Greatest two-year runs in NFL history (Super Bowl era)

[ivanvamp]

Sparked by some conversation in another thread, I thought I'd look at - in the Super Bowl era anyway - the teams with the best 2-year periods. To begin with, I made a ruling that the only two-year teams that qualified HAD to have won the Super Bowl both years. So that ruled out insanely good two-year teams such as the 1985-86 Chicago Bears, who were unbelievable, winning the SB after a 15-1 season in 1985, and then going 14-2 with a defense that surrendered even FEWER points than their famed 1985 defense did. Sorry guys, this group, as good as they were, doesn't make the cut because that 1986 team lost to the Redskins in the divisional round.

In light of that criterion, there are only eight contenders:

1966-67 Packers
1972-73 Dolphins
1974-75 Steelers
1978-79 Steelers
1988-89 49ers
1992-93 Cowboys
1997-98 Broncos
2003-04 Patriots

I then looked at these teams' win-loss record, offensive and defensive rankings, point differential, and offensive and defensive SRS ratings as compiled by pro-football-reference.com. I then ranked each team by those categories and added up their total rankings (I took their points ranking and yards ranking and averaged them together). If a team had something unique about it that was worth adding to the mix, I threw that in there as well. Here's how these teams came out:

1. 1972-73 Dolphins. 13 total ranking points, by FAR the fewest (i.e., best) total. 12 points ahead of the next best team.
- Win%: .929 (1st)
- Avg offensive ranking: 4.0 (5th)
- Avg defensive ranking: 1.8 (1st)
- Offensive SRS: 4.8 (3rd)
- Defensive SRS: 7.4 (2nd)
- Point diff per game: 14.5 (1st)

Just an overall juggernaut, even calibrating for the era in which they played. Utterly dominant, two years in a row. Their defense was even better than the famed Steel Curtain, all things considered. I hate them, but this two year run was the best the NFL has ever seen in the Super Bowl era. Having a totally undefeated season didn't hurt.

2. 1974-75 Steelers. 25 total ranking points.
- Win%: .815 (3rd)
- Avg offensive ranking: 6.5 (6th)
- Avg defensive ranking: 2.3 (3rd)
- Offensive SRS: 3.9 (7th)
- Defensive SRS: 6.7 (3rd)
- Point diff per game: 11.7 (3rd)

Another dominant team, following on the heels of the great Dolphins' run.

3. 1978-79 Steelers, 27 total ranking points.
- Win%: .813 (t4th)
- Avg offensive ranking: 3.8 (4th)
- Avg defensive ranking: 2.8 (4th)
- Offensive SRS: 4.7 (4th)
- Defensive SRS: 5.4 (5th)
- Point diff per game: 9.8 (6th)

The end of the great Steeler dynasty, this team was just about as good as the 74-75 editions, but a hair short of them. Still one of the great all-time groups.

4. 1992-93 Cowboys, 27 total ranking points.
- Win%: .781 (6th)
- Avg offensive ranking: 3.0 (3rd)
- Avg defensive ranking: 4.5 (5th)
- Offensive SRS: 5.7 (2nd)
- Defensive SRS: 4.1 (6th)
- Point diff per game: 10.1 (5th)

We may forget how good this Cowboys team really was. Strong on D, but a better offense than most of us remembered.

5. 2003-04 Patriots, 33 total ranking points.
- Win%: .875 (2nd)
- Avg offensive ranking: 10.0 (8th)
- Avg defensive ranking: 4.8 (7th)
- Offensive SRS: 4.2 (5th)
- Defensive SRS: 5.7 (4th)
- Point diff per game: 9.0 (7th)

Ok, here's where there may be some controversy. The total ranking points may suggest that this team should be ranked lower on this list of eight. They just weren't quite as statistically dominant as some of the other teams. But I'm putting them here for three main reasons. First, the salary cap. To do it in the modern era was just remarkable. Second, their winning streak. 18 straight during the season, and 21 straight including postseason. And third, their consistency. 14-2 each of the two seasons, 17-2 each of the two seasons including playoffs. This wasn't fueled by one insanely great year followed by another very good year. This was two 14-2 (17-2) seasons, back to back.

Others here (given that this is a Pats' forum) may put this group at the top. I think the reality doesn't warrant them being higher, but I understand that this is subjective.

6. 1966-67 Packers, 29 total ranking points.
- Win%: .778 (7th)
- Avg offensive ranking: 7.5 (7th)
- Avg defensive ranking: 2.0 (2nd)
- Offensive SRS: 3.3 (8th)
- Defensive SRS: 8.1 (1st)
- Point diff per game: 10.5 (4th)

Much better defensively than I would have thought. They are below the Patriots here because there was no free agency, no salary cap, and the AFC was weak, so their Super Bowl opponents just weren't very good at the time. Still, obviously an all-time great team.

7. 1997-98 Broncos, 25 total ranking points.
- Win%: .813 (t4th)
- Avg offensive ranking: 1.8 (1st)
- Avg defensive ranking: 7.5 (8th)
- Offensive SRS: 8.8 (1st)
- Defensive SRS: 1.0 (8th)
- Point diff per game: 11.8 (2nd)

Statistically, they should be much higher than the Patriots, or even higher than the Steelers or Cowboys. They get points for knocking off Favre and the great Packers team that was bidding itself to be on this list. But I'm holding against them the fact that they were TWICE found guilty of salary cap violations, so this team achieved its success largely because they were able to construct their franchise illegally. The reason I didn't punish the Steelers for steroid use in the 70s is because it wasn't illegal then, so they weren't breaking the rules.

8. 1988-89 49ers, 37 total ranking points.
- Win%: .750 (8th)
- Avg offensive ranking: 2.8 (2nd)
- Avg defensive ranking: 4.5 (6th)
- Offensive SRS: 4.0 (6th)
- Defensive SRS: 3.3 (7th)
- Point diff per game: 8.3 (8th)

Hard to believe that this great two-year run for the Niners is only 8th on this list. But that's in large part to their 10-6 season in 1988. They won the SB in dramatic fashion over Cincy, but that wasn't a great 49ers team. They only had a 4.7 point differential, and their record just wasn't great. Still, winning two SBs in back-to-back seasons puts them on the list, which itself is a remarkable achievement, and we know they were loaded with hall of fame caliber players.

 

[Patsfanin Philly]

The only problem I have is that it doesn't seem to take into consideration the strength of the opponents. IIRC, the Dolphins had one of the easiest schedules ( AFC East that year was poor) and I think they only beat 4 teams winning records the whole year including the playoffs....
Compare that to the 2003 Patriots who faced more playoff teams that year than nearly any other team and more 10 win teams on their way to the Super Bowl championship...

Dolphins opponents record 1972 ( 4th easiest SOS)
Only 2 teams over .500, both 8-6 and neither made the playoffs.....
They faced NO playoff teams that year...

• KC: 8-6
• HOU: 1-13
• MIN: 7-7
• NYJ: 7-7
• SD: 4-9-1
• BUF: 4-9-1
• BAL: 5-9
• BUF: 4-9-1
• NE: 3-11
• NYJ: 7-7
• STL: 4-9-1
• NE: 3-11
• NYG: 8-6
• BAL: 5-9

 

[BlueThunder]

Hate to burst Shula's bubble but that's a classic " Cupcake Schedule"....

 

[RobertWeathers]

03 & 04 Pats finished #1 and #2 in points allowed respectfully. I'm missing the math behind your ranking as 4.8. MIA finished #1 both years but you have them with 1.8.

Regardless, its very challenging to use statistical analysis to determine the most dominant back-to-back team. What I know is this...

Ive never seen the Packers play. They have a long track record of greatness. That counts for something. How much I don't know. The 66 team was better than the 67 team but something tells me if were to stack rank mental toughness, I'd be them, Pitt and NE.

I was a little kid when the great Dolphins and Steelers teams were running the table but have watched a handful of games on youtube and the NFLN. Easy schedules or not, they were dominant. MIA went to 3 straight SBs and Pitt was the team of the 70s. Both great teams.

The 49ers were the 49ers. That 89 49ers team might have had the greatest offense I've ever seen. Including the 07 Pats. So balanced. Their defense was incredible. The 88 team floundered a little but clearly found its groove after T-Day.

Broncos....great O but any team on this list would run over that D. It did enough for the O to stay on the field.

Cowboys were also great but I kinda put them in the Broncos category.

03-04 Pats.....03 offense did just enough. 04 was better. Great D. Brutal schedules. Winning 21 in a row...sheesh.

If I were to stack rank...

Steelers
Pats
GB
MIA
DAL
DEN

 

[ivanvamp]

The only problem I have is that it doesn't seem to take into consideration the strength of the opponents. IIRC, the Dolphins had one of the easiest schedules ( AFC East that year was poor) and I think they only beat 4 teams winning records the whole year including the playoffs....
Compare that to the 2003 Patriots who faced more playoff teams that year than nearly any other team and more 10 win teams on their way to the Super Bowl championship...

Dolphins opponents record 1972 ( 4th easiest SOS)
Only 2 teams over .500, both 8-6 and neither made the playoffs.....
They faced NO playoff teams that year...

• KC: 8-6
• HOU: 1-13
• MIN: 7-7
• NYJ: 7-7
• SD: 4-9-1
• BUF: 4-9-1
• BAL: 5-9
• BUF: 4-9-1
• NE: 3-11
• NYJ: 7-7
• STL: 4-9-1
• NE: 3-11
• NYG: 8-6
• BAL: 5-9

Hate to burst Shula's bubble but that's a classic " Cupcake Schedule"....

Yep, I totally get this. I think SRS takes those things into account though, if I'm not mistaken. So even though they played easy schedules, the Dolphins teams so dominated them that it was still hugely impressive.

And, of course, other teams have had cupcake schedules too, and have never done what those Dolphins did.

 

[ivanvamp]

03 & 04 Pats finished #1 and #2 in points allowed respectfully. I'm missing the math behind your ranking as 4.8. MIA finished #1 both years but you have them with 1.8.

Good question and I should have clarified at the beginning. There's a division among analysts over which is more important, or, I should say, more statistically significant: points allowed or yards allowed, *in terms of evaluating the actual quality of the defense*.

So I took them both into account.

2003 Pats: #1 points allowed, #7 yards allowed
2004 Pats: #2 points allowed, #9 yards allowed

(1 + 2 + 7 + 9) / 4 = 4.75, rounded up to 4.8

It's quite fair to quibble with my methodology here. But this is how I arrived at that number.

 

[everlong]

The 04 Patriots were also 10-1 if memory serves correctly against teams that made the playoffs. The next closest team is the 07 Patriots at 7-1......which we don't need to rehash.

 

[Ring 6]

Sparked by some conversation in another thread, I thought I'd look at - in the Super Bowl era anyway - the teams with the best 2-year periods. To begin with, I made a ruling that the only two-year teams that qualified HAD to have won the Super Bowl both years. So that ruled out insanely good two-year teams such as the 1985-86 Chicago Bears, who were unbelievable, winning the SB after a 15-1 season in 1985, and then going 14-2 with a defense that surrendered even FEWER points than their famed 1985 defense did. Sorry guys, this group, as good as they were, doesn't make the cut because that 1986 team lost to the Redskins in the divisional round.

In light of that criterion, there are only eight contenders:

1966-67 Packers
1972-73 Dolphins
1974-75 Steelers
1978-79 Steelers
1988-89 49ers
1992-93 Cowboys
1997-98 Broncos
2003-04 Patriots

I then looked at these teams' win-loss record, offensive and defensive rankings, point differential, and offensive and defensive SRS ratings as compiled by pro-football-reference.com. I then ranked each team by those categories and added up their total rankings (I took their points ranking and yards ranking and averaged them together). If a team had something unique about it that was worth adding to the mix, I threw that in there as well. Here's how these teams came out:

1. 1972-73 Dolphins. 13 total ranking points, by FAR the fewest (i.e., best) total. 12 points ahead of the next best team.
- Win%: .929 (1st)
- Avg offensive ranking: 4.0 (5th)
- Avg defensive ranking: 1.8 (1st)
- Offensive SRS: 4.8 (3rd)
- Defensive SRS: 7.4 (2nd)
- Point diff per game: 14.5 (1st)

Just an overall juggernaut, even calibrating for the era in which they played. Utterly dominant, two years in a row. Their defense was even better than the famed Steel Curtain, all things considered. I hate them, but this two year run was the best the NFL has ever seen in the Super Bowl era. Having a totally undefeated season didn't hurt.

2. 1974-75 Steelers. 25 total ranking points.
- Win%: .815 (3rd)
- Avg offensive ranking: 6.5 (6th)
- Avg defensive ranking: 2.3 (3rd)
- Offensive SRS: 3.9 (7th)
- Defensive SRS: 6.7 (3rd)
- Point diff per game: 11.7 (3rd)

Another dominant team, following on the heels of the great Dolphins' run.

3. 1978-79 Steelers, 27 total ranking points.
- Win%: .813 (t4th)
- Avg offensive ranking: 3.8 (4th)
- Avg defensive ranking: 2.8 (4th)
- Offensive SRS: 4.7 (4th)
- Defensive SRS: 5.4 (5th)
- Point diff per game: 9.8 (6th)

The end of the great Steeler dynasty, this team was just about as good as the 74-75 editions, but a hair short of them. Still one of the great all-time groups.

4. 1992-93 Cowboys, 27 total ranking points.
- Win%: .781 (6th)
- Avg offensive ranking: 3.0 (3rd)
- Avg defensive ranking: 4.5 (5th)
- Offensive SRS: 5.7 (2nd)
- Defensive SRS: 4.1 (6th)
- Point diff per game: 10.1 (5th)

We may forget how good this Cowboys team really was. Strong on D, but a better offense than most of us remembered.

5. 2003-04 Patriots, 33 total ranking points.
- Win%: .875 (2nd)
- Avg offensive ranking: 10.0 (8th)
- Avg defensive ranking: 4.8 (7th)
- Offensive SRS: 4.2 (5th)
- Defensive SRS: 5.7 (4th)
- Point diff per game: 9.0 (7th)

Ok, here's where there may be some controversy. The total ranking points may suggest that this team should be ranked lower on this list of eight. They just weren't quite as statistically dominant as some of the other teams. But I'm putting them here for three main reasons. First, the salary cap. To do it in the modern era was just remarkable. Second, their winning streak. 18 straight during the season, and 21 straight including postseason. And third, their consistency. 14-2 each of the two seasons, 17-2 each of the two seasons including playoffs. This wasn't fueled by one insanely great year followed by another very good year. This was two 14-2 (17-2) seasons, back to back.

Others here (given that this is a Pats' forum) may put this group at the top. I think the reality doesn't warrant them being higher, but I understand that this is subjective.

6. 1966-67 Packers, 29 total ranking points.
- Win%: .778 (7th)
- Avg offensive ranking: 7.5 (7th)
- Avg defensive ranking: 2.0 (2nd)
- Offensive SRS: 3.3 (8th)
- Defensive SRS: 8.1 (1st)
- Point diff per game: 10.5 (4th)

Much better defensively than I would have thought. They are below the Patriots here because there was no free agency, no salary cap, and the AFC was weak, so their Super Bowl opponents just weren't very good at the time. Still, obviously an all-time great team.

7. 1997-98 Broncos, 25 total ranking points.
- Win%: .813 (t4th)
- Avg offensive ranking: 1.8 (1st)
- Avg defensive ranking: 7.5 (8th)
- Offensive SRS: 8.8 (1st)
- Defensive SRS: 1.0 (8th)
- Point diff per game: 11.8 (2nd)

Statistically, they should be much higher than the Patriots, or even higher than the Steelers or Cowboys. They get points for knocking off Favre and the great Packers team that was bidding itself to be on this list. But I'm holding against them the fact that they were TWICE found guilty of salary cap violations, so this team achieved its success largely because they were able to construct their franchise illegally. The reason I didn't punish the Steelers for steroid use in the 70s is because it wasn't illegal then, so they weren't breaking the rules.

8. 1988-89 49ers, 37 total ranking points.
- Win%: .750 (8th)
- Avg offensive ranking: 2.8 (2nd)
- Avg defensive ranking: 4.5 (6th)
- Offensive SRS: 4.0 (6th)
- Defensive SRS: 3.3 (7th)
- Point diff per game: 8.3 (8th)

Hard to believe that this great two-year run for the Niners is only 8th on this list. But that's in large part to their 10-6 season in 1988. They won the SB in dramatic fashion over Cincy, but that wasn't a great 49ers team. They only had a 4.7 point differential, and their record just wasn't great. Still, winning two SBs in back-to-back seasons puts them on the list, which itself is a remarkable achievement, and we know they were loaded with hall of fame caliber players.

My thoughts are it's an 8 way tie because none of those teams could have accomplished anything more.
With respect to the rankings I don't think it's appropriate to weightvthem all equally. For example if team A ranks 2nd in win % but 5th in margin of victory but team B is 5th in win % but 1st in margin of victory, team B ranks better wrt these 2 categories in your analysis meaning losing more games but blowing out the teams you beat makes you a better team.
I think yardage rankings also work the same way. More wins, more points, better margin but less yards are not equivalent factotrs.
But nice work and interesting concept.

 

[archstanton543]

Take Denver off the list as they cheated on their salary cap to win those two years.

 

[TennisBallHead]

I think holding the 10-6 record against SF that much is a mistake. Granted, they only won the SB by 4, but they won their other two playoff games by 25. And then in '89, they absolutely pasted their playoff opponents, winning by 28, 27, and 45!

 

[RobertWeathers]

Good question and I should have clarified at the beginning. There's a division among analysts over which is more important, or, I should say, more statistically significant: points allowed or yards allowed, *in terms of evaluating the actual quality of the defense*.

So I took them both into account.

2003 Pats: #1 points allowed, #7 yards allowed
2004 Pats: #2 points allowed, #9 yards allowed

(1 + 2 + 7 + 9) / 4 = 4.75, rounded up to 4.8

It's quite fair to quibble with my methodology here. But this is how I arrived at that number.

Its all good. I was just curious.

At the end of the day those teams you mention deserve to be in the discussion. It stats and the amount of winning and level of excellence, talent and coaching is what separates each other.