True Context: The 2018-19 Patriots are playing to become a dynasty

[Ice_Ice_Brady]

Now I know that this doesn’t sound right since the New England Patriots dynasty was established in 2004/05 with a win over the Eagles in SB39.

But the truth is that THESE Patriots are not yet a dynasty, and this game would vault them into that status. It’s widely accepted that THREE championships is a very special distinction in modern sports, such that that the word “dynasty” is typically applied. Three is very difficult, and the players that make up the dynasty are all essentially legends, building strong cases for the Hall of Fame, and really making a mark in the history books.

While Tom Brady and Bill Belichick are the atomic particles that make up the Patriots, the fact is that this actual Patriots team is composed of players, and these core players have won two Super Bowls. With another Super Bowl victory, they too will have build their own dynasty and even exceeded the 2000s dynasty (more wins, more conference championships, more impressive records.). The players in particular who have a chance to get their third ring:

Julian Edelman
Rob Gronkowski
James White
James Develin
Marcus Cannon
Dont’a Hightower
Devin McCourty
Duron Harmon
Patrick Chung
Matthew Slater
Nate Ebner
Stephen Gostkowski
Ryan Allen
Josh McDaniels (as offensive coordinator)

It would awesome if the narrative focused more on these players, much like it did going into SB39. While it’s easy to lump the Patriots dynasty into Tom Brady’s career, this is a very different team than the early 2000s and these guys are playing for history, to establish themselves as the NFL’s next notable dynasty.

 

[DarrylS]

As my signature states.. always thought why BB values players who are coaches sons or Co-Captains of their college football teams..

"For me, tough, smart, dependable. That’s where I would start. Tough -- mentally and physically. Smart -- good decisions, good football understanding, high football IQ. Dependable -- [in] critical situations, you can count on those players to perform under pressure. You can count on those players to execute what you want to execute as a team. The tougher the game, the more critical the game, the more important the situation, the more I want the tough, smart, dependable player in the game, in the eye of the storm, making a decision that needs to be made for us to win.".. Bill Belichickism

 

[neuronet]

All due respect to my man Ice_Ice_Brady, but do you really think they need to do anything else to establish they are a dynasty? Isn't it obvious they are just extending a dynasty that goes back to 2001?

 

[Raymond]

I do believe 99% of rational people even now say, win or lose , the dynasty horse has already left the barn.

 

[Ice_Ice_Brady]

All due respect to my man Ice_Ice_Brady, but do you really think they need to do anything else to establish they are a dynasty? Isn't it obvious they are just extending a dynasty that goes back to 2001?

I think that the Patriots dynasty is secure, but I think there’s a lot more legacy achievements at stake for many players than the common media narrative suggests. The idea that they are playing with the house’s money is bunk.

 

[tasmlab]

"Dynasty" is a subjective term that anyone can award without any fixed metrics or list of qualifications. I think they got it.

 

[A Defiant Goose]

All due respect to my man Ice_Ice_Brady, but do you really think they need to do anything else to establish they are a dynasty? Isn't it obvious they are just extending a dynasty that goes back to 2001?

I think of it this way. Belichick and Brady I consider an "era" or a "dynastic era" whereas the current run from 2014-2018 and the 2001-2004 are two separate dynasties. Nobody would consider the 2000s Steelers a dynasty with just two Super Bowl wins, why would they consider these current Pats one with just two? Win a third, then you're a dynasty.

 

[Steve102]

Just in case you young'ins forget.

An aside: I coach HS football in NH. We are heavy in underclassmen. Most of them weren't even born when the Dynasty was born. Let that sink in.

 

[Ice_Ice_Brady]

Here’s a cool “trend” that makes me believe greatness will find a way. In every decade, an NFL franchise has won at least three championships. Patriots have another chance on Sunday.

2000s - Patriots
1990s - Cowboys
1980s - 49ers
1970s - Steelers
1960s - Packers
1950s - Lions and Browns
1940s - Bears
1930s - Packers
1920s - Canton/Cleveland Bulldogs

 

[Palm Beach Pats Fan]

I read a statistical analysis of NFL seasons and dynasties recently. Not sure of where it was right now. It was statistically based on both offensive and defensive performance relative to league averages.

It ran through several scenarios.

For example, if you consider a dynasty with respect to level of dominance over a five year period, the Patriots had the greatest dynasty in NFL history, and the third greatest as well, for a separate, non-overlapping five year period.

If you consider a dynasty with respect to level of dominance over a 6 year period, the Patriots had the greatest dynasty in NFL history, and another top 5 greatest as well, for a separate, non-overlapping 6 year period.

If you consider a dynasty with respect to level of dominance over a 7 year period, the Patriots had the greatest dynasty in NFL history, and another top 5 greatest as well, for a separate, non-overlapping 7 year period.

If you consider a dynasty with respect to level of dominance over an 8 year period, the Patriots had the greatest dynasty in NFL history, and another top 5 greatest as well, for a separate, non-overlapping 8 year period.

If you consider a dynasty with respect to level of dominance over a 9 year period, the Patriots had the greatest dynasty in NFL history, and another top 5 greatest as well, for a separate, non-overlapping 9 year period.

and so on

There was no way to find any period of time that would not categorize the Patriots under Brady-Belichick as the NFL's greatest dynasty.

For football, these are the good old days!

 

[Steve102]

Dynasties:

Yankees: 1936-43, 1947-64
Celtics: 1957-69
Bulls: 1990-98
Spurs: 1999-2016
UCLA Basketball: 1964-75
Canadiens: 1955-1960
Oilers: 1983-1990
Patriots:2001- current

You're really comparing, IMO, this team to the Yankees, Celtics, Oilers, and UCLA.

 

[n6249c]

Dynasties:

Yankees: 1936-43, 1947-64
Celtics: 1957-69
Bulls: 1990-98
Spurs: 1999-2016
UCLA Basketball: 1964-75
Canadiens: 1955-1960
Oilers: 1983-1990
Patriots:2001- current

You're really comparing, IMO, this team to the Yankees, Celtics, Oilers, and UCLA.

actually they are several years past everyone on that list except the damnYankees.

 

[Steve102]

actually they are several years past everyone on that list except the damnYankees.

I agree, although I think for historical purposed, the UCLA dynasty is damned impressive. Complete roster turn over every 4 years.

 

[bormio]

actually they are several years past everyone on that list except the damnYankees.

But for the war years, the Yankees had a 28 year dynasty. And the Pats are not that far off.

 

[Hammer of Thor]

Here’s a cool “trend” that makes me believe greatness will find a way. In every decade, an NFL franchise has won at least three championships. Patriots have another chance on Sunday.

2000s - Patriots
1990s - Cowboys
1980s - 49ers
1970s - Steelers
1960s - Packers
1950s - Lions
1940s - Bears
1930s - Packers
1920s - Canton/Cleveland Bulldogs

You missed the Cleveland Browns of the 1950s (1950 inclusive) who won 3 championships. I would argue they were the more dominant team of that decade than the Lions; Browns won 3 championships while appearing in 7 title games while the Lions won 3 championships appearing in 4 title games. That said, all of the Lions games were against the Browns so they went 3-1 head to head.

 

[Redstorm]

This has been the same dynasty since 2001


Just like the 49ers from 1981-1994. It never stopped

The 90s Bulls were all one dynasty (91-93, 96-98)

The 70s Steelers never got 3/4 but everyone calls them a dynasty

 

[VrabelJr]

Dynasties:

Yankees: 1936-43, 1947-64
Celtics: 1957-69
Bulls: 1990-98
Spurs: 1999-2016
UCLA Basketball: 1964-75
Canadiens: 1955-1960
Oilers: 1983-1990
Patriots:2001- current

You're really comparing, IMO, this team to the Yankees, Celtics, Oilers, and UCLA.

Wow I think you’re really shorting the Chinese and Japanese dynasties of the last 1000 years by leaving them off your list. The run that the Ming Dynasty (276 years!) went on was insane.

 

[PatsGirl2011]

The dynasty never ended. When Brady leaves, then let's talk!

 

[Ice_Ice_Brady]

You missed the Cleveland Browns of the 1950s (1950 inclusive) who won 3 championships. I would argue they were the more dominant team of that decade than the Lions; Browns won 3 championships while appearing in 7 title games while the Lions won 3 championships appearing in 4 title games. That said, all of the Lions games were against the Browns so they went 3-1 head to head.

Independent of AAFL? 3+ NFL championships in the same decade? No doubt they were an absolute dynasty.

 

[Palm Beach Pats Fan]

Here’s a cool “trend” that makes me believe greatness will find a way. In every decade, an NFL franchise has won at least three championships. Patriots have another chance on Sunday.

2000s - Patriots
1990s - Cowboys
1980s - 49ers
1970s - Steelers
1960s - Packers
1950s - Lions & Browns (1950, 54, 55)
1940s - Bears
1930s - Packers
1920s - Canton/Cleveland Bulldogs

I added the Browns to your list