32.00

[muskiesfan]

(11-11-2018, 11:32 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Oh, I never claimed the Saints weren't good on offense.

My problem was more with the Top-5 and Top-10 threshholds. A 5th ranked offense that has played the Bengals D might not be as good of and offense as a 6th ranked offense who hasn't played the Bengals. The same with 9th-10th versus 11th-12th. The offenses the Bengals went against would still be good, but they would likely drop a rank/a couple ranks if they didn't play the Bengals.

The Saints were a good offense. They were averaging 402 yards and 34.9 points per game. They put up 509 and 51 against the Bengals. Playing against the Bengals D makes them look even better than their already good level.

This guy was trying to make it sound like if it weren't for playing these unstoppable offenses, and if Dennard and Vigil were back, they wouldn't be terrible. It is hard to properly convey how historically bad this defense has been.

Agreed. The defense wasn't performing much better if any when Vigil, Lawson, Dennard, and Burfict were on the field. Even with all 4 of them today, I doubt that would've stopped the Saints from completely dominating the Bengals. The argument seems to be that Andy Dalton is a big reason for how historically bad this defense is performing.