It's official Pats Team of Decade..

[DarrylS]

at least according to Tom Curran and Greg Rosenthal.. needless to say their is agreement...

No contest for team of decade ? Patriots rule - NFL- nbcsports.msnbc.com

It’s been a good decade. After Bill Belichick’s 5-11 debut season, they reeled off three Super Bowl wins in four seasons (2001, 2003, 2004)....

Their biggest wins (2001 Super Bowl over the Rams) and losses (2007 Super Bowl) were historic. They’ve dominated the decade.

 

[VrabelMayeWin]

The Patriots clearly are the team of the decade but we need to ensure that Pittsburgh doesn't win the SB this year. Even if "we" still think they're the team of the decade there would be a viable argument for a tie - although I would disagree.

We blew our chance at GoAT two years ago and fate f*cked us last year. You know what we have to do this year.

 

[jmt57]

I can't believe Curran, Rosenthal and Miller were so generous with the Pats' SB record for the decade: 3-0. And I wouldn't have considered the Cowboys to be so low, but after looking at those numbers I don't disagree.

 

[Jimke]

The Patriots need to win another Superbowl soon or their

reputation will fade away very quickly.

 

[PATRIOT64]

If the Steelers win the SB this year then its a tie I am afraid,despite more wins you have to go by the SB titles as the overall evaluation.

 

[RoughingthePasser]

If the Steelers win the SB this year then its a tie I am afraid,despite more wins you have to go by the SB titles as the overall evaluation.

True...but I don't see them returning to the SB and winning it again.

 

[PatsChowder]

While I love the idea of the Pats being the team of the decade, I would love to see another ring added this year just to put the stamp on it. If Pittsburgh doesn't win it the Patriots will be the T.O.D., but if the Pats can pull it out again it really leaves an impression.

 

[upstater1]

If the Steelers win the SB this year then its a tie I am afraid,despite more wins you have to go by the SB titles as the overall evaluation.

Playoff record, conference championships, (i.e. Super Bowls) and most importantly head-to-head in those conference championships.

All favor the Patriots. 4 Super Bowl appearances is better than 3. 2 wins to no losses head-to-head.

I'd still give it to the Patriots.

 

[eagle eye]

Playoff record, conference championships, (i.e. Super Bowls) and most importantly head-to-head in those conference championships.

All favor the Patriots. 4 Super Bowl appearances is better than 3. 2 wins to no losses head-to-head.

I'd still give it to the Patriots.

Not forgetting the 16-0 regular season.

 

[jmt57]

If the Steelers win the SB this year then its a tie I am afraid,despite more wins you have to go by the SB titles as the overall evaluation.

The writers are saying there is more to evaluating best teams of the decade than just Super Bowl wins; that is why the Eagles rank higher than three Super Bowl winners.

And while both teams would have three wins in that circumstance, the Patriots would have more conference championships.

If the Steelers were to win the Super Bowl next year, here is how the two teams would match up in the criteria used in this article.

Record: Patriots would still be ahead of the Steelers unless they finish eight games ahead of the Pats in 2009. Currently the Pats are 102-42 and the Steelers are 94-49-1.

Playoff Appearances: Both teams currently have six; the Pats would need to miss the playoffs completely for this to be a factor.

Playoff Record: It would take the Steelers going 4-0 and the Pats going 0-1 for Pittsburgh to catch up. Currently the Pats lead 14-3 vs 10-4.

Conference Championships: Unless Pittsburgh (2-2) beats the Pats (3-1) in the AFCCG, the Pats would still lead this category. And if that were to happen, then the Pats would take the Playoff Record (above) category.

Super Bowls: Best Pittsburgh can do is match the number of wins. While they would have a better winning percentage, they would also have less appearances.

Losing Seasons: Both teams have one; it is highly unlikely that the Pats will fail to win more than seven games this year.

Other: Pats go 16-0 in 2007.


Bottom line is that it would take the Steelers going 19-0 while the Pats finish 7-9 or worse for the crown to clearly go to Pittsburgh. A Super Bowl victory for the Steelers will stir the debate, but I feel the Pats would still have a slight edge if they simply make the playoffs this year, regardless of what else happens.

 

[upstater1]

Conference Championships: Unless Pittsburgh (2-2) beats the Pats (3-1) in the AFCCG, the Pats would still lead this category. And if that were to happen, then the Pats would take the Playoff Record (above) category.

Patriots are actually 4-1 in Conference Championships. For me this is the #1 factor that would put them over a 3 SB Pitt team, not to mention that Pitt has lost a couple times to the Patriots.

 

[BradyFTW!]

If the Steelers win the SB this year then its a tie I am afraid,despite more wins you have to go by the SB titles as the overall evaluation.

Then there's this thing called a tiebreaker which would include playoff appearances, notable achievements, SB appearances, h2h playoff record, multiple 20+ game winning streaks, overall record, etc. In the event of a tie, the Pats win any conceivable tiebreaker. That said, it won't come to that.

 

[godef]

If the Steelers win the SB this year then its a tie I am afraid,despite more wins you have to go by the SB titles as the overall evaluation.

Nooooo. This is "team of the decade", not all time. Even if their records are exactly the same during the 2000s, what happened in the 70s has nothing to do with this.

 

[jmt57]

Nooooo. This is "team of the decade", not all time. Even if their records are exactly the same during the 2000s, what happened in the 70s has nothing to do with this.

I think what Patriot64 is saying is that if Pittsburgh wins the SB this season then both the Steelers and Pats would have three championships this decade, and therefore the "team of the decade" is a tie - end of discussion.

Of course, if that were to happen then the discussion would not only not end, but would probably continue even after "team of the 10's" and "team of the 20's" had already been crowned - regardless of the other factors in the Pats' favor already pointed out earlier in this thread.

 

[jmt57]

Patriots are actually 4-1 in Conference Championships. For me this is the #1 factor that would put them over a 3 SB Pitt team, not to mention that Pitt has lost a couple times to the Patriots.

I should have caught that. That's two fairly obvious oversights to the numbers used in the article: first, stating that this decade the Pats are 3-0 in Super Bowls, and then giving the Pats a 3-1 record in conference championships. Makes me wonder how reliable the rest of their numbers are.

 

[Angry Man]

Well of course the Pats are the team of the decade. 3 SB wins, 16-0 perfect season, 21 game winning streak, on and on and on. Pittys may have won two SBs this decade but they lack the rest of what the Pats have done this decade even if Pittsy wins number 3.

 

[VJCPatriot]

If the Steelers win it in 2009 then they will have a legitimate bone of contention with that pick. I think if the Pats win the Superbowl in 2009 then it's a lock. If the Steelers win, it's a tossup. Besides the NFL is all about what have you done lately.

 

[???ä??]

Does this come as a surprise to anybody? Nobody has more championships the past 10 years and the Steelers will not repeat.

 

[PYPER]

Did no one else catch the fact that once again the Patriots numbers were shortchanged.

They're not 3-1 in Conference Championships, they're 4-1 ('01, '03, '04, '07 - '06)

They're also not 3-0 in SB's, they're 3-1.

I've noticed a trend over the last few years that the Patriots numbers are always underrepresented by media sources. What gives?

 

[upstater1]

I should have caught that. That's two fairly obvious oversights to the numbers used in the article: first, stating that this decade the Pats are 3-0 in Super Bowls, and then giving the Pats a 3-1 record in conference championships. Makes me wonder how reliable the rest of their numbers are.

What enrages me is that the Patriots should be 5-0 in conference championships if not for a bogus offensive pass interference against Troy Brown and a totally blown non-call on Kelvin Hayden against bugeyes Caldwell in the end zone.

I swear to God, that's the second worse loss in Patriots history. That game just kills me.