Will The Packers Making the Playoffs?

[Raptorman]

Definitely. Collins was a stiff. Hanie was mobile. Olsen was a thorn in the Packer side. But Lovie got to a SB with Rex Grossman at QB. And he came close against the Packers in 2010 both in the Championship and in WK 17. Had he knocked us out in the season finale the Bears just may have been in another SB. Just not in the cards.

And yet Grossman had 23 TDs and 20 INTs that year. But yeah, it was Grossman. Can anyone here name a QB, any QB that has won multiple Super Bowls or Championships, back to 1960, who did it without a top 10 defense? Anyone? Montana? Nope. Brady? Nope. And we all know Starr didn't. (In every one of the Packers' Championships, their defense has been top 4 or better.) Mahomes? Nope. Elway? Nope.

There has only been one. Plunkett came close, with his 13th-ranked and 10th-ranked defenses. Nope. The award goes to Eli Manning. He had the 25th and 17th-ranked defense on the year when the Giants won under him. But what Eli did have was a defense that did one thing for him. Show up during the playoffs. In the years they won the Super Bowl, the Giants' defense, which pretty much sucked those years, ended up only giving up 15 ppg. And on offense, those years, the Giants managed a staggering 23 ppg on offense over those 8 games. This includes one game of 37 points. Which pretty much matched their offensive output per game during those years. Well, to be fair, it was 23 ppg one year and 26 the other. Eli, of course, gets the credit.

Now to address something that someone here will certainly pull out of their ****. Fran and Vikings. Guess what? Fran was a mediocre QB on a good team. Oh, he was fun to watch. But he sucked in the playoffs. Just look at his stat line from 3 Super Bowls.

46​

89​

51.7%​

489​

1​

6​

​

​

​

​

​

​

1 Td to 6 Ints? Are you effing kidding me? I can't even make TD plural for God's sake. And in all playoff games? 11 Tds' and 17 Int's?

So, excuse me if I don't bow down to the idea that "The QB is the king" in winning the Super Bowl. I just don't see it. I see him as an integral player to the team. Important, yes, he has to be good. But he's not the driving source of Super Bowl wins. He doesn't need to throw 35 TD's a year to win the Super Bowl, he only has to outplay his defense by an average of 6 points a game to be competive. That may be 21 points a game or 28. And 28 is damn hard to maintain over any period of time. Just ask Mahomes.

 

[milani]

And yet Grossman had 23 TDs and 20 INTs that year. But yeah, it was Grossman. Can anyone here name a QB, any QB that has won multiple Super Bowls or Championships, back to 1960, who did it without a top 10 defense? Anyone? Montana? Nope. Brady? Nope. And we all know Starr didn't. (In every one of the Packers' Championships, their defense has been top 4 or better.) Mahomes? Nope. Elway? Nope.

There has only been one. Plunkett came close, with his 13th-ranked and 10th-ranked defenses. Nope. The award goes to Eli Manning. He had the 25th and 17th-ranked defense on the year when the Giants won under him. But what Eli did have was a defense that did one thing for him. Show up during the playoffs. In the years they won the Super Bowl, the Giants' defense, which pretty much sucked those years, ended up only giving up 15 ppg. And on offense, those years, the Giants managed a staggering 23 ppg on offense over those 8 games. This includes one game of 37 points. Which pretty much matched their offensive output per game during those years. Well, to be fair, it was 23 ppg one year and 26 the other. Eli, of course, gets the credit.

Now to address something that someone here will certainly pull out of their ****. Fran and Vikings. Guess what? Fran was a mediocre QB on a good team. Oh, he was fun to watch. But he sucked in the playoffs. Just look at his stat line from 3 Super Bowls.

46​

89​

51.7%​

489​

1​

6​

​

​

​

​

​

​

1 Td to 6 Ints? Are you effing kidding me? I can't even make TD plural for God's sake. And in all playoff games? 11 Tds' and 17 Int's?

So, excuse me if I don't bow down to the idea that "The QB is the king" in winning the Super Bowl. I just don't see it. I see him as an integral player to the team. Important, yes, he has to be good. But he's not the driving source of Super Bowl wins. He doesn't need to throw 35 TD's a year to win the Super Bowl, he only has to outplay his defense by an average of 6 points a game to be competive. That may be 21 points a game or 28. And 28 is damn hard to maintain over any period of time. Just ask Mahomes.

As much as Tarkenton was a thorn in the Packers side even back in the Lombardi days I still place him high up on the echelon of QBs. He went up against some very great teams in those SBs on both sides of the ball. The one SB the Vikings should have won was SB IV. And that was with Joe Kapp at the helm. In fact if you asked many Packer fans from that era they would have rather faced Unitas than Tarkenton.

 

[weeds]

i fell a few days behind and had to do a 5-page catch-up on this post, which pretty much eradicated the time I'm willing to spend on a computer (phone, laptop or desktop) when I'm not at work. I laughed. I cried. I cowered in fear under my desk ... all of the usual emotions, ya know.

Just want to say that this could very well be the best all-around thread I've encountered on one of these forums and I've been lumbering around these beasts since ... oh.... whenever Darren Sharper's rookie season was.. on the old Journal Sentinel Online (JSO) site.

Plenty of venturing off topic, veering back on topic ... completely falling off of the cliff and then clawing its way back. I read every post and that's saying something considering I just had cataract surgery (with round two coming up in a week or so).

Further, having guys like Raptor and Caleb in the mix makes for just good reading (even with one gimpy eye).

 

[gopkrs]

It's difficult to win in this league w/o a very good QB. It's also tough to win if you don't have a decent offense no matter how good your defense. Very few teams have won Superbowls strictly on a great defense. And when they have; during that game, the offense showed up. I like that we are trying to get a studly O line. Who won the Ice Bowl? Our offense or our defense?

 

[rmontro]

It's difficult to win in this league w/o a very good QB. It's also tough to win if you don't have a decent offense no matter how good your defense. Very few teams have won Superbowls strictly on a great defense. And when they have; during that game, the offense showed up.

Of course, having a great defense often helps the offense. They contribute to a good field position, they keep the other defense on the field and tired them out, puts pressure on them to keep up, inspires the offense to perform, keeps them in the game, helps build a lead, gets the ball back with turnovers, etc. Some offenses are just too anemic to contribute, but for even a decent offense it can be a huge advantage.

 

[milani]

i fell a few days behind and had to do a 5-page catch-up on this post, which pretty much eradicated the time I'm willing to spend on a computer (phone, laptop or desktop) when I'm not at work. I laughed. I cried. I cowered in fear under my desk ... all of the usual emotions, ya know.

Just want to say that this could very well be the best all-around thread I've encountered on one of these forums and I've been lumbering around these beasts since ... oh.... whenever Darren Sharper's rookie season was.. on the old Journal Sentinel Online (JSO) site.

Plenty of venturing off topic, veering back on topic ... completely falling off of the cliff and then clawing its way back. I read every post and that's saying something considering I just had cataract surgery (with round two coming up in a week or so).

Further, having guys like Raptor and Caleb in the mix makes for just good reading (even with one gimpy eye).

Darren Sharper's rookie season was what made Wolf decide to let ageless Eugene Robinson go to Carolina and play in another SB.

 

[Raptorman]

i fell a few days behind and had to do a 5-page catch-up on this post, which pretty much eradicated the time I'm willing to spend on a computer (phone, laptop or desktop) when I'm not at work. I laughed. I cried. I cowered in fear under my desk ... all of the usual emotions, ya know.

Just want to say that this could very well be the best all-around thread I've encountered on one of these forums and I've been lumbering around these beasts since ... oh.... whenever Darren Sharper's rookie season was.. on the old Journal Sentinel Online (JSO) site.

Plenty of venturing off topic, veering back on topic ... completely falling off of the cliff and then clawing its way back. I read every post and that's saying something considering I just had cataract surgery (with round two coming up in a week or so).

Further, having guys like Raptor and Caleb in the mix makes for just good reading (even with one gimpy eye).

Hope that eye surgery helps. After all, you have been seeing yourself as a Packer fan for so many years, maybe the eye surgery will help you see how bad a decision that was.

Heal fast.

 

[weeds]

Darren Sharper's rookie season was what made Wolf decide to let ageless Eugene Robinson go to Carolina and play in another SB.

I remember that too. I always believed Eugene Robinson was the REAL straw that stirred the drink. Anyway, Sharper always seemed to be "around" turnovers that someone created - my impression was that he didn't like to tackle - we nicknamed him "The Matador" and his missed tackles were "ole's". Anyway...the was the first "fan forum" I frequented.

 

[weeds]

Hope that eye surgery helps. After all, you have been seeing yourself as a Packer fan for so many years, maybe the eye surgery will help you see how bad a decision that was.

Heal fast.

Thanks. One eye at a time. I swear I've been walking in circles these last 4 days. Like a NASCAR driver...all he's gotta do is make left turns...

 

[milani]

I remember that too. I always believed Eugene Robinson was the REAL straw that stirred the drink. Anyway, Sharper always seemed to be "around" turnovers that someone created - my impression was that he didn't like to tackle - we nicknamed him "The Matador" and his missed tackles were "ole's". Anyway...the was the first "fan forum" I frequented.

Robinson got along well with LeRoy and Reggie. The Pack was shifting from an older defense to a younger one.

 

[gopkrs]

Robinson got along well with LeRoy and Reggie. The Pack was shifting from an older defense to a younger one.

There was some kind of fiasco the night before the Superbowl. Maybe that had something to do with it

 

[OldSchool101]

That's what the "experts" say. The fact is, you need a good point differential.

No. I do not rely upon the “experts”. I’m educated enough and watch enough football to do my own research (gratitude to many persons who did the heavy lifting of recording all the details for me and all glory to God for gifting me with numbers)
I did my own research. I’ll share my findings for you only because you are a valued Poster in here and I truly don’t want you to believe a false myth. My findings are as Follows:

“Well Rounded Teams Win Championships”

My findings included the first 53 Superbowl Winners. It took a couple hours one day when I was bored. I love doing historical research to begin with but I was always curious about statement “Defense Wins Chanpionships”. Especially after a debate ensued in here about 6? Years ago that I was no part of because I really didn’t know. Yet I wanted to solve that riddle to know the truth

Across a LARGE sample size was a scoring ranking differential of 1.3 in favor of Defenses over Offense. I used Rounded to a whole number because it was fairly close.
The average SB Winning Offense
ranked #8
The average SB Winning Defense
ranked # 7

So what I found is YES it’s leaning Defense. However neither party were wholly correct or wholly wrong because it’s so slight margin. Both option O or D superiority offer exceptional chances of winning a SuperBowl and it’s proven factual that it’s VERY slightly leaning D.

I’ll send you the Bill because I know you don’t want to believe me raptor.
This whole notion you are pushing that QB’s are not as important as Defenses or that Offenses are not as important as Defenses (past a micro margin) is not true. The chances of Winning a SB without JJ McCarthy stepping up in a Big way is very low. Ok maybe if you finish #1 Defense by a wide margin (15.5 points per game etc) he can play “above average”.

 

[Thirteen Below]

So, excuse me if I don't bow down to the idea that "The QB is the king" in winning the Super Bowl. I just don't see it. I see him as an integral player to the team. Important, yes, he has to be good. But he's not the driving source of Super Bowl wins.

I'll say this, in support of your argument - during the peak of Favre's career, he was one of the top 3 or 4 QBs in the NFL, yet they only won one Super Bowl. Rodgers? Again, 15 years one of the top (frankly) 2 or 3 on anyone's list. And he only played in one Super Bowl, and that of course was also the only one he won.

So, for 30 years, we had one of the best quarterbacks in the history of the NFL, but for 28 of those years some other team with a different quarterback won the Lombardi. Usually more complete, better all-around teams. And coaches.

 

[milani]

I'll say this, in support of your argument - during the peak of Favre's career, he was one of the top 3 or 4 QBs in the NFL, yet they only won one Super Bowl. Rodgers? Again, 15 years one of the top (frankly) 2 or 3 on anyone's list. And he only played in one Super Bowl, and that of course was also the only one he won.

So, for 30 years, we had one of the best quarterbacks in the history of the NFL, but for 28 of those years some other team with a different quarterback won the Lombardi. Usually more complete, better all-around teams. And coaches.

Think of the former Buc QB who won a SB with Ray Lewis and the Ravens. His name escapes me he is so popular. And the Bucs won a SB with some former Viking QB. They are forgotten. But the team is not.

 

[Thirteen Below]

Think of the former Buc QB who won a SB with Ray Lewis and the Ravens. His name escapes me he is so popular. And the Bucs won a SB with some former Viking QB. They are forgotten. But the team is not.

Yes; Trent Dilfer and Brad Johnson. They were the first two who came to mind as I was writing that.

 

[OldSchool101]

Championships, back to 1960, who did it without a top 10 defense? Anyone? Montana? Nope. Brady? Nope. And we all know Starr didn't. (In every one of the Packers' Championships, their defense has been top 4 or better.) Mahomes? Nope. Elway? Nope.

Up until 2017
the Super Bowl Winning D ranked #6.9 scoring.
the SuperBowl Winning O ranked #8.2
Scoring.

-1.3 scoring differential or very very slim leaning Defense

UPDATE. What I did not know until 5 minutes ago? I was getting ready to research updates since my last findings. Here’s on the shows a trend moving heavy into Offense scoring in 6
Of the last 8 Superbowls (2017-2022)

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

 

[OldSchool101]

I multiplied the average Scoring ranking through 2016 by number of SB’s through 2016 to get a cumulative number. I added in 2017-2022 (this article did the math for me). Then added in 2023-2024 fur KC+Philly rankings. I divided those ranking by the number of Superbowls.

Since Superbowl I.
Offenses ranked #8 scoring (7.991)
Defense ranked #7 scoring (7.114)

Since 2017 Super Bowl (this article plus I added calculations for 2023,2024)
Offenses (#5.6 ranked)
have outranked
Defenses (#7.6 ranked)

We’re splitting hairs here, but Offenses are catching up and well within 0.887 margin difference of Defenses in Super Bowl Rankings. Within 1 whole number is approaching negligible.

Well Rounded Teams Win Championships barely leaning Defense in a TieBreaker

Since 2017 Super Bowl Offenses are beating Super Bowl Defense by 2 full points of scoring ranking.

*according to this article. The tide changed after 2000. If it wasn’t for several Teams posting strong D performances (I think of Gruden’s Tampa) the Offense would easily dominate the Defenses scoring ranking by a healthy margin across the last 25 SB’s. Either way, Offenses still Win in “today’s NFL”

 

[milani]

I multiplied the average Scoring ranking through 2016 by number of SB’s through 2016 to get a cumulative number. I added in 2017-2022 (this article did the math for me). Then added in 2023-2024 fur KC+Philly rankings. I divided those ranking by the number of Superbowls.

Since Superbowl I.
Offenses ranked #8 scoring (7.991)
Defense ranked #7 scoring (7.114)

Since 2017 Super Bowl (this article plus I added calculations for 2023,2024)
Offenses (#5.6 ranked)
have outranked
Defenses (#7.6 ranked)

We’re splitting hairs here, but Offenses are catching up and well within 0.887 margin difference of Defenses in Super Bowl Rankings. Within 1 whole number is approaching negligible.

Well Rounded Teams Win Championships barely leaning Defense in a TieBreaker

Since 2017 Super Bowl Offenses are beating Super Bowl Defense by 2 full points of scoring ranking.

*according to this article. The tide changed after 2000. If it wasn’t for several Teams posting strong D performances (I think of Gruden’s Tampa) the Offense would easily dominate the Defenses scoring ranking by a healthy margin across the last 25 SB’s. Either way, Offenses still Win in “today’s NFL”

What was it they said? The best defense is a good offense?

 

[Thirteen Below]

So what I found is YES it’s leaning Defense. However neither party were wholly correct or wholly wrong because it’s so slight margin. Both option O or D superiority offer exceptional chances of winning a SuperBowl and it’s proven factual that it’s VERY slightly leaning D.

Let's not forget the 85 Bears, with Jim MacMahon. They had not only the top defense in the league, but many people consider that the best defense in the history of the NFL.

Their quarterback had a career-high 2392 yards passing (utterly pathetic)... 15 touchdowns against 11 interceptions, and a QB rating of 82.6. Probably the worst season for any Super Bowl quarterback.

Yet they went 15-1 (and in their only loss, they were only down by 6 points I think), and in their playoff run, they outscored their three opponents 91-10! Shutting out the first two teams; and in the Super Bowl, holding the Patriots to 3 points all the way into the 2-minute warning. Until 13:46, the Bears had outscored their playoff foes 91-3 - 30 to 1. Absolutely monstrous defense. Nobody's ever seen a defense like that; the Bears deserve massive credit for what they did that season.

Again, with a quarterback with a passer rating of 82.6, less than a hundred yards passing per game, and only had one good eye because he had somehow stabbed the other one wth a fork at dinnertime. For god only knows what reason, but he was a Bear, so why even bother trying to make sense of whatever that idiot did.

Bears. All you need to know.

But anyway... that is the dictionary definition of dominant defense, and I don't think there is any better example of defense winning championships. Caleb deserves to be able to brag about that team.

 

[gopkrs]

Personally, I thought that Jim McMahon was a good fit for the bears and that he was better than his stats indicate. And the bears with I guess Walter Payton were a running team. They also probably had great field position in most games.

 

[Raptorman]

No. I do not rely upon the “experts”.

That was directed at many Packer fans who think they are experts. But this is what I have from 2010 to this past year. PPGD is the difference between offense and defense per game.

Year

Lg

Tm

W

L

T

Pts

PFPG

PPGD

PAPG

PA

2024

Philadelphia Eagles.*

14

3

17

463

27.2​

9.4​

17.8​

303

2023

Kansas City Chiefs*

11

6

0

17

371

21.8​

4.5​

17.3​

294

2022

NFL

Kansas City Chiefs*

14

3

0

17

496

29.2​

7.5​

21.7​

369

2021​

NFL

Los Angeles Rams*

12​

5​

0​

17​

460​

27.1​

5.2​

21.9​

372​

2020​

NFL

Tampa Bay Buccaneers*

11​

5​

0​

16​

0.688​

492​

30.8​

8.6​

22.2​

355​

2019​

NFL

Kansas City Chiefs*

12​

4​

0​

16​

0.750​

451​

28.2​

8.9​

19.3​

308​

2018​

NFL

New England Patriots*

11​

5​

0​

16​

0.688​

436​

27.3​

6.9​

20.3​

325​

2017​

NFL

Philadelphia Eagles.*

13​

3​

0​

16​

0.813​

457​

28.6​

14.1​

14.4​

231​

2016​

NFL

New England Patriots*

14​

2​

0​

16​

0.875​

441​

27.6​

11.9​

15.6​

250​

2015​

NFL

Denver Broncos*

12​

4​

0​

16​

0.750​

355​

22.2​

3.7​

18.5​

296​

2014​

NFL

New England Patriots*

12​

4​

0​

16​

0.750​

468​

29.3​

9.7​

19.6​

313​

2013​

NFL

Seattle Seahawks*

13​

3​

0​

16​

0.813​

417​

26.1​

11.6​

14.4​

231​

2012​

NFL

Baltimore Ravens*

10​

6​

0​

16​

0.625​

398​

24.9​

3.4​

21.5​

344​

2011​

NFL

New York Giants*

9​

7​

0​

16​

0.563​

394​

24.6​

-0.4​

25.0​

400​

2010​

NFL

Green Bay Packers*

10​

6​

0​

16​

0.625​

388​

24.3​

9.3​

15.0​

240​

That average difference over the last 14 years is 7.6 ppg. And through all Super Bowls it is 9,4 ppg. Over the years, offense has slowly been going up, but then again, so has the PPG on defense.

And you are right, what you need is a well-rounded team with a QB that doesn't make stupid mistakes in the playoffs. The offense doesn't need to score 30 points a game to win the Super Bowl if the defense is only giving up 15.

 

[Raptorman]

Here’s on the shows a trend moving heavy into Offense scoring in 6
Of the last 8 Superbowls (2017-2022)

I don't like his 5-year rolling thing. Way to many variables for that to matter in my book. And your guy is nothing more than you or me. He took data and came to his own conclusions.


But have you done this? Looked at the Super Bowl losers in the same way? See, when you do the losers, the average offense comes out to 5.2, but the defense comes out at 7.5. This is what I have. See, everyone concentrates so much on the winners, no one thinks to look at who lost.

	offense rank	defense rank
Super Bowl winners.	5.6​	5.7​
Super Bowl losers	5.2​	7.5​

 

[mradtke66]

The offense doesn't need to score 30 points a game to win the Super Bowl if the defense is only giving up 15.

While technically correct, it's more nuanced. In 2024, 5th in the league was 29 ppg and the best scoring defense gave up 18.1.

Your Vikings played excellent defense, holding the opposition to 19.9, 4th overall (https://www.teamrankings.com/nfl/stat/opponent-points-per-game). I think expecting more from them is unlikely, just because of how well they did.

They scored 24.5, good for 9th (https://www.teamrankings.com/nfl/stat/points-per-game). Darnold was 5th in TDs (35). Average, 16th, was 20. (https://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/2024/passing.htm)

Naive math says that if you get average play from JJ and he only throws 20 TDs (and those TDs aren't replicated elsewhere, like I said, naive) and everything else stays the same, you'd fall to 30th (18.3ppg) giving you a negative point differential. If he's top 10, you're back to a positive point differential, but that's well above average.

You're almost certainly going to live and die by JJ this year.

My math, in case I made a silly mistake:

total points:
24.5 * 17 = 416.5

TD difference:
35-15 = 20

Points from 15 TDs:
15 * 7 = 105

Point difference losing 15 TDs:
416.5 - 105 = 311.5

PPG
311.5 / 17 = 18.3

If JJ is top 10 (Daniels and Love, 10th and 11 thew 25)

Points from 10 TDs:
15 * 7 = 70

Point difference losing 15 TDs:
416.5 - 70 = 346.5

PPG
311.5 / 17 = 20.38, or 21st overall.

 

[Raptorman]

While technically correct, it's more nuanced. In 2024, 5th in the league was 29 ppg and the best scoring defense gave up 18.1.

Your Vikings played excellent defense, holding the opposition to 19.9, 4th overall (https://www.teamrankings.com/nfl/stat/opponent-points-per-game). I think expecting more from them is unlikely, just because of how well they did.

They scored 24.5, good for 9th (https://www.teamrankings.com/nfl/stat/points-per-game). Darnold was 5th in TDs (35). Average, 16th, was 20. (https://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/2024/passing.htm)

Naive math says that if you get average play from JJ and he only throws 20 TDs (and those TDs aren't replicated elsewhere, like I said, naive) and everything else stays the same, you'd fall to 30th (18.3ppg) giving you a negative point differential. If he's top 10, you're back to a positive point differential, but that's well above average.

You're almost certainly going to live and die by JJ this year.

My math, in case I made a silly mistake:

total points:
24.5 * 17 = 416.5

TD difference:
35-15 = 20

Points from 15 TDs:
15 * 7 = 105

Point difference losing 15 TDs:
416.5 - 105 = 311.5

PPG
311.5 / 17 = 18.3

If JJ is top 10 (Daniels and Love, 10th and 11 thew 25)

Points from 10 TDs:
15 * 7 = 70

Point difference losing 15 TDs:
416.5 - 70 = 346.5

PPG
311.5 / 17 = 20.38, or 21st overall.

Yup. Because the offense isn't getting better, it's going to go backwards, and the Defense will remain the same. JJ will be average. Because we all know that a new Vikings QB can't possibly be above average. The Vikings have averaged 31 TDs a year in passing under O'Connell. And in 2023, that was 30 with 4 different QB's. So it only makes sense that JJ will be average in that offense.

The best defense gave up 17.7. Not sure where you are getting your numbers from. And the Vikings gave up 19.5 ppg. Actually, simple math. 332/17 equals 19.5. But let's assume that the Vikings defense isn't getting any better in their third year with Flores. Even at that, 19.5, they still only need 6-7 ppg to make it to the playoffs. The average NFL score is around 22.9 ppg. So, an average offense with a good defense should still get you in the playoffs.

Also, the average of the top 32 QBs was 22 TD's per game. And the average of QBs who played 17 games was 29. But then you throw in guys like Daniel Jones in New York, who was the 34th QB on the list of TDS's thrown. He didn't even finish the year out with the Giants. He spent the last 6 games on the Vikings Practice squad. The average passing TD's per team last year was 25.

 

[OldSchool101]

Let's not forget the 85 Bears, with Jim MacMahon. They had not only the top defense in the league, but many people consider that the best defense in the history of the NFL.

Their quarterback had a career-high 2392 yards passing (utterly pathetic)... 15 touchdowns against 11 interceptions, and a QB rating of 82.6. Probably the worst season for any Super Bowl quarterback.

Yet they went 15-1 (and in their only loss, they were only down by 6 points I think), and in their playoff run, they outscored their three opponents 91-10! Shutting out the first two teams; and in the Super Bowl, holding the Patriots to 3 points all the way into the 2-minute warning. Until 13:46, the Bears had outscored their playoff foes 91-3 - 30 to 1. Absolutely monstrous defense. Nobody's ever seen a defense like that; the Bears deserve massive credit for what they did that season.

Again, with a quarterback with a passer rating of 82.6, less than a hundred yards passing per game, and only had one good eye because he had somehow stabbed the other one wth a fork at dinnertime. For god only knows what reason, but he was a Bear, so why even bother trying to make sense of whatever that idiot did.

Bears. All you need to know.

But anyway... that is the dictionary definition of dominant defense, and I don't think there is any better example of defense winning championships. Caleb deserves to be able to brag about that team.

Oh absolutely. The Bears 1986? D was so good that they used their D players on Offense.
Obviously it was those Earlier Defenses (I think of the Steel Curtain and off memory the earlier 70’s Vikings eating people alive!?) that gave legitimacy and substance to the argument that “D wins Championships”. At one time it was absolutely true. I’ll admit that even I didn't explore the breakdown like this article did by generations.

We’ve recently learned that the Tide has flipped though for 2+ Decades in favor of the Offense rankings. Surprisingly Mahomes Won in 2023? With a #15 ranked Offense.

My guess is one major factor is the Rules changes and protections afforded to the QB’s and seemingly promoting higher scoring games (flags at every turn for Defenseless Receivers or PI or Holding)