Printable View
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2...in-nfl-history
Before I read, I am guessing that there are two Packer units on this list (he does not include pre-1960 NFL defenses for reasons you can read for yourself.
I am also guessing Capers appears at least once, but not with a Packers team.
'62 and '96 would be my guesses.
Only one Packer defense it turns out.Quote:
Originally Posted by hoosier
1962 then. Though I still insist that defense > offense on the '96 team.Quote:
Originally Posted by pbmax
It's hard to compare eras, even the span of 1960 to now. So I guess if you say "relative to the era they played in, and the rules by which they played..." this is the best defense. In a vacuum, how would the 1962 Packer defense do vs. the 2000 Rams offense? Impossible to say, really.
The most dominant defenses that I've ever seen are the 1985 Bears and the 2000 Ravens. They were both nasty.
I agree. Packers offense in '96 was hamstrung by injuries for quite some time and Andre Rison did not cure all of it. Especially since he didn't know the playbook.Quote:
Originally Posted by hoosier
Defense and ST gave them VERY beneficial field position all season long.
It was a combination of signing Rison and getting Free back that re-ignited the offense. In the stretch without Brooks and Freeman, the defense was not enough to win games. As good as the 96 defense was, it will never be remembered as an all time great due to a few factors. 1) There wasn't one aspect that dominated so much everyone took note and feared it. Can you think of the real identity of the 96 defense? 2) Most of the star players didn't play much longer. White and Jones were at the end of their careers. Brown was effective for maybe 1 more year. Simmons got injured not long after. Only Butler remained an outstanding player for a number of years. 3) They are overshadowed by the offensive juggernaut that basically took the running game away from the opponents, leaving a solid secondary and pass rush to end the game. As noted, when the offense sputtered due to injured receivers, the defense did not shut down opponents enough to win.Quote:
Originally Posted by pbmax
Good question about the defense's identity, even if it was rhetorical. I think that defense did have an identity, but it wasn't a player or a unit, it was turnovers. Problem is, they had a pretty big dry spell in the middle of the season: 25 in their first six regular season games, and another 12 in the three post-season games. GB played its worst two games of the season after losing Freeman against Tampa, but then the defense came back and played some of its best games during the last month of the season, which was before Rison really started to contribute anything. So it's true that team performance as a whole declined because of key injuries to receivers, but the defense showed during December that it wasn't just taking advantage of a high powered offense.Quote:
Originally Posted by MadScientist