Chargers defense of Air Coryell Era post-1979

[JohnH19]

Four years is an eternity in the sports world.

[CSKreager]

Reviving this thread having watched the Chargers’ 1981 yearbook and their defense that year was statistically odd:

Against the run- 2nd in the AFC, 5th overall, allowed the 7th fewest yards per carry- but allowed 25 touchdowns on the ground.

Against the pass- 14th in touchdowns allowed which doesn’t sound terrible, yet they were dead last in yards allowed.

This was a year when Jack Pardee was DC, who presided over good defenses in Chicago/Washington/Houston. Even when he coached the run and shoot Oilers, those defenses were never THAT bad in terms of yards and points.

[SeahawkFever]

Reviving this thread having watched the Chargers’ 1981 yearbook and their defense that year was statistically odd:

Against the run- 2nd in the AFC, 5th overall, allowed the 7th fewest yards per carry- but allowed 25 touchdowns on the ground.

Against the pass- 14th in touchdowns allowed which doesn’t sound terrible, yet they were dead last in yards allowed.

This was a year when Jack Pardee was DC, who presided over good defenses in Chicago/Washington/Houston. Even when he coached the run and shoot Oilers, those defenses were never THAT bad in terms of yards and points.

Maybe the defenses got key, timely turnovers, but gave up a lot of yards before many of those turnovers.

[SeahawkFever]

Four years is an eternity in the sports world.

For instance it’s been just three seasons since the year the Bengals made and lost the AFC Championship Game to Kansas City, and look at them now.

Yeah four years is longer than you might think at face value.

[7DnBrnc53]

Rupert Patrick I've made this argument before, which I have referred to as the Dan Fouts syndrome. here's how it works: A team that is heavily reliant on the pass and can literally score at will comes up with a new wrinkle or a new scheme or a hot new QB (San Diego in 1979, Miami in 1984) will often have great success with it for the first season or so, but after that, their opponents learn to play the same game they are playing (ie the big pass game) and before long these offensive powerhouses turn into 8-8 teams whose defensive passing stats closely resemble their stellar offensive passing stats.

Good points.

Honestly, I think that Air Coryell should have been let go after the 1984 season instead of halfway through 1986. They needed to blow that whole thing up and start over.

[SeahawkFever]

Rupert Patrick I've made this argument before, which I have referred to as the Dan Fouts syndrome. here's how it works: A team that is heavily reliant on the pass and can literally score at will comes up with a new wrinkle or a new scheme or a hot new QB (San Diego in 1979, Miami in 1984) will often have great success with it for the first season or so, but after that, their opponents learn to play the same game they are playing (ie the big pass game) and before long these offensive powerhouses turn into 8-8 teams whose defensive passing stats closely resemble their stellar offensive passing stats.

Good points.

Honestly, I think that Air Coryell should have been let go after the 1984 season instead of halfway through 1986. They needed to blow that whole thing up and start over.

Did they not prioritize improving their defense after Air Coryell became what it was because they thought they could just ride the offense to titles?

If so, 85 Chargers would probably be a textbook example of this type of approach: 8-8 with a number one offense, and a 25th ranked defense.

Looking at that team's rankings it looks like they were terrible on defense for years before 84 even.

[CSKreager]

I've made this argument before, which I have referred to as the Dan Fouts syndrome. here's how it works: A team that is heavily reliant on the pass and can literally score at will comes up with a new wrinkle or a new scheme or a hot new QB (San Diego in 1979, Miami in 1984) will often have great success with it for the first season or so, but after that, their opponents learn to play the same game they are playing (ie the big pass game) and before long these offensive powerhouses turn into 8-8 teams whose defensive passing stats closely resemble their stellar offensive passing stats. They will have the best offense and worst defense in the league. There are exceptions to this rule - teams with balanced offenses, a strong rushing attack, will overcome this syndrome because they can control the clock; big passing games like Fouts and Marino have trouble doing so. In Marino's career he only had one 1.000-yard rusher. A team like the 49ers in their heyday, as an example, always had a Roger Craig or Ricky Watters and were more of a short-medium passing game. Even the Rams of the Kurt Warner era had Marshall Faulk who could run and catch screens although Warner had a cannon arm. Elway didn't really put it all together in Denver until he had Terrell Davis, he needed a great running back to take the pressure off him; he couldn't do it all by himself.

Then how do you explain unbalanced teams that were all run, no throw?

How else do you explain the first half of Shula’s Dolphins which literally was heavily reliant on everything but the pass to the point where by 1982 David Woodley ended up embarrassing himself in a Super Bowl?

Like apparently as long you can control the clock, Shula was so arrogant he thought they could win games without a QB that ad long ad they held onto the ball you could basically play not to lose.