PatsFans.com Menu
PatsFans.com - The Hub For New England Patriots Fans

Pats 5th most winningest team in NFL history


Status
Not open for further replies.
The thing is if we are going to include the 76 team in this discussion, (higher than 2001 team, etc) which I do, and think they were awesome... the 2007 team, 18-1, 16-0, easily is way better than the 76 team.. and likely really is the best single season football team of all time, championship loss or not. The 72 Dolphins have it officially, but the 2007 team is a far superior team to any team of the past.. and likely is better than 03 and 04 Pats which in my opinion are the 07 team's only competition for greatest Pats team of all time.
The numbers, especially the unbeaten regular seasons, are impressive-so were the "eye test" as we watched.

How I disagree with you is in terms of performance, and what really happened.

'72 Dolphins had things work out for them, and had things going for them, and time has exposed them badly as not as good as many other teams before and since.

Like some other Pats squads this century, the '07 edition did not improve down the stretch. They hung on. And the Giants team they failed to put away wasn't terrible, but neither were they that good.

I cannot see them being able to defeat the '76, '03 or '04 Pats teams in a dream championship, nor do I favor them against our '01 or '14 teams.

The 2007 Patriots are among the flashiest, most impressive teams ever to play in the NFL. Like lots of other great NFL teams before and after, they weren't champs and weren't the best that year.
 
Comparing salary cap era teams to non salary cap era teams is not a valid comparison. Pre salary cap era teams were open to stacking their teams with capability that modern era teams simply cannot do. A modern era team may have a one year wonder of being stacked/deep -- maybe two years at most -- but to maintain a 49ers type depth over a number of years is all but impossible.

Because some of these notable teams were pre salary cap era deep, their ability to maintain an elite level of play was something simply not available to the modern era/the Patriots. In the BB-TB era we have seen injuries derail what was otherwise the Patriots in overdrive to the SB (not that it couldn't happen to pre salary cap era but it was less likely). And it is this fact that makes, arguably, the pre salary cap era teams the "better" teams on paper as well as makes the comparisons invalid.
There was the NFL before and there is the NFL now. The Patriots are the greatest "now" team from the standpoint of wins, from the standpoint of being just two plays away from being the 'now' quasi-owners of the SB(6), from the standpoint of the hole they have had to play from (always picking near last, picks taken away, their team always are post season worn for the following season), and because the 'now' NFL is specifically designed to make a team like the Patriots difficult to happen.

Enjoy it while it lasts (while TB and BB are still capable of being elite at their respective levels) because it is extremely unlikely to be repeated by any 'now' NFL team.
 
Comparing salary cap era teams to non salary cap era teams is not a valid comparison. Pre salary cap era teams were open to stacking their teams with capability that modern era teams simply cannot do. A modern era team may have a one year wonder of being stacked/deep -- maybe two years at most -- but to maintain a 49ers type depth over a number of years is all but impossible.

Because some of these notable teams were pre salary cap era deep, their ability to maintain an elite level of play was something simply not available to the modern era/the Patriots. In the BB-TB era we have seen injuries derail what was otherwise the Patriots in overdrive to the SB (not that it couldn't happen to pre salary cap era but it was less likely). And it is this fact that makes, arguably, the pre salary cap era teams the "better" teams on paper as well as makes the comparisons invalid.
There was the NFL before and there is the NFL now. The Patriots are the greatest "now" team from the standpoint of wins, from the standpoint of being just two plays away from being the 'now' quasi-owners of the SB(6), from the standpoint of the hole they have had to play from (always picking near last, picks taken away, their team always are post season worn for the following season), and because the 'now' NFL is specifically designed to make a team like the Patriots difficult to happen.

Enjoy it while it lasts (while TB and BB are still capable of being elite at their respective levels) because it is extremely unlikely to be repeated by any 'now' NFL team.
Important points; and yes, you can't strangle a guy and say "take less money to stay here!"

You got your Bradys and Bruschis, and you got your Milloys and Welkers, whatever.

For anybody who's listening, I will point out that de-emphasizing intelligence and shrewdness is a mistake. A lot of teams of the past were limited simply by their own budget, including the Celtics, who barely got by each year but still paid Russ (slightly) more than Wilt. And the rest of the players complained loudly about it, but that was a reflection of the soon-to-change system.

A team that has people who make smart, substantive, practical and thoughtful personnel and strategic decisions is going to have a huge advantage and more success on the field than most others, who quite frankly, don't. Been that way for generations before the salary cap.

Specifically in this case, a team like the Broncos who openly, brazenly cheat on the cap, get slapped on the wrist and supported by the league, will continue to enjoy a clear competitive advantage over a team like the Patriots, who have not broken any rules-unless you concur with the commissioner's decision that their camera was in the "wrong location"-yet have lost draft picks including two first-rounders, lots of money, and playing time.
 
In my opinion the 'Patriots were awful their entire history before Brady' theme is overblown. Perhaps I am saying that because I'm tired of fans of other teams repeatedly trotting out that line to attempt to disparage the Pats, but to me the Patriots were not as bad as some make them out to be.

In the first forty years of existence the Patriots had 17 losing seasons.

Average? Yes.

God-awful dredges of the history of pro football? For a few terrible seasons (1970, 1972, 1990) yes.

But not for their entire existence.

35-17-3 between 1961-1964 and 8-4 in 1966 [Nance]

Parilli gone, then Clive Rush insanity sent them into a tailspin until Fairbanks fourth year in 1976.
 
No, they lost.
So?

If team A would beat team B nine times out of ten if they were able to play ten times, but happened to lose if they only played once, that doesn't mean B is better than A.

Are you really arguing that the 2007 Giants were a better team than the 2007 Pats? Because that's what your argument amounts to. Better that day, after NE was distracted by Tomase's crap and with an in-game injury to Neal? Sure. But a better team? No way.
 
So?

If team A would beat team B nine times out of ten if they were able to play ten times, but happened to lose if they only played once, that doesn't mean B is better than A.

Are you really arguing that the 2007 Giants were a better team than the 2007 Pats? Because that's what your argument amounts to. Better that day, after NE was distracted by Tomase's crap and with an in-game injury to Neal? Sure. But a better team? No way.
I agree, along with Randy's 15-1 Vikes and the '90 Bills and lots and lots of other great teams, who lost.

It's just especially hard regarding the '07 Pats, because the zebras failed to call holding on the Tyree catch.

Asante tried, but he just couldn't hang on. Just like Wes.
 
So?

If team A would beat team B nine times out of ten if they were able to play ten times, but happened to lose if they only played once, that doesn't mean B is better than A.

Are you really arguing that the 2007 Giants were a better team than the 2007 Pats? Because that's what your argument amounts to. Better that day, after NE was distracted by Tomase's crap and with an in-game injury to Neal? Sure. But a better team? No way.

The object of the game is to win when it counts.
 
The object of the game is to win when it counts.

Kind of. It is also to provide me, the fan, with the maximum pleasure over the course of a season, which translates to quantity of wins, as well as "winning when it counts."
 
Status
Not open for further replies.


MORSE: Patriots Day 2 Draft Opinions
Patriots Wallace “Extremely Confident” He Can Be Team’s Left Tackle
It’s Already Maye Day For The Patriots
TRANSCRIPT: Patriots OL Caedan Wallace Press Conference
TRANSCRIPT: Eliot Wolf’s Day Two Draft Press Conference
Patriots Take Offensive Lineman Wallace with #68 Overall Pick
TRANSCRIPT: Patriots Receiver Ja’Lynn Polk’s Conference Call
Patriots Grab Their First WR of the 2024 Draft, Snag Washington’s Polk
2024 Patriots Draft Picks – FULL LIST
MORSE: Patriots QB Drake Maye Analysis and What to Expect in Round 2 and 3
Back
Top