Give me dominant DL over super star QB

No this has nothing to do with Dak. I would take the Giants 4 DL in 08 even over Mahomes.

 

Actually they lost 4 starters on the OL. Their starting RG opted out before the season started because of the Covid stuff, and then their LG plus both tackles were lost to injuries.
Then like you said, add to that the Refs turned it into a Flag Bowl instead of Super Bowl.
To me, it was a very disappointing game.

 

Right on reddy, true words!

 

Rahr-rum!
https://images.app.goo.gl/qyADrjtkPgPacpXK7

 

Very true . Dominant running game opens up so many opportunities to score and pass and control the clock

 

Tell that to the redskins. They have the best DL in the NFL by far. Ask them if theyd like that super star QB

 

Washington doesn’t need a Super star quarterback, they would settle for a good young NFL quarterback in a heartbeat.

 

There are more instances where the team with a great D and average QB lost to the team with the great QB...examples
Pats over Atl
Pats over Rams
Chiefs over 49ers
Packers over Pitt
Cowboys over Pitt XXX

great DL is important for sure but if you want to single out just one indicator for success, it’s QB.
After that I’d say HC and then DL

 

maybe its the new NFL I cant say but QB is #1 ,OL #2 DL ##

 

There are several instances of good quarterbacks winning in the Super Bowl against future Hall of Fame quarterbacks. Washington over Denver, New York over Denver, Washington over Buffalo, New York over Buffalo, Philadelphia over New England. No it doesn’t hurt to have a great quarterback or be to be great on defense or offense. However I think it’s usually borne out that the best team wins or the team that plays best on that day.

 

It takes a team to win. QB is obviously the most important position and having a great one gives you a leg up but some people act like its the only position. Even a great QB isn't going to win with a bad defense and the most important positions on defense are on the line.

At the end of the day, everyone plays with the same budget. The team that wins is the one that is the healthiest and gets the most value for its money. A team should really build itself based on investing in the positions where there is a scarcity of talent.

Scarce talent (ie. less good ones than slots available): QB, LT, DT, CB
Non scarce talent (more good ones than slots available): RB, TE, 4-3 LB

Personally, I think one of Jerry's biggest flaws is that he has a tendency to overinvest in positions where he could get roughly equivalent play for less money. Dalton Schultz was a pretty good example of that this year. He wasn't elite but he was perfectly fine. A great team needs bargains like that.

 

Atlanta was offense only vs the Pats. That was Ryan’s MVP year.

Pats and Rams in 2000 was the defense and average QB (Brady as a rookie) beating a superstar offense. Pats Rams 3 years ago was a defensive struggle. McVays unstoppable offense was shut down for the first time and it exposed Goff.

Chiefs last year are about the only team that was offense only to win.

Cowboys had a great defense vs the Steelers. Larry Brown was MVP.

The Bills in the 90s were another offense heavy team nicknamed the K-Gun offense. Went 0-4.

 

The QB is more important than the DL. Again it wasn't Philly's front four that won them that SB. It was that Foles turned into Tom Brady during their late playoff run. So to say the Eagles won a SB on the basis of DL play is wrong. They won it because of QB play.

 

he was one of the reasons. probably even the biggest single reason. but there are always a lot of reasons that go into why a championship is won in team sports.

lets stop trying to boil complicated matters down to one answer. "they" put it all together, "they" deserve credit for that.

 

its always about what you don't have. they have a pretty good foundation on both sides of the ball. give them high level play from the QB and they can compete with anyone.

no different than those years where we were close but just needed a little more out of a couple positions to put us over the top.

 

Worked wonders for the WFT......Sheesh.

 

He was the difference and everyone knows it. I'm not claiming he did it all by himself.

 

Yeah I know. They had a good defense last year too and it got them 7-9.

 

its not an either or thing You need both. Look at Tampa Bay. Look at KC. Tampa had 2 studs on the interior dline in Suh and Vea. Look at KC...they had Pennel and Jones on the interior dline. But if both those teams do not have very good QB's...they aren't making the playoffs, let alone making it to the SB. ideally, IT TAKES BOTH.

 

I’ll take a stud QB over a dominant DL every time. History has shown that gives you the best shot at a Super Bowl.

Just look at this year, the teams with the best 4 QBs all made the title game: Brady, Rodgers, Mahomes, Allen.

Two teams with dominant DLs but no QB exited the playoffs early: Rams and Washington.

There are exceptions of course, and it’s best to have both like Tampa Bay.