Super Bowl Prediction

Now, I've heard some valid reasons why the Colts will win. I've heard some invalid ones too. Things like Peyton Manning is due to win one. He's a much better quarterback than Rex Grossman. One columnist pointed to Manning's record against the NFC being 8-1 over the past three years in "games that mattered". A guy at work told me the Colts will win because the AFC is better than the NFC. Another writer mentioned that #1 seeds (like Chicago) are 1-5 in the Super Bowl this decade, and he believes it's because they have an easier path to the Super Bowl which makes them complacent.

Peyton Manning is due is a completely invalid argument. No one is "due" to win a title. That's why Mark Rypien and Jeff Hostetler have started Super Bowl wins, but Dan Marino and Dan Fouts haven't. That would be like me saying Grossman played for Florida, and Manning couldn’t beat Florida, so that’s why the Colts will lose. It is a team game which is why Manning being better than Grossman may be a factor in who wins, but certainly not the deciding one. As for Manning's record against the NFC, there's a reason why the writer only picked the last three years. The previous three, Manning was 6-6 against the NFC. Besides, how many NFC teams has Manning beaten in the playoffs? Oh right, he hasn't played an NFC team in the playoffs. You have to get to the Super Bowl for that. As for the AFC being better than the NFC, that’s subjective since they only played four games against the opposing conferences, but even if correct (and I would say it probably is), it doesn’t matter. Chicago’s only playing the Colts, not the whole AFC.

The last one about the #1 seeds is almost laughable. To begin with, by decade, he apparently meant since 2000, not 1996 because going back to 1996 would have included three Super Bowls won by #1 seeds in four years. However, even sticking with the past six games, it’s still disingenuous. Last year’s Pittsburgh team was actually an exception. They were the 6 seed in the AFC and knocked off the #1 seeded Seahawks. Three of the other four #1 seeds to lose to a lower seed from the other conference actually had a worse record than the team they lost to. For example, Baltimore was a wildcard team in 2000 when they beat the NFC’s #1 seeded Giants, but Baltimore had a 13-3 regular season record to New York’s 12-4. The belief that playing a harder road to the Super Bowl gives you the edge is silly. In the past ten years, seven out of ten Super Bowl winners had first round byes. That’s advantage Bears since the Colts were a wildcard team. Of the three winners that didn’t have a bye, Baltimore and the ’97 Broncos were wildcards who still had the second best record in their conference (they were wildcards because the team with the best record was in their division), so once again, Pittsburgh is the exception as they won three road games in route to the Super Bowl. Of course, I’ve always felt a big factor in the Steelers going all way last year was they got hot at the end of the season (had to win four straight just to get into the playoffs). The Colts lost three of their last five.

Can the Colts win the Super Bowl? Sure. I think Grossman is a good quarterback with bad moments, but if the Colts get to Grossman and he has a bad moment, the Bears could get hammered. Or Manning could get hot. The Colts defense could have really turned it around. However, there is a fallacy that the game will be the high powered Colts’ offense versus the stout Chicago defense. Chicago actually scored the same number of points as the Colts. Now, I’m not going to say the Bears are in the same class offensively. They are ranked 15th in total offense to the Colts’ 3rd. However, the Bears excelled at scoring on defense and special teams with nine touchdowns to two for the Colts’. The Colts’ special team coverage during the season was atrocious, so it’s my guess that the Bears won’t have to go as far to score their points. Besides, Grossman has good games. He’s won 74% of his starts. Manning’s only won 63% of his. And Peyton has bad games, especially in the playoffs. Last week’s win over the Patriots was really the aberration. He had played well in early round games, but played poorly in big ones. Last year, Manning had a 90 passer rating against the Steelers, but they only scored 18 points. In his three previous playoff losses, his passer ratings were 69, 35.5 and 31.2 plus the Colts only scored 17 total points. Look at these playoffs, Manning may have won it against New England, but they won in spite of him at Baltimore and Kansas City. Even with the New England game, Manning has thrown six interceptions to two touchdowns in the playoffs this year. I really think the best bet for the Colts would be to go no huddle to keep the Bears from substituting on defense. Wear them down. They also need to protect him because if Manning starts taking hits, he gets jumpy in the pocket.

Now, one bright spot for the Colts has been the play of their defense in the playoffs, although they gave up 34 points to the Patriots. However, that’s where I think they will lose. Chicago is the superior team on defense and special teams. Chicago’s defense did struggle some at the end of the year, but it really only lasted two games. Then, in the NFC Championship game, they held the league’s number 1 offense to 14 points with only one other drive even having a shot at scoring. Even while struggling, their defense made the plays when it counted. It’s not a myth that defense wins championships. Good defense and special teams mean shorter fields for your offense. Plus, the biggest advantage in football is a forced turnover. You usually get good field position and your opponent’s defense starts out on their heels because they weren’t expecting to get back out there so soon. The Bears were the best at creating turnovers. The Colts weren’t close. Plus, I think the Colts have played better in the playoffs on defense, but I’m still not sold. I did a quick look at the past Super Bowl winners (since the 1970 merger) on the basis of Points Allowed and Total Defense which indicate how good your defense is (and it’s easy to look up). I found only a couple of teams that were outside the top 10 in either category, but the ’76 Raiders (12th in Points, 19th Total) were the only Super Bowl winner to have finished the regular season outside the top ten in both categories. Most teams were top ten in both. The Colts aren’t just outside the top ten in both. They are outside the top 20 in both (21st in Points, 23rd Total). The Colts’ defense did look good in the playoffs, but a bad defense can look good for a few weeks. I just don’t think a team that was as bad as the Colts’ defense was can turn it around permanently like that. If they can do it for one more game, they'll have a good chance of winning.

Of course, it could all come down to whether or not "Bad Rex" makes an appearance. Grossman hasn't played poorly in the playoffs. He's averaging a 75 passer rating which is almost 12 points higher than Manning. I think Chicago can establish the run to take pressure of Grossman, and that will open up the play action passing. While Chicago may not have receivers as good as the Colts, I remember Muhsin Muhammad blowing up for 140 yards and a touchdown when he was in the Super Bowl with Carolina. I think Grossman has been focused in the playoffs. He hasn't made mistakes, but he has made plays when needed. I'm saying Chicago by seven.