The Los Angeles Rams won the Super Bowl over the Cincinnati Bengals despite a rushing performance among the worst in history.
Conventional wisdom says it takes a great defense and a dominant rushing attack to win championships.
The Rams definitely had the former en route to their victory in Super Bowl 56, but they were lacking the latter.
That’s okay though. They lifted the trophy while staying true to the franchise. After all, the Rams have now won two championships with little to no rushing game to speak of.
The Rams Super Bowl-winning rushing performance was the second-worst ever
On Sunday, Los Angeles’ rushing total of 43 yards on 23 carries was the second-lowest for the winning team in Super Bowl history.
The worst mark ever? The St. Louis Rams prevailed in Super Bowl 34 with just 29 yards on 13 carries.
Usually, teams that struggle to run the ball end up on the losing side of the big game. That was the case for the franchise in their last two championship losses.
Despite Marshall Faulk’s 76 yards in Super Bowl 36, the Patriots outpaced STL with 133 yards at 5.3 yards per rush. It was a similar story in Super Bowl 53 as Los Angeles managed 62 yards on 18 rushing attempts while New England had 154 at 4.8 yards a pop.
This rushing performance against the Bengals was worse than either of those, but Matthew Stafford and Cooper Kupp came through in the clutch while the defense gave Joe Burrow and company more than they could handle.
Cincinnati still outrushed LA 79-43. They also won the turnover battle 2-0. The fact that the Rams won is pretty incredible.
The Rams were able to rely on their passing game and key defensive moments in two separate Super Bowls while playing for two different cities. Who says that’s not a recipe for winning?