OT: SI, Colts fans still think they could be Team of the Decade - New England Patriots Forums

NovaScotiaPatsFan · 12-23-2009, 09:42 AM

ROFLCOPTER!!!111

Colts still alive in*NFL team of decade debate - Don Banks - SI.com

Team of the decade still up in the air - Unofficial Indianapolis Colts Fan Forums

Quote:

The Colts also don't have their Super Bowl(s) tainted by cheating.

If the Colts go 19-0, they'll have two clean Super Bowls, as opposed to three dirty ones.

*cough* piped in crowd noise *cough*
*cough* artificially raised temperatures in the AFCC game *cough*
*cough* your president, who sites on the Competition committee changing rules focus to benefit your team *cough*

My final, clinching argument:
3 > 2

PatsFanSince74 · 12-23-2009, 09:50 AM

I don't want to think about it because I do NOT believe that the Colts will go 19--0 (or even get to the SB even if they finish the regular season 16--0).

...HOWEVER, if they were to do the improbable and go 19--0, with an overall regular season record better than ours and with two rings, I think I'd have to admit that there could be an objective argument about who should be the Team of the Decade. I'd still give it to us on the basis of having one more ring and of dominating the Conference and League from 01 to 04 and then again in 07 (well, the conference anyway in 07), but many would see it differently.

The most difficult thing about this, of course, is that we had it in our power to end the debate forever in the 06 AFCCG and then again this year in Indy and didn't do so.

***Rob0729*** · 12-23-2009, 10:19 AM

Even if the Colts go 19-0, I don't think they deserve to be in the discussion for team of the decade. It is just a typical case of a writer trying to be provocative in a column. The Patriots have been to four Super Bowls and won three of them. At best the Colts can do is go to two and win two. Even with a perfect season, that isn't enough to be the team of the decade even with the other accomplishments.

Teams in sports are judged primarily on one key category - championship wins. The Pats will have more than the Colts. Banks does make a valid point that if the Colts do go 19-0 that they will be the team of the second half of the decade, but just by cutting the decade in half doesn't make it that the Colts are now in contention for team of the decade because the Pats were the team of the first half and the Colts were the team of the second half.

That said, there is no trophy for team of the decade and it is just a media creation. It doesn't change the Pats' accomplishments whether they are considered the team of the decade or not.

MrTibbs · 12-23-2009, 10:33 AM

Patriots: 4 Super Bowl trips 3 wins

Colts: 1 Super Bowl trip 1 win.

Why is this even a discussion?

NovaScotiaPatsFan · 12-23-2009, 10:36 AM

Because Colts fans are delusional.

PatsFanSince74 · 12-23-2009, 10:43 AM

Interesting topic.

If we look at the history of the SB era, this is the first decade when there would be a serious debate, were the Colts to go 19--0, which is by no means a given, in combination with the best regular season record and two rings.

Clearly, Lombardi's Packers dominated the 1960's, with two SB's and three NFL Championships before SB I.

The 1970's had four amazing teams, but the Noll/Bradshaw Steelers won four rings. The Cowboys went to five SB's but only won two of them. The Dolphins went to three and won two. The great Grant/Tarkenton Vikings teams went to three but won none. So, the Steelers won twice as many SB's as their two closest competitors and there can be no real discussion as to who was the Team of the Decade, except maybe in Bars or Chat Boards in Dallas I guess.

The 1980's were the decade of Joe Montana and the niners, with four rings. The Raiders and Redskins each took home two (one of the Redskins coming in a strike year). So, no debate.

To most observers, the 90's belong to the Cowboys with their three Lombardi's. Broncos fans might want to argue that they took home two in the 97 and 98 seasons, but they generally aren't in the discussion.

So, the only thing that could re-open a discussion about the 00's would be a 19--0 Colts Season that was then combined with the best overall regular season record and two rings. Part of the argument would be that the Pats had the chance to end the discussion in the 2006 season AFCCG and in Indy this year and didn't do so. Personally, I'm not going to cross that bridge until we come to it, as I haven't ruled out a fourth Lombardi in Foxboro this year.

PatsFanSince74 · 12-23-2009, 10:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrTibbs

Patriots: 4 Super Bowl trips 3 wins

Colts: 1 Super Bowl trip 1 win.

Why is this even a discussion?

Agreed. It's only a reasonable discussion on the hypothesis that they go 19--0 in combination with the best regular season record and two Lombardi's. Otherwise, the case is closed as no one is suggesting that the Steelers two trophies put them in the debate.

PatsFanSince74 · 12-23-2009, 11:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rob0729

Even if the Colts go 19-0, I don't think they deserve to be in the discussion for team of the decade. It is just a typical case of a writer trying to be provocative in a column. The Patriots have been to four Super Bowls and won three of them. At best the Colts can do is go to two and win two. Even with a perfect season, that isn't enough to be the team of the decade even with the other accomplishments.

Teams in sports are judged primarily on one key category - championship wins. The Pats will have more than the Colts. Banks does make a valid point that if the Colts do go 19-0 that they will be the team of the second half of the decade, but just by cutting the decade in half doesn't make it that the Colts are now in contention for team of the decade because the Pats were the team of the first half and the Colts were the team of the second half.

That said, there is no trophy for team of the decade and it is just a media creation. It doesn't change the Pats' accomplishments whether they are considered the team of the decade or not.

Good points all, especially your final one about this being a media creation.

It's interesting that pre cap and FA, there was no reasonable debate about the Team of the Decade in the 60's, 70's and 80's; it was the Packers, Steelers and Niners respectively. In the cap/FA era, the 90's could also be divided between the Cowboys in the first half with three rings and the Broncos in the second half with two rings, though most would say the Cowboys. Now, if the Colts pull off a 19--0 season, we could have a similar debate in the 00's.

***tanked_as_usual*** · 12-23-2009, 11:09 AM

the decade is over in a couple of weeks.......the next SB is in 2010, which happens to be in the next decade

not sure what that idiot banks doesn't understand about that notion

PatsFanSince74 · 12-23-2009, 11:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tanked_as_usual

the decade is over in a couple of weeks.......the next SB is in 2010, which happens to be in the next decade

not sure what that idiot banks doesn't understand about that notion

The decade refers to the seasons. So, the decade includes the ten seasons beginning with 2000 and ending in 2009, even though their SB's are played in the next calendar year.