Biggest single season turnaround in NFL history?

[sb1]

If the Pats manage to win out that means they went 4 to 15 wins in consecutive seasons. I can't recall any other team who did that. Arians turned the Colts from 2-14 to 11-5 in 2011-12. Also got him COTY. The Rams in 98 went from 4-12 to the GSOT and Super Bowl champs at 13-3. The Dolphins had a big one too in the wildcat season IIRC.

Has any team ever gone from 4 wins in a season to 15? Never mind back to back 4 win seasons to 15? If the Pats pull it off it has to be the biggest single season turnaround of all time.

And regarding "ThE SkEdUulE" - the Rams in 99 had a last place schedule and beat 0 teams with a winning record until the Super Bowl. It doesn't matter as much as people think if you have talent and you're well coached.

 

[sb1]

Did some research. It never happened before. Would be great if the Pats pull it off.

The Steelers were close... they went from 6 wins to 15 wins in 03-04.

 

[RobertWeathers]

If the Pats manage to win out that means they went 4 to 15 wins in consecutive seasons. I can't recall any other team who did that. Arians turned the Colts from 2-14 to 11-5 in 2011-12. Also got him COTY. The Rams in 98 went from 4-12 to the GSOT and Super Bowl champs at 13-3. The Dolphins had a big one too in the wildcat season IIRC.

Has any team ever gone from 4 wins in a season to 15? Never mind back to back 4 win seasons to 15? If the Pats pull it off it has to be the biggest single season turnaround of all time.

And regarding "ThE SkEdUulE" - the Rams in 99 had a last place schedule and beat 0 teams with a winning record until the Super Bowl. It doesn't matter as much as people think if you have talent and you're well coached.

Rams beat TN in week 8 of the 1999 reg season but yea you point is their schedule wasn't hard.

St. Louis Rams at Tennessee Titans - October 31st, 1999 | Pro-Football-Reference.com

St. Louis Rams 21 at Tennessee Titans 24 on October 31st, 1999 - Full team and player stats and box score

www.pro-football-reference.com

 

[TheRainMaker]

Rams beat TN in week 8 of the 1999 reg season but yea you point is their schedule wasn't hard.

St. Louis Rams at Tennessee Titans - October 31st, 1999 | Pro-Football-Reference.com

St. Louis Rams 21 at Tennessee Titans 24 on October 31st, 1999 - Full team and player stats and box score

www.pro-football-reference.com

You mean the Titans beat the Rams in the regular season that many, including myself, continually forget. Nobody really took the Titans seriously that season and they really shouldn't have even made it out of the wild card round. Most people wanted to see Jacksonville take on St. Louis that season.

 

[TheRainMaker]

And regarding "ThE SkEdUulE" - the Rams in 99 had a last place schedule and beat 0 teams with a winning record until the Super Bowl. It doesn't matter as much as people think if you have talent and you're well coached.

After all these years I did not realize the Rams faced a whopping 2 teams with at least a .500 record that season. That is wild! Ravens went 8-8 and the Titans went 12-4. That might be the easiest schedule for a Super Bowl winner. However, they beat teams with winning record in the playoffs before the Super Bowl.

 

[Hammer of Thor]

If the Pats manage to win out that means they went 4 to 15 wins in consecutive seasons. I can't recall any other team who did that. Arians turned the Colts from 2-14 to 11-5 in 2011-12. Also got him COTY. The Rams in 98 went from 4-12 to the GSOT and Super Bowl champs at 13-3. The Dolphins had a big one too in the wildcat season IIRC.

Has any team ever gone from 4 wins in a season to 15? Never mind back to back 4 win seasons to 15? If the Pats pull it off it has to be the biggest single season turnaround of all time.

And regarding "ThE SkEdUulE" - the Rams in 99 had a last place schedule and beat 0 teams with a winning record until the Super Bowl. It doesn't matter as much as people think if you have talent and you're well coached.

Colts went from 3-13 in 1998 to 13-3 in 1999 ending with Manning’s first of his record one and dones.

2007 Dolphins went 1-15 and in 2008 they went 11-5.

Those are the biggest win improvements in NFL history — 10 wins from prior year. So if Pats go 3-1 they’ll match it, 4-0 they’ll best it.

 

[TommyD4207]

After all these years I did not realize the Rams faced a whopping 2 teams with at least a .500 record that season. That is wild! Ravens went 8-8 and the Titans went 12-4. That might be the easiest schedule for a Super Bowl winner. However, they beat teams with winning record in the playoffs before the Super Bowl.

Yeah, that's the trick, right? Win, get the bye, escape through the playoffs, and then let your coaches have 2 weeks to scheme something up for the Super Bowl.

As for the Rams, they whooped on the Vikings who had a terrible defense, escaped that 11-6 classic against a Tampa team that would have won with literally any QB play, and had a good scheme against Tennessee, and held on at the end.

The difference was, the Rams were putting up video game numbers indoors, which is why the NFL at-large was so enamored with them.

 

[Vindicate]

If the Pats manage to win out that means they went 4 to 15 wins in consecutive seasons. I can't recall any other team who did that. Arians turned the Colts from 2-14 to 11-5 in 2011-12. Also got him COTY. The Rams in 98 went from 4-12 to the GSOT and Super Bowl champs at 13-3. The Dolphins had a big one too in the wildcat season IIRC.

Has any team ever gone from 4 wins in a season to 15? Never mind back to back 4 win seasons to 15? If the Pats pull it off it has to be the biggest single season turnaround of all time.

And regarding "ThE SkEdUulE" - the Rams in 99 had a last place schedule and beat 0 teams with a winning record until the Super Bowl. It doesn't matter as much as people think if you have talent and you're well coached.

Bengals went from a 4 win season in Zac's first season to the Superbowl the next, if that counts.

 

[RobertWeathers]

You mean the Titans beat the Rams in the regular season that many including myself continually forget. Nobody really took the Titans seriously that season and they really shouldn't have even made it out of the wild card round. Most people wanted to see Jacksonville take on St. Luis that season.

Yea apparently I can't read lol

 

[TheRainMaker]

Yeah, that's the trick, right? Win, get the bye, escape through the playoffs, and then let your coaches have 2 weeks to scheme something up for the Super Bowl.

As for the Rams, they whooped on the Vikings who had a terrible defense, escaped that 11-6 classic against a Tampa team that would have won with literally any QB play, and had a good scheme against Tennessee, and held on at the end.

The difference was, the Rams were putting up video game numbers indoors, which is why the NFL at-large was so enamored with them.

That's why the Pats have the better odds than the Broncos to get the #1 seed. The Pats only face the Bills and Ravens as teams with a potentially winning record and/or make the playoffs. The Broncos have GB, Jacksonville, KC and the Chargers again who are all fighting for the playoffs. I could see the Broncos losing 2 of those.

 

[TommyD4207]

That's why the Pats have the better odds than the Broncos to get the #1 seed. The Pats only face the Bills and Ravens as teams with a potentially winning record and/or make the playoffs. The Broncos have GB, Jacksonville, KC and the Chargers again who are all fighting for the playoffs. I could see the Broncos losing 2 of those.

They're in a spot where they could drop them all too.
That Washington game should have been a real eye-opener across the league. Tough spot playing at sea-level for Denver, but Washington is really, really bad.

Sean Payton's gotta be almost out of duct tape and chewing gum, protecting Bo Nix from Nixing it up.

 

[sb1]

Yea apparently I can't read lol

I was sure that those Rams didn't beat any winning teams until the Super Bowl. I remember hearing that one when the same thing was said about the 2011 Patriots who didn't beat a team with a winning record all season until the AFC Championship game...

 

[sb1]

5-11 in 00 to 11-5 and champs in 01 was a good one too.

 

[Vindicate]

I was sure that those Rams didn't beat any winning teams until the Super Bowl. I remember hearing that one when the same thing was said about the 2011 Patriots who didn't beat a team with a winning record all season until the AFC Championship game...

2016 Patriots had an "easy" schedule and then they pull out the best comeback in the SB of all time while never scoring less than 34 points in the post season lmao.

 

[RobertWeathers]

I was sure that those Rams didn't beat any winning teams until the Super Bowl. I remember hearing that one when the same thing was said about the 2011 Patriots who didn't beat a team with a winning record all season until the AFC Championship game...

Yep. Accurate.

 

[Thelonious]

I suspect far more teams have had a sudden or unanticipated decline than have had a sudden ascension. I suppose there is a lesson there as well, a lesson of which it seems to me Vrabel is very much aware, hence his abhorrence of complacency.

 

[maust]

If the Pats manage to win out that means they went 4 to 15 wins in consecutive seasons. I can't recall any other team who did that. Arians turned the Colts from 2-14 to 11-5 in 2011-12. Also got him COTY. The Rams in 98 went from 4-12 to the GSOT and Super Bowl champs at 13-3. The Dolphins had a big one too in the wildcat season IIRC.

Has any team ever gone from 4 wins in a season to 15? Never mind back to back 4 win seasons to 15? If the Pats pull it off it has to be the biggest single season turnaround of all time.

And regarding "ThE SkEdUulE" - the Rams in 99 had a last place schedule and beat 0 teams with a winning record until the Super Bowl. It doesn't matter as much as people think if you have talent and you're well coached.

"ThE SkEdUulE" talk never seems to come up when the '72 Dollyphins are struttin' their **** but they played only two teams with winning records, both were 8-6. The combined win % of their regular season opposition was .396

Tuck that one away for when Fins fans run their mouths at year's end

 

[Ring 6]

Rams beat TN in week 8 of the 1999 reg season but yea you point is their schedule wasn't hard.

St. Louis Rams at Tennessee Titans - October 31st, 1999 | Pro-Football-Reference.com

St. Louis Rams 21 at Tennessee Titans 24 on October 31st, 1999 - Full team and player stats and box score

www.pro-football-reference.com

They also couldn’t have faced losing team in all the pre Sb playoff games.

 

[Vindicate]

I suspect far more teams have had a sudden or unanticipated decline than have had a sudden ascension. I suppose there is a lesson there as well, a lesson of which it seems to me Vrabel is very much aware, hence his abhorrence of complacency.

I think both of these things are less sudden than most realize. We, for example, have been in the rebuild, this wasn't overnight. A sudden rush of wins shouldn't always be confused for ascension. Pieces were acquired over the past few years and the final pieces came into slot this year. Same with descents. The 2018 Patriots being a perfect example where they win the SB, but we as fans knew the offense was running dry and was going to be running on fumes.

Not to say you're the one doing the confusing or are wrong, just using your post to chime in.

 

[Thelonious]

I think both of these things are less sudden than most realize. We, for example, have been in the rebuild, this wasn't overnight. A sudden rush of wins shouldn't always be confused for ascension. Pieces were acquired over the past few years and the final pieces came into slot this year. Same with descents. The 2018 Patriots being a perfect example where they win the SB, but we as fans knew the offense was running dry and was going to be running on fumes.

Not to say you're the one doing the confusing or are wrong, just using your post to chime in.

We have arguably been in a rebuild for several years. I call this rise "sudden" because there was essentially no progress whatsoever under late Bill and Mayo. I am reluctant to regard a rebuild as a rebuild where there is no rebuilding accomplished. We did, of course, acquire Drake during those dismal years, so that would go on the other side of the ledger, not that either failed HC I mention had anything to do with that. All in all, if the rise of this iteration of the Pats cannot be called "sudden," then the term is inapplicable in any circumstance actually likely to arise. and we should just set the term aside, which would be fine with me. I'm just glad we are where we are, "suddenly" or not.