Championships: Offense or Defense?

[hawkeye]

Defense wins championships....Offense sells tickets. Has times changed? UT Martin was #4 in scoring offense last year and averaged 38 points a game. We got to the conference championship last year but lost to EKU. In 2006 the defense got us to the first round against SIU. Most of the offense is back this year. Defense is average at most this year. Has times changed that defense no longer rules?

[jonmac]

Well, this is a topic that can garner a bunch of posts. I think it can be done both ways. It makes sense to say that if you have a great defense that can limit the scoring of the opponent then you will not have to score many points to win. But if you have an unstoppable offense that can score more points than the other team then that would work too. I guess in the end your defense has to be able to limit the opponent to fewer points than you score. To win championships you better have both a good D and a good O. I really don't know if one would outweigh the other. It takes the whole package coming together at the right time, many times, to win championships.

There, did I cover all the bases?

[WileECoyote06]

I think it depends on the talent level. At FCS, I lean more towards offense.

At BCS and NFL, defense still rules the day. The only Super Bowl winners in the last ten years which featured a more prominent offense than defense were the Rams and the Colts. And even they had efficient defenses.

[appfan2008]

I agree that at this level offense is very important... during our run we have been much more noted for our O... our D has been fine but not top of the nation great like our O

[GATA]

You need both..."Defense wins championships" is just another cute catchphrase that people take way too seriously. Just because a football coach said it one time doesn't mean it's the gospel. Football coaches also said that the flexbone was a predictable, played out, high school offense and would never work in the ACC...

The only time I've ever seen a team win a championship with an absolute garbage offense was when the Ravens won it. If you can't score points you're not going to win...you can just AVOID getting blown out all the time by having a good defense. You need to be able to score points.

How often do you see a championship team that isn't solid on both sides of the ball? They're both important. Don't forget about those special teams.

[hawkeye]

You need both..."Defense wins championships" is just another cute catchphrase that people take way too seriously. Just because a football coach said it one time doesn't mean it's the gospel. Football coaches also said that the flexbone was a predictable, played out, high school offense and would never work in the ACC...

The only time I've ever seen a team win a championship with an absolute garbage offense was when the Ravens won it. If you can't score points you're not going to win...you can just AVOID getting blown out all the time by having a good defense. You need to be able to score points.

How often do you see a championship team that isn't solid on both sides of the ball? They're both important. Don't forget about those special teams.

Great point on "Special teams". Rarely discussed yet many times its the game breaker. Just like the last two meetings with EKU for us which came down to a blocked field goal to end the game and a long field goal to win the game for EKU.

[RichH2]

Offense Defense Specials

IMHO, no single aspect can win for your team. Great O with avg D and ST might do it. Likewise great D with avg other aspects could do it.

Real quote should be that a bad O or D or ST can stop a team cold , even if it has a great O.

Lehigh had a bunch of teams with greatOs, " Air Lehigh" , consistent winning seasons but could never get over the hump because lacking either on D or ST or both

[PapaBear]

Defense prevents losses. Offense wins games.

In a tie game with 2:00 left on the clock and the ball on the -20, who do you want on the field, your offense or your defense?

No matter how dominant a defense you have, you still want your offense on the field at crunch time. You want the ball in your hands, because without it, you can't score the winning TD or field goal.

This is not to devalue the importance of defense. But, defense's main job is to get the ball back for the offense. The more dominant your defense is, the better they accomplish that fundamental goal, the more chances your offense has to score points and win games.

Here's another way to look at it: If your offense eats up clock and stays on the field and wins the time of possession battle, you'll often win the game. But if your defense is on the field too long, you'll often lose.

jmxtwocentsx

[jstclmet]

In 07 Appy's great offense overshadowed their very good defense.

In 08 UR's very good defense shut down Montana's very good offense.

Conversely, UR's offense was good (not very good, but good). Montana's defense was avg at best. With a backup QB, JMU almost came back on Montana. And as seen in the NC game UR's offense had it's way against Montana.

Team health, a good defense, good offense, Special teams will determine the 09 NC winner.

[89Hen]

You need both..."Defense wins championships" is just another cute catchphrase that people take way too seriously.
For the most part. The Ravens won a Super Bowl without offense. It's rare, but D can win the game by itself.

[ngineer]

Offense Defense Specials

IMHO, no single aspect can win for your team. Great O with avg D and ST might do it. Likewise great D with avg other aspects could do it.

Real quote should be that a bad O or D or ST can stop a team cold , even if it has a great O.

Lehigh had a bunch of teams with greatOs, " Air Lehigh" , consistent winning seasons but could never get over the hump because lacking either on D or ST or both

Yes, the Hank Small days drove me up a wall with an offense scoring 35 points a game but giving up 38. I have always been of the view, that you put your best overall athletes on defense. I the opponent doesn't score, or scores little, you are always in the game wherein a play or two can make the difference. Scoring a lot of points requires a lot of consistency in moving down the field. Dropped balls, penalties, etc., at any one time can stall out a nice drive. Of course, one has to score points to win, but to win the ultimate prize I think you need an excellent defense.....and a reliable kicking game.

[lucchesicourt]

I think having a great defense without an agressive coach is bad. A coach who has a great D and then in the 4th quarter goes into a prevent defense , or changes the O to run the clock (in a close game), is a loser. Stay with what got you to where you are. Stick with both the O's and the D's game plan. If you have been passing successfully, continue to do so. Don't change just to run the clock and get a 3 and out as a result. This only helps the opponent. Defensively, giving the other teams O's receivers 5 yards to prevent a big play, just means they will throw more 5 yard outs. Eventually, they are in the red zone. You need to play the same in the 4th quarter as you have the whole game.

[txstatebobcat]

Like everyone is saying, you need both while also including a good special teams. Back in the late 1990's and early 2000's TxSt had one of the best defenses in the nation at the time. We had a horrible offense however and average special teams. End result was a team that had multiple losing seasons with most games lost by 7 pts or less.

2003 we had a great offense, horrible defense, horrible special teams. endresult: 3-8 season while getting beaten badly everytime we played a team with a half-way decent defense.

2005 great offense, slightly better than average defense, good special teams and a coach with no balls- Possibly one knee away from playing in the championship game.

2008- great offense, the worst defense I've ever seen wear maroon and gold, great special teams. We won a lot of close games last year en route to earning a butt kicking in misoula.

[FCS_pwns_FBS]

At pretty much every level of football, there are far more teams with a good defense and a great offense then there are teams with a good offense and great defense that win championships in their respective leagues. If you have a good offense and you execute you will score points. If you have a good defense and you stick to your assignments you might stop your opponent.

[JohnStOnge]

I looked at where the past 10 I-AA/FCS champs finished in Total Offense and Total Defense. It looks like the edge goes a little to offense. But it also looks like you don't necessarily have to have either a great offense OR a great defense. At least not statistically.

The average total offense rank for the past 10 champs is 23.7 and the average total defense rank is 32.3. Only one team, Richmond last year, that finished in the top 10 in total defense won a title. Three teams that finished in the top 10 in total offense won it. Also, all three of those teams finished in the top 5 in total offense (1, 1, and 3). Richmond finished 10th in total defense.

However, James Madison finished 52nd in total offense and 28th in total defense when it won the title in 2004. Western Kentucky's 2002 championship squad finished 50th in total offense and 23rd in total defense.

I realize that teams that win championships have their stats distorted by the fact that they played four playoff caliber teams in the playoffs. Still, though, I think we're back to the cliche about scoring at least one more point than the opponent does in each game; however that's done. I think one could arguably say that most I-AA/FCS national champions...of the past 10 years anyway...didn't have either "great" offenses OR "great" defenses.

[coover]

Defense, defense, and defense. Oh, did I forget to say defense?

However, 0 to 0 games must go into overtime, so a little offense thrown in helps, too.

A coach needs both, but he needs his best players on defense.

[Skjellyfetti]

I agree that at this level offense is very important... during our run we have been much more noted for our O... our D has been fine but not top of the nation great like our O

I think that's true of the 2007 championship. In 2005 I think it dominant defense with a pretty good offense. And 2006 we had a great offense and great defense that played on similar levels imo.

[Twentysix]

Actually if your defense is that great they can score of interceptions and fumbles.

If i were to give a team one superpower it would be the best defense in "ze" world!

[93henfan]

You have to be great at one and at least formidable at the other. Take your pick.

The ASU teams were great on O and formidable on D. The '03 Hens squad was formidable on O and great on D.

[Bull Fan]

How about good old fashioned "health" for two of the three squads. Most I-AA teams are not built with that much depth on either side of the ball.

[proasu89]

I think that's true of the 2007 championship. In 2005 I think it dominant defense with a pretty good offense. And 2006 we had a great offense and great defense that played on similar levels imo.

xthumbsupx

2005 - Defense won the title
2006 - Fairly equal on both sides of the ball
2007 - Offense won the title

It can be done either way.

[elcid83]

Here’s some data for you to ponder. Here are the champions and their winning scores over the last ten years:

99 Georgia Southern over Youngstown St. 59-24
00 Georgia Southern over Montana 27-25
01 Montana over Furman 13-6
02 W. Kentucky over McNeese St. 34-14
03 Delaware over Colgate 40-0
04 James Madison over Montana 31-21
05 App. St. over N. Iowa 21-16
06 App. St. over Mass. 28-17
07 App. St. over Delaware 49-21
08 Richmond over Montana 24-7

Some of these victories came as a result of potent offenses and some came as a result of strong defenses. I'm sure many of our posters will specifically remember details of particular games that involve their teams. I will still fall primarily in line with those that believe in the importance of defense.

Go Runnin' Bulldogs!

[bkrownd]

Here’s some data for you to ponder. Here are the champions and their winning scores over the last ten years:

Individual scores are the result of the dymanics of individual matchups. You need to look more closely at the entirety of the season to get a sense of defensive and offensive strengths and weaknesses.

[JohnStOnge]

Here’s some data for you to ponder. Here are the champions and their winning scores over the last ten years:

99 Georgia Southern over Youngstown St. 59-24
00 Georgia Southern over Montana 27-25
01 Montana over Furman 13-6
02 W. Kentucky over McNeese St. 34-14
03 Delaware over Colgate 40-0
04 James Madison over Montana 31-21
05 App. St. over N. Iowa 21-16
06 App. St. over Mass. 28-17
07 App. St. over Delaware 49-21
08 Richmond over Montana 24-7



I haven't done it for the offense but I looked at how many points per game each season's national champ gave up all the way back to the first I-AA champ in 1978. The median "points per game" given up by national champs over given seasons is 16.4. 27 of the 31 national champs gave up fewer than 20 points per game. So it does look like, most of the time, it takes a relatively good defense to get the title. The highest average points per game given up by any national champ is 28.2 (Umass, 1998). The lowest is 9.5 (Furman, 1988).