by Isaac Cheifetz, Minneapolis Star Tribune, September 20, 2004

The National Football League season has begun. The Minnesota Vikings have a great offense and an improved defense. Can they win the Super Bowl?

Probably not, for the same reasons some of the most creative companies never dominate their markets. In both cases, these organizations are tempted to focus on what they do best or identify most with, rather than ruthlessly concentrating on a critical factor for success that does not come as naturally to them.

In football, offense entertains, but defense wins championships. Of course, teams with both great offenses and defenses can dominate and win multiple Super Bowls (the Cowboys, Steelers and 49ers dynasties). But great offenses with good-but-not-great defenses rarely go far in the playoffs.

In contrast, a long list of defensive powerhouses who were merely adequate on offense have won the Super Bowl -- the Patriots, Ravens and Buccaneers in recent years, the Bears and Giants in the 1980s. These teams demonstrated that you can never have too much depth on defense, or the offensive line. They are remembered most for their defensive stars, not their offensive stars.

The Vikings had the No. 1-ranked offense in the NFL last year. Daunte Culpepper is a Pro Bowl quarterback, Randy Moss the best receiver in the NFL, and several first-rate running backs are on the roster. The offensive line, decimated by age and tragedy several years ago, has been rebuilt into one of the best in the league.

The defense, mediocre the past several years, has been bolstered by two great drafts in a row, adding potential stars Kevin Williams, Kenechi Udeze, E.J. Henderson, Dontarrious Thomas and Mike Nattiel. And in the off-season, the Vikings aggressively sought and signed the premier cornerback available through free agency, Antoine Winfield.

The Vikings are favored to win their division and make the playoffs. They have done a good job of turning their weakness into a strength, but not with enough vigor to win the Super Bowl.

Despite their improved defense, the Vikings find themselves, as in past years, bolstering their defensive secondary with undrafted free agents and players released by other teams.

Consider their 2003 draft. Though the Vikings primarily selected defensive players and excellent ones at that, they could not resist using midround draft picks on an additional wide receiver, Nate Burleson, and running back, Onterrio Smith.

Both players are starting now, and have star potential. But in choosing them, the Vikings were only improving their already strong offense, and offense after all, does not win championships.

In contrast, two cornerbacks selected soon after Burleson and Smith would have significantly improved the Vikings secondary. Ricky Manning, a star at UCLA and a minor league baseball player in the Twins system, started for the Carolina Panthers in the Super Bowl. And Asante Samuel, a fellow Central Florida alum of Daunte Culpepper, is a critical reserve for the Super Bowl champion New England Patriots.

Dominant market leaders tend, on average, to have products that are somewhat innovative and very reliable, delivered to customers through world-class sales and service organizations. Occasionally, they take serious risks on radical innovations.

Many companies are founded by visionaries, who see a new way for their industry to function. But history has repeatedly demonstrated that customers can assimilate only a finite amount of creativity at a time.

Oracle and Microsoft are the two dynasties of the software industry. Both build quality products and plow their profits back into innovation. But they first achieved market dominance through aggressive sales and distribution. By doing so, they overwhelmed competitors who were arguably more innovative -- Ingres and Informix in databases, Lotus in productivity software.

A good solution, aggressively focused and sold to customers who need it, will usually beat creative product innovation. Many customers are satisfied with "good enough," and don't have the specialist's appreciation for an elegant, optimal solution.

The Vikings resemble a software company spending precious resources to make an already creative solution -- their offense -- even better, when sales and marketing -- defense -- ought to be improved with every available resource.

It is difficult to concentrate on improving weaknesses. We find comfort and fulfillment in our strengths. It is tempting to keep trying to improve them, even if we know deep down that other factors are holding us back. Choosing to ruthlessly focus our energy on critical success factors is daunting.

Perhaps next year's Vikings training camp will feature battles among promising prospects for the mundane but critical backup cornerback roles, rather than a fourth running back or fifth wide receiver.

The good news is, the Vikings are a remarkably young team - nearly all their key players are in their mid-20s, or younger. Given the skill with which they have drafted the past two years, another year of player development and one more good draft could make their defense as fearsome as their offense.