I think its easier to build a good defence than a good offence,because of the type of players it takes.
What do you think
2007-09-19 03:20:41 · 10 answers · asked by muddyriverdogz 3 in Sports ➔ Football (American)
Fences are not allowed in football.
2007-09-19 03:24:27 · answer #1 · answered by dCon 5 · 2⤊ 1⤋
I think that it is easier to build up a strong offense. Here are my reasons:
1. The rules in the NFL are geared to favor the offense, for example, the "no contact after 5 yards" rule.
2. In an offensive system, the offensive line is the most important piece. If you have a good offensive line, you can put basically anyone anywhere on the field, and you should put up a good amount of points.
3. On defense, you have to have good talent at every single position. If you don't, the offense will pick at the same spot over and over again.
2007-09-19 11:04:51 · answer #2 · answered by Joe R 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I disagree. Bill Walsh once said that you can win with poor players in a good offensive system, but that you need playmakers on defense. In other words, you can plug in average players on O and still produce enough points to win if you've got a strong defense. Lacking that defense, though, means you're going to have to win high-scoring games every week.
Less-than-stellar QBs like Trent Dilfer, Jeff Hostetler and Brad Johnson have all won Super Bowls by not making mistakes and allowing dominating defenses to handle the rest. I've yet to see any team play truly poor defense but still take the title. You can always find a decent guy at most offensive skill positions to do the job, but it's rare to find that superstar defensive player.
If it really was so much easier, I think you'd see more good defenses in the league. There really are very few.
2007-09-19 10:31:43 · answer #3 · answered by Craig S 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Not necessarily. It all depends on the scheme you are running. A good coach will build a scheme around the talent of his players.
The hardest position to play has to be the QB but the hardest position to FILL is CB. The top corner back on most team is usually the best athelete on the team. In order to have a good defense, you have to have a good secondary which requires exceptional atheletes at CB which is not as easy as it appears.
2007-09-19 10:50:06 · answer #4 · answered by cowboysfan 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yea I think that it is easier to build a good defense than a good offense because with and offense you really need the team chemistry and everyone needs to play their part in order for the offense to be successful but with a defense it seems like as long as everyone plays their part they can be successful and they really don't require much chemistry at all
2007-09-20 05:55:14 · answer #5 · answered by krnboi6549 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
i think its easier to build a good D. player can be switched around from position to position easier than on O. the only guys that can really switch to play other positions on O are the linemen
2007-09-19 10:26:27 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's easier to find someone who can tackle with all of their weight than to find someone who can run and catch at the same time. Defense just stops plays... Offense has to try and make plays happen.
Defense definitely.
2007-09-19 10:25:27 · answer #7 · answered by theewokprincess 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
YES allot more rookies are starters on defense because theres not as much to learn as there is on the offensive side of the ball.
2007-09-19 10:34:25 · answer #8 · answered by RWB4646 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I think a wood fence is easier.
2007-09-19 10:29:55 · answer #9 · answered by vae4usc 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I dunno about that. There's an old saying that receivers are just guys who weren't quite good enough to be coverage guys. Coverage guys gotta be even quicker than receivers.
2007-09-19 10:52:24 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋