Comparison of the Super Bowl era dynasties - Page 2 - New England Patriots Forums

***Pat the Pats Fan*** · 01-13-2009, 03:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by richpats

Ugh I can only imagine Pitt winning this year and cutting the Pats dynasty "in half" so-to-speak.

Or Baltimore, they won in the beginning of the decade.....although all their other number for the decade would be questionable.

***ausbacker*** · 01-13-2009, 04:30 AM

I just hope the trend of the Patriots missing the playoffs on a countback followed by 2 Superbowl victories holds true.

everlong · 01-13-2009, 06:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rabthepat

Does losing the last Superbowl drop us off the list with those other teams? None of them choked in the big show.

I am not saying the Pats are not a good team and it has been a great run the last 8 years but I do not think other football fans will put us on par with those teams now.

The 49ers had 3 straight one and done's during their run. Every team has scars.

***Rob0729*** · 01-13-2009, 07:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rabthepat

Does losing the last Superbowl drop us off the list with those other teams? None of them choked in the big show.

I am not saying the Pats are not a good team and it has been a great run the last 8 years but I do not think other football fans will put us on par with those teams now.

Why?!? So it is more impressive to lose in the AFC Championships than the Super Bowl? Are you really saying the Pats' legacy would be better of they went 17-1 and missed the Super Bowl than 18-1 and lost the Super Bowl?

NEGoldenAge · 01-13-2009, 07:37 AM

The Patriots certainly belong in the list of greatest dynasties, just look at the win percentage for the time. Had they won the SB last year, they would have stood first among those dynasties. That one still hurts, but it's a testament to the parity of the NFL. Clearly, it's the most competitive of all

Winning in the NFL is hard, especially in this decade. I realize that our team is in a well set up for success next year, and for years to come, barring another obscene rash of injuries, but people shouldn't be earmarking superbowls. Hope for one, but don't expect it. It's a hard thing to do because the playing field is soooo even.

***DarrylS*** · 01-13-2009, 07:40 AM

Excellent work, as much as I agree with this being one of the "Great Dynasties".. the media and its obsession with Spygate, will forever taint the perception of what has been accomplished... I completely disargree with this point, but all of this was compounded by the overreaction of Goodell... and others will justify it because of his actions.

***ALP*** · 01-13-2009, 08:03 AM

none of those teams had an undefeated reg season either, which really is something for the history books even we dont like it b/c of the it played out in the end

***godef*** · 01-13-2009, 08:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rabthepat

Does losing the last Superbowl drop us off the list with those other teams? None of them choked in the big show.

I am not saying the Pats are not a good team and it has been a great run the last 8 years but I do not think other football fans will put us on par with those teams now.

Absolutely not! Actually, losing the Super Bowl ADDED to the Patriots resume, because it means we won 1 more conference championship relative to those other teams. A Super Bowl loss is better than not appearing in the Super Bowl at all.

Consider: a typical Jets fan might boast that they are undefeated in the Super Bowl (1-0) whereas the Patriots are merely .500 (3-3). Does this make the Jets the better all-time team? Of course not.

Reconsider: the Patriots have won 6 conference championships, and THEN gone on to win 3 Super Bowls, whereas the Jets are won just 1 measly conference championship (actually, AFL championship) and went on to win the single Super Bowl.

Remember: if lose the Super Bowl, you're still the 2nd best team in the entire league. If you award 1 point for getting to the Super Bowl, and then 1 more point for winning the Super Bowl, then the Pats are up on the Jets 9-3.

BradyManny · 01-13-2009, 08:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deus Irae

Of course, in order to "choke" in the big show, you have to first get to the big show.

Apparently winning the first 18 games of the season isn't an achievement...

Maybe the NFL is different, but most winners in other sports were 2nd place as often as they were first. Celtics lost in the NBA finals, Jack Nicklaus has a record # of 2nd places in majors, etc. Winning the AFC is an achievement, so 16-0, and another AFCCG adds to our resume, no doubt.

***godef*** · 01-13-2009, 08:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TommyBrady12

don't forget about the 21 game winning streak. none of those other dynasties had that.

Two separate 21 game winning streaks: the overall streak in 2003-2004, and the official regular season streak than ran from the last 3 games in 2006 through the first 2 games in 2008.