It has often been quoted that we had the 32nd rated defense last year and have certainly even went backwards from last year in having perhaps our best defender (pacman) suspended for probably the entire season and perhaps indefinitely. But did we really have the worst defense last year? Looking at our roster, it doesn't look like we are a last place team on defense. We definitely have talent: Haynesworth, PacMan, Hope, and Bullock are among the elite players at their respective positions. KVB had a bit of a down year but he is expected to be a near pro bowl caliber player. On top of that, the only positions where we have insufficient talent imo would be MLB (question mark with new addition) and safety (LT!?!). Just one year ago, DE was the strength of our team and the only reason we think it's a pressing need now is due to A. Odom missing the season. At CB, we have 3 players that could start at 2 positions in Harper, Hill, and Finnegan. Even if some of this is arguable, most would agree that our lineup does not look like one that should be finishing 32nd in the league. So what happened? For many people that watched every Titans game, one trend was clear: either both our offense and defense played well or neither played well. It seemed to happen every week. I see one of two possible causes (or more likely a combination of both): either (1) that's because there is a clear separation of good teams from bad teams on the schedule that we played or (2) there is something that ties the defense and offense together. Most everyone is familiar with "the best defense is a good offense". But then there is also "defense wins championships". So which applies? Well, here is an interesting correlation. When we get 20+ first downs, we allow an average of 20.6 points per game. When we get 1-19 first downs, we allow an average of 27.5 points per game. Percentage of games of 20+ first downs that we won: 80% Now, that is nothing groundbreaking, but it does point out something rather obvious that few seem to take into consideration: adding defensive talent will not help if we can't keep them off the field. So why take defense just because they are ranked 32nd? If our offense has lost all its playmakers and we never get 20 first downs in a game, all the talent in the world isn't going to help. We were 2:43 below the league average for Time of Possession. Of note is that we would have surely been even lower than that if we had not ran the ball at such a high rate and with relatively good success (*cough* Travis Henry who is no longer with us). Contrast this with the amount of first downs allowed versus the points we score: When we allow 20+ first downs, we score an average of 20.6 points per game. When we allow 1-19 first downs, we score an average of 19.7 points per game. Percentage of games of 1-19 first downs allowed that we won: 50% So, granted with a relatively small sample size, it's clear that offense and moving the ball has a greater correlation with on the field success than defense does. With our offensive moves, I don't think it is a point of much contention that we have lost much more on offense than on defense. If we don't replace some of our offensive losses, expect a long season irregardless of Vince.