It wasn't just one segment. It was the first half of almost every win. Find me the Lions games where Detroit was ahead 24-3 or 21-0 or 31-7 or 17-0 (twice) or 17-3 at halftime.
And the entire point of making this thread is that Porter helps with a new attitude where the Cards will play for the entire game instead of just the first two quarters.
I can't, because the Lions don't have Kurt Warner. They don't have the ability to take on big leads early.
Just looked it up on NFL.com, I don't pretend that i watch Lions games, I use all my time on the Cards. 10-
7 for Lions after first half against the Vikes. Ended up losing 27-13....13-
0 for Lions after first half against Washington...2-
10 against the Rams...3-
10 against the Vikes.....3-
6 against SF. If you add only the 4th and 1st quarter against the Steelers, Lions are in the lead 13-
7..That's half of the game! Obviously, their defense was able to play solid/well for some segments, but not entire games. Not good enough for me. Same can be said about the Cards.
I guess picking up segments of solid defensive play is meaningless. You could do that for any defense in NFL and make them look like studs. Lions defense was statistically arguably the worst in NFL. However, the entire picture is the important stat. 4 quarters instead of 2. Counts for Lions as much as for Cards and any other bad defense. In fact, losing big in second half is a very strong indication that the defensive coordinator is outschemed and can't adjust to the changes made by the offense during games. That's the worst conclusion. That happens often and there is a reason for it. You would wish that it was other way arround; namely giving some points up early, then adjusting better than the offense and outscheming/outplaying completely in the end. No, that's not the case.
I have looked at every play closely, regular season as well as postseason, even multiple times - saying that the defense was good and will be better can't be backed from anything on the tapes IMO. They were horrible and defenitely the worst performance of any playoff defense. Ever. If you can see anything postive in that, please, let me know. Speaking of talent, we have gone a step in wrong direction or taken a status quo, at best. If we keep the same philisophy and playcalling, there is nothing that indicates the defense will be playing well this year. Under Clancy, at least we had two dominant defensive performances in playoffs. You have to respect that. Under Davis, in playoffs, we make history in playing bad defense.
It will be up to the offense to win games (again) , unless some noticable change in playcalling/philosophy is made. Perhaps, if our rungame turns out to be top 5 ( i don't believe that, but could happen since we won't be able to pass the ball IMO) , defense could get plenty of help. Could burn out time on the clock and keep them fresh. That's the best case scenario that can help them look better. More man coverage and running the ball more is the best help with a below average QB as Leinart.
Really? Then explain the the
20.3 points per game allowed by the Cardinals last season.
Quite simply the defense in 2009 was not as terrible as you are making it out to be.
There are some good points made in your diatribe (post #25), too bad it's overwhelmed by the contradictions...
I'm not sure we are on the same page. I was refering to a hypothetical number rather than season average. The best defensive games that we make at the moment is letting many points in and, if lucky, make a play or two in the end. That's the best this defense can offer right now. It is not able to play well for 4 quarters and not allow more than 10 points. There is no contradiction in that, that's just the way it is.
In two games, when it matters the most, and thus when the argument is most valid, 90 points were scored against the Cards.
And yes, the defense was terrible last year considering we had the talent on key positions: top 3 D-Line and DRC.
