Perspective Thread: How many Super Bowls should the Patriots have won by now?

[Soul_Survivor88]

Since 2001, New England has made the playoffs twelve times, appearing in 9 conference championship games and making it to the Super Bowl on six occasions. At this point, the Patriots have won the Super bowl four times over a fourteen-year span. By these metrics, if the New England Patriots were a poker player, they would have made nine out of 15 final tables, cashed six times, and gone on to play heads up for the title 6 times, so far winning four!

Yet Chase Stuart of footballperspective.com asks the question: how many Super Bowls should the Patriots have won?

Stuart calculates the odds of the Patriots winning the Super Bowl 2001 - 2014 according to expected winning percentage and point-spread betting. Here are his findings:

http://www.footballperspective.com/how-many-super-bowls-should-the-patriots-have-won/

• In the 2014 playoffs, New England was a 7-point favorite against both Baltimore and Indianapolis, which translates to a 69.3% chance of winning. The betting line in Super Bowl XLIX ranged from New England +1 Seattle -1 implying a 50% chance of winning. In all, that means the Patriots had a 24% chance of winning the Super Bowl in 2014 postseason.

• In 2001, New England was a 3-point favorite against Oakland in the Tuck Rule game (58.6%), but was a 10-point underdog in Pittsburgh in the AFC Championship Game (23.5%) and a 14-point dog against the Rams in the Super Bowl (15.6%). That means the Patriots had just a 2.2% chance of winning the Super Bowl in 2001.

• In 2003, the Patriots were favored by 6, 3.5, and 7 against the Titans, Colts, and Panthers, which means New England had a 27.7% chance of winning it all that year.

• In 2004, New England faced a murderer’s row of Indianapolis, Pittsburgh, and Philadelphia, and the Patriots were favored by just 1, 3, and 7 points, for a cumulative championship probability of 21.5%.

So in 2001, 2003, 2004, and 2014, the Patriots should have been expected to win 0.754 Super Bowls. Instead, the team won 4.000! How insane is that?!?

But what about the other eight years? According to Stuart, the ’05 Patriots had a 10.2% chance of winning all the games in the postseason, 06' Patriots had a 7.1% chance of winning all the games in the postseason, 07' Patriots had a 57.5% chance of winning all the games in the postseason, the 09' Patriots had an approximate 3% of winning all the games in the postseason, 10' Patriots had a 33.7% chance of winning the postseason, 11' Patriots had a 33.9% chance of winning it all, the 12' Patriots had a 26.6% of winning all the games in the postseason, and the 13' Patriots had a 12% chance of claiming the Super Bowl)

If put on a chart, the numbers would look like this:

As you can see, the Patriots massively overachieved from 2001 to 2004 (other than missing the playoffs in 2002), and then the team underachieved in the postseason for about a decade (other than missing the playoffs in 2008), winning no Super Bowls despite being expected to win about 1.8 of them.

But as Stuart points out, if you sum the Super Bowl probabilities for New England in each postseason, the Patriots should have been expected to win about 2.6 Super Bowls from ’01 to ’14, instead of the 4.0 they actually won.

 

[Brewskies]

I am glad Stuart was wrong

 

[New England Pride]

4

 

[5thRing-Hunt]

All I know is I still feel like Brady should have had his fourth back in 06. We should have held that lead and beat the colts. We all know the pats would have won the sb that year. It's crazy to think how Brady would have been perceived if he had tied Montana that soon in his career.

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

To me that 2006 loss to Manning was worse, yes worse, than the loss in the Super Bowl to the giants in 2007 I knew 2007 was going to end badly however I was convinced the Pats had beaten the Colts in the 2006 season AFC championship

 

[fnordcircle]

6.

Fuck the Giants.

 

[PATSYLICIOUS]

Four is a pretty fair number. 2.6 is way too low IMO considering our overall winning percentages.

 

[RobertWeathers]

Good work on the numbers, @Chiuba E. Obele. I know you are coming at it from a probability standpoint but I'll come at it from this angle.

01- Miracle. Best "team"
02- No chance
03- Best team
04- Best team
05- Coulda. They get by DEN they would have had PITT at home for AFCCG. SEA was beatable.
06- Shoulda (BS 4th qtr but give Indy credit. They would have beaten CHI)
07- Shoulda
08- No chance
09- No chance. Not sure a healthy WW would have helped.
10- Awful defense and they still go 14-2.
11- Shoulda (w/o Gronk)
12- Shoulda (w/o Gronk)
13- A slight chance but deck was stacked vs them.
14- Best team

Should have been 8 rings.

 

[Deus Irae]

Should have won in 2003
Should have won in 2004
Should have won in 2006
Should have won in 2007
Should have won in 2014

Shouldn't have won in 2011


I struggle with 2001, because I don't consider it to be clear in either direction. So...


5 should haves
1 Could have gone either way

 

[aluminum seats]

Fun topic. Just looking at the Super Bowl themselves, while they've all been very close, I think only in three (the two losses and this year) do you look at the game and question who "should" have won--coming down to one play, a key injury absence, etc. (I realize that's completely subjective, that's just my perspective.) So the Pats were net "unlucky" there, losing two out of three. In 2006, if the Pats complete that 3rd & 4, they win the Super Bowl. I'd love to give it to them in 2005, because that Denver game just had EVERYTHING go wrong, but that's bound to happen at some point, I suppose, so can't project a Super Bowl there.

So what does that boil down to? I feel like under the laws of cosmic justice, the Pats "should" have won....5 so far. But I'm damn happy with 4.

 

[patsfaninpa]

Should have won in 2003
Should have won in 2004
Should have won in 2006
Should have won in 2007
Should have won in 2014

Shouldn't have won in 2011


I struggle with 2001, because I don't consider it to be clear in either direction. So...


5 should haves
1 Could have gone either way

SD has us beat if their dumbass db falls down with the ball. We were more lucky to win that game than the Colts were to defeat us. I would also add that if Drew Bennett doesn't drop that pass late in game. Tennessee could have beaten us in 03. I thought we were the best team in 04, 07 and 2014. We'd have won it in 2011 if Gronk wasn't hurt.

 

[Deus Irae]

SD has us beat if their dumbass db falls down with the ball. We were more lucky to win that game than the Colts were to defeat us. I would also add that if Drew Bennett doesn't drop that pass late in game. Tennessee could have beaten us in 03. I thought we were the best team in 04, 07 and 2014.

2010 Patriots have the Jets if Brady doesn't brain lock on a screen pass and Crumpler doesn't drop a TD. I can't go back to earlier games like that, though. You get into way too many coulda/woulda scenarios.

We'd have won it in 2011 if Gronk wasn't hurt.

The Giants beat the Patriots during the 2011 regular season, when Gronk was healthy, as well as winning the SB. If I'm doing a full evaluation of the entire era for should've, the Patriots can't take 2011. If I'm doing a discussion of the post-2009 seasons and pointing to health issues, that's a different story.

Just my approach

 

[TBR]

2006-2007 - Should've beat Indy to face the Bears in the SB

2007-2008 - Should've won!!!

2008-2009 - Brady got hurt, but this would've been a prime opportunity for a 3 peat. AFC was kind of weak IIRC

2011-2012 - Should've beat the Giants, if only Gronk was healthy

 

[patsfaninpa]

2010 Patriots have the Jets if Brady doesn't brain lock on a screen pass and Crumpler doesn't drop a TD. I can't go back to earlier games like that, though. You get into way too many coulda/woulda scenarios.





Just my approach

You can't compare the first drive of the game to something that happens in the last 2-3 minutes.

 

[BradyManny]

I am well beyond content with the careers of Bill Belichick & Tom Brady, and the Patriot dynasty of the last decade and a half. We endured some crushing, painful defeats, but BB/TB have established themselves as GOATs. The rest are details. I hope we continue to be fortunate enough to have a chance at titles going forward.

 

[shmessy]

Either eleventy billion or just those where they had the most points at the end of a Super Bowl where they were a participant.

My answer depends on the day.

 

[Deus Irae]

You can't compare the first drive of the game to something that happens in the last 2-3 minutes.

No offense, but I can compare whatever the hell I want to in this case, as long as my logic is consistent. It's sort of like how I can say that if the Patriots had beaten the Colts in 2006, they'd definitely have beaten the Bears in the SB, as long as I acknowledge that 2011 goes to the Giants regardless of Gronk's health, because of an earlier win that season.

 

[sb1]

Going back a few years, how about SB 31 if Parcells hadn't already quit on the team.

Worst coaching job I have ever seen by a Super Bowl participant.

 

[Wheelman]

Shoulda woulda coulda!

But I admit I do think about it. For me:

2006: blowing the lead,, bogus calls. We had it!
2007: meh don't need to just look at the tyree catch, there were plenty of other missed opportunities in that game.
2008: If we win in 2007, we don't play the chiefs opening night, Brady never goes down. We win again. First to win 3 championships back to back.

2011: Gronk healthy easy win.
2012: Gronk healthy we will win.
2013: Gronk healthy I still believe we can win. He is truly elite.

and 2014 Gronk was finally healthy in the Superbowl and we won!

So I would say 10 Superbowls.

 

[Soul_Survivor88]

Four is a pretty fair number. 2.6 is way too low IMO considering our overall winning percentages.

Yeah, but you also have to take into account the point spread on the betting line