Jump to content

  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Your Bend

stirs

By stirs,
in Carolina Panthers

Recommended Posts

stirs Grand Master

stirs

Posted
Posted

When you cheer a team, would you rather they be an awesome Defense or Offense.

I remember the Bears in the 80's and the 46 defense. I could not wait to see them destroy opponents. I was much more fired up watching them stop the other guys than to watch a team score 50 points.

I love a strong ferocious defense way more than offense.

Modern day, Not necesarily today. Saints offense? or Ravens Defense?

You?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Razeyfingers Newbie

Razeyfingers

Posted
Posted

I enjoy watching where the great plays are being made. I can watch anything once but I rarely re-watch anything thats crap unless Im intentionally looking for laughs. . . like when Jimmeh does his main move, the "point at the line and mumble some poo to the refs about checking that speck of random nothingness in the grass right after you just made a horribly bad play".

Link to comment
Share on other sites
L-TownCat Grand Master

L-TownCat

Posted
Posted

Big play teams are fun to watch. 2008 panthers had a great mix of both sides making plays.

The patriots near undefeated season had a spectacular offense and the ravens 1 st Super Bowl D was the tits.

I like teams that get that swagger about them and just know going in that they are gonna bring the hurt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
PiratePanther189 Newbie

PiratePanther189

Posted
Posted

I can't watch an anemic offense. At times I can watch a bad defense as long as the offense is capable of winning a shootout, but a bad offense is so brutal to watch.

 

Now I would prefer a team that is balanced, fast paced, and makes plays on both sides of the ball, but with an offense that is able to put a lot of points on the board

Link to comment
Share on other sites
frash.exe Apprentice

frash.exe

Posted
Posted

If I had to choose one I would rather watch an electrifying offense than a team whose only skill is stonewalling opponents and nothing else

I understand a lot of older fans appreciate defense but nothing else, and purge the idea of a high scoring offense. They call it being "old school". I call it "retarded".

Link to comment
Share on other sites
tiger7_88 Experienced

tiger7_88

Posted
Posted

When you cheer a team, would you rather they be an awesome Defense or Offense.

I remember the Bears in the 80's and the 46 defense. I could not wait to see them destroy opponents. I was much more fired up watching them stop the other guys than to watch a team score 50 points.

I love a strong ferocious defense way more than offense.

Modern day, Not necesarily today. Saints offense? or Ravens Defense?

You?

 

As an Auburn guy, I can tell you from a college football perspective that I always loved an awesome defense and was totally dedicated to that point of view.

 

Then 2010 came around and turned my world upside down.

 

In other words, I don't care... quoting the wisdom of the late, great Al Davis: "Just win, baby!"

 

I.

 

Don't.

 

Care.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Salvo Newbie

Salvo

Posted
Posted

Would rather have an awesome defense, but it can't be a lopsided difference. A great offense with a Swiss cheese defense can be fun to watch, but you will likely end up with a hole in the wall after the game. A great defense with an anemic offense is like pulling teeth.

 

For once, after all these years, I would like to see some balance on both sides of the ball.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
rayzor Grand Master

rayzor

Posted
Posted

balanced and dominant with both. 

 

I'm not choosing. you can't make me. if we have one one and not the other I'll complain about the other. i expect both to be great. it's not fun for me watxhing a team that is weak on any side of the ball.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jackofalltrades Community Regular

Jackofalltrades

Posted
Posted

Balance is optimal; but I consider myself a fan of old school football lead by a ferocious defense that O's just don't want to play.

That's why I liked Fox so much; but he was WAY too dependent on the D. I really like Rivera because he doesn't completely choke off the O; but is known for having some damn good D's.

I also think offensive teams are perceived as finese. I'm more of a bull in a china shop type.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Jackie Lee
      If you wanted Danny Dimes here’s the chance

      By Jackie Lee · Posted

      Strange, every news article and tweet I just searched all mentioned waivers. It is definitely his sixth year of at least 6 games. All I was trying to think of earlier was at the vet min could he beat out Bryce in camp next year lol. He's kinda got the old Darnold issue where he can obviously launch deep balls and qb run at a level Bryce will never achieve, but it sounds like he would be content being like a Josh Allen backup who doesn't throw the whole game plan out the window if he has to come in for a series or two. If we had him and for some reason still wanted to start Bryce he would kinda do what Justin Fields was doing the other night with Dangeruss, coming in for designed runs and maybe some play action/triple option rpo things to go deep. That would be so obvious and sad though. At least Russ can still sling it 40 yards in the air with a flick of the wrist
    • strato
      If you wanted Danny Dimes here’s the chance

      By strato · Posted

      Too late to edit above but the quote is from this Diane Russini article in the Athletic: https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/5941684/2024/11/23/russinis-what-im-hearing-the-day-the-jets-fell-apart-and-the-broncos-rallied-belichick-best-fits/ Okay.. there you have sorry I left that out the first post.  Also waivers keep the contract intact. That is the major difference in released and waived. It's all in that link from the other post.
    • strato
      If you wanted Danny Dimes here’s the chance

      By strato · Posted

      Okay so I am reading something in The Athletic and it says that Jones had to pass through waivers. So I don't know. I looked this stuff up when we were number one there all offseason and I thought it said 4 years in the league got you vested, as they call it.  Vested gets you out of waivers as I understood it. I probably got something wrong, but when I think about the slack quality of journalism these days I wonder about that. So I went and looked, again. Well, well.  For everyone: "When a player has accrued at least four seasons in the NFL, they are considered a vested veteran. When these vested veterans get cut, they are released and their contract is terminated. When a vested veteran is released, they are an unrestricted free agent that can sign with any NFL team, and the team that released them doesn’t need to provide any additional compensation." It runs it all down here, where the quotes came from: https://www.profootballnetwork.com/waived-vs-released-nfl/ As far as Jones, the team turned down his 5th year option so I knew that meant he had 4 years in, because they re-signed him anyway, after turning down the much cheaper extra year.  The Athletic is owned by the New York Times so I shouldn't be surprised. That paper was an institution once upon a time but they let their standards go.
×
×
  • Create New...