Pandion Haliaetus
Well-known member
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2013
- Messages
- 3,881
- Reaction score
- 848
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?
I think so, but I think that's because they knocked out the starting QBs themselves.
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?onanygivensunday":s8nfyxvb said: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).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.
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.
If you're referring to the analysis that I did, I looked at the whole regular season... not just one game.scutterhawk":23ow2px2 said: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?onanygivensunday":23ow2px2 said: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).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.
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.
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":3655oqsg said: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?onanygivensunday":3655oqsg said: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).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.
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.
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.
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?.
Football Outsiders would agree with you, as they have the 2013 Seahawks slightly ahead of the 2000 Ravens.onanygivensunday":24b6mvcp said:If you're referring to the analysis that I did, I looked at the whole regular season... not just one game.scutterhawk":24b6mvcp said: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?onanygivensunday":24b6mvcp said: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).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.
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.
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.
The 2013 Seahawks D was statistically better scoring-wise then the 2000 Ravens D.
CALIHAWK1":fck6kuyr said:scutterhawk":fck6kuyr said: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?onanygivensunday":fck6kuyr said: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).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.
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.
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.
No crap. The 86 Giants were there the very next year so this "do it more than one year" is BS.
MVP53":1mdy0cyn said:CALIHAWK1":1mdy0cyn said:scutterhawk":1mdy0cyn said: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?onanygivensunday":1mdy0cyn said: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).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.
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.
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.
No crap. The 86 Giants were there the very next year so this "do it more than one year" is BS.
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.
onanygivensunday":2vadu0ui said: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).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.
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.
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.
I agree.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.
He was the HC, but calling it his D is kind of funny. Just sayin.
onanygivensunday":2w2vhfge said:I agree.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.
He was the HC, but calling it his D is kind of funny. Just sayin.
Billick's coaching history before becoming the HC for the Ravens... he was always on the offensive side of the ball.
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.onanygivensunday":2yitqfoq said:If you're referring to the analysis that I did, I looked at the whole regular season... not just one game.scutterhawk":2yitqfoq said: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?onanygivensunday":2yitqfoq said: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).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.
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.
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.
The 2013 Seahawks D was statistically better scoring-wise then the 2000 Ravens D.
you'll get no argument from me, as that's exactly where I rank them.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.
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."