"Top Ten NFL Teams" on NFLN... spoiler...

[TommyD4207]

Somewhere Don Shula just crapped himself.............

To be fair, Don Shula craps himself every 2 hours these days.

 

[TommyD4207]

Also, I think in a few years people are going to remember that 2016 team as being much, much better than you recall.

Top 5 offense and defense, undefeated on the road. Didn't have the GOAT for the first 4 games. Greatest comeback in Super Bowl History, destroying their own greatest comeback in Super Bowl History.

It's too fresh in our minds (including mine) to say 'Top 10 Greatest Team of All Time' especially with the echo of 'THEY DIDN'T PLAY ANYONE MIKE!' in our heads (which was actually the 9th hardest schedule in the league, for those interested in facts).

I think in time, 2016 will be thought of as 'wagon' status with 2004 and 2007.

They really were THAT good. We'd just seen it before.

 

[RobertWeathers]

Also, I think in a few years people are going to remember that 2016 team as being much, much better than you recall.

Top 5 offense and defense, undefeated on the road. Didn't have the GOAT for the first 4 games. Greatest comeback in Super Bowl History, destroying their own greatest comeback in Super Bowl History.

It's too fresh in our minds (including mine) to say 'Top 10 Greatest Team of All Time' especially with the echo of 'THEY DIDN'T PLAY ANYONE MIKE!' in our heads (which was actually the 9th hardest schedule in the league, for those interested in facts).

I think in time, 2016 will be thought of as 'wagon' status with 2004 and 2007.

They really were THAT good. We'd just seen it before.

I totally agree with this.

The 2016 team was a VERY, VERY good team.

 

[Hammer of Thor]

2003 defense was better, I think, but the offense took steps forward in 2004 and may have been the more complete team.

Crazy to think that they shut down Manning’s Colts in both postseason runs, and should’ve done it again in ‘06.

The biggest difference in the 2003 and 2004 defense was the injuries at CB. It just amazes me to think that they were so dominant and able to win with Earthwind Moreland and Troy Brown getting significant time back there. If Law and Poole had remained healthy, that 2004 team really might be considered one of the best ever; as is I still think it's the best Patriot team ever, even better than 2007, 2014 and 2016.

Of course, the 2003 defense was #1 in points allowed, gave up 11 TDs and got 29 interceptions..... And this includes a 31-0 shellacking in the opener. Just insane.

 

[lancerman]

2016 was very good. I did actually think we were ultimately a stronger team in 2014 though. We just had a better defense with Revis and Browner at corner and Jamie Collins and Chandler Jones still there. Then on offense we actually had a healthy Gronk for the season. What we really lacked were a few x factors like Hogan and Mitchell on offense, but I'd trade them for healthy Gronk any day. Otherwise we had the core of the rest of the offense. Also worth noting that 2016 was a bit of a down year for us with kicking as Ghost was in a bit of a slump.

Unfortunately 2014 will be kind of unfairly labled because of the Kansas City loss and then blowing the opener to Miami (did you notice in three of the last four years we had issues in the first four games and in two of them we one the Super Bowl?)

 

[Hammer of Thor]

Also, I think in a few years people are going to remember that 2016 team as being much, much better than you recall.

Top 5 offense and defense, undefeated on the road. Didn't have the GOAT for the first 4 games. Greatest comeback in Super Bowl History, destroying their own greatest comeback in Super Bowl History.

It's too fresh in our minds (including mine) to say 'Top 10 Greatest Team of All Time' especially with the echo of 'THEY DIDN'T PLAY ANYONE MIKE!' in our heads (which was actually the 9th hardest schedule in the league, for those interested in facts).

I think in time, 2016 will be thought of as 'wagon' status with 2004 and 2007.

They really were THAT good. We'd just seen it before.

I agree. Look at this this way - that team was able to win the Super Bowl despite Gronk being on IR much if the year. Gronk injuries derailed many other seasons (2011, 2012, 2013) yet the 2016 team still scored 30+ per game in each playoff game.

 

[TommyD4207]

2016 was very good. I did actually think we were ultimately a stronger team in 2014 though. We just had a better defense with Revis and Browner at corner and Jamie Collins and Chandler Jones still there. Then on offense we actually had a healthy Gronk for the season. What we really lacked were a few x factors like Hogan and Mitchell on offense, but I'd trade them for healthy Gronk any day. Otherwise we had the core of the rest of the offense. Also worth noting that 2016 was a bit of a down year for us with kicking as Ghost was in a bit of a slump.

The actual results and statistics don't really bear this out. Defense was better in 2016, so was the offense.

 

[RobertWeathers]

The biggest difference in the 2003 and 2004 defense was the injuries at CB. It just amazes me to think that they were so dominant and able to win with Earthwind Moreland and Troy Brown getting significant time back there. If Law and Poole had remained healthy, that 2004 team really might be considered one of the best ever; as is I still think it's the best Patriot team ever, even better than 2007, 2014 and 2016.

Of course, the 2003 defense was #1 in points allowed, gave up 11 TDs and got 29 interceptions..... And this includes a 31-0 shellacking in the opener. Just insane.

The 2004 secondary still had Rodney, Asante, Gay and Geno so they still had very good talent back there but I think the secondary's success was aided by an incredibly talented front 7++.

Sey
Warren
Wilfork
Willie
Bru
Johnson
Colvin
Vrabes
Roman
Green

 

[lancerman]

The actual results and statistics don't really bear this out. Defense was better in 2016, so was the offense.

I don't want to be that guy, but schedule.... We played the Broncos and Manning was still at a high level at that point in the season, Luck with a competent offense twice, Rodgers in an MVP year, Rivers playing at high level and even Stafford was having a decent year. That was a hellacious stretch. Probably the hardest in recent memory for a defense.

I'd much rather roll with the 2014 defense over the 2016 defense. It was just more stacked from top to bottom and they shouldered a heavier burdern. Are number one CB's in 2016 would have been number 3 and 4th in 2014

 

[Off The Grid]

Somewhere Don Shula just crapped himself.............

Redundant.

 

[TommyD4207]

I don't want to be that guy, but schedule.... We played the Broncos and Manning was still at a high level at that point in the season, Luck with a competent offense twice, Rodgers in an MVP year, Rivers playing at high level and even Stafford was having a decent year. That was a hellacious stretch. Probably the hardest in recent memory for a defense.

Patriots 2014 Strength of Schedule: T-10th
Patriots 2016 Strength of Schedule: 9th

I'd much rather roll with the 2014 defense over the 2016 defense. It was just more stacked from top to bottom and they shouldered a heavier burdern. Are number one CB's in 2016 would have been number 3 and 4th in 2014

Patriots 2014 Defense: Points- 8th Yards - 13th
Patriots 2016 Defense: Points - 1st Yards - 8th

"Eye Test" and "THEY DIDN'T PLAY ANYONE MIKE" doesn't matter once all the games are over. The numbers are all right there and final. They are what they are. I loved 2014s story, and at that time, it was the greatest 4th quarter performance in a Super Bowl that I had ever seen.

2016 will go down as an absolute wagon, rolling teams without their Hall of Fame tight end.

 

[Oswlek]

I could probably come up with 20 teams off the top of my head that were "better" than the '72 Dolphins, including numerous SB losers. And we're not talking obvious historical dominance either. For instance, I'd take the 2004 Eagles, 2013 Seattle, 2014 NE, 2002 Bucs, 1996 Packers (by a country mile), 1999 and 2001 Rams all over the Phins, just to name a few.

 

[TommyD4207]

I could probably come up with 20 teams off the top of my head that were "better" than the '72 Dolphins, including numerous SB losers. And we're not talking obvious historical dominance either. For instance, I'd take the 2004 Eagles, 2013 Seattle, 2014 NE, 2002 Bucs, 1996 Packers (by a country mile), 1999 and 2001 Rams all over the Phins, just to name a few.

The 84 Dolphins would have rolled the 72 Dolphins.

 

[lancerman]

Patriots 2014 Strength of Schedule: T-10th
Patriots 2016 Strength of Schedule: 9th



Patriots 2014 Defense: Points- 8th Yards - 13th
Patriots 2016 Defense: Points - 1st Yards - 8th

"Eye Test" and "THEY DIDN'T PLAY ANYONE MIKE" doesn't matter once all the games are over. The numbers are all right there and final. They are what they are. I loved 2014s story, and at that time, it was the greatest 4th quarter performance in a Super Bowl that I had ever seen.

2016 will go down as an absolute wagon, rolling teams without their Hall of Fame tight end.

Strength of schedule is a malleable thing. We probably take more losses playing the 2014 schedule than the 2016 schedule. Are defense would look alot different playing the 2014 schedule with the 2016 team. I don't know how you look at Manning on one of the most stacked offenses he ever had, Luck having his best year ever, and Rodgers playing lights out in an MVP season as less difficult than anything we did in the 2016 regular season.

What that really means to me is that there was a massive void in talent in 2016 and our SOS benefitted from it

 

[Off The Grid]

Few thoughts...

1 ~ Comparing our 2003 and 2004 teams has always been tricky. Given theoretical 100% health, I believe that the 2004 team was better. But where do you draw the line between the core team and the team that played the games and finished the season, when you're talking about best of all time? It's a hell of a question.

2 ~ I hate The Infernal Salary Cap, because it's a constant drain on Excellence ~ a forced redistribution of wealth that punishes the organizations that build Depth of Talent. That aside...It feels incomplete, to me, if we don't make some allowance for teams built after the imposition of The Infernal Salary Cap, because it's well nigh impossible to build a truly dominant team, isn't it? The Miners had Steve freaking Young fermenting on the bench for a few years, because the absence of a Salary Cap allowed them to. Given that enormous advantage, it seems unfair to draw a one on one comparison between those Miners, for instance, and the Patriots of the last 17 Years. We're always just One Injury Away, and the reason for that is that it's now impossible to avoid that. So you can say that the 2007 Pats, even, didn't have comparable depth of talent to the 1989 Miners...But we're grading a curve.

3 ~ Along those lines: Considering the horrific dilution of talent that The Infernal Salary Cap imposes, is it possible to quantify how much more difficult it is to win multiple Championships, these days, than it was, before? Just asking. Me, I'd hypothesize that winning 3 Championships in 10 Years is like winning 6 Championships in 10 Pre-Salary Cap Years...but that's just me.

4 ~ Change of subject: I feel honor-bound to mention that any such conversation is not complete without mention of not the 1974, the 1975, the 1978, or the 1979 versions, but of the 1976 PittsBurgh Steelers, the best of any of them.

Whose asses we kicked, by the way!!

 

[TommyD4207]

Strength of schedule is a malleable thing.

I mean, no. No, it's actually not. Once all the games are played - strength of schedule is the exact opposite of 'malleable'.

We probably take more losses playing the 2014 schedule than the 2016 schedule. Are defense would look alot different playing the 2014 schedule with the 2016 team. I don't know how you look at Manning on one of the most stacked offenses he ever had, Luck having his best year ever, and Rodgers playing lights out in an MVP season as less difficult than anything we did in the 2016 regular season.

What that really means to me is that there was a massive void in talent in 2016 and our SOS benefitted from it

I mean, it sounds more like a Manning/Rodgers fanboy kind of thing to me - but again, the facts are, the Patriots beat top-10 offenses and defenses that year (2016), in some cases teams with both (in Pittsburgh's case, twice), and a historically great offense was held to 21 points and 344 yards in the Super Bowl.

Losing the to the Packers really doesn't hold much weight to me as a positive.

 

[chris_in_sunnyvale]

I actually agree. Even if the Patriots won that Super Bowl in 07, I think I'd still view them and the Bears as 1A and 1B. They were just that dominate. Of course this list NFLN put together has them at 6 which idk.

1. 49'ers 1989
2. Steelers 1978
3. Patriots 2007
4. Dolphins 1972
5. Packers 1062
6. Bears 1985 (pretty much everybody in the video disagreed with them being this low)
7. Broncos 1998
8. Patriots 2004
9. Colts 1968 (I lied, they lost the Super Bowl too)
10 Cowboys 1992

So some key notes. Basically they said because the Bears offense wasn't that great it couldn't be ranked higher. That's somewhat fair. I'd still put them top 3, but I can't argue too much against the Steelers, Patriots and the Niner's there. Those were all worthy. The Dolphins are still way too high.

Kudos to us though. Only team on the list twice and only team post 2000.

I didn't see the episode. Is one of the criteria that the team is the best of a mini run of excellence? I'm trying to understand how the '91 Skins are left off this list and this would explain it.

Regards,
Chris

 

[Off The Grid]

Nother aside, abstruse, I confess it...

1991? That was a tremendous RedSkins team that rolled Beefalo in the SuperBowl, but those PlayOffs were not complete without the Eagles or the Miners, who missed out on TieBreakers. Damned, damned shame. That was the year that Montana and then Young both got hurt, but the Miners were rolling with Steve Bono by the end of the year...And it was the year that the Eagles fielded one'f the most magnificent Defenses that's ever seen the field. They both lost out on TieBreakers to the Falcons and Bears, and both'f them were worthy teams, but damn...I would've gladly born twenty years of mediocre 7th and 8th seeds, just for year like 1991, when genuine PowerHouses like those Eagles and Miners would've made almost every PlayOff contest feel like a Super Bowl...Yeah, I'm an 8 Seeds guy, all the way.

 

[Off The Grid]

Strength of schedule is a malleable thing.

Owl ****. Respectfully submitted.

Strength of Schedule and Face to Face are the only TieBreakers that matter.

Again.

Strength of Schedule and Face to Face are the only TieBreakers that matter.

Why I ever have to explain that astonishes me.

Who gives a rat's ass about Division Record, Conference Record, Points Against Division 47 Foes, and Number of Freckles on your Lithuanian Offensive Linemen when you can just say "Hey...They had the same record, right? And they split their Head to Head or didn't play each other? OK...What was the composite record of the teams they played against? Who achieved their record against stronger Foes?"

Crystal...freaking...clear.

Oh...

And in case I haven't mentioned it, lately: Had the DEBRIS that decide such things not stuffed their heads up their collective asses a few decades ago and left them there, and actually established TieBreakers based on logic that'd be obvious to any 4 Year old....The Patriots would be about to celebrate their 17th consecutive divisional Championship...and maybe their 7th Super Bowl win. #JustSayin

 

[mgteich]

So, it is not enough for great teams to CRUSH everyone they face. They need to have a top QB and offense. NONSENSE!

The 1985 Bears were one of the top 3, probably the best.

I actually agree. Even if the Patriots won that Super Bowl in 07, I think I'd still view them and the Bears as 1A and 1B. They were just that dominate. Of course this list NFLN put together has them at 6 which idk.

1. 49'ers 1989
2. Steelers 1978
3. Patriots 2007
4. Dolphins 1972
5. Packers 1062
6. Bears 1985 (pretty much everybody in the video disagreed with them being this low)
7. Broncos 1998
8. Patriots 2004
9. Colts 1968 (I lied, they lost the Super Bowl too)
10 Cowboys 1992

So some key notes. Basically they said because the Bears offense wasn't that great it couldn't be ranked higher. That's somewhat fair. I'd still put them top 3, but I can't argue too much against the Steelers, Patriots and the Niner's there. Those were all worthy. The Dolphins are still way too high.

Kudos to us though. Only team on the list twice and only team post 2000.