I'm going to prove to you that to win the SB nowadays, first you need a Defense. Then you need a decent QB. A decent RB is optional. Nice to have, but optional.

Chris Johnson is unarguably the best RB in the game right now. He's playing for a team that there's no way in hell is going to even go to the big game. Who's going to go? Well, from the AFC, it will be either the Colts, the Chargers, or the Patriots most likely. I was about to include the Bengals but they're only +47. I like +100 teams.

Let's look at the those 3 teams:
Colts: #1 D, elite QB, 30th in rushing
Chargers: #14 D, elite QB, 31st in rushing
Patriots: #7 D, elite QB, 14th in rushing

On our side of the pond, I'm taking the Saints, the Vikings, and our beloved Packers as the most likely NFC reps to the SB:
Saints: 18th D, elite QB, 5th in rushing
Vikings: 9th D, elite QB, 9th in rushing
Packers: 7th D, elite QB (he's got over a 100 rating, he's elite), 11th in rushing

From a historical perspective, if the season ended today, the Colts would beat the Packers in the Playoffs. It's because the team most likely to win the SB is the team with the #1 D. That's what history tells us. No guarantee of course, but the trend is there. Keep reading.

What do all these teams have in common? Well only the Chargers and Saints are not in the top 10 in D. All six have elite QBs. Only the Vikings have an elite RB but with a huge asterisk - the Saints' RBs play as a team and put together, they're really elite.

Now let's look at the SB winners in the 00s:
2000 - Ravens - #1 D, average QB, 5th in rushing. This team has one of the most sick Ds I've ever seen, barely allowing 10 points a game. Their QB was irrelevant but their RB tandem was elite - Jamal Lewis + Priest Holmes

2001 - Patriots - #6 D, the best QB of the 00s*, 13th in rushing. This was a well balanced team led by an evil genius Coach that found ways to win.

2002 - Bucs - #1 D, average to good QB, 27th in rushing. 2000 and 2002 are perfect examples of that boring (but true) cliche that defense wins championships. I hated that cliche and in the process of trying to disprove it, I ended up realizing it's right. Look at the stats. 2002 is the perfect example of it.

2003 - Patriots - #1 D, elite QB, 24th in rushing. Build a D, get a QB, RB optional. Need I say more?

2004 - Patriots - #2 D, elite QB, 7th in rushing. All around a more balanced team than the previous year. This team could rely on any aspect of it to win games, as it had to all season long.

2005 - Steelers - #3 D, good QB, 5th in rushing. Ben R had the worst QB performance ever in a SB by a winning team, but you don't need to do much when your team doesn't allow very many points.

2006 - Colts - #23 D, elite QB, 18th in rushing. OK, there are exceptions to every rule and this year, by historical trends, da Bears were supposed to win the SB. Instead, Wrecks Grossman singlehandedly destroyed his team in the SB (and I lost a lot of money because of that ass clown).

2007 - Giants - #17 D, good to average QB, 4th in rushing. Two years in a row, we have exceptions to the rule. However these two years are the exception. See every other year in the 00s.

2008 - Steelers - #1 D, good QB, 23rd in rushing. I think I've made my point. Build a D. Get yourself a decent QB, RB optional.

So in summary, in 4 of the 9 years, the team with the #1 D won the SB. One year it was the #2 D and one year the #3 D. That makes 6 of the 9 years, a top 3 D wins the SB. Kind of proves the point that D wins championships.

For QBs, an elite QB is nice to have but five of the 9 years, there wasn't an elite QB on the SB winning team. Tom Brady, the best QB of the 00s, won 3 of them. Peyton Manning, the second best QB of the 00s won once. Some of these other QBs are forgettable though but "good enough" to let the D all the work and work a little bit of magic when necessary.

As for RBs, optional. Giants had the best running game of the SB winners this decade at #4. The '02 Bucs won the SB at 27th in rushing. The '03 Pats won it at 24th in rushing. Last years Steelers won it with only 23rd in rushing. So nice to have, but optional.


--
* My personal opinion. Most of you would probably put P Manning above Brady but Manning implodes in the Playoffs worse than any other QB I've ever seen. He doesn't have an excuse either as he's played 5 years this decade with a top 10 D including one year with the #1 D and 2 with the #2 D. This year, once again he has the #1 D and he'll most likely collapse again in the Playoffs.

Brady on the other hand has good to solid stats during regular season, then becomes Joe Montana Jr in the Playoffs. I'd take Brady.

---

Good stuff. But, I will never say Tom Brady is the best quarterback in any sense. I hate him more than any other player in the NFL.

---

Oh it's not about liking him. Him and Belichick have a special place reserved for them in hell. I'm just talking performance.

---

Personally, Minnesota is the best roster in the league, but going up to New Orleans is going to be tough. I also don't like Peyton in the playoffs, but I'm feeling San Diego this year. I like what they got going on and they've knocked Indy out in the last two seasons.

I would get San Diego vs. New Orleans in the Super Bowl, but the trend you point out says it's more likely to be Indianapolis vs. Minnesota.

One thing I learn watching trends and that's they're meant to be broken....... eventually. Whether or not that's this year will remain to be seen.

I refuse to mention a certain team in this topic for personal reasons. 🙂

---