Early signs are that Garrard is the leading QB candidate.

[EKnight]

I am completely puzzled as to what you see as proof.  His stats showed that the defense was really good early in the game but became bad in the final quarter, and that the offense was bad throughout the entire game but played their worst in the fourth quarter.  How does this do anything to disprove the claim that the defensive side of the ball was doing much more to carry their weight?
Then you're using the same flawed logic he is.

When Miami's defense was cracking skulls during the first three quarters, the offense was sitting on their hands.  When it came to the fourth quarter, and the defense was tired and run down, the offense was getting even worse.

You're faulting the defense because they were carrying the team for only three quarters instead of all four.  That's ridiculous.

What's more ridiculous is how wrong you are here. The offense had leads into the fourth quarter of at least six of those games. They weren't "sitting on their hands." They put up enough points to be in front. The defense fell apart and couldn't hold those leads. And as far as tired and run down? The offense was on the field MORE than the D through three quarters. Time of possession shows this. So not only was the D not "cracking heads," but THEY were actually the ones sitting on their hands more than the offense. Miami was 8th overall in TOP in the first half and 14th in the third quarter. They drop all the way to 26th in the fourth quarter. So the side of the ball that wasn't even on the field most of the fourth quarter, and actually gave Miami the lead late in most of its games- that's who is to blame for the defense collapsing after three quarters all year long? -EK

[Diehard_Dolfan]

How many games has the Ravens defense won without any help from their offense?  Good defenses win games even when their offense isn't helping!  San Francisco defense pulled their offense along..

Like I stated before Miami's defense overachieved IMO... you can site stats all you want... teams like Cleveland and the Jags had better all around defenses... their problem... their offenses were worst!  

[MikeO]

How many games has the Ravens defense won without any help from their offense?  Good defenses win games even when their offense isn't helping!  San Francisco defense pulled their offense along..

Like I stated before Miami's defense overachieved IMO... you can site stats all you want... teams like Cleveland and the Jags had better all around defenses... their problem... their offenses were worst!  

Nobody is putting Miami's defense on par with the Ravens. That's the point.  The 49ers is an awful example they played in the worst division in NFL history maybe.

[Spider-Dan]

What's more ridiculous is how wrong you are here. The offense had leads into the fourth quarter of at least six of those games. They weren't "sitting on their hands." They put up enough points to be in front.

So when the score is 6-0 going into the fourth quarter, your thought is that the offense has done their part so far?

The only reason Miami's horrible 20th-ranked offense had a lead through three quarters is because... their 5th-ranked defense was keeping the opponent from scoring!  How can you possibly fail to connect the dots here?  Your absurd logic inevitably leads to the conclusion that if the offense scores 3 points but the defense allows 6, the loss is the defense's fault.

The defense fell apart and couldn't hold those leads. And as far as tired and run down? The offense was on the field MORE than the D through three quarters.

Surely you cannot be serious.  I guess in your world, offenses get tired from having the ball too much?  Perhaps you think that the solution is a quick fumble to get your tired offense off of the field?

I find it incredibly sad that I have to explain such a basic, fundamental point of the game of football, but when your offense is on the field, knows what plays you are running, and can dictate the pace of the game (e.g. subbing players at your leisure), it is a lot less tiring than being on defense and having to react to the opponent's offense.  This is why you have never heard any broadcaster in the history of football say, "This team's offense is just too tired and needs do whatever they can to get off of the field... throw an interception if you have to."

[Spider-Dan]

How many games has the Ravens defense won without any help from their offense?  Good defenses win games even when their offense isn't helping!

So I guess your complaint is that... the defense wasn't scoring enough points?

Whatever it takes to avoid assigning blame to the offense, I suppose...

[EKnight]

So when the score is 6-0 going into the fourth quarter, your thought is that the offense has done their part so far?

The only reason Miami's horrible 20th-ranked offense had a lead through three quarters is because... their 5th-ranked defense was keeping the opponent from scoring!  How can you possibly fail to connect the dots here?  Your absurd logic inevitably leads to the conclusion that if the offense scores 3 points but the defense allows 6, the loss is the defense's fault.
Surely you cannot be serious.  I guess in your world, offenses get tired from having the ball too much?  Perhaps you think that the solution is a quick fumble to get your tired offense off of the field?

I find it incredibly sad that I have to explain such a basic, fundamental point of the game of football, but when your offense is on the field, knows what plays you are running, and can dictate the pace of the game (e.g. subbing players at your leisure), it is a lot less tiring than being on defense and having to react to the opponent's offense.  This is why you have never heard any broadcaster in the history of football say, "This team's offense is just too tired and needs do whatever they can to get off of the field... throw an interception if you have to."

Was the lead 6-0 in any of those games? No. Therefore everything else about your argument is invalid. You can't just create game lines out of no where to fit your incorrect argument. The time of possession point- which, as usual, you twist to fit your own ideas- was not meant to show the offense was tired. It was posted to show that the defense was actually sitting on their asses MORE than half of the game resting, no exactly "cracking heads" like you said.

Why is this so hard for you to get? If the offense is consistent- within 1.2 points throughout each quarter- and that's good enough to have the lead through three quarters, it should be good enough to have the lead through four, except- oh yeah- the overrated defense is allowing over a TD per game in the fourth quarter. -EK

[Spider-Dan]

Was the lead 6-0 in any of those games? No.

Say, what was the lead against DEN entering the 4th quarter?

The time of possession point- which, as usual, you twist to fit your own ideas- was not meant to show the offense was tired. It was posted to show that the defense was actually sitting on their asses MORE than half of the game resting, no exactly "cracking heads" like you said.

So when the defense is doing its job (i.e. "cracking skulls"), what happens to the opponent's time of possession?  Please do explain.

Why is this so hard for you to get? If the offense is consistent- within 1.2 points throughout each quarter- and that's good enough to have the lead through three quarters, it should be good enough to have the lead through four, except- oh yeah- the overrated defense is allowing over a TD per game in the fourth quarter.

The offense being consistently BAD for four quarters does not shift the blame on to the defense.

Bottom line when it comes to scoring:
Overall, defense ranked 6th, offense ranked 20th
In the fourth quarter, defense ranked 27th, offense ranked 28th

How can you possibly read that as the defense's fault?

[MikeO]

Great points Spider, the fact that these points need to be explained just shows you the level of "football mind" you are dealing with in this debate. It also shows why people CAN'T "cherry pick" stats.

This person can't run and point to the 25th best pass defense  and then say because of that the defense sucks. But IGNORE the 3rd ranked Rush Defense and 6th ranked Scoring defense stat. That's like saying the Packers are 3rd ranked passing offense but 27th in rushing offense, so therefore their offense sucks! That is laughable and silly. Just like when someone does it here with "the 25th ranked pass defense" stat so the defense sucks. Well duh, there is two sides to the story. The Packers pass the football with ease and with success, so of course they will run less and have less rushing yards/attempts and have a poor rushing offense stat. Just like opponents CAN'T Run on Miami and the Dolphins STOP the run with ease and success, therefore opponents will pass more on Miami hence making their pass defense stats look very poor as its the "weaker" of the 2 (pass defense/run defense). And using the Cleveland Week 3 game as an example is just flat out friggin STUPID! The defense gave up 210 yards passing, only 70 yards rushing the entire game. Less than 300 total yards of offense they gave up over 4 quarters. Yet because the offense didn't score a touchdown from the mid-way point of the 1st quarter on they lost, so blame the defense? That's not even rational.

Also, You can't run and point to the 27th ranked 4th quarter defense so the defense must suck, but then IGNORE the 28th ranked 4th quarter offense stat and place all the blame on the defense. Once again, just stupid talk.

Either all the stats count, or none of them do. So, if someone uses one stat to back up a point, they must accept the other stats (which are also facts) that in this case, shoot down their entire theory/stance/argument.

[Diehard_Dolfan]

So I guess your complaint is that... the defense wasn't scoring enough points?

Whatever it takes to avoid assigning blame to the offense, I suppose...

It's not that i don't blame the offense because I do!  I just don't give the defense more credit because they were just as responsible for the losses as the offense... My point was that great defenses keep it close and make plays to put themselves in position to win.. our defense didn't do that!  

Our defense didn't force turnovers or score.. which is something "GOOD" defenses do!

[MikeO]

It's not that i don't blame the offense because I do!  I just don't give the defense more credit because they were just as responsible for the losses as the offense... My point was that great defenses keep it close and make plays to put themselves in position to win.. our defense didn't do that!  

Our defense didn't force turnovers or score.. which is something "GOOD" defenses do!

"IMMORTAL" defenses and "ALL TIME" defenses do what you are describing.  You want the 85' Bears, 2000 Ravens, 02' Bucs, Purple People Eaters, Steel Curtain....nobody in their right mind has the 2011 Miami Dolphins on that level or anywhere near it. Nor is anyone comparing them to any of those groups. Nobody is even saying the 2011 Dolphins defense was "great." That's not the issue at hand.

The Dolphins defense played good enough in 2011 (and the stats back it up) to win more games than 6. The offense failed them in multiple games.

[Diehard_Dolfan]

"IMMORTAL" defenses and "ALL TIME" defenses do what you are describing.  You want the 85' Bears, 2000 Ravens, 02' Bucs, Purple People Eaters, Steel Curtain....nobody in their right mind has the 2011 Miami Dolphins on that level or anywhere near it. Nor is anyone comparing them to any of those groups. Nobody is even saying the 2011 Dolphins defense was "great." That's not the issue at hand.

The Dolphins defense played good enough in 2011 (and the stats back it up) to win more games than 6. The offense failed them in multiple games.

Cleveland, Jacksonville, and Washington all had better defenses than Miami!   I'm not asking for Elite defense just getting turnovers would have made a difference!

[Spider-Dan]

With all honesty and seriousness:  if your complaint about your defense is that they aren't scoring enough, your priorities are skewed.

There's a part of the team that is responsible for scoring.  It's called the offense.

Are people so intent on deflecting blame away from the offense that they will lay lack of scoring at the foot of the defense?  What's next, blame the defense because they aren't eating up enough clock?

[mecadonzilla]

OMFSM this is so tedious.

I can't wait until there's football to be played.

[Diehard_Dolfan]

With all honesty and seriousness:  if your complaint about your defense is that they aren't scoring enough, your priorities are skewed.

There's a part of the team that is responsible for scoring.  It's called the offense.

Are people so intent on deflecting blame away from the offense that they will lay lack of scoring at the foot of the defense?  What's next, blame the defense because they aren't eating up enough clock?

You see what you want to see.. that's obvious!  I said turnovers and you still come back with defensive scoring... smh!   

Both the offense and defense were offensive in the 4th Qtr's of games last yr!

[MikeO]

Cleveland, Jacksonville, and Washington all had better defenses than Miami!   I'm not asking for Elite defense just getting turnovers would have made a difference!

who said they didn't have a better defense? Nobody is claiming Miami had the best defense in the league! You have totally missed the point

Both the offense and defense were offensive in the 4th Qtr's of games last yr!

But the first 3 quarters of the games (which count too) the Defense was outstanding while the offense still sucked!