Question regarding SuperBowl winners.

[byroan]

Uh, John Elway! 3,600+ yards in 97'-27 TD's and 2,800+ in 98'-22 TD's

Uh, Dan Marino...

I don't even need to mention his stats, do I?

 

[NJFINSFAN1]

They still wouldn't have gotten to the SB without TD. We had Marino, what did that get us?

The Redskins and Gibbs are a run first offense, Riggins, Timmy Smith etc.. Look at the superbowl years, they were a run first team.

 

[gunka]

I hope so too. But thats what people want by trading Surtain for Edge. And at the expense of our draft too. And at the expense of our depth chart. Or chart rather, I would hardly call it deep.

Agreed. But who are you talking about? I don't think many people here want to give up a lot for Edge. And most everyone is unhappy with the rumored trade -- PS for EJ, our 1 for theirs.

 

[LtDan]

Uh, Dan Marino...

I don't even need to mention his stats, do I?

Yes but where the hell was his running game! We are saying you have to have both a running game and passing game. I thought you were smarter than that Byroan. I generally respect your post but either you missed something or I did.:)

 

[finfansince72]

Giants with Phil Simms and Hostetler? Ravens with Jamal? Falcons made one with Anderson but didnt win.

 

[Dolphins17-0]

wait why exactly would edge make us a one dimension team? chambers, mcmike, booker, maybe boston, definitely thompson and gilmore????

might in fact give feeley more time than a rookie would, just a thought... no way does getting an elite RB make us a one dimension team this time around.

we have weapons

 

[LtDan]

wait why exactly would edge make us a one dimension team? chambers, mcmike, booker, maybe boston, definitely thompson and gilmore????

might in fact give feeley more time than a rookie would, just a thought... no way does getting an elite RB make us a one dimension team this time around.

we have weapons

That is a good question actually.

 

[painnotpleasure]

I think he means when was the last time a team won a Super Bowl with just a running game and no QB like we had with Ricky and Fiedler (which is my opinion of having no QB). Denver wouldn't qualify in my opinion. And I really can't think of any team off hand...

 

[byroan]

Yes but where the hell was his running game! We are saying you have to have both a running game and passing game. I thought you were smarter than that Byroan. I generally respect your post but either you missed something or I did.:)

Who knows. I was just going by Ricky having 1800+ yards and remembering how much we relied on him. I figure if TD had 2000+ yards that they would really have relied on him.

 

[Dolphins17-0]

When was the last time a team won the Superbowl solely on the strength of their running game? A one dimensional team like we were with Ricky? Or would have to be with Edge?

I'm waiting.

Either a great offensive team or a great defensive team wins championsips. Or a good mix, like the Pats.

If we waste our cap on a running back, without improving our defence we are screwed. And the key to improving our passing game is our O-line. And maybe, too early to tell, a QB. I have faith in our recieving core. With, or without, Boston. I don't have the same faith in our ENTIRE defence. In fact, with the exception of Madison, Taylor, Thomas, and (right now) Surtain, I think the whole thing is garbage. How many other people think the same?

And if people think that trading everything for Edge is the answer, please explain to me how we will be a better team in the long run? Not just next year but in the next 3 or 4. And how you think that will translate into a Superbowl?

And not thinking that every 4th round pick we have currently is going to the probowl either. Thats not realistic, that is pathetic.

man, this whole thing is a mess, where do i start.
a - the goal may always be the super bowl, but realistically are you planning on winning it next year?

b - we wouldnt be a one dimensional team (see above post)

c - we wouldnt be wasting our cap on an elite RB, that trade would save us money overall

d - giving up the #2 overall and surtain for edge and the 29 is giving up "everything" lol

e - is it also pathetic that everyone thinks whoever we draft at 2 will be an all pro for the next 10 years?

 

[Mitchy71]

Sigh. This thread was for all the people that say we should sign Edge. All I was trying to get at, was if we gave them the farm for Edge, we will have nothing. We have to be more then a running team, and with our defence gone to crap, and have to improve our offence. Agreed RB is a big part, but only one part. If we tie up too much salary in a RB we are screwed. We have so many holes, that we can't afford too. IMHO getting Edge will screw us severely. Rumour mill is that we wouldn't even get the #29.
Or do you think that we will be ok with a shell of a team, gutted by age and salary constraints, but with an all pro running game?

We have weapons yes. Did Feely get to use them last year? No. Are we indeed weaker on our O-line so far this year? Maybe and maybe not. Will Feely have a chance to use our recievers? Only if they pass a rule saying he can throw while he is on his ***.

I agree, Bensen or Brown would look good in aqua. I just hope that is as far as we go this year. Does anyone know what kind of money a #2 RB will sign for? There hasn't been a top 5 in a few years.

Surtain would be more valuable in a trade this year for a pick. Or a young, cheap, running back. Something we can afford and work with, rather then something that will further weaken our future.

That was the point of my thread. Either great offence or great defence. Not wanny
s running attack.

And, incidentaly, Lewis with the Ravens in 2001 had well under 1000 yards that year. I think the top RB had about 700 yards if that. I don't call that run dominant.

 

[byroan]

And, incidentaly, Lewis with the Ravens in 2001 had well under 1000 yards that year. I think the top RB had about 700 yards if that. I don't call that run dominant.

That's because they were the 2000 Ravens that won the SB. He had 1364 the year they won.

But everyone knows the reason they won was their #1 ranked defense.

 

[adamprez2003]

the dolphins teams of 72 and 73 had a great defense and a great receiver to keep defenses honest. the broncos teams had elway to keep defenses honest. if you go into the playoffs with an average defense and only a running game you will get killed. running back is the easiest position to game plan for. Mitchy71 is right. we need to build on the defensive side of the ball this year and take care of offense next year(with the exceptions of possibly getting a left tackle and a speed receiver who can stretch the defense) if we go for a running back in free agency my picks are lamont jordan or dominc rhodes (who is probably the cheaper option now). through the draft we should not draft a running back until the third at the earliest

 

[Awsi Dooger]

Run the ball often, pass the ball well

That's been the NFL blueprint for success. The statistical dosage index was historically 28 or more rushing attempts per game average, and a QB with at least 7.0 yards per pass attempt. Those are regular season averages.

For at least 15 years, my Las Vegas friends and I cleaned up in the playoffs by utilizing that formula and betting against the phony rejects. And there were plenty, including the Dolphins on many occasions, when we ignorantly refused to run the ball often enough. The formula also tossed out many #1 seeds that supposedly were "upset" in the playoffs, including the two-time defending champion 49ers in 1990, and the Chiefs and Steelers in the AFC during the '90s. That celebrated Oilers team that finished the season with something like 10 straight wins was also a phony, and cooperated by bowing out immediately to the Chiefs at home.

Alas, the NFL bit us gamblers in the *** by instituting this salary cap. The teams are statistically flawed and imbalanced now, but it no longer matters. As someone else posted in this thread, you just need to be great at something now. It royally sucks, but allows for quick turnarounds after a pathetic season.

The '99 Rams violated the 28 rushing attempts per game criteria. The defensive monster '00 Ravens did not meet the 7.0 YPPA stat. The '02 Buccs fell short in that regard also. If anyone doubts the game has suffered at the top, the numbers shout you are wrong. Hell, the damn Eagles didn't come close to the 28 rushing attempts number this year and made the Super Bowl. At least there was justice when they tried to wing it 51 times, and came up short.

My question to Paul Tagliabue: if there is a salary cap, why not a profits cap? Oh sorry, I almost forgot. You work for the lovely owners.

 

[Disnardo]

The RB was not Soley Responsible for Denvers Victories that year, it was Balance!

1998 Broncos - Terrell Davis 2008 Rushing Yards.
1997 Broncos - Terrell Davis 1750 Rushing Yards


Not like it matters, but with Edge we wouldn't have to rely on him like we did with Ricky. Wanny is no longer our coach and we can say goodbye to run,run,pass,punt.

Not really a full running attack that got them there. It was a balanced attack both years. They were either in the TOP 10 or the Top 5 in Rushing or Passing Attack. As an opponent, you had a tough time to stop both of them.

In 97, and 98 they had 2 +1000 yds receivers (including Ed MacCaffrey, Rod Smith and Shannon Sharpe).

In 98 they had 491 pass att and 520 rush att...
In 97 they had 513 pass att and 520 pass att...