Don Banks of SI discusses the 'Team Of The Decade' debate

[ScottieC]

New England Patriots, Pittsburgh Steelers vie for*team of decade - Don Banks - SI.com

I think its well between the Steelers and the Patriots and whoever goes farther this season will probably earn the title by most sports writers.

Not to disrespect Cassel anymore, but if Brady had played all last season I think this issue would be non existent and we probably would have been where Pittsburgh ended last season and ended the argument of who the better team was for the past 10 years.

Pretty Simple formula-

Who has the most rings? Take the TWO winners and continue

Who has the most Super Bowl Appearences? Take the TWO winners and continue

Who has the best OVERALL record? The team with the best record wins

Tie breakers?

Who has the best play off record?

Who holds the 2 longest winning streaks in NFL history in the decade?

Who has the most NFL Player of the Year winners?

Who has a undeafted Regular Season?

Who has broken more NFL records: Team and Individual?

It's really not that difficult.

 

[Palm Beach Pats Fan]

These discussions have been about wins and clutch wins, not stats.

And BTW, the team had the best ever offense in 2007.

An aside...

Saying the 2007 offense was the best ever relies on STATS! I think it's a flawed argument, even though I love the Pats. The best offense ever would be one that could run the ball at will even when the defense knew you were going to run the ball, and pass the ball at will even when the defense knew you were going to pass the ball. I think that we did the second part better than any team in history but the first part not so much. This year I expect to be able to do the first part too.

Who did both? What comes to mind is the late 80s 49er teams with Rice, Taylor, Montana, and Roger Craig all in their primes. They could run at will and pass at will (though less in that one category compared with the 2007 Pats).

Anyway, back to the larger argument, the head-to-head playoff meetings have pretty much decided this already. If the Steelers win the next Super Bowl and beat NE on the way, then they get a share of that honor in my book. Anything less and they fall short.

 

[TruthSeeker]

I agree with your comments.

Unfortunately, it is part of a team's responsibility to have backups. Depth counts! We had the best team in the league last year (as we do this year) and we also had one of the weakest schedules. Unfortunately, we didn't have a backup quarterback capable of even getting this best team to the playoffs. Were injuries the issue? Are we only the best team when we don't have injuries?

Exactly. Why couldn't we have a backup QB that could throw a pass? I mean, he was so bad that he's earning a franchise tag salary in 2009.

It seems you missed several tidbits in your in-depth analysis of the Patriots 2008 season. For example, they actually won 11 games. And that the major problem on the team wasn't the backup QB but rather the sieve that was called a defense.

 

[Dino 6 Rings]

Whoa there, buddy.. spoiled much?



Now, back on topic. There is no debate, as others have said--not unless you are trying intentionally to start one. The Patriots have the best record of the decade (probably tied with the Colts, who have also been more worthy than the steelers), more Superbowl wins, more Superbowl appearances, a 16-0 season, a few Hall of Fame players, and a Hall of Fame head coach.. there is no argument. Screw the Steelers. Roethlisberger is the most overrated QB in the game.

And let's look at who the Steelers played in their Superbowls... oh that's right. The NFC West. Lol. You might as well have mailed them rings in advance... and even then they could barely handle the Seahawks without help from the refs.

Three out of four of the pats' Superbowls will go down as some of the best ever played... the Rams in 01, Panthers in 03, and Giants in 07.. all great games and other than the giants, elite opponents from the NFC. Even the Giants had one of the best defensive lines ever, certainly one of the best of the decade.

This line "Roethlisberger is the most overrated QB in the game." Is so hilarious. I actually laughed out loud when I read it.

 

[godef]

New England Patriots, Pittsburgh Steelers vie for*team of decade - Don Banks - SI.com

I think its well between the Steelers and the Patriots and whoever goes farther this season will probably earn the title by most sports writers.

Not to disrespect Cassel anymore, but if Brady had played all last season I think this issue would be non existent and we probably would have been where Pittsburgh ended last season and ended the argument of who the better team was for the past 10 years.

Just conjecture: what if the Steelers go 9-7 (no playoffs) and the Pats 7-9? I think that would be a wash, and the Pats would still have 3 SBs and a 16-0 regular season and SB loss to boot (4 AFC champs vs 2), whereas the Steelers would have just two SBs. The Steelers must win at least 1 more SB to even be in the running.

 

[BradyFTW!]

The issue's already nonexistent. Even if the Steelers somehow managed to win again this year, tying the Pats in total SBs in the 2000s, one would just look at how they fared against each other in the playoffs, where the Steelers were repeatedly thrashed by us this decade.

 

[Ring 6]

The backup wasn't the problem, as we saw by the end of the season. If you want to look for blame, feel free to blame BB for not pulling Brady out of more games and letting Cassel get more experience and shortening his learning curve once he was forced onto the field. We could also toss in the bad luck of being the only team in NFL history to fail to make the playoffs with 11 wins under the current system.

Either that, or we could just realize that the salary cap makes it almost impossible to adequately buttress the QB position if you've got a top 5 salary QB as your starter.

Or, to put it another way, Byron Leftwich wasn't taking Pittsburgh to the Super Bowl if Ben R. went down on week 1, Sorgi wasn't taking the Colts there, etc...

Ultimately the back was the problem, or better put Tom Brady's injury was the problem.
Had he not gotten injured, at worst this team would have met Pitt in the AFCC.
But, as you said, what backup could take any team to a SB win playing all 16 games?
I think had 11 been enough to get in the playoffs, the Pats would have competed well, but in the end it was just a whole lot of bad shlt all coming together to doom the season.

 

[Ring 6]

An aside...

Saying the 2007 offense was the best ever relies on STATS! I think it's a flawed argument, even though I love the Pats. The best offense ever would be one that could run the ball at will even when the defense knew you were going to run the ball, and pass the ball at will even when the defense knew you were going to pass the ball. I think that we did the second part better than any team in history but the first part not so much. This year I expect to be able to do the first part too.

Who did both? What comes to mind is the late 80s 49er teams with Rice, Taylor, Montana, and Roger Craig all in their primes. They could run at will and pass at will (though less in that one category compared with the 2007 Pats).

Anyway, back to the larger argument, the head-to-head playoff meetings have pretty much decided this already. If the Steelers win the next Super Bowl and beat NE on the way, then they get a share of that honor in my book. Anything less and they fall short.

I think the fairest yardstick is the team that scored the most points was the best offense, since that is their job.
Your point about running the ball at will or throwing at will is inaccurate, becuase if you could do EITHER at will, you'd have the points record.
Also, it seems you imply running the ball when needed was a flaw of the 2007 Pats O, but how can it be when the O was so good, when needed was NEVER. You cannot name a flaw as a reason if that flaw never perpetuated itself in a negative way, and it never did.

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

This line "Roethlisberger is the most overrated QB in the game." Is so hilarious. I actually laughed out loud when I read it.

Sadly, I have revised my prior years' opinion and now agree with you. After winning his 2nd SB vs the debacle in his 1st SB performance, I have more respect for the guy. He's one of the few elite NFL QBs. Just geting to the SB and then winning twice, however it's accomplished, is remarkable. Congrats again to the Stealers (sorry, can't help myself) and their well earned SB Championship.

 

[patsfan-1982]

even if the steelers win the SB again this year witch they won't

the pats would still be the team of the Decade

everyone want to find a new team of the Decade because of spygate


for some reason everyone thinks that the pats 3 SB are because of cheating


and the steelers are all pure and perfact

 

[Palm Beach Pats Fan]

You cannot name a flaw as a reason if that flaw never perpetuated itself in a negative way, and it never did.

2.8 yards per carry in the Super Bowl wasn't so great, and running the ball effectively is a great way to slow down the Giants pass rush that hurt us all game long.

You are right in that it didn't hurt until the end when it hurt most of all.

 

[APatrioticVirginian]

New England Patriots, Pittsburgh Steelers vie for*team of decade - Don Banks - SI.com

I think its well between the Steelers and the Patriots and whoever goes farther this season will probably earn the title by most sports writers.

Not to disrespect Cassel anymore, but if Brady had played all last season I think this issue would be non existent and we probably would have been where Pittsburgh ended last season and ended the argument of who the better team was for the past 10 years.

Are you serious? So if they get further than us this year they are the team of the decade? Even if they win the Superbowl this year they only tie us for championships. We have the more dominant seasons. Plus in our head to head playoff appearances we own them. They have never went through us for the title. What is your malfunction?

 

[Disco Volante]

...There's a ****ing debate?

 

[Ryan]

The Steelers are close in some categories (playoff berths, division titles, double digit victory seasons) but overall the Pats have a clear edge as team of the decade. The 3 Super Bowls to Pittsburgh's 2 should be more than enough for there to be no debate as things stand right now. Maybe if Pitt wins another one this year, which I doubt, then they have a claim. The 16-0 season and the two 14-2 seasons were great, but let's face it, the only thing people will remember are the Super Bowl titles, and if Pitt is tied with the Pats after this year, then they'll be regarded as co-Teams of the Decade.

 

[PatsChowder]

The notion that another team could be the team of the decade in the NFL on a Patriots message board was bound to go over poorly. If I try to look at this with an unbiased eye, the Steelers can make a case. But that's it.

Even if the Steelers won back-to-back Super Bowls (which , let's face it is very VERY difficult to do in this NFL) the Patriots would still hold the edge in overall record, head-to-head, playoff match ups, etc. Not to mention all of the personal/team records that the Patriots set this decade.

I can see why Steelers fans would make a case for their team, but when it comes down to it........ no dice.

 

[Dino 6 Rings]

I can see why Steelers fans would make a case for their team, but when it comes down to it........ no dice.

Actually, Steelers fans just want to win it again this year to even open up the discussion and get to Number 7 and talk smack like crazy.

Most of us recognize that 3 is greater than 2. Nobody considers the Denver Broncos with the Cowboys as team of the 90s. Yet it was 2 SBs to 3.

The only reason I can come with why there are so many "team of the decade" articles is that the Patriots and Steelers are 2 of the most looked for NFL teams online. So if you mention both of them in the same article, and say anything controversial in either regards, pro steeler, anti patriot, or anti steeler, pro patriot, you'll get tons of hits to your articles because both of our fan bases are pretty rabid and interested in what's written about our teams.

 

[NJPatsfan26]

Actually, Steelers fans just want to win it again this year to even open up the discussion and get to Number 7 and talk smack like crazy.

Most of us recognize that 3 is greater than 2. Nobody considers the Denver Broncos with the Cowboys as team of the 90s. Yet it was 2 SBs to 3.

The only reason I can come with why there are so many "team of the decade" articles is that the Patriots and Steelers are 2 of the most looked for NFL teams online. So if you mention both of them in the same article, and say anything controversial in either regards, pro steeler, anti patriot, or anti steeler, pro patriot, you'll get tons of hits to your articles because both of are fan bases are pretty rabid and interested in what's written about our teams.

Is this the writing template for all the reporters at ESPN?

 

[PatsFanInVa]

I think when you try to name the team of a decade before the decade's over, if your team has significant accomplishments later in the decade, that makes your team seem more significant overall.

That said, it's been a while here. I think it's about Lombardi time again

 

[ScottieC]

even if the steelers win the SB again this year witch they won't

the pats would still be the team of the Decade

everyone want to find a new team of the Decade because of spygate


for some reason everyone thinks that the pats 3 SB are because of cheating


and the steelers are all pure and perfact

Unlike your spelling and punctuation.

 

[PatsFanSince74]

American Football in the NFL is the ultimate team sport and winning the Super Bowl is the ultimate measure. We can argue all we want about "accidental" SB winners, but the truth is that 32 teams (now) start the season (as Bill Belichick is fond of pointing out at about this time every year) at the bottom of the mountain and play a long, hard 19 or 20 games to be the last team standing. The Pats have done that three times this decade; the Steelers twice, the Colts once. The Pats have gone to five AFCCG's and four SB's, the Steelers to four (edit) CG's and two SB's, the Colts to two CG's and one SB. To me, that's pretty much all she wrote.

If the Steelers go to their fifth CG (edit) and win their third SB this year, then let the debate begin. Until then, end of story.