10 best teams of decade, per Yahoo

[Fencer]

The 10 best NFL teams of the last decade - Shutdown Corner - NFL Blog - Yahoo! Sports

Not necessarily focused on Super Bowl winners. Their #1 is the 18-1 Super Bowl losers. Two 2001 teams made it, and neither was the Super Bowl winner that year.

 

[upstater1]

It's funny. Patriots fans for many years heard that the Rams in 2001 were the better team, and that the Patriots lucked out. Then comes 2007, and none of those same fans hold to that logic.

At least the writer here is consistent in putting the 2001 Rams ahead of the 2001 Patriots.

As a Patriot fan, I have difficulty arguing with him. No question I would much rather be a fan of the Patriots in 2001 or the Giants in 2007 than a fan of the best team in those years.

Then again, I'm glad I'm a fan of the best team in the decade, for obvious reasons.

 

[BSR]

Pretty good list. I think the only one that I have a problem with is the 2001 Steelers at #2. That one is a real headscratcher.

 

[Rob0729]

How could you have the 2001 Steelers over the 2004 Patriots? Heck, I might put the 2004 Steelers over the 2001 Steelers (15-1). I would put the 2001 Rams over the 2001 Steelers. I don't like this list.

 

[mayoclinic]

The Pats take up 3 places on that list (#1, 3 and 6). In addition, the 2001 Pats beat 2 of the teams on that list en route to winning the SB(#2 and #5), as did the 2004 Pats (#7 and #9). So we clearly dominate that list.

The biggest omission that I see is the 2006 Chargers, who finished 14-2 and were absolutely dominant. They were a much better team than the 2005 Seahawks, for example. And we beat them, too - a loss which probably cost them the SB, and which psychologically destroyed them, leading to Schottenheimer's ouster.

 

[Rob0729]

The Pats take up 3 places on that list (#1, 3 and 6). In addition, the 2001 Pats beat 2 of the teams on that list en route to winning the SB(#2 and #5), as did the 2004 Pats (#7 and #9). So we clearly dominate that list.

The biggest omission that I see is the 2006 Chargers, who finished 14-2 and were absolutely dominant. They were a much better team than the 2005 Seahawks, for example. And we beat them, too - a loss which probably cost them the SB, and which psychologically destroyed them, leading to Schottenheimer's ouster.

I think the 2005 Seahawks should be disqualified from this list just because they play in the NFC West. They had six easy wins that year. There wasn't another team in that division that year with more than 6 wins.

 

[PrairiePat]

Yeah, as many have stated here (and in the comments following that article), the glaring omissions seem to be the 2006 Chargers, the 2008 Steelers, and the 2000 Ravens, if 2000 is included in the 'decade'. I personally don't see how the 2001 Steelers are rated so highly either - any team that depended on Kordell Stewart as its QB was fatally flawed from the start.

It's funny to see how often the 'best' team fails to win the Superbowl in a given year. But I guess if you compare it to how often the regular season champ fails to win the World Series or the NBA Championship, I guess it's not so surprising. There is a pretty small margin between great teams and good teams in most professional sports these days.

 

[Yehoodi]

Yeah, as many have stated here (and in the comments following that article), the glaring omissions seem to be the 2006 Chargers, the 2008 Steelers, and the 2000 Ravens, if 2000 is included in the 'decade'. I personally don't see how the 2001 Steelers are rated so highly either - any team that depended on Kordell Stewart as its QB was fatally flawed from the start.

It's funny to see how often the 'best' team fails to win the Superbowl in a given year. But I guess if you compare it to how often the regular season champ fails to win the World Series or the NBA Championship, I guess it's not so surprising. There is a pretty small margin between great teams and good teams in most professional sports these days.

The 2008 Steelers had a losing record against teams with winning records, they were lucky not to have to face in the PO the 4 teams that beat them in the regular season - namely, Indy, NYG, Phil and Tenn. I have a tough time putting a team that could not beat their own peers in the top ten of the decade . . .

 

[RobertWeathers]

The 2008 Steelers had a losing record against teams with winning records, they were lucky not to have to face in the PO the 4 teams that beat them in the regular season - namely, Indy, NYG, Phil and Tenn. I have a tough time putting a team that could not beat their own peers in the top ten of the decade . . .

It is exactly this reason that I am not throwing in the towel on a potential SB for the Pats.

In theory, a tough schedule makes you a better team. Playing the best allows you to take pause, understand where you need to improve and go from there.

 

[HarkDawg]

Kurt Warner(notes) collected his second MVP award in 2001, and it was also the last year that Marshall Faulk(notes) would crack the 1,000-yard rushing barrier. In fact, Faulk went over 2,000 yards from scrimmage when you factor in his 83 catches and 765 receiving yards. The Rams outgained the Patriots 427-267 in the Super Bowl, but turned the ball over three times and let the Patriots shock the world and start a dynasty.



Oh yeah..... winning the SB is everything. ^^^ This game gave birth to a Patriot Dynasty. All haters can Feel It


Gotta win the big show to be the best...... and to do it 3 time

 

[StraightCashHomey81]

That '04 Pats team is one of the 7 or 8 best teams ever. Dominant run game, all-time great QB, plethora of solid receivers, dominant d-line, one of the deepest, most veteran LB corps ever and a borderline hall of fame S holding the back end together. The best part about that team was their playoff run. They held an all-time great offense to 3 pts against Indy, scored 41 on the #1 D in the league at home, and then beat Philly in the Super Bowl. You could reasonably argue that all the 04 Steelers, Eagles, and Colts all belong on that list as well.

 

[Ryan]

I really don't get '01 Steelers being #2. The '04 Pats should've been there, or even #1 to be honest. The '01 Steelers were very good, but not anywhere near worthy of being #2 on the list.

 

[Lansdowne]

2004 Patriots should be at the top of that list. Yes, the 2007 team had the greatest offense of all-time, and came within a minute of being the greatest NFL team of all-time, but the team's inability to seal the deal did them in. The 2004 Patriots punched you in the mouth, and didn't give you a chance to get back up (well, except for the Dolphins game).

 

[RayClay]

The 10 best NFL teams of the last decade - Shutdown Corner - NFL Blog - Yahoo! Sports

Not necessarily focused on Super Bowl winners. Their #1 is the 18-1 Super Bowl losers. Two 2001 teams made it, and neither was the Super Bowl winner that year.

Oh my gawd, I'd really like to frame that. That is so apropos of the front running fantasy football mentality I can't believe it.

6 of the greatest teams of the decade lost when it counted.

But they were the greatest!!!

Oh, sweet lord, I wish I had Bill Russel's email address so I could send this to him.

All the pundits that have 76ers and Lakers teams as the best of the sixties have been vindicated!!

In a related story, Germany and Japan have been named greatest militaries of WWII.

Priceless.

Thank you Yahoo, thank you so much.

 

[RayClay]

the 2001 Pats beat 2 of the teams on that list en route to winning the SB(#2 and #5), as did the 2004 Pats (#7 and #9).

..................

 

[RayClay]

I'm actually a little sorry they listed the 04 team, which was great during regular season but could also (gasp) win in the clutch.

Otherwise they would have had five losing teams as the five greatest teams of the decade.

Oh well, I have enjoyed the laughs anyway. Surprised some more of Peymeatons earlier gaudy stat seasons leading to late season chokes would have made it, but i guess i don't know my losing playoff/bowl teams like Yahoo does.