No, your definition sucks and that's putting it lightly. Just to pull an example that will hit close to home, the Patriots matched up well with the Seahawks from 2012-current due to their quick strike passing game mitigating the Seahawks' secondary. And yet they went 1-2 against the Seahawks during that time. I can pull up examples from other sports if you'd like but 1) you get the point and 2) you're "done with this".
Andy, you're getting all turned around here. You may want to go back and read the thread if you're not "done".
And good defenses rush the passer with four rushers while dropping seven into coverage, which is what those defenses did. Hence, a blueprint. Glad we're in agreement.
So you were talking out of your behind here. Good to know.
Eli literally lofted a pass toward the middle of the field that should have been picked. He got lucky on another one that went through the hands on Asante. How you're trying to argue that Bortles is a terrible QB, which is true, while ignoring that Eli was also a terrible QB is some mental gymnastics fit for the Olympics.
Not acting like "they're the Browns" at all. That's straw man #2 for you. When you have to rely on logical fallacies to make a point, that should tell you that you have no point at all. The Steelers are the better offense and we won that game in spite of everything I've already covered in this thread. That defense, on the other hand, just handed Bortles 38 points. If you don't think Tom Brady would have done better, then you're lost. The Patriots would have extended drives and kept them off the field while having KVN and Branch back on defense (on top of the addition of Harrison) to keep Bell under control. That game would have been a blowout.
And yet it has been and hasn't been refuted.
Suuuuuuuuuuuure you are.
