Welcome to PatsFans.com

Team of the decade to be determined - A close 2 team race

Discussion in 'PatsFans.com - Patriots Fan Forum' started by PATRIOT64, Sep 4, 2008.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. PATRIOT64

    PATRIOT64 Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2006
    Messages:
    3,775
    Likes Received:
    7
    Ratings:
    +7 / 0 / -0

    I don't see it that way like this writer does,I think the team with the most SB titles should be declared this uneventful title.

    As it looks right now NE leads Indy by only 2 games for most wins in the decade but has 2 titles more and that should widen the gap for critics but if Indy happens to pull a daily double the next 2 years then who knows?

    http://www.usatoday.com/sports/football/nfl/2008-09-01-fans-guide_N.htm?csp=34

    Cannot believe Detroit has only won 40 games in 8 years as it states on that page - I guess things could be worse than to have Matt Cassel as a backup QB - you could be a Lions fan ;)
    Last edited: Sep 4, 2008
  2. MrTibbs

    MrTibbs Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2004
    Messages:
    1,484
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Two more Super Bowls, an undefeated regular season, 21 wins in a row, 5 home losses in 5-6 seasons. There is no question who the team of the decade is.
  3. chrisfx811

    chrisfx811 Rookie

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2007
    Messages:
    829
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    If it wasn't for the Colt's image, and the newfound hatred for the Pats, this wouldn't even be discussed.
    The Colt's would have to win the next 2 just to make it a discussion.

    Pats have 4 SB trips, 5 AFCCG trips, record setting offense, best reg season ever, etc.
  4. BionicPatriot

    BionicPatriot Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2004
    Messages:
    2,542
    Likes Received:
    3
    Ratings:
    +3 / 0 / -0

    One more super bowl and the real dynasty legacy is cemented. I hope this organization goes on a run similar to the niners at least. Dominant now, at least ultra competitive for an extra decade. I'm just greedy;)
  5. hambone1818

    hambone1818 Rookie

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2007
    Messages:
    837
    Likes Received:
    6
    Ratings:
    +8 / 3 / -0

    Exactly...nothing to see here, just some jackass spouting nonsense. To even raise the question is ridiculous.

    They also have a winning record against the Colts this decade, as well as a winning record in the playoffs against them, have won more titles, have played in more playoff games, more AFC Championship games, have broken team records for winning streaks, for most points, for most wins in a season, etc, etc...I'm almost offended that there's another team in this discussion.

    Also, off topic but seeing those return numbers for Hester...I mean, WOW. I'm amazed that teams still kick to him.
    Last edited: Sep 4, 2008
  6. Rob0729

    Rob0729 PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2006
    Messages:
    29,771
    Likes Received:
    235
    Ratings:
    +518 / 5 / -1

    Personally, I think the race is over. I guess if the Colts won the next two Super Bowls and the Pats missed the playoffs all together, they would win the race. Otherwise, I think the Pats have already sewn that up.

    I don't know if you can look just at playoff appearances and Super Bowl wins as an indicator. The Pats have been to 5 championship games and are 4-1 in them vs. the Colts being in two and are 1-1 (the best they can be is 3-1). The Pats have been to four Super Bowls, the most the Colts can be in is three. The Pats also have 6 Division Titles vs. the Colts' 5. The Pats have the first and second all time regular season win streaks in NFL history. They are the only team to go 16-0 in the regular season in NFL history. They have the single season TD leaders in passing and receiving in NFL history.

    To me, unless the Pats tank it and the Colts win the Super Bowl over the next two years, the race is clearly over. There is no other way the Pats can lose the team of the decade title.
    Last edited: Sep 4, 2008
  7. Danny

    Danny Rookie

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2006
    Messages:
    2,262
    Likes Received:
    4
    Ratings:
    +8 / 0 / -0

    No Jersey Selected

    Indianapolis Colts, 2000-2007
    - 1 Super Bowl, 1 SB appearance
    - 7 playoff appearances, 2 AFCCG
    - lost first game of playoffs three times (2002, 2005, 2007)
    - 89-23 regular season record + 7-6 playoff record = 96-29 overall record (.768 win%)

    New England Patriots, 2000-2007
    - 3 Super Bowls, 4 SB appearances
    - 6 playoff appearances, 5 AFCCG
    - won at least one playoff game in each of those six years
    - 91-21 regular season record + 14-3 playoff record = 105-24 overall record (.814 win%)
    - 16-0 regular season
    - record setting seasons by Brady, Moss, as well as a record setting offense
    - 18 consecutive regular season wins (record)
    - 21 consecutive total wins (record)
    - the grey hoodie

    Head-to-head
    Regular season: Patriots, 6-3
    Playoffs: Patriots, 2-1

    etc.

    Is this even debateable?
    Last edited: Sep 5, 2008
  8. BionicPatriot

    BionicPatriot Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2004
    Messages:
    2,542
    Likes Received:
    3
    Ratings:
    +3 / 0 / -0

    Not really, like others said it would take the Pats to tank for the Colts to take over that title. Like I said before, hopefully they win #4 this year and end any debate period.
  9. SamusAranX

    SamusAranX Rookie

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2008
    Messages:
    90
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    You know, I was optimistic and thought that maybe, just maybe, the talk of "the colts are still teh bestz!111" would end after their return to " Regular Season Darlings only" last year.

    There is no question, without a doubt, that as of now, the Patriots are the team of this decade. It should be cemented within two years barring the bizarre.
    Last edited: Sep 5, 2008
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>