Superbowl: Best team prevails?

[Tuck ya in]

Not directly Vikings related, sue me. It seems every other year everyone's Superbowl pick at the start of the playoffs is knocked out early. How often does the years best overall team actually get the Lombardi trophy? I could do a statistical breakdown researching history but this will be fun off the top of the head. I think maybe 7% of the nation picked Philly last January....

[weimy froob]

the team that hits the hardest has a real good chance to win every year.

[Tuck ya in]

One vote!? Let's go here damnit!

[Beef Supreme]

Why make this a vote? You could crunch the data and get an objective answer.



My sense is that what really matters is being hot going into the playoffs. You can't win the Super Bowl in September and October. W/L is all that matters there. It doesn't matter how well you're playing, if you're stealing wins, that's good enough. Come January, you need to play well to beat good teams 3 or 4 times in a row. I can't think of any team that won the Super Bowl but played poorly through most of the playoffs.

You can lose it in those early months, though (by losing and failing to make the playoffs).

[Tuck ya in]

Why make this a vote? You could crunch the data and get an objective answer.



My sense is that what really matters is being hot going into the playoffs. You can't win the Super Bowl in September and October. W/L is all that matters there. It doesn't matter how well you're playing, if you're stealing wins, that's good enough. Come January, you need to play well to beat good teams 3 or 4 times in a row. I can't think of any team that won the Super Bowl but played poorly through most of the playoffs.

You can lose it in those early months, though (by losing and failing to make the playoffs).

Going off an educated guess, rather than a statistical analysis...like I wrote. Wasn't writing a Harvard essay. I just think most football fans are so far from reality when it comes from what football really is. It's a freaking crap shoot, specifically in the playoffs. And there's so many crazy changes that happen as a result...good and bad. It's so easy to overreact and want changes, but there's so much more to look at, and I thank god changes usually don't come about from fan's pressure. I look at a body of work. I know it's all about the biggest stages though, hell think about Chilly for instance if Favre doesn't throw across his body and we win our first Superbowl.....he might still be coach for all we know. Or if Keenum doesn't throw that pick six last year and massively change momentum? Blair's missed field goal to upset the NFC favorite that year, with a healthy Teddy moving on to play Arizona?

[Tuck ya in]

I'm sure most people had Seattle beating Dallas last night, hmmm.

[weimy froob]

Why make this a vote? You could crunch the data and get an objective answer.



My sense is that what really matters is being hot going into the playoffs. You can't win the Super Bowl in September and October. W/L is all that matters there. It doesn't matter how well you're playing, if you're stealing wins, that's good enough. Come January, you need to play well to beat good teams 3 or 4 times in a row. I can't think of any team that won the Super Bowl but played poorly through most of the playoffs.

You can lose it in those early months, though (by losing and failing to make the playoffs).

Going off an educated guess, rather than a statistical analysis...like I wrote. Wasn't writing a Harvard essay. I just think most football fans are so far from reality when it comes from what football really is. It's a freaking crap shoot, specifically in the playoffs. And there's so many crazy changes that happen as a result...good and bad. It's so easy to overreact and want changes, but there's so much more to look at, and I thank god changes usually don't come about from fan's pressure. I look at a body of work. I know it's all about the biggest stages though, hell think about Chilly for instance if Favre doesn't throw across his body and we win our first Superbowl.....he might still be coach for all we know. Or if Keenum doesn't throw that pick six last year and massively change momentum? Blair's missed field goal to upset the NFC favorite that year, with a healthy Teddy moving on to play Arizona?

i still think at the end of the day the most physical team during the tournament wins the game-and that the most physical teams in each conference end up playing the game many of the years. it's hard to tangibly put this into statistics though. it pretty much is an eye test thing.

[Tuck ya in]

Why make this a vote? You could crunch the data and get an objective answer.



My sense is that what really matters is being hot going into the playoffs. You can't win the Super Bowl in September and October. W/L is all that matters there. It doesn't matter how well you're playing, if you're stealing wins, that's good enough. Come January, you need to play well to beat good teams 3 or 4 times in a row. I can't think of any team that won the Super Bowl but played poorly through most of the playoffs.

You can lose it in those early months, though (by losing and failing to make the playoffs).

Going off an educated guess, rather than a statistical analysis...like I wrote. Wasn't writing a Harvard essay. I just think most football fans are so far from reality when it comes from what football really is. It's a freaking crap shoot, specifically in the playoffs. And there's so many crazy changes that happen as a result...good and bad. It's so easy to overreact and want changes, but there's so much more to look at, and I thank god changes usually don't come about from fan's pressure. I look at a body of work. I know it's all about the biggest stages though, hell think about Chilly for instance if Favre doesn't throw across his body and we win our first Superbowl.....he might still be coach for all we know. Or if Keenum doesn't throw that pick six last year and massively change momentum? Blair's missed field goal to upset the NFC favorite that year, with a healthy Teddy moving on to play Arizona?

i still think at the end of the day the most physical team during the tournament wins the game-and that the most physical teams in each conference end up playing the game many of the years. it's hard to tangibly put this into statistics though. it pretty much is an eye test thing.

In the trenches me boy, I agree.

[hategreenticemase]

No one had Denver beating GB, except ol hgtm who gladly took the 10 points and laughed all the way to the bank. One of my all time fave games!

[weimy froob]

No one had Denver beating GB, except ol hgtm who gladly took the 10 points and laughed all the way to the bank. One of my all time fave games!

considering that the nfc had won about a dozen SB's in a row and they were being represented by the defending champion in that game it's not hard to believe the point spread. that's all based on money and perception-not the actual quality of the two teams. the broncos were the more physical team in that game though-surprising for an afc team considering that the more physical conference was the nfc for years and years. but they were. good game and the packers had a chance to tie the game in the end-but they didn't. i watched that game at TI before i had a good night playing blackjack later-that's what i remember most about that SB.

[Simpson Get Lifted]

A poll is an odd choice considering it can be looked up, but also, why you had to explain what percentages mean for each option further extends the weirdness.

[Tuck ya in]

No one had Denver beating GB, except ol hgtm who gladly took the 10 points and laughed all the way to the bank. One of my all time fave games!

Do you remember what you waged?

[weimy froob]

great games this weekend from a hitting perspective. lots of intense action and i think the case could be made that the more physical teams won every game. the ravens D was pretty good-but their o-line was weak so i'll give the chargers the edge there. the bears/eagles game was pretty even in the physicality factor-and it was decided by one point and in the last seconds.

colts and cowboys were the more physical teams in saturday's matchups-but seattle showed up. a good week for the nfl from the teams competing perspective. the refs and the replays though? bad.

[weimy froob]

chalk beats up on their opponents yesterday. surprised in both instances that they covered the spread. that's why i don't bet. physicality can be displayed on both sides of the ball. think of the whoopings the vikings took in all of their SB losses. dominant performances by every one of those offensive lines against the vaunted purple people eater defense. that leads to an 0-4 record in the big game, unfortunately.

[Deep Purple]

Best offensive line teams prevail. Been like this forever. See Vikings past Super Bowl losses for a reference. See this years playoffs for a reference.

[Tuck ya in]

And the Saints oline is really good, sadly. Brees has alllll day!

[DonaldDouchebag]

The Randy Moss Patriots and ‘98 Vikes who ended up losing are the two that come to mind for me.

[Beef Supreme]

Way too chalky this year for me.

[weimy froob]

Way too chalky this year for me.

agreed. relatively boring games with 3 of the four favorites covering the spread and the saints a missed field goal from doing the same. hopefully the nfl makes up for it with some competitive games this week.

what a difference a year makes. this was the monday after the minneapolis miracle. now the purple look like they are so far away from the top teams in the league that i don't know how they make that move next season. all four teams left showed their physicality on the offensive line in their wins. hopefully spielman and co. took notice.

[weimy froob]

Best offensive line teams prevail. Been like this forever. See Vikings past Super Bowl losses for a reference. See this years playoffs for a reference.

definitely on display again yesterday. rivers was under constant pressure and brady had all day. that led to a blowout. the eagles hung in there and could have won-and that's because their offensive line held up pretty good too.

[Beef Supreme]

Best offensive line teams prevail. Been like this forever. See Vikings past Super Bowl losses for a reference. See this years playoffs for a reference.

The patriots have never had the best offensive line during the Brady/Bellichick dynasty.


The cowboys have probably had the best offensive line the last few seasons. They haven’t won shit.


Your ol has to be okay. It can’t be bad, but it doesn’t need to be great. I’m fact, if it’s great, it probably means you’ve shorted yourself in other areas and will only be an average team.

[weimy froob]

Best offensive line teams prevail. Been like this forever. See Vikings past Super Bowl losses for a reference. See this years playoffs for a reference.

The patriots have never had the best offensive line during the Brady/Bellichick dynasty.


The cowboys have probably had the best offensive line the last few seasons. They haven’t won shit.


Your ol has to be okay. It can’t be bad, but it doesn’t need to be great. I’m fact, if it’s great, it probably means you’ve shorted yourself in other areas and will only be an average team.

that was a dominant offensive line that kept the chargers at bay yesterday. same with their performance in the SB last year. you undersell that line all the time. the cowboys gave up lots of sacks this year. last year they were injured. the only year that they were really dominant was in prescott's rookie year.

all four teams in the semi-finals this year have superior offensive lines. that's just a fact. great QB's look very pedestrian when they're being harassed. when they have the time to throw they earn huge contracts and lots of sports talk praise. but it's the o-lines that give them the opportunity to show what they have throwing the ball.

and the stat that aikman brought out in saturday's game was that the rams run the ball 43 percent of the time-as much as the cowboys did this year. and you saw what they did to them in that game on the ground. broke their will and won the game. all because of that superior blocking in that game.

give me a team with a great o-line and i think the GM can find a QB. it's very difficult to do it the other way around. pretty much non-existent in my mind in the history of SB winners. one constant is the offensive line. even the patriots-as they showed yesterday. in a big time manner.