Ranking the most talented Patriots teams in NFL history

[PATRIOTSFANINPA]

I thought about making a thread on ranking from 1 to 10 of the MOST Talented Patriots teams in NFL history based on quality of depth on the roster and individual performances of all the players within that particular year and combined into one team.

After the first 3 Patriots teams which is probably agreed by everyone,I think it gets a little tricky,Getting to the Super Bowl or having a better record is not always the indicator of talent on the roster but sometimes a little bit of luck along the way is the factor,so some may disagree but here is my rankings from #1 being superior best fully stocked talent across the board to #10 which was good but not great.

#1 - 2007 team - Likely the unanimous choice at #1 unless you are on crack
#2 - 2004 team - Team had great depth and won many nail biters
#3 - 2003 team - After week 1,they got together and turned out the lights
#4 - 2008 team - No Brady after a 1/4 of play but still talented than most
#5 - 1995 team - Drew Bledsoe & a cast of talented but little known players
#6 - 1976 team - A loaded championship team with bad fortune
#7 - 2001 team - Brady with a cast of 'who is that?' overachieving players
#8 - 1985 team - Sure they made the SB but talent was below the top 8
#9 - 2006 team - With some AFCCG defense in the 4th qtr they win it all
#10 -1978 team - Fairbanks exit disrupted a championship talented team

I left out a very good 1986 team but I think the 1978 squad was more talented.

 

[MoneyFX]

Nice post. Pretty interesting. Of course the 04' team beats the 03' team. They had same records but Brady was more consistent in 04' and destroyed Indy and Pittsburgh en route to their super bowl win. But the 03' Super Bowl was the more exciting superbowl.

 

[RobertWeathers]

For #5, do you mean the 1996 SB team or the 1994 playoff team? I assume the former.

Overall, I agree with this most of this. I think you may be underapreciating the 1985 team. That roster sent 7 or 8 Pro-Bowlers to Hawaii. Looking back, is it a better roster than the 2001 team w/ Seymour, Brady, Bruschi, Law, Vinatieri? Not sure. I think I just argued with myself and agreed with you! Also, was the 2006 team THAT talented? The secondary, WR units and RBs were ok units. They won on guts that year.

I thought about making a thread on ranking from 1 to 10 of the MOST Talented Patriots teams in NFL history based on quality of depth on the roster and individual performances of all the players within that particular year and combined into one team.

After the first 3 Patriots teams which is probably agreed by everyone,I think it gets a little tricky,Getting to the Super Bowl or having a better record is not always the indicator of talent on the roster but sometimes a little bit of luck along the way is the factor,so some may disagree but here is my rankings from #1 being superior best fully stocked talent across the board to #10 which was good but not great.

#1 - 2007 team - Likely the unanimous choice at #1 unless you are on crack
#2 - 2004 team - Team had great depth and won many nail biters
#3 - 2003 team - After week 1,they got together and turned out the lights
#4 - 2008 team - No Brady after a 1/4 of play but still talented than most
#5 - 1995 team - Drew Bledsoe & a cast of talented but little known players
#6 - 1976 team - A loaded championship team with bad fortune
#7 - 2001 team - Brady with a cast of 'who is that?' overachieving players
#8 - 1985 team - Sure they made the SB but talent was below the top 8
#9 - 2006 team - With some AFCCG defense in the 4th qtr they win it all
#10 -1978 team - Fairbanks exit disrupted a championship talented team

I left out a very good 1986 team but I think the 1978 squad was more talented.

 

[Double G]

#1 - 2007 team - Likely the unanimous choice at #1 unless you are on crack
#2 - 2004 team - Team had great depth and won many nail biters
#3 - 2003 team - After week 1,they got together and turned out the lights
#4 - 2008 team - No Brady after a 1/4 of play but still talented than most
#5 - 1995 team - Drew Bledsoe & a cast of talented but little known players
#6 - 1976 team - A loaded championship team with bad fortune
#7 - 2001 team - Brady with a cast of 'who is that?' overachieving players
#8 - 1985 team - Sure they made the SB but talent was below the top 8
#9 - 2006 team - With some AFCCG defense in the 4th qtr they win it all
#10 -1978 team - Fairbanks exit disrupted a championship talented team

I left out a very good 1986 team but I think the 1978 squad was more talented.[/QUOTE

I agree with 1, 2 and 3; I'd swap #4 with #6, that 76 team was absolutely loaded and had they not gotten screwed by the worst bag job call in NFL playoff history, they would have beaten an injury riddled Steeler team and a soft Vikings team for the first Super Bowl title in Patriots history.

Also agree about #10; had the whole Fairbanks fiasco not occured, they were another Super Bowl contender...................

 

[jmt57]

Personally I would put the '76 team no lower than fourth.

 

[PATRIOTSFANINPA]

Personally I would put the '76 team no lower than fourth.

It was a tough call but I just think Welker,Moss,Seymour,Harrison,Faulk and others was just too good to drop down too far with that 2008 group despite 11-5 and no playoffs,Even with Brady out - With Brady we may have been talking #2

I loved the 1995 team and Drew was outstanding and special that year much like Brady in 2001 with the exception of Drew and Co. coming up short to Brett and his gang.

1976 was indeed an awesome group and I could certainly see that team ranked #3 to #5

 

[PATRIOTSFANINPA]

For #5, do you mean the 1996 SB team or the 1994 playoff team? I assume the former.

The 1995 team was the 1996 SB team so yes,that was the group I meant - The 1994 team was not so talented but more gutsy than good but that didn't get them far.

 

[Spiral]

I think you're shortchanging the '78 team. They set the NFL record for team rushing yards that has stood for over 30 years, despite the fact that the team didn't have a franchise running back. Sam Cunningham was the only back that could even have been considered above average, and he gained a total of 768 yards, less than 25% of the team's total. That was a team that could simply line up and shove it down other team's throats, which was a lot of fun to watch. You hear teams talk all the time about having a tough defense, but that was the the toughest offense I've ever seen. The whole Fairbanks fiasco ruined that season, but as far as talent goes, that team should be right up there.

 

[AzPatsFan]

A more significant issue to me is where the 2009 edition will fit.

Right now I am tempted to rate it as prospectively the Number 1 or Number 2 most talented team. I think the Offensne is actually better than 2007, and more dangerous. Galloway is IMHO, an upgrade over Stallworth, and the RB depth is much better than 2007 edition.

On Defense this team is much FASTER and Younger than the 2007 Defense. The 2007 edition had a large number of sacks and that has been criticism of last year's team. But with big leads and fewer rookies playing, I expect the sack figures to soar, as the Offense returns to running up big leads.

 

[jmt57]

I was curious so I went back to look at some of the stats of the '76 team - and actually they weren't as impressive as my mind remembers them.

Although the team ranked 2nd in points scored, they were 8th in yardage. Similar to the '78 team, the running game led the way: they ranked 2nd in rushing yardage but 20th in passing yardage.

On defense the rankings surprised me; the Pats ranked only 11th in both yards allowed and points allowed.

On a side note the Steelers defense that year allowed just less than 10 points per game. They also had the number one rushing offense, but no passing game to speak of. If the Pats had won the Dreiforth game against Oakland, they would have met Pittsburgh in the AFCCG. I think New England would have won that game given the Steeler's lack of balance, despite their great defense; once Pittsburgh got behind they didn't have a way to catch up, unless their defense scored on a turnover.

 

[Wildo7]

I think the 2005 team was more talented than 2006 personally. In fact I think 2006 and 2002 were the two worst teams of the decade.

 

[jmt57]

I think one reason we tend to rank the '76 team higher than the '78 team is that had the Pats got that call against Oakland, most believe they would have gone on to win the Super Bowl. As good as the '78 team was, Pittsburgh and Dallas were clearly the two best teams in the NFL that year.

I know that shouldn't be a factor in a ranking such as this, but I think that plays a part in why Pats fans tend to rank the '76 team as better than the '78 team.

Offensively the '78 team ranked 4th in points scored, 1st in yardage, and 5th in points differential. The Pats were 9th in passing yardage and 1st in rushing yardage - they ran for 3165 yards and had 30 rushing touchdowns that year. On defense they were 13th in points allowed and 9th in yards allowed.

 

[Ring 6]

I dont know how the team that lost the SB can be #1.

1) 2004
2) 2003
3) 2001
4) 2007
5) 1996
6) 1985
7) 1976
8) 2006
9) 2005
10) 1978

 

[Wildo7]

I dont know how the team that lost the SB can be #1.

1) 2004
2) 2003
3) 2001
4) 2007
5) 1996
6) 1985
7) 1976
8) 2006
9) 2005
10) 1978

My understanding was that the question was "most talented" not "most successful." If you're just going to rank them based on results then there isn't really any room for disagreement.

 

[farn]

I'm on crack (I guess) because I'll go with the 04 as #1. Here's the problem : people equate talent with the offensive side of the ball.

#1-the 04 team only lost 2 games (one more than the guys from 07)
#2-the playoff wins were much, much more impressive as they steamrolled the best teams one after the other
#3-the defense of that team was better than the 07 defense (banged up secondary ? yes. but WOW, the rest of the gang was on fire)
#4-fluke, lucky... whatever you say about the 07 team NOT winning, there is something to be said for the 04 team that DID win

 

[SHOWTIME15]

i happen to think the 2004 team was better as a whole than the 2007 team. i like good defenses and i simply don't think the 2007 defense was that great. i think the offense covered up the ok defense we had that year. i mean we would be up by 3 tds and teams would have to play catch up all game. the 2004 patriots defense was mean and physical. they played smart and attacked the ball.

 

[Ring 6]

My understanding was that the question was "most talented" not "most successful." If you're just going to rank them based on results then there isn't really any room for disagreement.

I guess it depends on how you define talented. I have never thought running faster or jumping higher was a greater talent than the ability to make key plays that result in your team winning. That is a facet of talent that appears to be overlooked when saying a team that didnt win its most important game is more 'talented' that SB Champs.

There is certainly room for disagreement as to where 04,03 or 01 were better, same with 85,96,07 and so on.

 

[Deus Irae]

• 1 - 2007
• 2 - 2009 (Projection based upon Bodden being a good CB)
• 3 - 2008 (Pre-Brady injury)
• 4 - 2004
• 5 - 2003
• 6 - 2001
• 7 - 2006
• 8 - 1976
• 9 - 1995
• 10 - 1985

 

[RDS11]

I guess it depends on how you define talented. I have never thought running faster or jumping higher was a greater talent than the ability to make key plays that result in your team winning. That is a facet of talent that appears to be overlooked when saying a team that didnt win its most important game is more 'talented' that SB Champs.

There is certainly room for disagreement as to where 04,03 or 01 were better, same with 85,96,07 and so on.

Are you saying that the 2001 team would beat the 2007 team if they played each other ? I think the 2007 team would win more times than they would lose...the 2001 team beat the Rams by 3 points on a late field goal in the Super Bowl. Stats wise, the 2007 Pats had a better offense than the 2001 Rams...I would assume then that on a 2001 vs 2007 matchup, the 2007 team would score more than 17 points. Heck, they could have taken the lead and never look back.

 

[Absurdly Metro]

Personally I would put the '76 team no lower than fourth.

:yeahthat: