the reason for why i think the pats will not win without a stronger running game is two-fold:
1. When brady struggles (and he struggles against good defenses with top pass rushers), who will pick up the slack on offense? Obviously none of the receivers can do anything with a struggling QB, so the answer is the RB. I can't remember the last time i saw a pats RB bust one for 20 yards or so. BJGE ran for 4 yards per carry last year, which is average. Brady cannot shoulder the offense on his back - he needs help. when he faces a top defense, he has struggled. he panics and makes mistakes like the inexplicable safety in the SB and interception to blackburn.
2. the defense sucks. another way to help brady out is to have a strong D, but the pats don't have one.
the easier fix is to get a strong running game.
in super bowl 46, ahmad bradshaw by himself ran for almost as many yards as the entire pats team. overall, the giants ran for about 115 yards and the pats 75 yards.
in super bowl 42, the patriots ran for a putrid 45 yards or so, the giants 90 yards. corely dillon stated that year he wanted to come back, but BB said no. dillon would have been amazing in the super bowl, certainly a huge upgrade over maroney.
in super bowl 39, the patriots ran for 112 yards, the eagles 45.
in super bowl 38, the patriots ran for 125 yards, carolina 90 yards.
in super bowl 36, the patriots ran for 115 yards, while the rams 90 yards.
so in every super bowl in the brady era, the team that ran for more yards won
a running game is still important.
A few things:
- Apparently you missed this season if you can't remember a Patriots' RB busting it for 20 yards or so because Stevan Ridley had three rushes for 20 plus yards (another for 18) and Shane Vereen had a 19 yard TD run. Yes, that isn't a lot, but it is far more than you remember.
- Please explain to me how a strong running game would have made Welker and Brady connect on that pass, made the Pats cover Mario Manningham, stopped David Tyree drop his miracle pass, make Asante Samuel or Brandon Meriweather catch easy INTs they dropped, or made the Pats cover Dallas Clark.
- The first Giants Super Bowl, the Giants only rushed for 101 yards on 26 carries (3.9 YPC). It wasn't as bad as the Patriots, but clearly not a great rushing effort.
- In that Super Bowl, the o-line played so bad that no RB would have performed very well against the Giants' front four.
- Last year, the Packers won the Super Bowl with only 50 yards rushing. The year before the Saints won the Super Bowl with only 51 yards of rushing. The year before that, the Steelers won the Super Bowl with 58 total yards of rushing. Three years in a row, the Super Bowl winner won with virtually no running game.
- Another thing that the Pats had the three years the Pats won the Super Bowl was a great to dominant defense. In the Rams' Super Bowl, that was why they won by shutting down the Greatest Show on Turf and scoring only 6 less points than the offense (the defense scored 7 and the offense scored 13).
- The last few years the rules have been increasingly been skewed towards the passing game and the running game across the league (unless you have a rushing QB) has become less and less important. All these rules were put in place after the Pats won their last Super Bowl.
- All of the Pats Super Bowls with Brady have come down to the wire. The difference between the wins and the losses have literally come down to a small handful of plays. Many of these plays came while the Pats' defense was on the field.
Sorry, but your argument is weak on the running game aspect. The evidence isn't there as much as you want to spin it. In fact the evidence is against you with three of the last four Super Bowl winners won despite they had no running game in the Super Bowl.