How would you rank the Raiders Defense

**DavetheRaider** · 07-02-2003, 12:12 AM

In Madden 2004 it is ranked a 91 which is the third best. I would also say its third best behind Miami and Tampa. Philadelphia would be fourth because of many losses.

**breestoboston** · 07-02-2003, 05:28 AM

Well...I've got to disagree with the makers of Madden on that one. I can't see the Raiders defense ranked above other teams defenses like New England, Baltimore, Pittsburgh, Tennessee, Carolina, and Atlanta. Those teams win through their defensive play. The Raiders win through their offense. I think your guys #1 rated offense masked alot of deficiencies in your defensive philosophy all throughout the season. When teams were able to keep the game close, your offense off the field, and continue running against your front seven they wore out the Raider D by the 4th quarter. I'd say your somewhere around 10th or 12th in the league....and that's all you really need since you've got that offense putting up a ****load of points.

**daraydaz** · 07-02-2003, 07:03 AM

Are we ranking based on Madden 2004 or real life?

There's no way we're even close to being a top 3 defense. We have the makings of a good defense but there are a lot of variables especially on the DL.
I agree with B to B right now, I would say we're a top ten defense.

**DarthRaider** · 07-02-2003, 07:23 AM

Originally posted by daraydaz
Are we ranking based on Madden 2004 or real life?

There's no way we're even close to being a top 3 defense. We have the makings of a good defense but there are a lot of variables especially on the DL.
I agree with B to B right now, I would say we're a top ten defense.

I'd be happy with a top ten defense. If we can get some stability with our corners (no lengthy injuries) then we'll be a good to very good defense. If Brayton, Williams, and Pierson pan out then we'll have speed on the edge and will ease the pressure off our corners. Being able to apply continued pressure on the QB from the front 4 opens up a lot of possiblities with the rest of the defense. Not blitzing a LB all the time naturally improves your rush defense.

**bzdup** · 07-02-2003, 07:47 AM

Originally posted by DavetheRaider
In Madden 2004 it is ranked a 91 which is the third best. I would also say its third best behind Miami and Tampa. Philadelphia would be fourth because of many losses.

We were a borderline top ten defense.

**Eastraider** · 07-02-2003, 09:04 AM

I think we have a top 10 D. Our D was better (2003) than the Patriots D.

Top D's (off the top of my head).

Bucs, Ravens, Denver, Panthers, Philly, Miami, Bears.

I agree with Darth that we can be even better this year for the following reasons:

(1) Less turnover - only new starters are Stubby, P Buch, and DE.

(2) Health - the odds are against our DB's and DE's getting hurt like last year. (although u could argue we are due for injuries to LB's and DT's, which would be just as disastrous).

(3) Young vets more experienced - Harris, Barton, P Buch, Gibson.

(4) Contract year for C Wood.

Potential downsides are the level of play of R Wood and Romo possibly declining. But those guys seem to consummate pros - always stay in shape, professional, etc.

Also I think it is too much to expect all of our D Rookies to contribute immediately. We were really fortunate last year with Harris, and Buch. On D if we can get something out of Nnamdi, and Brayton I would be really happy. If Williams gave us something (6 to 8 sacks, and 5+ pressures) I would be ecstatic.

FYI, Pierson is getting work at LB not DE. Check out raiders.com article.

**Towner13** · 07-02-2003, 09:22 AM

Brees...

Pittsburgh??? Atlanta???

Raiders are absolutely better than these two defenses... Pitt doesn't have a single CB worth putting on the field... And Atlanta is one of those teams who is getting the best they will ever get out of unlikely prospects... That **** don't last...

Atlanta I can kind of see you saying because they had some big defensive games led by Kerney and Brooking.

But Pittsburgh... Don't get blinded by the history of the "steel curtian", That defense was more Holy than the Pope! (filled with holes... Yeah I know that was dumb)

I am not going to go check stats, but I am pretty sure that Gildon had an off year... This Bell Kid gets an injuiry every time he gets out of bed... They are now learning that Earl Holmes was the reason Porter and Gildon could just blitz and do nothing else...
What I think is funny (and I will get some people who disagree with this statement)... is that Pittsbugh as a city is the King of finding a fall guy to blame last season on. This time they blamed one of there best defensive players and got rid of Lee Flowers.

"HE can't cover, He can't Cover".. SO THE **** WHAT! He is your strong safety who lays more hat than most safeties in the AFC! They have 3 CB's who get worked every down a couple Free Safety's who are supposed to be the Cover saftey anyhow... and FLowers is the reason they blame their coverage on...

**Raidahs7** · 07-02-2003, 09:29 AM

ok here's my take, we have ALL the talent in the world on D. Two EXCELLENT shutdown corners that teams drool for, a great secondary leader in R. Woodson, all three of our LB's are pimp, and we have two above average DT's......our ends are still "wait and see"....but most important, our D-Coordinator SUCKS ASS!!!! Until he leaves, this defensive group full of potential will never materialize into a top echelon D.....if bresnahan was the DC in KC, it would have been worse than what they displayed last year. But because we have talent on our D, it compensates for bresnahan's incompetantcies......take John Fox in Carolina.....his D is not that talented but because he is damn good defensive coach, it turned out to be a respectable defense. So until Al drop kicks bresnahan in the nutts and tells him to get the **** out....our d will be more shaky than rosie o'donnell runnin down the street.

**breestoboston** · 07-02-2003, 10:35 AM

Originally posted by Towner13
Brees...

Pittsburgh??? Atlanta???

Raiders are absolutely better than these two defenses... Pitt doesn't have a single CB worth putting on the field... And Atlanta is one of those teams who is getting the best they will ever get out of unlikely prospects... That **** don't last...

Atlanta I can kind of see you saying because they had some big defensive games led by Kerney and Brooking.

But Pittsburgh... Don't get blinded by the history of the "steel curtian", That defense was more Holy than the Pope! (filled with holes... Yeah I know that was dumb)

I am not going to go check stats, but I am pretty sure that Gildon had an off year... This Bell Kid gets an injuiry every time he gets out of bed... They are now learning that Earl Holmes was the reason Porter and Gildon could just blitz and do nothing else...
What I think is funny (and I will get some people who disagree with this statement)... is that Pittsbugh as a city is the King of finding a fall guy to blame last season on. This time they blamed one of there best defensive players and got rid of Lee Flowers.

"HE can't cover, He can't Cover".. SO THE **** WHAT! He is your strong safety who lays more hat than most safeties in the AFC! They have 3 CB's who get worked every down a couple Free Safety's who are supposed to be the Cover saftey anyhow... and FLowers is the reason they blame their coverage on...

Well...as far as Pitt goes....even with their problems at corner last year and poor safety play they still finished ahead of Oakland in passing defense. Pitt was #20 in pass defense and gave up an average of 216 yards a game, while Oak #23 in pass defense gave up 220 a game. That's not too big of a difference but...throw in the fact that Pittsburgh had the #1 rushing defense in the NFL and yeah...I'd say Pitt has a better defense. It's by no means a steel curtain but it's still pretty damn good. You can't find too many teams with as much talent in their front seven as Pitt, and they added Polamalu and Ike Taylor in the draft. Mark my words....Taylor's gonna do great things in this league....Washington is pretty consistent in coverage, but yeah...Flowers is taking the brunt of last years bad safety play due to being the slowest, but he's getting replaced with Polamalu who is blazing fast and just as hard of a hitter as Flowers was. here's a little write-up on Taylor....

www.theredzone.org

THE BEST ATHLETE IN THE DRAFT, HANDS DOWN, PERIOD, EXCLAMATION POINT!
Defensive Draft Sleepers
By Dave-Te Thomas

Ivan Taylor Louisiana-Lafayette, 6:00.3-202…Want to know who has been even more busier than American Airlines flying around this country (to visit a record 27 NFL teams)? Want to know who even coach Tom Shaw, Deion Sanders’ trainer calls, “the best athlete I’ve ever coached” is? Want to know what EVERYONE in the league knows right now? They all “like Ike!” Ivan “Ike” Taylor has only one year of cornerback experience, yet, when teams come to work him out, they leave dumbfounded, shaking their stop watches (4.19 in the 40-yard dash), marveling at this version of Superman (able to leap higher than the tallest building, Ike has a 44-inch vertical), amazed of his physique (3.5% body fat), explosion, quickness and most of all, the greatest word of all – potential. Before all is said and done, this athlete will become just as great of a football player. If not, I am giving up my day job!

As for Atlanta...their pass defense was better than Oakland's and Pittsburgh's last year...their rushing defense wasn't nearly as good as Pittsburgh or Oaklands...but remember, no teams really tried to run on Oakland due to always being behind and having to catch up through passing. When other teams were able to stop the Oakland offense, they had pretty good success on the ground. Atlanta rode their defense through the second half of the season when Vick started to struggle. Everybody made a huge deal about Vick and how he carried the falcons, but it was their defense that carried them into the playoffs...not Vick.

**Eastraider** · 07-02-2003, 10:47 AM

As for Atlanta...their pass defense was better than Oakland's and Pittsburgh's last year...their rushing defense wasn't nearly as good as Pittsburgh or Oaklands...but remember, no teams really tried to run on Oakland due to always being behind and having to catch up through passing. When other teams were able to stop the Oakland offense, they had pretty good success on the ground. Atlanta rode their defense through the second half of the season when Vick started to struggle. Everybody made a huge deal about Vick and how he carried the falcons, but it was their defense that carried them into the playoffs...not Vick.

Good insight but this is exactly why the stats can be misleading.

For example, Pittsburgh. Everyone knows they have a very good front seven relative to their pass defense so everyone attacks their DB's and abandons the run. Their pass d stats rise and their rush d stats fall.

In Oakland's case, our O got big leads forcing teams to pass and abandon the run (plus we had DB injuries) so our rush stats were better than we actually were.

That's why off the top of my head I did not lsit Pitt. Actually I should remve Denver as well because their pass D is awful. I would probably add Dallas to the list. Honestly I did not see alot of Atlanta so maybe are a top 10 D.

**DarthRaider** · 07-02-2003, 10:49 AM

Originally posted by Eastraider
I think we have a top 10 D. Our D was better (2003) than the Patriots D.

Top D's (off the top of my head).

Bucs, Ravens, Denver, Panthers, Philly, Miami, Bears.

I agree with Darth that we can be even better this year for the following reasons:

(1) Less turnover - only new starters are Stubby, P Buch, and DE.

(2) Health - the odds are against our DB's and DE's getting hurt like last year. (although u could argue we are due for injuries to LB's and DT's, which would be just as disastrous).

(3) Young vets more experienced - Harris, Barton, P Buch, Gibson.

(4) Contract year for C Wood.

Potential downsides are the level of play of R Wood and Romo possibly declining. But those guys seem to consummate pros - always stay in shape, professional, etc.

Also I think it is too much to expect all of our D Rookies to contribute immediately. We were really fortunate last year with Harris, and Buch. On D if we can get something out of Nnamdi, and Brayton I would be really happy. If Williams gave us something (6 to 8 sacks, and 5+ pressures) I would be ecstatic.

FYI, Pierson is getting work at LB not DE. Check out raiders.com article.

I included Pierson because he'll be used in pass rushing situations from time to time. Primarily being groomed as Romo's replacement. He'd look good in a 3-4 set

**silverandblackattack** · 07-02-2003, 10:59 AM

i do not belive the raider defense is in the top 5 , until we get a consistant pass rush, we need more of a push up the middle. a consistant pass rush would make the linebackers and secondary that much better. part of the problem is bresenhan at time is is aggresive and at times he tends to pull back and that hurts the raiders

**daraydaz** · 07-02-2003, 11:13 AM

Originally posted by DarthRaider
Being able to apply continued pressure on the QB from the front 4 opens up a lot of possiblities with the rest of the defense. Not blitzing a LB all the time naturally improves your rush defense.

That's why TB and Miami excel on defense. Subsequently their backers are on the ball like flies on horse ****.

**RaiderBlitz** · 07-02-2003, 11:29 AM

Originally posted by daraydaz
Are we ranking based on Madden 2004 or real life?

There's no way we're even close to being a top 3 defense. We have the makings of a good defense but there are a lot of variables especially on the DL.
I agree with B to B right now, I would say we're a top ten defense.

Normaly Daz I would agree with you. But last year I thought we had the potential of being a top threeD. Injuries and a lot of new players held us back. Perhaps I'm overly optamistic but with the added speed a solid healthy unit coming back I think we will have one of the elite defenses in the game. Time will tell. Often over looked is special teams and I see us as having one of the best.

"It IS ALL GOOD"

**crizpynutz** · 07-02-2003, 11:34 AM

I don't believe we are the 3rd ranked defense for a minute. There are plenty of defenses that are better, but New England!!!! No ****ing way are they better -- did you guys even once see how bad the middle of their defense was last year, that was the major reason they've targeted the middle of the defense in the offseason. I'm with Towner on the Pittsburgh defense 100% -- and just because we gave up more yards doesn't make us a 'worse' defense. We were ahead nearly every game forcing teams to pass on our defense far more often that ****tsburgh ever had. Looking at the entire picture, I'd rank the NFL defenses this way as the only top-to-bottom solid defenses (in real life, not Madden):

1. Tampa Bay
2. Miami
3. Baltimore
4. Carolina

Defenses that could surprise: Washington, Oakland, Philadelphia, Dallas, New England, Atlanta. None of these teams are at the top as they all have weaknesses to improve on before becoming elite. Whether it's Washington trying to put all that talent to good use, Oakland keeping their guys healthy and finding a pass rush, Philly stopping the run, Dallas' front four providing anything, New England stopping the run or Atlanta shoring up the secondary.

Brees -- although San Diego should be far improved they may be a year or two away defensively. They need some experience, particularly in the secondary before they can become dominant. Don't get me wrong, they've drafted very well and should be able to put it together, but I'm not sure they're going to be there this season.