The Defense Snob
We’ve all been gatekeepers in one way or another. If you are a big fan of anything, you’ve gatekept. Maybe not to the degree of a Git Gud Souls player or a “name 5 songs or you aren’t a real fan” music douche, but we’ve all had our moments. I won’t deny my own tendency to do it, so you don’t have to go find any examples in past posts. Part of growing up is growing out of the phase where we look down on people for having different preferences. That’ll never happen fully, but it is a thing that’s good to be aware of about yourself because it can really take a conversation and ruin it.
The reason I bring this up is that in the past several years I’ve run into a new type of football snob that I wasn’t seeing a lot of before. Not necessarily the “boomer football” type snob who thinks everyone today plays in dresses and the league is full of cucks, but the “smart” football snob who seems to be offended at the idea that scoring is good. I noticed a lot of this after the 13-3 Pats/Rams bore-fest of a Super Bowl. That game absolutely sucked ass, but mentioning that you felt that game sucked ass inevitably brought in the folks who insist you just don’t appreciate good defense.
I think it’s generally a reverse push-back response to the league’s general move towards favoring offense. As offense is favored more and more in the rules and play the average number of points has gone up. More and more touchdowns are being scored. It’s impossible to deny that defense has become more and more hindered over the past decade or two. It’s also hard to deny that defense…just doesn’t produce the same level of engagement most of the time. Sure, big plays like sacks, or interceptions, or forced fumbles…those get the blood pumping. But watching a team get stuffed for 2 short runs and a dropped pass to start a drive followed by a punt and the other team doing the same isn’t the same degree of exciting as watching a team successfully execute plays and get first downs. So while you might intellectually appreciate the skill and execution of watching that happen, it’s unlikely to really get you going until it starts happening at key moments or you are rooting for the team doing good defense.
It feels like there are now some folks who have latched onto appreciating defense as the way they can signal that they are better football fans than you. They are smarter football fans than you. The truth is who gives a shit what you like about football? I like defense. I like watching a smothering defensive line eat a QB alive. I like Aaron Donald. But is it really such a crime to think scores are fun? Scores are fun! 10-6 games can be fun, but they generally aren’t. Touchdowns are fun, and I like seeing them.
The problem here is some of these well-intentioned folks who really just want to show affection for defense are ignoring that good defense doesn’t always make a good football game. These folks love to show up in the aftermath of high-scoring light shows like Bills/Chiefs to lament the loss of defense and accuse all these folks who found that game fun as shit as “casuals” of sorts. There is nothing wrong with liking defense. If a 3-6 field goal fest gets you hard, cool. If watching QBs get frustrated and star WRs have no targets or no catches gets your blood going, more power to you. There’s nothing wrong with that. If a 43-47 barnburner makes you feel remorse for the sport, that’s okay. What I take issue with is looking down on fans who aren’t into that as lesser. Accusing them of being casual or ignorant. In the same vein as liking defense, there’s nothing wrong with liking scoring. Preferring more scores. The league has grown more popular over the past decade, clearly a lot of people like seeing touchdowns. There’s nothing wrong with that. The game will always evolve and so will what makes people appreciate it. There’s no need to put someone down for liking games differently than you do.
I know some people who thought Rams/Pats was a refreshing change of pace. What those people watched I will never understand, but I’m glad they could watch it and find a lot of pleasure in it because I sure as hell couldn’t.
This whole post was inspired by some arguing I saw and participated in online when I expressed that I felt the most recent super bowl was a bit underwhelming and not very memorable. Since it was a mostly defensive game, it was like triggering the bat signal for defense stans to show up and tell me I’m bad at liking football. In the ensuing week, I’ve actually been thinking pretty hard about what indeed makes a football game memorable, to me. So many factors go into any particular game to make it stand out and thrill, but what do I personally latch onto? What makes a game stick with me? This is more or less what I’ve thought of:
-Chaos. I love the unexpected. I love when best-laid plans go awry with the tip of a single pass or the doink of a field goal. There are so many ways a football game can go tospy turvy at any second, and it doesn’t matter what the score is. I did not love Bills/Chiefs because it had a lot of scoring, I loved it because it had a lot of scoring in 2 minutes at the end. The game went absolute bonkers in the final minutes. The first 3 and a half quarters were a good experience. That sudden explosion of chaos is what turned that game from good into an all-timer. I loved the Rams/Bucs game because it was a blowout win that suddenly and very alarmingly turned into a tense nail-biting experience as the Rams fell apart. I loved the 49ers/Packers game because nobody could score, namely the MVP, and the biggest play of the game was a fucking blocked punt. The unexpected gets me going. The best moment in Bengals/Rams was the immediate deep ball touchdown by the Bengals to start the second half because it changed the entire game instantly.
-Narrative. This is a divisive one, but I firmly believe storylines are important to enjoying any sport. Humans like stories. Sure, some of the narratives are manufactured or enhanced by nonsense media shit, but it still matters. It still makes you care. When I’m old and talking to myself on a park bench about what I loved about my day watching football, it won’t be the stat-lines and QBR of Eli Manning that I remember. It’ll be the battle of the underdog maligned QB who took down the mighty Goliath, no matter how that simplifies the actual story. Narrative power can enhance a game tremendously.
-Balance. This isn’t the opposite of chaos, but to me, the best pure football games feature a lot of push and pull all around. The game never gets too out of hand so the tension stays close. Defense steps up at key moments, but so does offense. This can occur in both high and low-scoring affairs. But you need bigger moments than just continuous 3 and outs or constant steady, methodical drives. Bengals Rams was pretty balanced overall, but kind of lacked in other departments.
-The big moments. Nobody will disagree with this. The best games all have those signature moments. The Helmet Catch. The Butler INT. The Philly Special. The Hail Mary. Some games, the best games, have more than 1. This is one of the things I found lacking in the Bengals/Rams. The bomb TD to start the second half was nice, but so early. The Donald 4th down sack was a good symbol for the game, but they had annihilated Burrow to that point and things looked bleak already. What should have been the biggest moment of the game (the late Rams drive deep in Bengals territory to take the lead) was bogged down and ruined by the officials.
What do I not respond to?
-Stats. I could not give a shit if Mac Jones is completing most of his passes. I do not care how many rushing yards Zeke has. I don’t give a fuck how many field goals a kicker has made. I only care if he shanks this next one.
-Efficiency and execution. This is the order opposite my beloved chaos. This is why I found the Patriots boring. A team that always executes well is dull as shit to watch. The Packers under Rodgers are similar. He never throws picks, so he’s no fun anymore. I am not enthralled by teams executing well all the time. I am thrilled when shit goes wrong. Yeah, you need shit to go right to appreciate shit going wrong, but some teams have shit go right too much. A humming efficient offense gets boring. A stifling defense that doesn’t let anyone move the ball well gets tiresome.
-Fantasy or Betting. This stuff matters a great deal to a large number of people, but I never bet on sports and even when I played fantasy, I couldn’t bring myself to care about my team that much.
-Penalties. Sometimes a bad call can inject some chaos into the experience, but generally, nobody likes it when the yellow flies in. Considering it’s gotten worse and worse over the past decade, and they are making games memorable for the wrong reasons.
Anyway this was way too many words but the subject has been on my mind since the Super Bowl so here we are. I imagine if you are here, you probably hold similar tastes to my own, but let me know what gets your motor running.
I’ve appreciated defense more lately, because my team has a good defense and an anemic offense. I get excited about the opposing teams drive stalling out, because I’ve already assumed that my team’s will.
PS – I hope we get an exciting QB and an O-line in Pittsburgh next year.
Meh, you do you mate. I thought the play on the field was outstanding, and that’s just what I watch Football for – good plays.
The defenses just happened to make good plays. More shockingly so, the Bengals defense. Its nothing snazzy, but eh.
At the end of the day, we all watch Football for differing reasons and for different phases of the game. And that’s aiet.
Yes, the Bengals defense, specifically Eli Apple, was just incredible. (Am I getting my sarcasm through here?)
Be careful man, his mom will yell at you with mean Tweets.
this guy right here
im less “6-3 games are the only good games” and more “6-3 games CAN be good games as can 382-371 games”
also ipa fucking sucks ass but thats just my opinion man
10-6 games can be fun, but they generally aren’t.
yeah this is where you and i differ. im “10-6 games can be fun” full stop
Plus the certain SB game in 2019 wasn’t a case of great defensive plays that made the score low but the fact that there have been series of offensive incompetence from both sides, just moreso from the Rams that game. I’m sure there would have been less complaints regarding the offensive boom if the defense haven’t been hindered where the offensive actually earns their way, the SB between the Pats and the Rams looked more like both teams trying to lose than anything. No word can describe how bad Goff was in those drives, it looked like Kerry Collins was leading these drives.
I maintain that the Pats/Rams Super Bowl was an example of dogshit offense rather than particularly memorable defense though that’s a digression from your point
I will fully admit that a large part of my love for defense is a reaction to how blatantly the league and the refs favor offense. Quarterbacks get all the love, all the respect, they play the hArDeSt PoSiTiOn In SpOrTs after all. There is nothing I love more than watching a quarterback’s soul get crushed, preferably with a fresh patch of grass on his jersey. Marching down the field and scoring is the expected outcome these days so the most exciting thing that can happen is for the quarterback to get slapped silly and for a defender to take the ball the other way.
I’m hesitant to even try adding anything to your comment, because you have absolutely nailed the essence of it. *chef’s kiss*
I think the bad offense is a good point, and relevant. It’s not a DROPPED pass that we like seeing. It’s a BROKEN UP ONE.
The other thing that irks me with people (not Dave specifically, although he does mention several of the points above) is the implication that loving defense means you only love field goal games and punts. No, I like turnovers and sacks. Touchdowns are fine, in doses. The defense has to be viewed as the BIG BAD in the room and a constant threat. 2011 NFC Championship Game. Giants. 9ers. Beyond Eli being pounded into the turf and getting up over and over again, there was a chess element at play. The defenses were DYNAMITE, but both offenses were competent, and there was the balance you mentioned, Dave. On one drive the D reacts super fast and forces an out, so maybe on the next drive the QB takes advantage, fakes them out, and gets a long bomb play. There was TENSION when the offenses were out there, because those defenses were DANGEROUS. They went into OT tied 17-17, and despite the scores, to me, it was a defensive slugfest. The D having a sharp edge is the key for me.
My personal issue with high-scoring affairs is it means touchdowns are handed out like pez, which means bad defense. The TDs lose their value and excitement, because someone is scoring every time you get up to grab another beer. I like a touchdown to be a minor achievement within a game, not a predetermined outcome on most drives. Because what happens then is the defense is just window dressing, with no real bite, and the game will probably come down to whoever has the ball last. WHOOPPPEEEEEE.
Exactly. A lack of scoring because it’s Clayton Thorson with no receivers on one side, and a rookie qb with no offensive line on the other is boring and horrible to watch. Seeing a good defense SHUT DOWN an offense is glorious. Especially in the Super Bowl with offenses of the Rams and Bengals calibers.
Had the Chiefs/Bills playoff game played out like the final minutes the entire game I would have hated it. Easy scoring is not exciting for me. I honestly don’t see how it could be exciting unless (allow me to paraphrase Dave here) you are rooting for the team scoring frequently or you have their best player on your fantasy team.
As you put it, it’s the chess match. The actual amount of scoring is kinda irrelevant. Not to say we (or I) are smarter or more appreciative than Dave, but it seems kinda disinterested to describe this past Super Bowl as underwhelming and not memorable because it was a defensive game. The game still had:
Long Touchdowns
Long Drives
2nd Half Lead Changes
Standout individual offensive performances
and it was within one score the entire way through the 4th quarter. That’s a pretty good game right there. What about Aaron Donald going super saiyan after getting punched on the sidelines? What about offense is more engaging than that?
You misread the post if you think I found the game unmemorable because it was mostly a defensive game. That wasn’t my point. My point is I found it kind of underwhelming, and since it happened to be a more defensive type, saying that made the folks who love defense get mad at me
Here’s my rebuttal to your points
-It had one long touchdown. Odell’s was 17 yards, but it didn’t feel that long, then he got hurt.
-It had like 3 or 4 good long drives. Most got stuffed or stopped for field goals.
-Lmao, there were exactly 2 second half lead changes. one in the very first minute, and one near the very end. Practically the entire second half was played with the Bengals in front.
-Who? Outside Kupp on the final drive, nobody really stood out. Beckham got hurt so early. Chase had one big catch, but it wasn’t a score or anything. Higgins got the one big TD, but it came at the expense of a facemask that should have been called. His other TD was routine.
-There was no run game from either team, at all
-Burrow was clearly hurt and not himself, the Rams were dropping passes and playing weirdly cautiously
-Being within one score makes it tense, but at some point a team had to break through, and that’s why the final Rams drive was fun. Of course, that final drive, and the TD in general, was spoiled by refball, which put a massive damper on what should have been the payoff to all that tension by basically gifting the Rams an easy TD
It wasn’t a bad game at all, but it could have been stronger.
This is perfect, except that I’d like to defend (sort of) the Pats-Rams Super Bowl. It wasn’t entirely bad offence, I don’t think, it was an excellent defence stifling a good offence on one side and then bad offence on the other, Imo. My own biggest issue is with the mentality that the best games are the ones where possessions = touchdowns, like the Chiefs-Rams a few years back. It feels entirely short-sighted to promote games where half of both teams are playing like dogshit half the time. It’s about as enjoyable as a 6-3 puntfest where both teams are bad on offence.
I always see that Rams/Chiefs games from a few years ago used in the defensive guy arguments and my main rebuttal to that is: how often do those games actually happen? People talk about that game like it’s a slippery slope for the death of defense but games like that, or Bills/Chiefs, are still pretty damn rare. They get remembered and stand out BECAUSE they are still rare. Folks are afraid the NFL will turn into college ball but from what I can tell, defense still matters so much in the modern league, and games that end with lower end scores feel more common than those light shows.
Just from general watching it feels like at least some of the high score games out there come as a result of a blowout+garbage time, which sucks, but isn’t really the fault of defense going away but one team sucking and then the other one slowing up with the win in the bag. Or they are things like the Vikings/Steelers game, where the Vikings destroyed the Steelers, only for the Steelers to catch up and almost win, and that was a good game and still featured defense. Games with no defense at all are still unicorns.
That’s all well and good, but the media tried to jam that game down our throats as some sort of gem to be aspired to, rather than a statistical anomaly we hope never happens again
This is exactly the point. The media SLAMS high scoring down your throat, and if you saying anything about not liking a ton of touchdowns, you get this comic as a response.
That game was incredible and everyone was high off it in the days after, overreaction in the moment is just how the sports reaction ecosystem works. I don’t remember it being nearly as slammed down our throats but more awe that it lived up to billing because going in we knew neither team had a great defense to start
In the years since, the only people I see ever bringing that game up are the people who got mad about it. I also remember seeing plenty of pushback at the time.
If by incredible you mean “not credible”, I agree. I didn’t think it was a good game. It was mediocre at best and then the media wouldn’t shut up about it for the rest of the season. If you liked the game you didn’t mind it but if you didn’t, you got tired of it really fast. I thought this Bills-Chiefs game was way better because the defences were making plays until they got gassed at the end of the game and then it became a shootout.
My issue with the media obsession with offence and I feel calling it a slippery slope fallacy is disingenuous is that we all know the NFL is driven by money. They walked back their COVID protocols again to protect their TV product for the playoffs and again for the combine because they maybe could have lost some money. They see offence selling and they’ll try to get more of it, and as a fan of good, balanced football, that makes me nervous
I don’t think the NFL is as nearly at risk of becoming a score mess as you do. Defense still proves it’s worth every single year in the league, and it just did so again.
I don’t actually think you remember that game as well as you might think, because defense actually played a bigger role in that game than people give it credit for. Both Goff and Mahomes got strip sacked that game for TDs, Mahomes literally got stripped twice by Aaron Donald and one turned into a return score. Multiple sacks outside that. The Rams got a Pick 6. The game was sealed on Mahomes’ third pick. Literally 3 TDs of that game were on defensive scores. The team that won was the team that scored more on defense. It wasn’t a game with no defense. It was a game when the defense struggled but when it came through, it came through big time. That game was great because it was two of the best teams in the league going at it and putting on a show across the board. If you didn’t like it, you didn’t like it, but it featured more balance than you give it credit for. The final score does not tell the story of that game.
If you want a game with no defense, Saints/Giants was a better example, and that still had a pick 6 in it. Nobody talked about that game like an all-timer, it was mostly laughed at for the lack of defense, and isn’t held up as the pinnacle of the sport and has been mostly forgotten.
That hustle play by McCourty though…
Ditto since there’s not much to add aside from saying I agree with you on this. Those were some of the worst drives I had seen, especially by Goff.
I just get pissy when they act like low scoring game automatically equals great defense.
The Pats/Rams bowl? Neither team was playing great, sorry
Is he related to Glennon or something?
Oh look, Dave milking the super bowl for content
A football comic referencing the Super Bowl? Good heavens!
Im confused by this comment, is it sarcasm that I’m not picking up on? What’s wrong with bringing up a game that happened a week and a half ago to discuss a broader point? In the offseason, no less?
Just saying, you could’ve drawn…actully you know what this was the only thing going on right now. Sorry.
Ahh, Rams-Pats. As someone who actually paid money to go and watch… that, I have a lot of opinions about that game.
I think you hit the nail on the head here but with that game specifically, it sucked by every stretch of the imagination. I like good defense, and on a technical level that game (at least on Belichick’s end) was a masterful display of excellent gameplanning and efficient defense. The problem is that efficient defense is boring. Efficient defense turns games into punt-fests, which is never fun. Not to say that there weren’t any big plays (JMac’s pass breakup was outstanding and Gilmore’s INT was awesome) but even in those cases it was moreso Jared Goff making terrible throws at the worst possible moment than anything Belichick schemed up. It was not a fun game and sure as shit not something worth losing a kidney to see live. If people enjoyed that, more power to ’em, but I wouldn’t think that you’re a better fan for enjoying that sort of game.
Super Bowl 50 was a fun defensive game because it was dense with huge, game changing plays. Picks, sacks, fumbles, strip-sack TDs, you name it. Super Bowl 48 was a fun sort of defensive blowout since Seattle was making huge plays left and right. Even this year’s Super Bowl was decently fun and exciting in the final moments once Cooper Kupp decided to go God mode on the final drive. Super Bowl 53 was an ugly slog and not something I’d ever want to rewatch, even if my team won it. A fitting win for the Patriots, sure, but still a shitshow nonetheless.
Even as a fan of the winning team, I’ll agree that the recent Rams/Pats was not a fun watch (it might’ve even been WORSE as a fan of either team, because of all the frustrating ineptitude shown at moments when it seemed like your team could pull ahead). But I’m not sure Super Bowl 50 was better. Wasn’t there a stretch in where Denver had something like 11 straight failed 3rd down conversions (I remember the announcers saying it’d set a record anyway)? Denver’s defense had *some* big plays, but Cam also just played mediocre. Denver’s offense / Carolina’s defense could’ve gone home after the opening kickoff and we still would’ve had the same game game, and that was pretty boring. Take away the “Peyton’s last stand” narrative and I think we’d remember that game with a lot less love too.
I found Broncos/Panthers far more entertaining than Rams/Pats. Watching the best team in the league get stifled by the Broncos while the Broncos tried desperately to overcome their offensive shortcomings was tense because someone had to break, but both defenses just kept making big plays. Like every play in that game was a big play on D, strip sacks, fumble recoveries, picks, that was a defense battle I enjoyed.
Pretty much all of this. It’s rare enough to see a non-QB completely take over a game by himself. It’s even more rare to see a defensive player do it. SB50 was a great example of excellent defense on both sides of the ball. Von Miller understandably stole the show, but had Carolina somehow pulled out a win, the SBMVP would have likely gone to Kony Ealy who finished with 3 sacks (for reference, Von Miller finished that game with 2.5 sacks). It wasn’t just efficient defense being played. The defensive plays in that game were electric.
Super Bowl 53 was just some variation of stuffed run, pass breakup, punt every drive. That’s not fun to watch at all, and if I was bored out of my mind inside the stadium watching it live as someone with a legitimate rooting interest, I can’t imagine how most people felt watching it on TV with no dog in the fight. I would much rather watch Carolina and Denver go blow for blow in their defensive showcase than sit through Super Bowl 53 again. Doesn’t help that the game itself played out more like a soft blowout due to New England’s offense forgetting how to play football once they crossed the 50 every drive.
Due to being an actual defensive battle where the defenders would take over. Plus one wants to see whether Ware or Allen gets a ring.
I saw nfl throwback call that rams pats game the 29th best super bowl, and it was the first time i ever thought they were idiots
I love defense, but I also love games that are fun to watch. Can a 13-10 nail biter be interesting? Yes. Is it more likely to be boring? Yes. Can a high scoring game still turn on a big defensive play? Also yes. How often do you see a game with a college basketball score that ends with the losing QB throwing a killer interception or getting sacked, or a running back get stonewalled on fourth-and-short? Or Super Bowl XLVIII, or the Browns’ playoff win over the Steelers last year?
The Pats-Rams super bowl was bad because it was more bad offense than good defense.
This super bowl was good defense. Heck, I wouldn’t even necessarily say it was all that low scoring! 43 points is a touch low but not too much. I absolutely side with the defense stans here, not every playoff game needs to be a stupid slugfest like that Bills Chiefs game where all it came down to was who had the ball last.
I’m torn because I do particularly love good defense. I was at the Bills Patriots playoff game and watching Micah Hyde play center fielder and undercut a would be touchdown at the last second was a thing of beauty. QB sacks are fun to watch. High pointing contested catches is fun to watch. Watching linebackers come downhill and lay a guy out is fun.
The Rams Bengals game was below average offense. Watching the running backs run into brick walls because they could not think of a better scheme was not fun. Watching Stafford turf the ball was not run
Seeing two meh performances while the rest of the playoffs was thrilling was a let down.
IPA’s -> Gatekeeping. Belgian Abbey Ale -> Get on my level gate keeping.
The point about “is it good defense or bad offense” is something to consider. We saw this all the time in college football 15 years or so ago. Nick Saban had great defenses and good offenses. Will Muschamp defenses were good, but his offenses were awful. So many CFB coaches were risk averse. Thankfully, a lot of those guys are gone.
insert shh let people enjoy things meme here
A defensive battle is thrilling and awesome. That Super Bowl wasn’t a defensive battle.
The Rams offensive line and running games was so bad, it made the Bengals run defense look superhuman. I’ve watched every Bengals game this year. They’re good, but not THAT good. It was unbelievable! Unfortunately, they still remembered how to pass block and Stafford was able to find the open receivers and Cupp just completely owned the Bengals secondary.
The Bengals offensive line topped it by being completely worse. All credit to the Rams defensive line for doing what the Raiders, Titans and Chiefs couldn’t do. Cincy’s O-Line was at least able to give Burrow an extra second to find the open receiver or give Mixon/Perine a small crack to sneak through for a decent run. The Rams not only didn’t give them the extra second, but they also took one or two more for good measure.
tl;dr Both teams sucked last Sunday. LA won by losing the least.
I kind of agree here, the run game was absolutely non-existent for both teams. The Rams had trouble catching passes at a few points (one led directly to an INT) and Burrow got hurt which let the Rams just demolish him harder. Credit to the rams of course, but it feels a bit sour when you can tell one player isn’t at full capacity.
I also think this Super Bowl was a bit anti-climatic given how good the rest of the playoffs had been. Divisional Round was the best it had probably ever been which is saying something because Divisional Round always delivers. And both Conference Championship games were really good as well.
So when the Super Bowl is solid but unspectacular it kind of feels like a letdown.
Also note there’s a thing with teams getting hit with a jinx whenever these lose to the Jets or the Bucs. Only time they win the SB is when they faced each other so that tells you something. Bengals were pretty much screwed before the playoffs began.
This feels like a bit of a strawman tbh, there are absolutely fans that only think games are good if they are super high scoring. Likewise, there is absolutely something to great defensive games.
Yeah, and I feel like I explained that? My problem is the gatekeeping, not the preferences between fans. I don’t see a lot of people who love massively scoring games doing the same thing, though I’m sure some of those folks exist. Probably in the college ranks where those scores are more common
“Offense snobs” are rare but they usually land a job with NFL Network lol
Right after posting this I realized my mistake. Offense snobs are actually pretty common, but you might miss them because they overlap HEAVILY with people who are way too into fantasy football.
The default stance of the media is offense snobbery, horrible slugfests usually lead to every commentator saying it was an all-time great game.
I feel like you are exaggerating this, it is not this bad
But something occurred to me reading the comments like yours. Maybe Redzone deserves a lot of blame here for “shoving offense in our faces”. Redzone is a constant highlight reel that frequently cuts out context that defense provides. The best way to appreciate defense is usually to watch games in their entirety and not just the highlights because defense is less flashy. I personally hate redzone, I prefer watching the ebb and flow of a game boring bits and all, but so many people love it and won’t watch anything else, and more scoring makes that channel more exciting.
Not to go off-roading on a tangent away from the gatekeeping debate… but I don’t think it’s people who love massively scoring games, per se. It’s people who love touchdowns. Who do you think pays for NFL Red Zone Sunday Red Carpet White Gloves VIP Back Stage Curbside Touchdown Pass Ticketfest?
I have a friend who just sits in his chair and ONLY watches touchdowns and red zone situations all day. He won’t watch his own team play. It just randomly bounces from game to game, cutting out all the non-scoring fluff. I don’t know how many of that kind of people there are, but I’d wager among casual watchers, the interest in watching nothing but TDs is probably high.
UGH, ignore me. I just reread your comment again after hitting submit. I missed the “doing the same thing” bit. Thought you were saying people who like massive scoring games don’t exist. Whoopsie!
It is remarkable how much Big 12 defenses improved once NFL ref Walt Anderson stopped moonlighting as the conference’s head of officiating, retired, and became a VP with the NFL in charge of training officials.
I wonder what happened to NFL defenses after that…
Part of the problem for TV viewers is how the defensive puntfests are handled imho.
Stuffed run, stuffed run, incomplete desperation pass play (or a screen for negative yardage if your DaBurrrrs) punt aaaaand heres the next 2 minute commercial break. Even if the offense is eating clock like a mfer you are getting 4 minutes of play – addbreak – 4 minutes of play – addbreak – and so on. Just feels fucking atrocious and even if im in front of the TV I often zap away to literaly anything else, on the PC you go and check reddit how the other games are going or if anything crazy happend like Mr BigChest retiring during a game….
This is a very good point I hadn’t considered. Good defense causes stoppages which hurts the rhythm of the game watching experience in a way that a 60 yard drive, even one that peters out into nothing, doesn’t.
While saying Super Bowl 53 was a good game is a bridge too far for me I do think the negative reaction to it was a bit overblown, so I do wonder how much of the defense oriented defending of it grow as a reaction to that. We had just been spoiled as most of the Super Bowls this century have been pretty entertaining. In particular it stands out as an unusually uninteresting Patriots/Brady Super Bowl as win or lose all the other ones were at least engaging throughout. Which is funny because regular season Brady Patriots games did indeed turn into the dull precision slogs Dave talks about above.
But I’d still rather watch SB 53 than some of the late 80’s or 90’s NFC beat downs I remember. SB 25 stood out as the exception to that stretch.
That’s an interesting point, especially when you consider that the previous SB, 52, was pretty much the gold standard for offense. There was, what, almost 1200 total yards of offense? Scoring on almost every drive. *ONE* punt. Trick plays on both sides. Defense was pretty much non-existent, with the strip-sack of Brady near the end being the sole defensive highlight on either side.
So then the slog-fest that was SB 53 looked even worse.
All I have to say is that I am Dam Marino’s Super Bowl Ring. Readers from summer 2016 know what I’m talking about #AfreeaTheArena
Also, the problem is that there is no longer a true balance between offense & defense. We don’t need to go back to the pre-Mel Blount rule 70s, but something closer to the mid 90s would be a nice balance.
I loved Broncos-Panthers, I liked Rams-Bengals, and hated Rams-Pats. I love great defensive play when it takes apart a well-tuned offense. I also think Aaron Donald should have been MVP in this game, though Kupp wasn’t a terrible choice. Ditto for Justin Tuck over Eli in 42 (though Eli earned it in 46), and especially Reggie White over Desmond freaking Howard.
I wonder if it’s due to being a Pats fan that I love efficient clinical games. Big plays are fun and hype but watching my team do 6 yard slants and march down the field for 12 minutes while the other team is totally powerless to stop it is amazing. The Bills Pats game where Mac threw like 3 passes was hilarious.
I just want to comment on the “I only drink IPAs” panel:
One thing I will NEVER understand is the single-brand beer drinker. Sticking to (for example) Coors exclusively makes no more sense to me than eating the same food EVERY MEAL.
(“Wanna grab a burger?” “NO! I only eat Pizza Hut thin-crust pepperoni!”)
When I’m at a brewery, I adopt the ‘once through the menu’ approach to the selections. Sometimes you get clunkers, but more often you hit new faves….
Low score =/= good defense
Rams v Pats SB was just terrible offense and a team that refused to do anything until Goff did something.
This Superbowl was good defense.
The uneven reffing ruined it.
In a correctly reffed game the Bengals score again in the first half. They don’t score the 75-yarder, but who knows how that drive goes.
The Rams would’ve had 3rd & goal from the 6 after a false start which would’ve been a dramatic TD if scored. Instead it was first & goal at the 1, and the score was inevitable.
The final drive would’ve continued because Donald was offsides. Does Money Mac get a chance at a long FG? Probably.
The bad reffing kinda evened out in the end, but it ruined a good game.
At the time I did not have cable or even a T.V. that worked so I had to procure the that SB on a cell phone.
and… it just felt like another game. Just any random afternoon game you catch because you live in like a NFC East or AFC South region. So, I enjoyed the game in the same context that I enjoy any NFL game but at no point did it feel like even a Playoff game.
Also Im a Saints fan and we totally would have beaten the Patriots that year AND NO ONE CAN PROVE OTHERWISE!
Honestly, the games that are good games are the ones that can easily go either way with both teams playing well. That I think is what leads to “chaos,” the sense that no one is in control of the game decisively. A low score game =/= both teams playing well. It could mean both are struggling, which is painful to watch. However, a low-score game with struggling teams is still more fun than a blow-out unless it is your team that is winning. Some of the games that are really memorable are the ones that appeared to be blow-outs but then became interesting in the second half, like the infamous 28-3. The parity in the league has led to a lot more fun games, making for better football because you know the teams have relatively equal strength and a chance to win.
A good game can be subjective. I’m probably one of very few non-Seahawks fans who really enjoyed the Seahawks-Broncos Superbowl. It was a blowout right from the first play. Sometimes it’s just fun to watch a villain get demolished. It can also be just as much fun to watch a team you hate, lose, as it is to watch a team you love, win.
I actually agree with you and I’ve had an idea stuffed down the pipeline about defending blowout games as enjoyable experiences in their own way
You gotta appreciate a 4th down stop on the goal line. But 3 and outs are boring as shit
Three and outs are usually boring as shit, but not always. If a team gets to 2nd and 1, get stuffed on that 2nd, then sacked on 3rd down that’s interesting. If they whiff on two passes and run to gain what they can on 3rd that’s an excellent example of boring as shit, though.
My favorite thing is when great defensive showdowns aren’t mentioned by the defense fans because of high scores, even if the scores were from the defense!
Look at the 2013 super bowl. I’m willing to bet the “you don’t appreciate defense crowd” wouldn’t stand up for that game because the Seahawks scored 43 points, but only 21 points were scored by the offense (27 if you want to count field goals). There was a massive kick return TD, a long pick six, and an opening play safety, and yet the defense lovers don’t bring up games like that (Similar cases could be made for the Bucs-Raiders and Giants-Ravens super bowls)
Look, I love defense. I mostly played defense when I played high school ball and I’m biased to say I like defense way more than offense, but the whole “people who hate low scoring games aren’t true football fans” crowd truly baffles me.