if a running back is the best player on your team...
 

...you will not win a super bowl.

i was thinking about the importance of running backs, and i came to the conclusion that, in looking at all of the super bowl champions, almost none of them featured an all-time great running back. obviously, some of them did, but in the last 30 or so years, having a great/hall of fame running back does not equal a championship.

i found that incredibly interesting, since we consider them such important pieces, and there have been so many great backs to come through the league. however, in all of the 2000's, no super bowl winning team's best player was a running back. in fact, only one team has had a player even remotely close to being in the hall of fame (marshall faulk, 01 rams). so, the best player on a super bowl winning team hasn't been a running back since marshall faulk with the '99 rams, and that's not a sure thing because kurt warner was there, and the system was conducive to both of them putting up numbers. beyond that, we'd have to look at terrell davis with the broncos, who i'd say was better than elway at that time. if there's argument over that, we'd have to go back to the 90's cowboys with emmitt smith.

thoughts?

Re: if a running back is the best player on your team...
 

I agree. I think winning a SB comes down to 3 things; Defense, OLine, + Turnover margin. The Bucs won the SB w/ Michael Pittman. I go as far as saying the QB doesn't matter as much as long as he doesn't turn the ball over.

Re: if a running back is the best player on your team...
 

Yep, Faulk, Davis & Smith were the last elite RBs to lead teams to Super Bowl victories. The reason I think an elite RB no longer equals a SB winning team is mainly due to the NFL's insistence on turning the game into a 7-on-7 drill and opening up the pass to be more potent.

Re: if a running back is the best player on your team...
 

Greazy, like you said...3 RBs.

and thats in the last 20 years. Crazy.

I think it's only 1 in 20 years. Faulk. Davis and Smith were great, no joke, but I could make a case that Elway was their best player (Broncos) and Aikman/Irvin were the best for Dallas.

Re: if a running back is the best player on your team...
 

You can't win a Super Bowl with one elite player at ANY position. You need a good chemistry and players who fit the scheme perfectly. Look at the 2007 Patriots. Immense talent does not equal a Super Bowl win

Re: if a running back is the best player on your team...
 

The best OFFENSIVE player of the 2000 Baltimore Ravens was Jamal Lewis. He doesn't get enough credit for his career. It didn't hurt having Holmes behind him but the run the Ravens went on was clearly on his back and he helped that dominant defense.

Clearly, the best player on the team was on the other side of the ball, but as mentioned, you don't win with just one player at any position and Jamal deserves as much credit as any Lewis on the field that day (that goes for Ray AND Jermaine).

Re: if a running back is the best player on your team...
 

i agree, i don't think you can win a super bowl with just one elite player. however, my point is that in looking at all super bowl champions, elite running backs are disproportionately absent from the winning teams.

Re: if a running back is the best player on your team...
 

funny you bring this up, since rifkin (mutual friend) said this to me as well. and i agree, jamal lewis is pretty underrated and forgotten (i don't even think he's in the league, now). he was the best offensive skill raven that year, though shannon sharpe was as important in the playoffs.

however, being the best ofensive weapon on one of the league's most historically inept offenses does not really speak to the fact that the 2000 ravens' team was 95% defense. also, despite bim being the best skill position player, jonathan ogden was the best player on that offense.

ray lewis
jonathan ogden
jamal lewis
jermaine lewis
everyone else on defense
shannon sharpe
everyone else on offense