An elite D is the most important thing. An elite QB is next. A good rushing attack is completely irrelevant to the success of your team.
Or let me put it into really simple words. It doesn't matter if you SUCK at running the ball or if you RULE at running the ball. What matters is that your Defense RULES and your Quarterback RULES. If your Defense RULES and your Quarterback RULES but your Running Backs SUCK, you still have a good chance at winning the Super Bowl.
"zombieslayer" wrote:
Lets broaden our horizons and look at the passing/running game from a different perspective: passing attempts and rushing attempts.
Only 3 of the top 10 teams in passing attempts made the playoffs. NOTE: Steelers were #27 in pass attempts.
6 Of the top 10 teams in rushing attempts made the playoffs. edit: NOTE: Steelers were one of these, at #8.
NOTE: Packers had a fairly well-balanced attack this year--16th in pass attempts and 20th in rush attempts--for a 56/44% pass-run ratio.
And having an Elite QB, while good, was hardly a guarantee of good performance (just ask the SD Chargers, with the #2 ranked QB this year). Also, not having an elite QB wasn't prohibitive to making the playoffs--Mark Sanchez was ranked #27, and Matt Hasselback was ranked #28 this year, both made the playoffs, and the Jets almost made the SB, losing to the Steelers 24-19 in the AFC Championship game.
FACT: The team with the more-balanced attack (run/pass ratio) during the SB has won 10 of the last 11 years, the sole exception being this year's SB, which had one D creating 3 turnovers, converting 1 directly into a TD.
I won't rehash all of the threads back over the last season that discussed the benefits a good running game brings to your passing game, I'll just summarize them, in simple words:
Instead of good running game = irrelevant, I would say good running game (and by good running game I mean a credible threat to run; one that attracts the D's attention) = better/improved passing game. edit: That's not irrelevant in my book.