Defense wins championships.It’s an axiom that’s been at the foundation of football since the Allegheny Athletic Club paid William “Pudge” Heffelfinger $500 to help the team beat Pittsburgh in 1892.The axiom has been proven true by names like “Iron” Mike Singletary, Lawrence Taylor, “Prime Time” Deion Sanders and Butkus.
It has spawned legendary units: The Monsters of the Midway, The Steel Curtain, The Purple People Eaters and the Doomsday Defense.
However, a quick analysis of recent Super Bowls, this season’s historic performances and an “eye test” show that the statement “defense wins championships” is on the verge of going the way of the dodo.
The Super Bowl has always been a relatively high-scoring affair. The highest scoring Super Bowl occurred in 1995 when the San Francisco 49ers and San Diego Chargers combined for 75 points. Tampa Bay and Oakland combined for 69 points only nine years ago.
The common thread between those games and most other high-scoring Super Bowls, pre 2004, is that one team was doing most of the scoring. San Fran beat the Chargers, 49-26, while the Buccaneers whipped Oakland, 48-21. Those who watched know several of the points were scored after the outcome had pretty much been decided or during what is known as “Garbage Time.” This is evidence that at least one of the team’s defenses was effective in keeping the other team from scoring while the game was in doubt.
That has changed. Since 2004, there have been six Super Bowls where the combined point total was more than 40 — including in each of the last three games. The average margin of victory in those six games was 5.3 points. In four of those games, both teams scored at least 20 points apiece and the average margin of victory in those contests was four points.
In the 37 Super Bowls before 2004, there were eight games where both teams scored at least 20 points. The average margin of victory in those contests was 14 points or two touchdowns. This proves again that in the past, at least one of the defenses involved was successful in keeping the other team from scoring when it mattered.
Conversely, the recent trend, post 2004, is a strong indication that offenses are ruling the day and that the winning defense was only successful at stopping the opposing offense one more time than its counterpart.
This trend has only picked up momentum during the regular season. In the interest of space, I’ll only focus on this year.
In the first week of the season, there was an NFL-record five games where the quarterbacks in each contest threw for at least 300 yards apiece — including New England’s Tom Brady and Miami’s Chad Henne, combining for a total of 933 yards in one game. That’s half the yardage Hall of Fame quarterback Roger Staubach threw for in 10 games in the 1971 season (1,882).
If there is one individual player who proves the demise of defense, it’s Carolina Panthers rookie quarterback Cam Newton who has thrown for an NFL record 854 yards in his first two games. It could be true that Newton is a once-in-a-generation talent, but what he has done is unheard of in any generation of football. Peyton Manning threw for a total of 560 yards in his first two games; Brett Favre threw for 365 yards; John Elway, 488 yards; and Joe Montana, 385 yards.
These early-season numbers are more impressive when you consider teams had little to no offseason and a scaled back preseason to get synchronized. Plus, history has always proven that defense starts the season with an advantage, mostly because their schemes are easier and units need less time to get in step.
Lastly, and this is certainly more subjective than the above examples, it is apparent just by watching the game that defenses are more than a few steps behind the offensive power curve. Fans of the game, ask yourselves: When did the league have a truly dominant defense? Maybe it was the 2006 Steelers or 2003 Buccaneers, but probably not since the 2001 Baltimore Ravens. Then ask yourselves: What is the true purpose of defense in today’s game? Is it to shut down the opposition and win the game, or is it to force an extra turnover so the offense can go out and win the game?
Numbers and trends lean toward the latter, which then begs the question: If defenses aren’t even being relied on to win one game, how plausible is it to expect them to do everything necessary to win a championship?
I’ll be doing my thing at the Senior Leader Conference next week, so I’ll see you in October.
Of course, until then, if you have any questions on this or anything to do with sports, contact me at chad.t.jones.civ@mail.mil.
This Fort Meade Live blog was written by Chad Jones, Fort Meade public affairs officer.
