Does Defense still win championships?

[CalgaryFan05]

I think that while it is still possible to win a Championship with a team based around defense but it is definitely more difficult than it was in the past. It seems like every year there is a new rule that continues to shift the advantage to the offensive side of the football. Defenders have to worry about hitting a guy too hard, too high, too low or when he is "defenseless". I still am not positive what constitutes a defenseless player. That's just for everyone but the QB. You never know what may be called roughing the passer anymore. Add on the fact that a legitimate option to pick up big yards is to just heave it down the field and hope for pass interference, the ambiguity of what constitutes a pick play and offensive lineman being allowed to line up deeper and wider and everything has been shifting towards the offensive side of the football. They are pretty much trying to eliminate the kickoffs which would also favor offensive minded teams. Those kickoff returns for big yardage or TD's really helped those teams with stud defenses but an offense that was just mediocre. You still need to have a good defense, just not sure you can put all your eggs in that basket anymore. One of the reasons I think they will focus on an offensive minded HC, unless they think that Waldron is the man or they can hire a stud OC and hand them the reins and get a HC that focuses on D. The issue with that is that high level OC's are constantly getting poached.

Nicely said. Excellent points.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

Those huge run plays only happened as Husky players were getting pulled from behind right at the point of attack, I watched very closely and watched those plays several times. Yes Penix was off, but it was a one sided officiated game, right as they were about to tie it the refs decided to call a hold not even close to what Michigan got away with. The receivers were getting mugged like crazy too. I guess you weren't watching closely enough

No national or even local narrative agrees with you, or this assessment of how the game went down.

But if believing the Huskies were jobbed getting their asses handed to them and Penix having what, 8 straight drives to tie up the game and couldn't do it? Then more power to you.

 

[Appyhawk]

If you want to drill down on this statement, it was really more about superior line play. Another Hawk evergreen deficiency, on both sides of the ball.

I don't care if it's 1945 or 2025, great D and O lines win. Period.

It usually is. Win the trenches, win the game. Physicality is the oldest scheme in the game. Watch the origins in rugby. It is amazing how the more things change the more they stay the same.

 

[raisethe3]

 

[cymatica]

No national or even local narrative agrees with you, or this assessment of how the game went down.

But if believing the Huskies were jobbed getting their asses handed to them and Penix having what, 8 straight drives to tie up the game and couldn't do it? Then more power to you.

I don't care about narratives, I know what I saw, and those blatant holds they got away with were the reason they had those big plays. Yes Penix was definitely off, but there's no arguing it wouldn't have been a different game if Michigan was called for the blatant penalties they committed right by the RB and QB on all of their big plays. If the refs actually called it even, and just let them play, then Washington has a good chance to tie it up while their defense was stopping Michigan. It's a completely different game at that point. Instead, the refs decided at that point that despite Michigan players pulling jerseys and arms all game, Washington deserved a penalty for much less.