I read a comment in an earlier post stating that the Vikings would have to improve their pass defense because at the time they were ranked 20th and as the writer proclaimed, "I don't think any Super Bowl winner has been ranked 20th or worse in pass defense."

This statement really aroused my curiosity, so of course I couldn't resist doing some on-line investigating. As some of you may know from a few of my past posts, I have a thing for statistics. The attached chart shows the data I gathered and provides a means of comparing the regular season defensive rankings of all Super Bowl participants since the NFL/AFL merger of 1970.

I'll let you have fun looking over the stats and maybe coming up with some of your own conclusions in the process. After the chart I have listed my conclusions and how they relate to the league standings as they are today.

OK, before I delve into the meat of the data I'd like to point out a few interesting facts:

1. There have been 8 champions that finished the regular season 1st in total defense.
2. There has only been 1 loser that finished 1st in total defense.
3. The Washington Redskins won the Super Bowl each of the 2 years there was a strike.
4. Indy won Super Bowl XLI after finishing last in the league in rush defense.
5. There have been 6 teams that finished the regular season 20th or worse in pass defense and won the Super Bowl.

Now to get back to why we're here, does defense really win championships? First let's examine what it takes to be a participant in the Super Bowl. To make things a little easier, I have divided the teams into 3 groups and listed the results as % of all participants.

Ranking of 1-10 = good defense

Ranking of 11-19 = average defense

Ranking of 20 and worse = poor defense

Super Bowl participants:

Good total defense - 76%

Average total defense - 19%

Poor total defense - 5%

Good pass defense - 51%

Average pass defense - 26%

Poor pass defense - 23%

Good rush defense - 76%

Average rush defense - 15%

Poor rush defense - 9%

As these numbers point out, for a team to make it to the Super Bowl, it is important to have a good defense. However, it seems that it is much more important to have a good rush defense than it is a pass defense.

Super Bowl winners:

Good total defense - 85%

Average total defense - 10%

Poor total defense - 5%

Good pass defense - 54%

Average pass defense - 31%

Poor pass defense - 15%

Good rush defense - 85%

Average rush defense - 13%

Poor rush defense - 2%

Looking at these numbers it is even more evident of the importance of a good defense. Again it is also evident that a good rush defense is more important than a good pass defense.

So how does this pertain to this year, and more importantly, what does it say about the Vikings chances? If the regular season were to end today, which teams would have a greater chance of making it to the Super Bowl?

Notes:

Only 6 Super Bowl participants in the last 39 games did not rank "Good" in at least one of the defensive categories. Of these 6 only 1 went on to win the game.

This tells me that if a team does not finish in the top 10 in either total defense, pass defense, or rush defense, it is highly unlikely they will win the Super Bowl.

OK, so who can we eliminate from the list above?

IND - gone

NO - gone (are you kidding me?)

ARI - gone

Remember that it was determined that a good rush defense is important. I think we can eliminate from the remaining teams those that have less than a good rush defense.

NE - gone

SD - gone

DEN - gone

Alright, who's left?

CIN - good possibility

JAX - would definitely be a surprise

DAL - eh...alright maybe could see it

MIN - you betcha

GB - they just keep hanging around

PHI - they always seem to overachieve

Well according to my calculations, one of these teams will be the next Super Bowl champion. Boy, I'll bet you haven't seen a prediction like that? The one good thing about this list is that only 2 of the teams really fit in the picture.

The Vikings and the Bengals in the Super Bowl!