Interesting Trend: QBs who have thrown 43+ TDs are 0-8 in attempt to win SB

[Ross12]

It's more of an anomaly than a "stat," but I'm glad you find it interesting.

Look, Kurt Warner led the league in passing TDs and won a SB in 1999. He threw for 41 TDs. That's the last time the MVP won the Super Bowl the same year. Nine more MVPs have made the SB since then and lost. That's a stronger trend than yours, but it doesn't really have anything to do with how the games themselves unfolded. But, whatever helps pass the time.

NFL Passing Touchdowns Single-Season Leaders | Pro-Football-Reference.com

If KC does win tomorrow I'm confident that NO will beat them, which will make it 10 times in a row for that MVP anomaly if Mahomes is the 2018 MVP as expected.

 

[SHOWTIME15]

I'm sitting back in a comfy chair, listening to the radio, watching a movie, playing a computer game, enjoying a drink (adult beverage), and talking to someone about Brexit on another forum.
.

in other words you have no life

 

[SHOWTIME15]

If KC does win tomorrow I'm confident that NO will beat them, which will make it 10 times in a row for that MVP anomaly if Mahomes is the 2018 MVP as expected.

the mvp curse actually goes back to 1999, almost 20 years

 

[jah]

The 2017-18 Eagles didn't have a prolific defense nor were they anywhere close to what the Chiefs have on offense, and yet, they still won a Super Bowl.

They were a rare anomaly who happened to make ONE defensive play that sealed their win.

Are we forgetting that they dominated the regular season?

 

[Triumph]

You can dominate a game without throwing a TD pass. Brady only threw one against the Chargers while Rivers threw three. Who played better?

Thats because the Pats wanted long time consuming drives and also committed to the run to the tune of 155 yards. Taking the ball after winning the toss confirms that. The Pats drained 7 minutes off the clock.

When it was all said and done, NE had the ball 16+ more minutes and 15 more offensive plays. There is a finite number of plays in a game.At the start of LAC last drive, NE had 76 offensive plays and LAC had 51.

NE put it all on Rivers to beat them. LAC had only 19 rushing yards. Trouble is that Rivers completion rate was 49%. Bradys was 77%.

 

[Ring 6]

The 2017-18 Eagles didn't have a prolific defense nor were they anywhere close to what the Chiefs have on offense, and yet, they still won a Super Bowl.

They were a rare anomaly who happened to make ONE defensive play that sealed their win.

Huh?
The eagles were #4 scoring defense and #3 scoring offense.

 

[Ring 6]

You can dominate a game without throwing a TD pass. Brady only threw one against the Chargers while Rivers threw three. Who played better?

Td passes is a misleading stat.
Scoring offense is a better gauge of the QB than whether the points were scored by running in or throwing in.

 

[RayClay]

Still interesting that nobody who has thrown 43+ has won the Superbowl in my opinion. If we only count 45+, thatd be less cherry picked.

Youd think one would have managed it. Either way, if anybody can its Mahomes. Its not why they lost the SB, but still a trend.

Might indicate unbalanced team that won putting up big numbers. Opponents defense sells out on pass rush/defense.

 

[Gronkowski123]

MVPs don't win super bowls anymore. Also, teams who lose the SB never return the following year

 

[Triumph]

MVPs don't win super bowls anymore. Also, teams who lose the SB never return the following year

Wut?

The Bills lost 4 in succession.

 

[Coolade2]

The MVP and passing TD leaders being skunked in the super bowl is a big enough sample size to apply a theory to. And we have our own Brady mcD fail in 42 to add that first-hand knowledge to it.
So my theory is that a successful offense gets a bit complacent since the success feeds into belief it will continue. However playoff defense has better players and all the film ends up producing less in the big games. And a complacent offense does not have enough creativity to change.

 

[Soliel]

Why is that? I wonder

I can explain the Buffalo anomaly. One time, we’ll, more than once but bear with me. I had an emergency operation on a thing called a “perforated viscus” caused by years of alcohol and drug abuse. (True story here)

I didn’t come awake for six days. While in this carnival like nightmare of the in between doorways. I saw god. He told me I could ask about the meaning of life. I said I’m cool with the whole meaning of life thing. But I had two questions. One: cleaveland? What’s the deal with Ohio? Two: the bills?? He laughed and said a lot of people ask that. Apparently when the devil was cast down, he landed in Cincinnati.

He had no answer about buffalo other than he don’t like the bills. I said I felt that made sense

 

[venecol]

.

 

[Ice_Ice_Brady]

So my theory is that a successful offense gets a bit complacent since the success feeds into belief it will continue.

Cool theory, bro. I guess only the offense is effected by this? Nardly!

 

[njpatsfan]

It means nothing on Sunday. Regardless of who wins on Sunday, it will also mean nothing during the SB. The notion that good defenses always beat offenses is nonsense. The notion that high powered offenses don't win Super Bowls is nonsense. It's all nonsense, and both the eye test regarding the SB winners and the scoring stats of the SB winners prove it.

You owe the OP an apology. The OP made none of those arguments. Bonus points for the condescending tone and irrelevant follow up. But perhaps attacking your own strawmen is the only way you can win an argument.

As others here have noted, he is clearly pointing out something interesting - if only because it seems counterintuitive. In determining to what degree it is important and relevant, you don't seem to have anything to contribute.

 

[Deus Irae]

You owe the OP an apology. The OP made none of those arguments. Bonus points for the condescending tone and irrelevant follow up. But perhaps attacking your own strawmen is the only way you can win an argument.

As others here have noted, he is clearly pointing out something interesting - if only because it seems counterintuitive. In determining to what degree it is important and relevant, you don't seem to have anything to contribute.

I don't owe the OP anything, and your post is garbage.

 

[njpatsfan]

1984 Dolphins (14-2)(#1 Team Off)(Lost SB 38-17 to 15-1 SF, scored 45 in CC) : Dan Marino - 48 Touchdowns
1986 Dolphins (8-8)(#1Team Off)(DNQ): Dan Marino - 44 Touchdowns
2004 Colts (12-4)(#1TeamOff)(Lost DIV 22-3 to 14-2 NE, scored 49 in WC): Peyton Manning - 49 Touchdowns
2007 Patriots (16-0)(#1Team Off)(Lost SB 17-14 to 10-6 NYG, scored 21 in CC)): Tom Brady - 50 Touchdowns
2011 Saints (13-3)(#1Team Off)(Lost DIV 36-32 to 13-3 SF; scored 45 in WC) Drew Brees - 46 Touchdowns
2011 Packers(15-1)(#3Team Off)(Lost DIV 37-20): Aaron Rodgers - 45 Touchdowns
2012 Saints (7-9)(#3Team Off)(DNQ): Drew Brees - 43 Touchdowns
2013 Denver Broncos (13-3)(#1TeamOff)(Lost DIV 43-22 to 12-4 NE; scored 45 in WC) : Peyton Manning - 55 Touchdowns

Adding to the OP's list - what the Team Offense rank was for that year, what the losing score was, and what was scored in the game prior.

 

[njpatsfan]

I don't owe the OP anything, and your post is garbage.

A better human being would realize you do.

A better human being would let the OP and others explore this topic without being disparaged or otherwise hijacking the thread.

Let's see you be that person.

 

[Coolade2]

Cool theory, bro. I guess only the offense is effected by this? Nardly!

You got a better one..? Nopely...!

 

[Ice_Ice_Brady]

You got a better one..? Nopely...!

Quite a time to choose to rebut this, since the teams just combined for 68 points.