This stat tells it all

[E CaT PanTHer]

What I said was true, it isn't whether you are elite or not but whether you play like one or not in the playoffs. You really want to say Brees was elite in the NFC Championship? Favre outplayed him by a ton but it was other factors. You can't exactly say the Saints played good defense but surely getting a ton of turnovers does the same thing. Bress is a classic example of a quarterback who was outplayed but won because of ther factors. Most times that is defense.

That games also shows that you can be an elite quarterback and play well like Favre did and still lose the game. In fact Minnesota had the better defense, ran better, and passed better. And still lost. So I don't see how your argument holds any water.

Remember, we're not focusing on just 1 game. We're focusing on the entire playoffs. Yeah Favre outplayed Brees and still lost, but when you look at the big picture, the Colts are in the super bowl b/c of Manning and the Saints are in b/c of Brees. That's all I'm trying to say. This thread is about winning championships, not about winning a single game.

Sanchez almost did it. He had a great team around him, a great defense, a great run game. But when it came down to making plays at the end, Sanchez failed and threw a pick, Manning didn't. The team with the greater QB won in that game, and that's why we have 2 elite QB's in the super bowl, as we do almost every super bowl for the past 20 years.

[Wither]

Remember, we're not focusing on just 1 game. We're focusing on the entire playoffs. Yeah Favre outplayed Brees and still lost, but when you look at the big picture, the Colts are in the super bowl b/c of Manning and the Saints are in b/c of Brees. That's all I'm trying to say. This thread is about winning championships, not about winning a single game.

Sanchez almost did it. He had a great team around him, a great defense, a great run game. But when it came down to making plays at the end, Sanchez failed and threw a pick, Manning didn't. The team with the greater QB won in that game, and that's why we have 2 elite QB's in the super bowl, as we do almost every super bowl for the past 20 years.

Has it ever really been in contention that most of the time an elite QB makes it to the championship game? What really propels teams is the other aspects: defense, running game, etc.

People argue about needing an elite QB all the time, but I think most people agree a team without an elite QB can make it in (but have less of a chance, duh).

Better Players = Better Team = Better Chance to Win

[E CaT PanTHer]

Has it ever really been in contention that most of the time an elite QB makes it to the championship game? What really propels teams is the other aspects: defense, running game, etc.

People argue about needing an elite QB all the time, but I think most people agree a team without an elite QB can make it in (but have less of a chance, duh).

Better Players = Better Team = Better Chance to Win

Panthers55 is trying to say that the team that plays the best defense and has the best running game in the playoffs will most likely win it all, even with an AVG QB. But that argument has no credibility b/c the Saints and Colts played mediocre defense and had a mediocre run game all playoffs, but yet those are the 2 teams left. So why is that? That's all I'm trying to say.

[panthers55]

Remember, we're not focusing on just 1 game. We're focusing on the entire playoffs. Yeah Favre outplayed Brees and still lost, but when you look at the big picture, the Colts are in the super bowl b/c of Manning and the Saints are in b/c of Brees. That's all I'm trying to say. This thread is about winning championships, not about winning a single game.

Sanchez almost did it. He had a great team around him, a great defense, a great run game. But when it came down to making plays at the end, Sanchez failed and threw a pick, Manning didn't. The team with the greater QB won in that game, and that's why we have 2 elite QB's in the super bowl, as we do almost every super bowl for the past 20 years.

If you look at all the playoffs you would still say that defense and running matter because the jets surely didn't have an elite quarterback and made it to the AFC championship. Passing surely helps but really Indy played pretty good defense as well. Minnesota also played good defense tonight but couldn't overcome a ton of turnovers. Plus the argument could be made that the Saints won against Arizona as much with the running game and defense as they did with Brees passing.

This thread is about what wins championships, passing primarily or defense and running with timely passing. I still don't see the overwhelming evidence to prove that the league is all about passing which is where we started ten pages ago. And as I noted before, the team that wins is the one that elevates their game when it counts. Manning has played better in the playoffs than he did in the regular season which is why he is in the Superbowl. Typically his playoff performances have lagged his regular season performances.

Brees was anything but elite. He and the Saints backed into the playoffs and frankly were handed the game. If the elite quarterback were playing in the Superbowl it would be Favre hands down.

[Wither]

It seems to me that both of you are right... your (latest) comments aren't really all that conflicting. You both have good points.

You should all know by now the NFL does not work like it seems it will. Teams that were bound to make the playoffs fall short and teams that supposedly had no chance make it to the big game. There is no exclusive reason why this happens: it can be a defense, a running attack or a QB, or any other position that puts a team over the edge and into greatness (or less than great, depending on if you are a fan or not ). Sometimes it's just pure luck.

[panthers55]

Panthers55 is trying to say that the team that plays the best defense and has the best running game in the playoffs will most likely win it all, even with an AVG QB. But that argument has no credibility b/c the Saints and Colts played mediocre defense and had a mediocre run game all playoffs, but yet those are the 2 teams left. So why is that? That's all I'm trying to say.

Thanks but don't speak for me. I said that passing alone won't win the Superbowl and Favre showed that. I said that running and defense can win a Superbowl if the average quarterback plays well whether or not he is elite. The Colts only gave up 14 points which is pretty good defense no matter how many yards they gave up. They played a bend don't break style of playing. The Saints played poor defense but got timely turnovers which stopped drives.

The Vikings played better everything but lost due to turnovers. That hardly proves your point. Honestly the way the Viking handed the game to the Saints, anyone could have beat them because they self-destructed.

The team in two weeks that plays the better defense will win the game. That is what I am saying.

[E CaT PanTHer]

If you look at all the playoffs you would still say that defense and running matter because the jets surely didn't have an elite quarterback and made it to the AFC championship. Passing surely helps but really Indy played pretty good defense as well. Minnesota also played good defense tonight but couldn't overcome a ton of turnovers. Plus the argument could be made that the Saints won against Arizona as much with the running game and defense as they did with Brees passing.

This thread is about what wins championships, passing primarily or defense and running with timely passing. I still don't see the overwhelming evidence to prove that the league is all about passing which is where we started ten pages ago. And as I noted before, the team that wins is the one that elevates their game when it counts. Manning has played better in the playoffs than he did in the regular season which is why he is in the Superbowl. Typically his playoff performances have lagged his regular season performances.

Brees was anything but elite. He and the Saints backed into the playoffs and frankly were handed the game. If the elite quarterback were playing in the Superbowl it would be Favre hands down.

Sure we can go look at every playoff game and say "oh, the defense really helped them there," or "the run game really helped them here." Like I said, I agree to the fact that you need a decent defense and run game to help you win it all. I'm not denouncing that at all. But at the end of the day, your QB needs to make plays if you want to have any chance of advancing in the playoffs and eventually winning the SB. Mediocre QB's can have great games and win individual games single handedly, but we're talking about putting together efficient and mistake free performances in a row. Only top tier or elite QB's can accomplish that over a span of more than one game. When the team had to make a play, Manning and Brees delivered, and these guys are arguably two of the best QB's in the NFL.

[E CaT PanTHer]

Thanks but don't speak for me. I said that passing alone won't win the Superbowl and Favre showed that. I said that running and defense can win a Superbowl if the average quarterback plays well whether or not he is elite. The Colts only gave up 14 points which is pretty good defense no matter how many yards they gave up. They played a bend don't break style of playing. The Saints played poor defense but got timely turnovers which stopped drives.

The Vikings played better everything but lost due to turnovers. That hardly proves your point. Honestly the way the Viking handed the game to the Saints, anyone could have beat them because they self-destructed.

The team in two weeks that plays the better defense will win the game. That is what I am saying.

And why is that? Because you have 2 elite QB's dueling it out. Point proven.

[panthers55]

Sure we can go look at every playoff game and say "oh, the defense really helped them there," or "the run game really helped them here." Like I said, I agree to the fact that you need a decent defense and run game to help you win it all. I'm not denouncing that at all. But at the end of the day, your QB needs to make plays if you want to have any chance of advancing in the playoffs and eventually winning the SB. Mediocre QB's can have great games and win individual games single handedly, but we're talking about putting together efficient and mistake free performances in a row. Only top tier or elite QB's can accomplish that over a span of more than one game. When the team had to make a play, Manning and Brees delivered, and these guys are arguably two of the best QB's in the NFL.

I don't agree at all and the history proves it. Jake surely wasn't elite in 2003 but played well in the playoffs. E Manning wasn't elite but won a Super bowl. Roethlesberger played poorly the first time and well the second. McNabb lost the Superbowl because he played crappy in the Superbowl. Even Peyton the first time played poorer in the playoffs than he did in the regular season. And Favre played great and lost.

Any quarterback can get hot in the playoffs and that is what it takes. Other times elite quarterbacks get outplayed like Brees did tonight and still make the big party.

Your theme hs been that only elite quarterbacks can win the Super bowl and by extension that until we have one we can't win one. Ny point all along has been that teams that are good in one phase or the other can make the playoffs. To win a Super Bowl the team needs to elevate their game and play well in all phases. And that will be borne out on 2 weeks I think. Having an elite quarterback and passing game will surely help, but the best passing team rarely wins the Superbowl unless they also play well at least on defense. I note this before and the Indy bears out that their defense has been in the most important stat of all which is points scored. They continued that last night allowing only 14 points. And again the team with the best defense in 2 weeks will win the game, plain and simple.

[panthers55]

And why is that? Because you have 2 elite QB's dueling it out. Point proven.

No, you have 2 quarterbacks who were elite in the regualar season who will have to rely on their team to elevate the other aspects of their game to win the Superbowl. Favre surely proved that passing alone won't win it.

[E CaT PanTHer]

Again what kind of crappy analysis is that. I also said you need a good offense and good defense in the playoffs to win. First of all you used regular season stats which mean much less than post season ones. Secondly you used quantitative stats instead of qualitative ones. Third you ignored my point that it is about total offense not simply rushing. For example New York won the Super bowl in 2007 with the 1st rated defense (points surrendered) in the post season, the 6th rated rushing attack(yards per carry) and the 8th rated passing attack (yards per game) out of 12 teams. Total offense was 7th based on points per game at 21. Any ideas what got them over the top.

You obviously took some regular season stats, which are not very telling and made erroneous conclusions proving nothing. Now do what I did for the other teams you mentioned using qualitative meaningful stats looking at where they ranked on rushing, defense, and passing and total offense in the post season and get back with me. At least you will have an analysis worth discussing at that point.

HAHAHAHA, am I really speaking for yourself? Seriously your arguments are all over the place that it's not even worth having a meaningful discussion with you. Say something and stick with it. The reason I bumped this thread and the first thing I posted was post season stats was b/c you told me that's what will determine who will go all the way. So I proved to you the Saints and Colts were average in running and in overall defense but yet they're still here.

With you, you set different standards given the game and the circumstances. But what kind of argument is that. I can easily say, "Oh well that team had a good defense that game and they're running game was good that game so they really didn't have to have good QB play that game." You completely lose credibility when you change things around. Just look at the playoff stats of the Colts and Saints (what you told me determines who will win it all) and then give me a sufficient argument, cuz right now I'm just wasting my time.

[Wither]

it's not even worth having a meaningful discussion with you.

You guys are having a pretty good dialogue, actually. *Grabs Popcorn*

[panthers55]

HAHAHAHA, am I really speaking for yourself? Seriously your arguments are all over the place that it's not even worth having a meaningful discussion with you. Say something and stick with it. The reason I bumped this thread and the first thing I posted was post season stats was b/c you told me that's what will determine who will go all the way. So I proved to you the Saints and Colts were average in running and in overall defense but yet they're still here.

With you, you set different standards given the game and the circumstances. But what kind of argument is that. I can easily say, "Oh well that team had a good defense that game and they're running game was good that game so they really didn't have to have good QB play that game." You completely lose credibility when you change things around. Just look at the playoff stats of the Colts and Saints (what you told me determines who will win it all) and then give me a sufficient argument, cuz right now I'm just wasting my time.

Any you totally focus on one aspect of the game without acknowledging that it take several aspects of the game to win. When Brees for example doesn't play elite and is actually outplayed by Favre you ignore that and continue to imply that because he was elite in the regular season that explains everything. The playoffs are totally different than the regular season and must be evaluated on their own merit. You ignore that in the playoffs the Jets got to the AFC championship with defense and running and lost because their average quarterback played that way in the big game while Manning elevated his game at the same time his team supported him with good defense. The playoffs are replete with examples where average quarterbacks play well making them good that day or during that period. While other times elite quarterbacks play quite average and either lose or get bailed out by other factors like brees did on Sunday.

You still haven't proven that the quarterback who passes the best gets to the Superbowl otherwise Favre wins hands down. The winner in 2 weeks will be the team that plays better overall, not necessarily the quarterback that throws for more yards. And that is what I have said consistently. You just aren't listening.

[E CaT PanTHer]

Any you totally focus on one aspect of the game without acknowledging that it take several aspects of the game to win. When Brees for example doesn't play elite and is actually outplayed by Favre you ignore that and continue to imply that because he was elite in the regular season that explains everything. The playoffs are totally different than the regular season and must be evaluated on their own merit. You ignore that in the playoffs the Jets got to the AFC championship with defense and running and lost because their average quarterback played that way in the big game while Manning elevated his game at the same time his team supported him with good defense. The playoffs are replete with examples where average quarterbacks play well making them good that day or during that period. While other times elite quarterbacks play quite average and either lose or get bailed out by other factors like brees did on Sunday.

You still haven't proven that it takes the quarterback who passes the best gets to the Superbowl otherwise Favre wins hands down. The winner in 2 weeks will be the team that plays better overall, not necessarily the quarterback that throws for more yards. And that is what I have said consistently. You just aren't listening.

So both QB's were blessed with good defensive performances but which team prevailed? I honestly don't even know what we're arguing about anymore. The more you speak, the more you prove my point.

And honestly, your argument is on a "per game basis." So basically it changes given the circumstances of each game. So in essence that's not even an argument. Just go through the pages and just read what you said. I quoted you exactly and I gave you an answer. Bottom line, the Colts and the Saints didn't elevate their run game or defense in the playoffs, yet the Colts and the Saints are in the super bowl. There's no reason to be hard headed. If the Jets would have beaten the Colts and if Mark Sanchez would have actually out dueled the Saints in the super bowl and won it, I would have given you respect. I've had one argument this entire discussion and have stuck with it where as you have been all over the place and constantly giving me something different given the circumstances of the game. It's people like you that makes me not even want to get into any discussions, b/c they'll do and say whatever they can to try to prove they were right even when they know they're losing more and more credibility by doing so.