Team of the Decade Standings

pheenix11 said:

At one point in the 80's the Redskins were the early leader in the clubhouse for team of the decade. Of course that got tossed aside when the 49ers won two straight. I think the Pats are going to do the same thing and cement their place as the greatest dynasty of all time.

Click to expand...

Yep. With wins in 80 and 83, the start of the 80s were the Raiders. Then SF won in 84 and tied them with the Al Davis bunch at 2SBs a piece. WAS then landed their 2nd Lombardi in 87 and tied them w/ SF and LA. As you say, it was close until SF went back-to-back in '88 and '89.

deters said:

Hope we can make it 2 decades of dominance. Only other run similar to this in football has been the 14 year run of FSU in the 90's.

Click to expand...

The Steelers run in the 70s is very similar to the Pats current run.

pheenix11 said:

I still remember the Rams saying before SB 36 that a dynasty would be born that night.

They were so right LOL!

Click to expand...

Yup. It was Ricky Proehl and his comment is immortalized on the 3 Games to Glory DVD. Nice prophecy.

1960Pats said:

The Steelers run in the 70s is very similar to the Pats current run.

Click to expand...

It is close. Steelers have won same # of SB in less time but Pats have 2 more SB appearances and 3 more AFCCG appearances. Not shabby at all.

Steelers: 8 years...4 SB appearances...4 SB wins...4 AFC Championships...6 AFCCG appearances. 8 playoff appearances.

Pats: 14 years..6 SB appearances...4 SB wins...6 AFC Championships...9 AFCCG appearances...12 playoff appearances.

Don't forget how quickly these Windows can close, the 49ers were thought to be the new IT team in 2012 and now look at them. Seahawks or the pats for that matter could fall off a cliff at some point in the next half of this decade.

meatface said:

Don't forget how quickly these Windows can close, the 49ers were thought to be the new IT team in 2012 and now look at them. Seahawks or the pats for that matter could fall off a cliff at some point in the next half of this decade.

Click to expand...

Not sure why the Seahawks and Pats are similar and used interchangeably here. The Seahawks have had a winning team for the last three years. The Patriots have had a winning team for the last 14 years. The Seahawks have well-documented locker problems and after they pay Wilson (likely this offseason), they will no longer have any superstars left on their rookie contracts. Would anyone really be surprised if this team is done being a contender?

robertweathers said:

It is close. Steelers have won same # of SB in less time but Pats have 2 more SB appearances and 3 more AFCCG appearances. Not shabby at all.

Steelers: 8 years...4 SB appearances...4 SB wins...4 AFC Championships...6 AFCCG appearances. 8 playoff appearances.

Pats: 14 years..6 SB appearances...4 SB wins...6 AFC Championships...9 AFCCG appearances...12 playoff appearances.

Click to expand...

The Steelers kept winning for another five years but didn't win another SB in that time. One other thing they have going for them is the fact that they won their four SBs in only six years.

1960Pats said:

The Steelers kept winning for another five years but didn't win another SB in that time.

Click to expand...

They sure did. Noll rebuilt the roster to get them to the AFCCG in 1984 and a few playoff appearances prior to that. In a 13 year span, very similar to what the Pats accomplished from 2001-2013. Both teams missed the playoffs twice in that span, Pitt had one more SB but 2 less SB appearances.

robertweathers said:

They sure did. Noll rebuilt the roster to get them to the AFCCG in 1984 and a few playoff appearances prior to that. In a 13 year span, very similar to what the Pats accomplished from 2001-2013. Both teams missed the playoffs twice in that span, Pitt had one more SB but 2 less SB appearances.

Click to expand...

Did the steelers have any losing season/s in that span?

makoute said:

Did the steelers have any losing season/s in that span?

Click to expand...

Looks like their worst record was 8-8 in 1981.

The thesis comment - that the Pats are like the Steelers of the 70s - seems less apt than that the Pats are like the 49ers of the 80s-90s. Long time span, always that boogey-man waiting to rise up and crush your team which you think is championship-ready, but not like the 70s steelers going back-to-back twice with half-time in between. Dynasty note: Steelers had to beat the whole AFC - because there wasn't an NFC at the time. That wasn't the Steelers' work exclusively. The NFC was just the JV squad in the 70s. Similarly, the NFC became dominant during the 9ers spread-out reign.

During the Patriots' dynasty, the competitive balance has favored first the AFC and now back to the NFC. I am going by unexamined "history memory" from seeing too much NFL films, but this is how my memory portrays it.

That said... Team of the Two-thousandsies? No contest. Team of the 2010s? Come on guys. We know it'll be measured by multiple rings, or it'll be a pretty watered down concept. If you have 10 different winners, nobody had a dynasty, just a long period of competition.

And to whoever complained that we don't name decades anymore, just 5 more years until the Roaring 20s, or whatever we decide to call this batch of 20s. Hard to believe that while we're slowly repealing prohibition of marijuana, 100 years ago the temperance movement had actually won. We'd only just begun to fly in the early 1900s. Now every kid has a quadcopter, we're trying to figure out how to fill the skies with commercial drones (frightening) and oh yeah we want to send guys to Mars. Well, that one might wait 'til mid-century, to be fair -- hope I live to see the delayed feed some minutes after that event (and that it's a successful landing.) Also I'm pretty sure phones have changed a lot...

I'm past halftime in life, with luck, I'm in the third quarter. I slipped on black ice running for a bus Friday and nobody on the bus laughed when I got on it. That's when you know you're old by the way. Nobody laughs when you fall. Sure there will be bumps in the road... but I want to finish up the Brady/BB/Kraft era with at least one more ring. That would cement the Pats as the GOAT dynasty, not just a dynasty.

I remember thinking before the Rams SB, "Please God just let us get this one Super Bowl... even against the insane odds..." Then I remember daring to think after we won it, "Let us be one of those dynasties... I know it probably won't happen but it would be so cool..." And then my wildest football wishes came true.

And then the big surprise to me was that even through some colossal "downs" like SB 42 and 46, this franchise had built an expectation of success. Sure it helps to have TFB under center... but I think this team stays competitive after his departure. I think you already see the signs of preparation for a different kind of football. I think we showed signs of it in SB 49. Yes we scored and allowed more points than in the Giants SBs, but the emphasis is now on balance, not the "flying circus" approach.

And of course, innovation... we got in Seattle's heads, and won the previous games, using that checking-in-ineligible thing. And you know we got in every other team's head too. Come the SB, Pete Carroll is flummoxed when BB leaves his defense on the field at the end. Russel Wilson throws a tip-toe pass, and bless their sainted hearts, Butler and Browner are flawless where Wilson and Lockette are flawed... sorry, just getting on my relive-the-super-bowl feeling.

There are no guarantees. But I hope for long life. Is it too much to hope for the Pats' dynasty to have a few more years to cast an unprecedentedly long shadow over the league? Not just a SB. Not just a Dynasty. But THE dynasty, over a 32-team league, in an era engineered for parity. Yeah I'll take that.

For right now, I'll take the draft, and pre-season 2015. I sleep soundly tonight knowing that BB and his scouts and negotiators and management are all hard at work keeping down the "competitive balance" of the league the old-fashioned way... just being better at it than them.

TFB playing into his 40s? All for it if he can pull it off. I like the JG insurance policy. We'll see. I like that he got reps in a game that counted... I like that he has a release and some wheels that can move us forward even when an O-line is ahem, imperfect. I like how the O-line grew into its role. I like how TFB spread out his looks, read them faster, stepped it up, and got the ball out in time. "TRUST."

I think TFB might be learning from JG (re: release), and of course JG is learning an insane amount playing behind Brady.

Right now it's a 1 in 32 chance we win it all again in 2015-16. I'm all for beating those odds. I'm all for this team establishing the greatest DYNASTY of all time. Hell, I'm even for outliving those mumblefracks who are gumming their cream corn and talking smack about the Packers' championships in the 60s before the SBs.

But if we have to look back at the 14-15 SB as the last one the Pats won in my lifetime, it's been a good fan life. We're well into the gravy period. I sat at the edge of my seat praying dominos line up just right for the Pats to make the playoffs my first 30 odd years... I know I can do it again.

I mean, unless we have to stomach actual multi-year success from the JEST. Then I'm on to learning hockey.

Ice_Ice_Brady said:

Not sure why the Seahawks and Pats are similar and used interchangeably here. The Seahawks have had a winning team for the last three years. The Patriots have had a winning team for the last 14 years. The Seahawks have well-documented locker problems and after they pay Wilson (likely this offseason), they will no longer have any superstars left on their rookie contracts. Would anyone really be surprised if this team is done being a contender?

Click to expand...

I suppose its just because they were both in the Super Bowl and have both been in two Super Bowl's this decade. You are right though it seems more likely that the Seahawks drop off as they have to start paying players and the Patriots have had sustained success for fifteen years. That being said it seems unlikely that Brady will be able to keep going at this level for the next five years.

Ice_Ice_Brady said:

Most consider the decades to start in year xxx0 and end in xxx9. Using that criteria, let's look at the teams from 2010-14 (halfway point). I saw this on a Ravens board last year and they were (yes, wait for it...) arguing the Ravens were the best team of the decade to that point (zing!) Of course, only Super Bowl champions were considered, which is fair enough, especially now.

Super Bowl Victories
t-1. New England Patriots (1)
t-1. Seattle Seahawks (1)
t-1. Baltimore Ravens (1)
t-1. Green Bay Packers (1)
t-1. New York Giants (1)

Conference Championships
t-1. New England Patriots (2)
t-1. Seattle Seahawks (2)
t-3. Baltimore Ravens (1)
t-3. Green Bay Packers (1)
t-3 New York Giants (1)

Conference Championship Game Appearances
1. New England Patriots (4)
t2. Seattle Seahawks (2)
t2. Baltimore Ravens (2)
t2. Green Bay Packers (2)
5. New York Giants (1)

Division Titles
1. New England Patriots (5)
2. Green Bay Packers (4)
3. Seattle Seahawks (3)
4. Baltimore Ravens (2)
5. New York Giants (1)

Playoff Wins
t1. New England Patriots (7)
t1. Baltimore Ravens (7)
t1. Seattle Seahawks (7)
4. Green Bay Packers (6)
5. New York Giants (4)

Playoff Appearances
t1. New England Patriots (5)
t1 Green Bay Packers (5)
t3. Baltimore Ravens (4)
t3. Seattle Seahawks (4)
5. New York Giants (1)

Regular Season Record
1. New England Patriots (63-17, .788)
2. Green Bay Packers (56-23-1, .706)
3. Baltimore Ravens (52-28, .650)
4. Seattle Seahawks (50-30, .600)
5. New York Giants (41-39, .513)

Point Differential
1. New England Patriots (+863, avg season +173, avg game +10.8)
2. Green Bay Packers (+573, avg season +115, avg game +7.2)
3. Seattle Seahawks (+402, avg season +80, avg game +5.0)
4. Baltimore Ravens (+328, avg season +66, avg game +4.1)
5. New York Giants (+17, avg season +3, avg game +0.2)

Click to expand...

Uh, wait. This can't be right. Where are Peyton Manning and the Denver Broncos?

goheels22002 said:

Uh, wait. This can't be right. Where are Peyton Manning and the Denver Broncos?

Click to expand...

Manning is probably doing a Papa Jerk's commercial.

The Broncos are probably praying for another QB to show up.

goheels22002 said:

Uh, wait. This can't be right. Where are Peyton Manning and the Denver Broncos?

Click to expand...

I didn't have enough room for One-And-Dones and Playoff-Pick-Sixes this time around.

Ice_Ice_Brady said:

I didn't have enough room for One-And-Dones and Playoff-Pick-Sixes this time around.

Click to expand...

The Broncos would make the list for playoff appearances with 4 during the 2010s. Two of those were Peyton one-and-dones. Overall the Broncos went 3-4 in the playoffs in the 2010s. The first win was Tebow's over the Steelers. In other words, Tim Tebow was 1-1 or .500 in the playoffs in the 2010s while Peyton Manning was 2-3 (.400) during this span with the Broncos.

meatface said:

Don't forget how quickly these Windows can close, the 49ers were thought to be the new IT team in 2012 and now look at them. Seahawks or the pats for that matter could fall off a cliff at some point in the next half of this decade.

Click to expand...

Yes, Windows and I.T. and San Francisco were hot topics in the past but we have a Mac with 32 great benefits. Take that Seahawks and your Microsoft owner.