SoggyHog Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 We've all heard the saying "Defense wins Championships" from time to time. With all the draft discussion about which position the Bills should draft this year (defense or QB), this is a closer look at the past 21 years of regular season Offensive and Defensive ranking of the Super Bowl winners. What I found was that 11 times (52%) a team won the Championship with a defense that out ranked the offense(48%). The average rank of the offensive team was 9.3 and the defensive team was 7.9. Only 4 times out of the last 21 years was the Super Bowl champions defense ranked #1 (19%) while only 3 times was the offense ranked #1 (14%). Elway, Aikman and Young have a combined 6 championships and are already in the HoF, while Farve, P. Manning, Brady, Warner and Roethilsberger have 8 rings and are on their way in the HoF. That's 14 out of 21 years teams won the SB with a HoF'er or possible HoF'er (67%). Include Rogers, E. Manning and Brees (all considered Franchise QB's) and that's 17 Super Bowl wins (81%). Can a team win with a marginal QB? Sure, Dilfer, B. Johnson, Rypien and Simms all have rings. Each of those QB's had defenses that out ranked the offense. So, 4 times(19%) in the last 21 years a defense carried the marginal QB to a Super Bowl ring. I apologize if this has already been posted in the past (I have not seen it), but I hope you enjoy the topic. Go Bills!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stormin Norman Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 (edited) You are comparing offenses to defenses and it presents a compelling picture, indeed. Perhaps your question should be asked this way: Which Super Bowl winning team had the better defense, period? I ask this question based on the experience of our Buffalo teams in the big game. Against the New York Giants, New York had the better defense (and another no-name Super Bowl winning quarterback in Jeff Hostettler, I might add). Remember, they went up against the 49ers in the NFC Championship game the week before and shut them down, too. The first Super Bowl featured Buffalo's best defense of the four appearances, and OJ Anderson ran over them at will. Too bad we couldn't get off the field because Thurman would have had a game for the ages. Against the Redskins, clearly Washington had the better defense. Again, their offensive line chewed us up and spit us out from about the middle of the second quarter to the end of the game. And then twice against the Cowboys, I would argue the Cowboys had the better defense than Buffalo. We just never had the defensive fortitude to stay with the other teams for sixty minutes, it seemed to me. It would be interesting to see how the defenses for the winning teams rank vs. the defenses for the losing teams. I am certainly not arguing that it doesn't help to have a great quarterback. Wish we had one! Edited February 22, 2011 by Stormin Norman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
b stein 22 Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 We already have a potential elite QB on our team. Fitz had a great year considering his circumstances. Fitz played with horrible wide receivers. Do we even have a number one on this team? Do we even have a TE. We do however, have a bunch of undrafted rookies on our team. Name one successful QB that has no talent around him and puts up numbers like FItz. I cant think of any. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoggyHog Posted February 22, 2011 Author Share Posted February 22, 2011 We already have a potential elite QB on our team. Fitz had a great year considering his circumstances. Fitz played with horrible wide receivers. Do we even have a number one on this team? Do we even have a TE. We do however, have a bunch of undrafted rookies on our team. Name one successful QB that has no talent around him and puts up numbers like FItz. I cant think of any. Jay Cutler Sam Bradford Alex Smith Shaun Hill Jason Campbell All similar numbers to Fitz and talent around him. None are Franchise QB's. Cutler should be, Bradford could be, Smith.......no way! I am a Fitz fan, but I'm afraid Ralph isn't. Is Fitz an 'elite" QB? Not now. Could he be? Hopefully but probably not. Could he lead the Bills to a Super Bowl? Sure, he has a 19% chance to do it if they stock the defense. However, get a "Franchise QB" like Ralph wants, and the chances increase dramatically! (per my OP) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geno Smith's Arm Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 We've all heard the saying "Defense wins Championships" from time to time. With all the draft discussion about which position the Bills should draft this year (defense or QB), this is a closer look at the past 21 years of regular season Offensive and Defensive ranking of the Super Bowl winners. What I found was that 11 times (52%) a team won the Championship with a defense that out ranked the offense(48%). The average rank of the offensive team was 9.3 and the defensive team was 7.9. Only 4 times out of the last 21 years was the Super Bowl champions defense ranked #1 (19%) while only 3 times was the offense ranked #1 (14%). Elway, Aikman and Young have a combined 6 championships and are already in the HoF, while Farve, P. Manning, Brady, Warner and Roethilsberger have 8 rings and are on their way in the HoF. That's 14 out of 21 years teams won the SB with a HoF'er or possible HoF'er (67%). Include Rogers, E. Manning and Brees (all considered Franchise QB's) and that's 17 Super Bowl wins (81%). Can a team win with a marginal QB? Sure, Dilfer, B. Johnson, Rypien and Simms all have rings. Each of those QB's had defenses that out ranked the offense. So, 4 times(19%) in the last 21 years a defense carried the marginal QB to a Super Bowl ring. I apologize if this has already been posted in the past (I have not seen it), but I hope you enjoy the topic. Go Bills!!!! It's just a nice catchphrase. Bill Parcells used to say it, and he won two Super Bowls (with a team that happened to have the greatest defensive player ever on it), so everything he says is right. Bill Parcells was such an egomaniac, that he hated QB's because he wanted to be the focus of the team (and media). He wanted to be "the Michael Jordan" (remember when players would bicker about who was "the Michael Jordan" on their teams?). "Teams win championships!" How's that one? I think teams can focus on what the talent on hand can accomplish. If you have a great offensive coordinator and a nice array of weapons you can emphasize offense. I know about applying drafting philosophy, but you don't avoid drafting some great offensive talent just because you're the Baltimore Ravens or something. "Nah, we don't DO offense" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akm0404 Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 No. Elite-level play from quarterbacks allows teams to compete for championships for a decade. Or, you can try to build a once-a-generation defense and do it that way. This isn't the 60s anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuckeyeBill Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 I would argue that a top defense puts you in a position to win. Playmakers (especially the QB), however, often determine the outcome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramius Posted February 22, 2011 Share Posted February 22, 2011 Good arguement, but i'll say that you can scratch Brad Johnson and Mark rypien off your "no-name" QB list. Sure, they were relatively pedestrian during their careers, but in the seasons their teams won the Super Bowl, both of those guys were playing at a pro bowl level. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geno Smith's Arm Posted February 23, 2011 Share Posted February 23, 2011 I would argue that a top defense puts you in a position to win. Playmakers (especially the QB), however, often determine the outcome. I think you are onto something there. Obviously if both teams are n the Super Bowl, then following the "Defense wins championships" maxim, both teams must have outstanding defenses. Someone has to make a play against the defense! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reddogblitz Posted February 23, 2011 Share Posted February 23, 2011 (edited) Can a team win with a marginal QB? Sure, Dilfer, B. Johnson, Rypien and Simms all have rings. Each of those QB's had defenses that out ranked the offense. So, 4 times(19%) in the last 21 years a defense carried the marginal QB to a Super Bowl ring. I'd add Eli Manning to that list of marginal QBs with a good defense winning the Super Bowl. It could be argued that Big Ben should be included as well. In his 3 SBs he's thrown 5 picks and 3 TDs. Nothing to write home to Mom about. Go Bills!!!! Indeed. Edited February 23, 2011 by reddogblitz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hapless Bills Fan Posted February 23, 2011 Share Posted February 23, 2011 Sure, Dilfer, B. Johnson, Rypien and Simms all have rings. Each of those QB's had defenses that out ranked the offense. So, 4 times(19%) in the last 21 years a defense carried the marginal QB to a Super Bowl ring. What about Hofstadler? (that's why you picked 21 years, innit?) Now it's 24%. The jury may still be out on Eli Manning as well. 29%. I agree it would be interesting to look at how the offense and defense of the two teams playing in the SB compare. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hooper Posted February 23, 2011 Share Posted February 23, 2011 Great post, good research....last in the league against the run, nuff said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truth on hold Posted February 23, 2011 Share Posted February 23, 2011 Scoring more points than the other team has proven successful 100% of the time. Plenty of ways to get it done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thoner7 Posted February 23, 2011 Share Posted February 23, 2011 Show me the sure-fire HOF QB in this draft and Ill take him. At least name a guy thats a concensus top QB, and would be considered a franchise QB. Not some obscure guy or a 1 read and run guy or the most inaccurate QB I have ever seen or a drug user... Ill go defense this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KOKBILLS Posted February 23, 2011 Share Posted February 23, 2011 We already have a potential elite QB on our team. Seriously? That's got to be the funniest thing I've read in weeks... The legend grows even in the off season...Amazing... Show me the sure-fire HOF QB in this draft and Ill take him. Right...Because those Prospects come along every year... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billsguy Posted February 23, 2011 Share Posted February 23, 2011 We've all heard the saying "Defense wins Championships" from time to time. With all the draft discussion about which position the Bills should draft this year (defense or QB), this is a closer look at the past 21 years of regular season Offensive and Defensive ranking of the Super Bowl winners. What I found was that 11 times (52%) a team won the Championship with a defense that out ranked the offense(48%). The average rank of the offensive team was 9.3 and the defensive team was 7.9. Only 4 times out of the last 21 years was the Super Bowl champions defense ranked #1 (19%) while only 3 times was the offense ranked #1 (14%). Elway, Aikman and Young have a combined 6 championships and are already in the HoF, while Farve, P. Manning, Brady, Warner and Roethilsberger have 8 rings and are on their way in the HoF. That's 14 out of 21 years teams won the SB with a HoF'er or possible HoF'er (67%). Include Rogers, E. Manning and Brees (all considered Franchise QB's) and that's 17 Super Bowl wins (81%). Can a team win with a marginal QB? Sure, Dilfer, B. Johnson, Rypien and Simms all have rings. Each of those QB's had defenses that out ranked the offense. So, 4 times(19%) in the last 21 years a defense carried the marginal QB to a Super Bowl ring. I apologize if this has already been posted in the past (I have not seen it), but I hope you enjoy the topic. Go Bills!!!! Nice effort, but filled with statistical and logical flaws. Does a great QB make the team or does a great team make the QB? It's a riddle without a definitive answer. There are too many variables to say which variables are most important to winning championships. Even if you could narrow it down, the exceptions will always muddy the waters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hplarrm Posted February 23, 2011 Share Posted February 23, 2011 My sense is that the answer to the O vs. D question is unfortunately the wimpy truth that both are necessary and neither one is sufficient without the other. There really are two different questions here: 1. How lackluster can a D be and still the team marches to victory due to a #1 O, and alternately how pathetic can an O be and still be carried to victory by a @1 D. 2. The other question which is far more relevant to the Bills is do you build an eventual winner by drafting D first or by drafting O first (namely a franchise QB in our case right now).. Actually I think these questions are fairly easily answered intuitively. Question 1: The Bears team in '85 and the Ravens led by their D which carried Dilfer are two examples which come to mind immediately of Ds that carried Os. On both teams the Os did not compare to the Ds in ability to dominate, and both MacMahon and Difer though not career franchise guys Had very good seasons in a large part due to the short fields the Os constantly took advantage of. The Walter Payton led Bears O fits well into my necessary though not sufficient theory (I was born in Chicago and became a Bills fan after marrying a Buffalo gal and moving to the Nickel City in 1989 but rooting for the Bears in 85 I always felt they had a better chance to score when the D was on the field than the O). I think you need both but the primary example of the converse case for me is the Bills in their first SB which had a great O but a D which despite Bruuuuce and some great LBs could not stop the run and lost to DYG because the great O could not carry a troubled D. Question 2: Which first is pretty much dependent on need and availability in real life as to whether you go D or O first. In the Bills case even if you are certain that Fitzy is not the franchise QB we need you have to agree that our D is beyond bad in terms of results. We are probably two stud D players away from even adequacy. Its hard to see a logical strategy for getting a QB with the #1 that does not count on us being so bad in '11 season we are "blessed" with a top 5 pick again next year. In addition to the situation on the team biasing one toward making the 1st an attempt to get one of the two defensive studs we must have to merely be adequate, it is really questionable with Luck opting out whether there really is a franchise quality QB in this draft. Maybe Newton but there is at least a serious case one has to admit to that his playing on a running team in college is at best a recipe for him learning in '11 rather than leading the team. Even worse, probably right up there with our clear D needs and the desire for a franchise QB is that the OL appears top be a player and a half away (RT and a swing guy) and also a need to build chemistry that is gonna place the QB in real danger in '11. I think the situation the Bills are in pushes us heavily toward a D pick as a building strategy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobChalmers Posted February 23, 2011 Share Posted February 23, 2011 (edited) Elway, Aikman and Young have a combined 6 championships and are already in the HoF, while Farve, P. Manning, Brady, Warner and Roethilsberger have 8 rings and are on their way in the HoF. That's 14 out of 21 years teams won the SB with a HoF'er or possible HoF'er (67%). And you don't think that winning super bowls had something to do with them being named to the Hall of Fame??? Aikman, for example, though he was a #1 overall pick - didn't have such great numbers during the regular season. Without the SB wins, there is no way he makes the HoF. His career stats: http://www.nfl.com/players/profile?id=AIK553722 are nothing special - Boomer Esiason, for example had better, and you don't even hear his name come up for the Hall. Aikman was never the NFL MVP. Elway is one of the most bogus examples. The Broncos were humiliated in the Super Bowl when Elway was the key to their offense. Later, when he was long past his prime and his job was to hand the ball to Terrell Davis - the 1998 regular season MVP - they won the Super Bowl over Brett Favre. Terry Bradshaw's career stats would get him cut even from the Bills today. 212/210 TD/INT; <28000yds, QB rating of 70.9!! He did win four Super Bowls "leading" one of the best teams ever. Does that make him why the Steelers won?? In fact, it's almost impossible for a QB to make the Hall of Fame w/o a ring. Your consideration of the regular season team ranks has merit. Claiming indivdual QB's being "Hall of Famers" as the reason the team got to/won Super Bowls is a circular argument with no merit. Edited February 23, 2011 by BobChalmers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akm0404 Posted February 23, 2011 Share Posted February 23, 2011 A lot of you guys are missing the point, looking at things like Roethlisberger's Super Bowl stats and the argument as to whether winning championships elevated quarterbacks like Elway and Aikman. The bottom line is, and I really feel like it is unarguable, that having an elite-level quarterback on your team makes it a relevant championship contender for a decade. When a team has an elite quarterback, they are the face of the franchise and usually stay with their team through the balance of their career. Teams place a huge priority on keeping an elite quarterback, but yet you'll often see elite pass rushers changing teams frequently (Peppers, Allen, etc.). Why do you think that is? Having an elite-level quarterback is every NFL team's #1 priority. Without one, you scratch and claw for a rare playoff appearance and maybe just maybe a freak Super Bowl run. With one, you are almost penciled into the playoffs year after year, and get legitimate looks at having a parade or two. Mark my words - The Bills futility will only finally end when they get elite-level play from a solidified QB position. Flounder around with 300 pounders on either side of the ball all you want, but it only keeps the team in neutral. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K Gun Special Posted February 23, 2011 Share Posted February 23, 2011 And you don't think that winning super bowls had something to do with them being named to the Hall of Fame??? Aikman, for example, though he was a #1 overall pick - didn't have such great numbers during the regular season. Without the SB wins, there is no way he makes the HoF. His career stats: http://www.nfl.com/players/profile?id=AIK553722 are nothing special - Boomer Esiason, for example had better, and you don't even hear his name come up for the Hall. Aikman was never the NFL MVP. Elway is one of the most bogus examples. The Broncos were humiliated in the Super Bowl when Elway was the key to their offense. Later, when he was long past his prime and his job was to hand the ball to Terrell Davis - the 1998 regular season MVP - they won the Super Bowl over Brett Favre. Terry Bradshaw's career stats would get him cut even from the Bills today. 212/210 TD/INT; <28000yds, QB rating of 70.9!! He did win four Super Bowls "leading" one of the best teams ever. Does that make him why the Steelers won?? In fact, it's almost impossible for a QB to make the Hall of Fame w/o a ring. Your consideration of the regular season team ranks has merit. Claiming indivdual QB's being "Hall of Famers" as the reason the team got to/won Super Bowls is a circular argument with no merit. Yea and Bradshaw was one of the best of his era, look it up. The overall numbers of players of his era were much lower. Talk about an argument with no merit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts