The Patriots have completed the first 16-0 season in the history of the National Football League and have rested on their bye week. Their run to 19-0 begins this weekend. Therefore it is time to look at handicapping their chances of bringing home the Lombardi Trophy.
I am a true believer in the theory that history repeats itself. If you want to see which 2007 teams have a realistic shot of winning the Super Bowl look at what the past champions have done and you can start dismissing unworthy teams pretty quickly.
People tend to make things a lot more complicated than it really needs to be. You have some people that keep preaching that defense and running the football wins championships. Look at the 1962 Packers, 72 Dolphins, 74 Steelers, 85 Bears, 93 Cowboys, and 00 Ravens. Others wills say that you need a Hall of Fame Quarterback like Brady, Elway, Favre, Manning, Montana, or Unitas. Others prefer the Hall of Fame Running Back like Allen, Brown, Harris, Payton, or Smith.
The fact is that teams have found all kinds of different ways to bring home The Lombardi Trophy since the 1966 season. Some have had great offense. Some have had great defense. Some have won as the 1st seed and prohibited favorite. The 05 Steelers won as the 6th seed. We have had a 17-0 team and a 15-5 team win it all. We have had a team that featured two 1,000-yard running backs. We have had the Greatest Show on Turf. While teams have all found different ways to win there is one formula for winning that works year in and year out. It is very simple and very basic. You need both a Top 10 Scoring Offense and a Top 10 Scoring Defense.
Seems pretty simple, right. You can’t be All World on one side of the ball and incompetent on the other side of the ball. You have to be able to score and stop the other team from scoring at a very high level. But that is the formula. These are the only teams since the 1970 merger that have won a Super Bowl without having both their offense and defense ranked in the top 10 of the NFL:
Year Team Offensive Scoring Rank Defensive Scoring Rank 1976 Raiders 4th of 28 teams 12th of 28 teams 1982* Redskins 12th of 28 teams 1st of 28 teams 1983 Raiders 3rd of 28 teams 13th of 28 teams 1990 Giants 15th of 28 teams 1st of 28 teams 2000 Ravens 14th of 31 teams 1st of 31 teams 2002 Buccaneers 18th of 32 teams 1st of 32 teams 2003 Patriots 12th of 32 teams 1st of 32 teams 2006 Colts 2nd of 32 teams 23rd of 32 teams
*strike shortened season
There you have it. Only 8 times since the 1970 merger has a team won a Super Bowl when one of its units was ranked outside of the top 10 in both points scored and points allowed. That is about 20% of the time. One of those years was the strike-shortened season of 1982 where the league only played 9 games. Furthermore, of the 8 times it has happened 5 of those times the team had the number one ranked defense in the NFL. That is where the saying Defense Wins Championships comes from. If you are going to be one dimensional it is much better to do so on the defensive side of the ball rather than the offensive side of the ball especially in the Live Ball Era. Defensive Dominance is a rare commodity when compared to Offensive Ability. Still the only teams that won a Super Bowl that were not in at least ranked in the top half of the league on their weaker side of the ball was the 1990 NY Giants, 2002 Buccaneers, and the 2006 Indianapolis Colts.
Now let’s look at the 12 teams that qualified for the playoffs this season and how they rank in relation to the other 32 teams in the NFL:
Team Offensive Scoring Rank Defensive Scoring Rank
Dallas Cowboys 2nd 13th
Green Bay Packers 4th 6th(t)
Indianapolis Colts 3rd 1st
Jacksonville Jaguars 6th 10th
New England Patriots 1st 4th
New York Giants 14th 17th
Pittsburgh Steelers 9th (t) 2nd
San Diego Chargers 5th 5th
Seattle Seahawks 9th(t) 6th(t)
Tampa Bay Buccaneers 18th 3rd
Tennessee Titans 22nd 8th
Washington Redskins 18th(t) 11th
Interesting how that theory applies to the playoffs too. Seven of the twelve-playoff teams have offensive and defensive units that are ranked in the top 10. Dallas is only 3 spots from being the 8th team in that group. Furthermore the teams that were in the top 10 in both categories went 3-1 on Wild Card Weekend as opposed to the teams that weren’t going 1-3. Pittsburgh and Jacksonville played each other so someone had to lose. Tampa and NY Giants played each other so someone had to win.
It also shows why people believe the AFC is the better conference. 5 of their 6 teams have both offenses and defenses that are ranked in the top 10 as opposed to only 1 of the 6 teams in the NFC.
What this means for New England is that they may very well have the toughest road that any “All Time Great” team has ever had to get to the Super Bowl. I’m not taking anything away from the 1985 Chicago Bears. But here are the rankings of the teams they met in the playoffs along with 8 other dominant teams in the Super Bowl era. By dominant I mean either an offense or defense ranked number 1 with the other unit ranked in the top 5. Their opponents offensive rank is listed first followed by the defense.
Only one of those teams played two teams that had top 10 units on both side of the ball to reach the Super Bowl. That would be the 1996 Packers. The only other team to play two such units in the same playoff is the 1972 Dolphins. It just doesn’t happen that often that you have that many teams in the playoffs that are that equally strong on both sides of the ball. Usually a team is strong on one side of the ball at the expense of the other, especially in the Salary Cap Era. If you are a number one seeded team you might have to face a dominant team in the Championship Game. However with a first round bye and playing the opponent with the worse record in the 2nd round, usually that opening round game poses some lesser challenges.
This is a very strange year in regards of the distribution of talent. The 1999 Buccaneers were able to make the NFC Championship Game with the 27th ranked offense in the NFL. I’m sorry, but that team wouldn’t make it out of the first round in the AFC this season unless they were playing Tennessee. To have 5 teams like that in the playoffs in one conference is beyond comprehension. The NFC has caught up to the AFC at the middle and at the bottom. The NFC went 32-32 against the AFC. That is a vast improvement over 2006 and especially 2005. However, the top teams in terms of overall balance still reside in the AFC.
This is bad news for the Patriots. Just because they had a fantastic regular season does not mean they are guaranteed to do anything in the post season. There have been plenty of times where you have two teams that have great balance playing in the same season. Only one can win it all and it isn’t always the team with the best record. Here are the 5 recent instances:
1990 Buffalo Bills (13-3) (1st, 6th) lost to NY Giants (13-3) (15th, 1st) 20-19 in the Super Bowl
1992 San Francisco 49ers (14-2) (1st, 3rd) lost to Dallas Cowboys (13-3) (2nd, 5th) 30-20 NFC Conference Championship
1997 Green Bay Packers (13-3) (2nd, 5th) lost to Denver Broncos (12-4) (1st, 6th) 31-24 in the Super Bowl
2001 St Louis Rams (14-2) (1st, 7th) lost to the New England Patriots (11-5) (6th, 6th) 20-17 in the Super Bowl
2005 Indianapolis Colts (14-2) (2nd, 2nd) lost to the Pittsburgh Steelers (11-5) (9th, 3rd) 21-18 in the AFC Divisional Round.
The fact is that while New England is 16-0 Indy is no slouch at 13-3. That is only a 3 game difference. Would we be shocked if a 10-6 team beat a 13-3 team? How about a 14-2 team losing to an 11-5 team? With so few games there isn’t much talent wise that separates teams who differ 3 games in the standings. It can be the result of injuries, schedule strength, or a few lucky breaks. While a 2001 14-2 Rams team or 2005 14-2 Colts team losing was a monumental upset, at least we had seen those teams lose before that season. It isn’t like we haven’t seen a team with great balance lose. We just haven’t seen an undefeated team with great balance lose because it hasn’t happened since 1972.
That isn’t meant to say that what New England has done isn’t that impressive. It is the most impressive regular season I have ever seen. What I am saying is that doesn’t translate into guaranteed playoff success. If these were 7 game series, there isn’t anyway a team could beat New England 4 times in a 7 game series. However, this is one 60-minute game where the winner takes all.
If I were to pick the one team that the 2007 Patriots remind me of on that list of dominant teams personnel wise it would be the 1999 Rams. High flying spread it out offense with a very solid but not dominating defense. Brady is better than Warner but Faulk was better than Maroney. Moss is better than Holt or Bruce, but the overall quality of the wide receiver unit is similar. They had very similar offensive philosophies. The biggest difference is the Patriots are a proven veteran team while the Rams were making their first run in the playoffs.
However the Rams got to play 3 teams that were in the middle to the bottom on one side of the ball. That didn’t translate into a cakewalk. The Super Bowl came down to a last play that failed to force OT. The Buccaneers played the Rams tight in the NFC Championship Game. Even the Vikings were able to put up 37 points. The 1985 Bears, 1989 49ers, 1991 Redskins, or 1996 Packers are the exceptions, not the rule. Usually the playoff games are competitive and come down to a handful of key plays no matter how good the team has played during the season.
Look at the 1940 Bears. They lost 7-3 to Washington before meeting them in the NFL Championship Game. They avenged that loss by winning 73-0 in the NFL Championship Game. They carried that momentum to 1941 where they won the NFL Championship at 10-1. In 1942 they outscored their opponents 376 points to 84 points or by 26.5 points per game. They had a perfect regular season. However, they lost to those Redskins 14-6 in the 1942 Championship Game. No matter how dominant a team was in the regular season any team can beat another team on any given Sunday.
While the Chargers and Colts were not successful the first time around; they may have learned something from that game. Just because they lost a close game or were even blown out doesn’t mean they won’t fare better this time around. The weather will be different. The refs will be different. The players will play different. If the Chargers or Colts play the Patriots again it could go anywhere from a rout to a closer game.
In the end, what the statistics show is that New England has 6 opponents in the playoffs this season (Green Bay, Indianapolis, Jacksonville, Pittsburgh, Seattle and San Diego) that compare favorably ranking wise to many past Super Bowl Champions. Furthermore, Dallas is too good to not consider a true contender because their defense is ranked 13. Count them as number 7. That is a lot of bullets to dodge in the playoffs. The first of those bullets is going to be a very talented Jacksonville team that excels in a lot of areas that the Patriots are not at their strongest.
I understand that where past champions ranked will not determine this year’s Super Bowl Champion in as much as the individual and team match ups. The fact that Jacksonville compares favorably ranking wise to the 1980 Raiders or 2001 Patriots is not going to determine that playoff game in as much as how the Jaguars perform against Tom Brady and Randy Moss. No matter how balanced a team is they don’t have a unit as strong as the New England Offense. It will take a perfect game to beat them.
That said, if people think the Patriots are going to steamroll the NFL playoffs like the 1985 Bears or 1989 49ers they probably better slow down. The 2007 Patriots will have plenty of worthy teams to ruin their run at history. Should they end the season at 19-0 it would be hard to say this isn’t the greatest team of all time. While I think the Patriots have a very good chance of hoisting the trophy in February, I wouldn’t bet the farm on it. I think Patriot fans better buckle up, because regardless of whether the Patriots do make it to 19-0 it is going to be a bumpy ride. That ride starts when Jacksonville goes to Foxboro on Saturday.
That is a lot of information and stats. To keep is short you could have said the Patriots will win because Randy Moss, but to each his own. Good stuff though.
bamaboy22 - Thank you for the post. I am definately a stat junky. I don't recall saying the Patriots were going to win it all. I said they had a good chance, but I am still holding out hope that the Packers can win the Lombardi Trophy.
Jan2813 - Thank you for the comments. Like I said the key is going to be stopping the Patriots offense and that starts with putting pressure on Brady and not letting Moss get open deep. However I think there are some pretty good teams left that will have a chance to stop the run at perfection.
At the risk of exhibiting an excess of pedantry, in that the whole of your post is carefully written and is filled with keen analysis, I will offer this spelling correction:
'receiving cores' should be receiving corps (corps, from the Latin corpus, body, as in Marine Corps).
Thank you for your excellent posts, which I have read with pleasure each week from my citizenship in Steeler Nation (filled for now with wailing and gnashing of teeth, and a dreadful chorus of "if only, if only . . .).
Dr Fred
Last edited by Dr Fred on January 9th at 11:47 AM.
QPublic - I'm not so sure. Jacksonville, Indy, and GB or Dallas would give them all they wanted and then some. Like I said, they are the favorite, they should win, but they are far from a slam dunk.
Dr Fred - I try to do my best job on the spelling, but don't have the editting staff to make sure it is perfect. I am glad you have enjoyed the post and am sorry that your Steeler's season ended in such dramatic fashion.
Excellent analysis here. If the Patriots can beat Jacksonville (a bad match-up defensively for the Jags), Colts and Cowboys/Packers, I would think their claim of Greatest Team (1-year) of All-Time would be legitimate. Now as far as the Greatest Dynasty (Decade or more)....we would have some work to do on the analysis and opinion end.
One thing I would like to know about the superbowl teams of years past. Injuries, and how the teams had done wth or without them. don't know if it is a ready stat still, but I am curious to see how injuries played, if at all in some of these cases. Obviously the team tha won probably had few injuries, but aside from a scoring standpoint, the injury update is one of the most important statistics in setting the line on all games.
Like you said, people always whine about injuries, penalties, and officiating, but injuries is a determining factor, but coaching and officials have no bearing on the betting line. Would the Pats be favored if they had the injuries that say the Steelers had?
Jeez that was a lot of work Cred.
Yet despite how complicated and often untrustworthy all the numbers can be its pretty simple. Teams that win the SB slow down or shut down their opponents strengths. Best ex in the past 10 years is the Patriots 1st SB win over the "the greatest show on turf".
Can either the Jags or assuming they win the colts stop NE this year? Absolutly. Slow down or shut down their offense (their strength). That said... nobody has...
Simply put, if anyone can score 40 on NE they have a pretty good chance but consider... NE could score 50 just as easy, maybe easier.
Moseby - Good post. I agree with that. I think the 50s Browns, 60s Packers, 70s Steelers, and 80s 49ers would all have something to say about that.
NetSteeler - Thanks for the comments. Absolutely teams have had to play through injuries. The 72 Dolphins played without their starting QB Bob Griese through the entire regular season and got him back halfway through the playoffs. Jeff Hostetler won the Super Bowl in 90 for the NY Giants as their backup QB. The Bills made it the Super Bowl in 92 without Jim Kelly and engineered the greatest comeback of all time. Robert Brooks was lost for the season in 96 and the Packers were able to plug in Andre Rison. The 01 Patriots lost Brady in a game and Bledsoe bailed them out against your Steelers. Those are just the ones I though of off the top of my head. I'm sure there are more.
The playoffs and Super Bowl is rich in tradition of backups and nobodies shining for that one day. The Pats would absolutely be favored if they had the injuries the Steelers had because the Patriots are the better team. Great teams play find ways to play through stuff like that.
Als - Thanks for the post. All I am saying is that a lot of people have been acting like the Patriots will win 150-30 in their 3 games on route to the Super Bowl. I think that points for vs. points against in relation to the rest of the league is a very legitimant way of evaluating a team's chances of beating the Patriots.
The Patriots are a very talented well balanced team. It is going to take someone with balance to beat them. I think their are a number teams that fit that bill. I don't necessarily agree with your assertion that it will take 30 or 40 points to beat them. The thing no one is talking about is the Boston winter weather. If there is wind and snow a team with a good running game and good defense (Jacksonville or Indy) would be better suited for those conditions.
The games the Patriots almost lost were in the 20s. I could forsee a situation where they lost 27-20 or 24-17 in bad weather like that.
Als - Yeah I think we agree. You were saying that someone could shut them down, but that it hasn't happened yet. All I was pointing out is that I think someone could shut them down in bad weather. Sounds like we are splitting hairs.
Last edited by StreetCred on January 10th at 11:24 AM.
Yes I agree about the Patsies being a better team, but only because of their depth on both sides of the ball. the Steelers had the depth on defense to show up this year, but with Hines hurt most of the season, and the o-line playing below par they showed very little depth at most posistions. + the pats have better coaching, love or hate billicheat!
Also if the Jets can hold the Pats to 20 points, then the Jags can certainly do it, but can they score 24 on the Pats at the same time?
Last edited by netsteeler on January 10th at 2:30 PM.
Netsteeler - The Seahawks beat the Bears this season, but the Packers lost to the Bears twice, including a blowout. So they are in trouble, right??? I don't think how the Jets did have any bearing on this game.
The Steelers had injuries this season. Everyone had them. The Colts haven't played with Freeney and Harrison most of the season. Seymour was hurt the first half of the season and Harrison missed 4 games to start the season. Maroney and Morris have been ####ed up at different times. Garrard was hurt for the Jags in the middle of the season. The Packers didn't have Jennings to start the season. Wynn was hurt for the year before they found Grant.
I'm just not buying into the Steelers were too injured at the end of the season. Parker was a huge loss. So was Smith. I don't deny that. Great teams find ways to play through that stuff. If the Steelers had lost Big Ben, Parker, Ward, and Holmes for the playoffs I would have a different view. One guy going down can't cost you a season. If it does, you weren't that great to begin with.
Last edited by StreetCred on January 11th at 8:35 AM.
well I think you missed my point..the teams you are talking about only lost 1 or 2 starters for a few games, even Freeny played most of the season. None of the teams still in the palyoffs have lost even half of the starters the Steelers did. which is my point, the Steelers wee not deep enough on offense to lose a running back, tackle, fullback, reciever, AND tight end! that is 5 starters on offense alone. like I said no depth on offense.
As for the jets...point is that if a 4 win team can hold the pats to 20 points, the 12 win jags can also!
Netsteeler - Look at the Chargers this weekend. They were down Rivers, LT, and Gates in that game and still found a way to win when trailing in the Colts in the 4th. The Giants don't have a healthy secondary and found a way to stop Dallas and their talented receivers.
The Steelers were a team that peaked in Week 9 and were not very good after that. Some of that was due to injuries. Losing Parker and Smith definatley hurt. What hurt more is that Parker had only 2 rushing touchdowns on the season and their play was up and down like the Dow Jones Stock Market the second half of the season.
I'm just not someone that buys into the injury excuse. That is part of the game and while it is unfortunate you have to play through it. Fans of losing teams point to the same weak excuses 1) Officiating, 2) Injuries, 3) Tough Schedule, Division, or Conference. Steelers had a good team this year and were among the top 10 in the league. It just wasn't a Championship Caliber Team when compared to some of the other teams in the NFL.
We will see about the Steelers when they have to play I think 8 playoff teams next year? but you still compare the Steelers with teams with way more depth than Pittsburgh. There is only one posistion on the field with depth and that is linebacker. I really hope they address the depth of their team this off season. they did very little last year, I think they signed Mayhan and that was it. Otherwise we are looking at a 8-8 or 9-7 season at best!
I live in Chicago, but am originally from Wisconsin. I am disgruntled Green Bay Packer fan that now loves the Jets. My favorite sports are Football, Basketball, and Baseball. Hockey and soccer are at the bottom of my list. I would rather watch the Spelling Bee than either of those sports. My favorite athletes of all time are Brett Favre and Michael Jordan. While I like debating many sports, NFL Football is by far my favorite topic to discuss.
In addition to this blog I am also a writer for the Fantasy Football Maniaxs. It is quite an honor to be writing with a group of knowledgeable football fanatics. The address is http://www.fa ntasyfootball maniaxs.com. I hope you enjoy the blog.
