kerouac9 said:
No. This couldn't be less true. New England didn't have a running game last season, but won the Super Bowl. Oakland didn't have much of a rushing attack in 2002, but still managed to win the AFC. Eddie George average less than three yards per carry last season, but Steve McNair lead the Titans deep into the playoffs. Same with Michael Vick in 2002. Chad Pennington didn't lead a killer rushing attack in 2002, but still advanced his team to the AFC Championship game.
Or Marino taking the Dolphins to the playoffs year after year. Or Elway before Terrell Davis came to Denver. Was Dorsey Levens really that good when Favre was winning Super Bowls? Come off it, Canuck. Maybe teams don't pass in the CFL, but there are tons of teams who have tons of success behind a premire quarterback in the League. It's the middling guys (like Jake Plummer) who need 1500+ yard backs to have any modicum of effectiveness.
All good points.
But I maintain that most D-coordinators believe that stopping the run, removing it as an option - is the first step in controlling a QB. New England's success in countering this is a notable exception. For lack of a running game, Marino failed to get his team back to the ultimate game, year after year... and Elway was viewed, by many, as a QB who had failed to meet his promise until the arrival of T. Davis.
This is a bit of chicken vs egg debate... and I'll stick with my view... and you with yours.
As for Plummer, I mildly suspect that he'll reach the Super Bowl at least as many times as Dan Marino, before his career is up.
The CFL, by the way - is a passing league. It's 3 down football on a longer and wider field.... what else could it be.....