren't even ranked #1 in overall D that year (the were #1 in least points, but Tennessee was #1 in fewest yards). And they got shredded by Jacksonville for 36 points in a particular game. The 2000 Ravens was a fantastic D, but my recollection is that they got famous in part because their offense was so horrible. The Ravens were won like 5 games in a row with the offense not scoring a TD, or something like that. So that team lived almost entirely on its D, since the O was inept. If the O had been even mediocre, I don't know that the D would've been as revered as it was, even as great as it indeed was.

Those are just some random thoughts I have. Nice to see the 2013 Seahawks in the conversation, and it's really "in the eye of the beholder" as the article says, no right or wrong answers, and it's impossible to make good comparisons between eras anyway.

scutterhawk":3655oqsg said:

onanygivensunday":3655oqsg said:

Scottemojo":3655oqsg said:

However, I still would call the Ravens D that won a Bowl my number one of the cap era, followed by the '13 Hawks.

Click to expand...

I put together data (and posted it) comparing the two defenses. I normalized the stats for both the era difference (2000 vs 2013) and the level of competition difference (they faced different levels of competition in their respective years).

From a scoring standpoint, the normalized data supports the premise that the Hawks 2013 defense was better than the 2000 Ravens defense.

Some may argue that stats be damned... "I saw what I saw"... but stats are more reliable than peoples' perceptions, especially from 13 years ago.

Btw, no knock on you, Scotte.

And I did the same analysis on the '85 Bears... and after normalizing the data, they were statistically better than the 2013 Hawks D.

Click to expand...

Hmm, so let me get this straight then, the '85 Bears played against the best Quarterback to EVER play the game at that time in that Super Bowl?
I'm not buying the notion that the Seahawks MUST prove by playing several Years, for a comparison to those others and their SINGLE Super Bowl wins.

Click to expand...

No crap. The 86 Giants were there the very next year so this "do it more than one year" is BS.

TwistedHusky":1b70k5na said:

"The only historically great defense to completely dismantle the greatest offense of all time was Seattle."

Didn't the Bucs team that dismantled the Raiders do that too?

It was my understanding that the Raiders were one of the top offenses at the time?.

Click to expand...

The Raiders were the highest scoring team that year; I don't know if they were the highest scoring of all time.

But regardless, I think 43-8 is more impressive than 48-21. :mrgreen:
And, OK, Raiders did get a special teams TD and garbage time points, but ALL of Denver's 8 points against Seattle were garbage time points.
And the media narrative was that since Gruden had been the Raiders coach, his TB team knew all of their plays.

One thing TB was more impressive in their SB win than Seattle was in theirs, is that TB has three pick-6's, while Seattle only had one.

onanygivensunday":24b6mvcp said:

scutterhawk":24b6mvcp said:

onanygivensunday":24b6mvcp said:

Scottemojo":24b6mvcp said:

However, I still would call the Ravens D that won a Bowl my number one of the cap era, followed by the '13 Hawks.

Click to expand...

I put together data (and posted it) comparing the two defenses. I normalized the stats for both the era difference (2000 vs 2013) and the level of competition difference (they faced different levels of competition in their respective years).

From a scoring standpoint, the normalized data supports the premise that the Hawks 2013 defense was better than the 2000 Ravens defense.

Some may argue that stats be damned... "I saw what I saw"... but stats are more reliable than peoples' perceptions, especially from 13 years ago.

Btw, no knock on you, Scotte.

And I did the same analysis on the '85 Bears... and after normalizing the data, they were statistically better than the 2013 Hawks D.

Click to expand...

Hmm, so let me get this straight then, the '85 Bears played against the best Quarterback to EVER play the game at that time in that Super Bowl?
I'm not buying the notion that the Seahawks MUST prove by playing several Years, for a comparison to those others and their SINGLE Super Bowl wins.

Click to expand...

If you're referring to the analysis that I did, I looked at the whole regular season... not just one game.

The 2013 Seahawks D was statistically better scoring-wise then the 2000 Ravens D.

Click to expand...

Football Outsiders would agree with you, as they have the 2013 Seahawks slightly ahead of the 2000 Ravens.

On the flip side, they also have a lot of modern defenses ahead of the 2012 Seahawks, including last year's Bears, the 2008 Steelers and Ravens and the 2002 Bucs.

Compiling all the advanced stats(multiple sites) actually has the 2013 Seahawks as the best ever. Factor in what we did against the best offense in regular season history and homerism aside I think this is the best defense of all time.

CALIHAWK1":fck6kuyr said:

scutterhawk":fck6kuyr said:

onanygivensunday":fck6kuyr said:

Scottemojo":fck6kuyr said:

However, I still would call the Ravens D that won a Bowl my number one of the cap era, followed by the '13 Hawks.

Click to expand...

I put together data (and posted it) comparing the two defenses. I normalized the stats for both the era difference (2000 vs 2013) and the level of competition difference (they faced different levels of competition in their respective years).

From a scoring standpoint, the normalized data supports the premise that the Hawks 2013 defense was better than the 2000 Ravens defense.

Some may argue that stats be damned... "I saw what I saw"... but stats are more reliable than peoples' perceptions, especially from 13 years ago.

Btw, no knock on you, Scotte.

And I did the same analysis on the '85 Bears... and after normalizing the data, they were statistically better than the 2013 Hawks D.

Click to expand...

Hmm, so let me get this straight then, the '85 Bears played against the best Quarterback to EVER play the game at that time in that Super Bowl?
I'm not buying the notion that the Seahawks MUST prove by playing several Years, for a comparison to those others and their SINGLE Super Bowl wins.

Click to expand...

No crap. The 86 Giants were there the very next year so this "do it more than one year" is BS.

Click to expand...

Article states the 86 Bears were actually better, statistically than the 85 version. They were also pretty good in 84 & 87. Only won one SB, but that doesn't mean their D was a one hit wonder.

MVP53":1mdy0cyn said:

CALIHAWK1":1mdy0cyn said:

scutterhawk":1mdy0cyn said:

onanygivensunday":1mdy0cyn said:

Scottemojo said:

However, I still would call the Ravens D that won a Bowl my number one of the cap era, followed by the '13 Hawks.

Click to expand...

I put together data (and posted it) comparing the two defenses. I normalized the stats for both the era difference (2000 vs 2013) and the level of competition difference (they faced different levels of competition in their respective years).

From a scoring standpoint, the normalized data supports the premise that the Hawks 2013 defense was better than the 2000 Ravens defense.

Some may argue that stats be damned... "I saw what I saw"... but stats are more reliable than peoples' perceptions, especially from 13 years ago.

Btw, no knock on you, Scotte.

And I did the same analysis on the '85 Bears... and after normalizing the data, they were statistically better than the 2013 Hawks D.

Click to expand...

Hmm, so let me get this straight then, the '85 Bears played against the best Quarterback to EVER play the game at that time in that Super Bowl?
I'm not buying the notion that the Seahawks MUST prove by playing several Years, for a comparison to those others and their SINGLE Super Bowl wins.

Click to expand...

No crap. The 86 Giants were there the very next year so this "do it more than one year" is BS.

Click to expand...

Article states the 86 Bears were actually better, statistically than the 85 version. They were also pretty good in 84 & 87. Only won one SB, but that doesn't mean their D was a one hit wonder.

Click to expand...

So does our 2012 defense not acount for anything? Its also called the 85 Bears. Not the 80's Bears. So we should actually be refering to the 86 Bears as the best defense of all time?

onanygivensunday":2vadu0ui said:

Scottemojo":2vadu0ui said:

However, I still would call the Ravens D that won a Bowl my number one of the cap era, followed by the '13 Hawks.

Click to expand...

I put together data (and posted it) comparing the two defenses. I normalized the stats for both the era difference (2000 vs 2013) and the level of competition difference (they faced different levels of competition in their respective years).

From a scoring standpoint, the normalized data supports the premise that the Hawks 2013 defense was better than the 2000 Ravens defense.

Some may argue that stats be damned... "I saw what I saw"... but stats are more reliable than peoples' perceptions, especially from 13 years ago.

Btw, no knock on you, Scotte.

And I did the same analysis on the '85 Bears... and after normalizing the data, they were statistically better than the 2013 Hawks D.

Click to expand...

I can see that point of view.
Mine is this: When teams played the Ravens, statistics be damned, the quarterbacks they faces were visibly frightened. In that playoff run, they knocked the QB out of damn near every game.

The big commonality of both teams is pure intimidation. I don't know how to quantify that, just that I thought the Ravens were more intimidating.

Two other defenses that get forgotten in the cap era are the Bucs and the Packers team that won a SB with Reggie White. Both good.

Not many folks mention how the rules have changed over the years. I think the rule changes AND salary cap play big roles in this. If we are going to apply a year. "85""00" to this. When the "13" Seahawks dismantle the # 1 offense like they did. Our guys are arguably #1.

Brian Billick himself, when asked to compare his Ravens 2000 D with Seattle's 2013 D, concedes that his D faced mediocre QBs in the playoffs, while Seattle's faced two HOF QBs, so he gives Seahawks props for that.
He won't say that the Seahawks D is outright better, but he says they're comparable, and openly admits that self-pride makes him reluctant to say any D was outright better than his Ravens D.

Escamillo":3p7eh260 said:

Brian Billick himself, when asked to compare his Ravens 2000 D with Seattle's 2013 D, concedes that his D faced mediocre QBs in the playoffs, while Seattle's faced two HOF QBs, so he gives Seahawks props for that.
He won't say that the Seahawks D is outright better, but he says they're comparable, and openly admits that self-pride makes him reluctant to say any D was outright better than his Ravens D.

Click to expand...

He was the HC, but calling it his D is kind of funny. Just sayin.

CALIHAWK1":2ffvo6q1 said:

Escamillo":2ffvo6q1 said:

Brian Billick himself, when asked to compare his Ravens 2000 D with Seattle's 2013 D, concedes that his D faced mediocre QBs in the playoffs, while Seattle's faced two HOF QBs, so he gives Seahawks props for that.
He won't say that the Seahawks D is outright better, but he says they're comparable, and openly admits that self-pride makes him reluctant to say any D was outright better than his Ravens D.

Click to expand...

He was the HC, but calling it his D is kind of funny. Just sayin.

Click to expand...

I agree.

Billick's coaching history before becoming the HC for the Ravens... he was always on the offensive side of the ball.

onanygivensunday":2w2vhfge said:

CALIHAWK1":2w2vhfge said:

Escamillo":2w2vhfge said:

Brian Billick himself, when asked to compare his Ravens 2000 D with Seattle's 2013 D, concedes that his D faced mediocre QBs in the playoffs, while Seattle's faced two HOF QBs, so he gives Seahawks props for that.
He won't say that the Seahawks D is outright better, but he says they're comparable, and openly admits that self-pride makes him reluctant to say any D was outright better than his Ravens D.

Click to expand...

He was the HC, but calling it his D is kind of funny. Just sayin.

Click to expand...

I agree.

Billick's coaching history before becoming the HC for the Ravens... he was always on the offensive side of the ball.

Click to expand...

No. He was an offensive genius. Just ask him.

onanygivensunday":2yitqfoq said:

scutterhawk":2yitqfoq said:

onanygivensunday":2yitqfoq said:

Scottemojo":2yitqfoq said:

However, I still would call the Ravens D that won a Bowl my number one of the cap era, followed by the '13 Hawks.

Click to expand...

I put together data (and posted it) comparing the two defenses. I normalized the stats for both the era difference (2000 vs 2013) and the level of competition difference (they faced different levels of competition in their respective years).

From a scoring standpoint, the normalized data supports the premise that the Hawks 2013 defense was better than the 2000 Ravens defense.

Some may argue that stats be damned... "I saw what I saw"... but stats are more reliable than peoples' perceptions, especially from 13 years ago.

Btw, no knock on you, Scotte.

And I did the same analysis on the '85 Bears... and after normalizing the data, they were statistically better than the 2013 Hawks D.

Click to expand...

Hmm, so let me get this straight then, the '85 Bears played against the best Quarterback to EVER play the game at that time in that Super Bowl?
I'm not buying the notion that the Seahawks MUST prove by playing several Years, for a comparison to those others and their SINGLE Super Bowl wins.

Click to expand...

If you're referring to the analysis that I did, I looked at the whole regular season... not just one game.

The 2013 Seahawks D was statistically better scoring-wise then the 2000 Ravens D.

Click to expand...

All that is well and good, but, and this is an important factor, what were the Bears opponents rankings for both Offenses, and Defenses, strength of Schedule, as all these play into where they were ranked statistically.
Same for the Ravens.

pmedic920":1chlrmcl said:

Not many folks mention how the rules have changed over the years. I think the rule changes AND salary cap play big roles in this. If we are going to apply a year. "85""00" to this. When the "13" Seahawks dismantle the # 1 offense like they did. Our guys are arguably #1.

Click to expand...

you'll get no argument from me, as that's exactly where I rank them.
Everyone admits that players are NOW bigger, faster, stronger, and more athletic than ever, and that has to play into the ratings also.

Throwdown":1i6i0hiw said:

Well according to Dan Pompei they are.

What we can be sure of is this is one of the best collections of big, athletic, skilled players in history. The Seahawks are pretty special in that regard. But in order to be remembered by history like the Steel Curtain and the '85 Bears, the Seahawks D will need to be sustainable. Since it's such a young defense, we have no idea if there is even a single Hall of Fame player on the unit. "I'm not ready to put Seattle with that group yet," Dungy said of the Steelers of the mid-'70s. "You have to see it develop over the course of a couple years and see it over a period of time."

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

http://www.sportsonearth.com/article/68 ... um=twitter

Them old school defenses could'nt run the guantlet Seattle just did and come out on top. Seattle plays at a different speed with a very high level of physicality in a NFL with new offense friendly rules. If 13' Seattle Seahawks could play with the old school steel curtain era set of rules I doubt you would see any TD's threw the air and players would be be going to the hospital left and right. Bigger,Stronger,Faster it's just a different level the Seahawks play at.