Which do you perfer we win Super Bowl 46 Or Super Bowl 52 and why

[SammyBlueCat]

 

[Kontradiction]

52 without a doubt.

 

[SHOWTIME15]

We repeated in 03/04, and Yea I heard that before because of our D but that wasn't a bad team, same season Gronk broke a record with like 17TDs and we had Hernandez and Welker

Thanks for the correction. I was thinking one thing and typing another

This. The 2011 team was relatively average for the early 2010s era Patriots. Plus, had we won, it would have been written off as coming against a 9-7 team, and wouldn't have changed anything about 18-1.

The 2011 team didn’t deserve to be there. They really should have lost to the Ravens in the AFCCG, who I thought played better.

 

[Ring 6]

I want 52

and 46

and 42

and 41

and don't feel that I should have to settle for anything less.

Smh

 

[Bradyking12]

Smh

Can't say that's off, that list is how things should of panned out, tho I would throw SB45 in there potentially but that's up for debate.

 

[chasa]

Maybe if we win 46, Hernandez gets a ring, and is wearing it the night of the homicide, looks at it, and thinks twice about his actions and goes home instead. Hmmm

which homicide? the one in the industial park, or the one where he shot up an suv and killed 2 people?

 

[ErniesPinkStripes]

Originally I was thinking 46 as I really wanted revenge and was incredibly disapointed after losing to the Giants AGAIN. I thought we would win that one for sure. Ugh

After reading your answers, I'm going with 52. 3/4 twice?? would have been incredible, one of the greatest achievements in the history of sports. Ugh

 

[Chasing greatness]

Maybe if we win 46, Hernandez gets a ring, and is wearing it the night of the homicide, looks at it, and thinks twice about his actions and goes home instead. Hmmm

Nice to think about but I doubt it plus he had already shot someone else prior to the lloyd murdrm iirc

 

[BTTA]

Super Bowl 52 so we can be the only team to repeat twice. I’m not even sure the 2011 team deserved to be there tbh.

The Steelers repeated twice.

 

[juxtapoz15]

Super Bowl 52 easily, I live in PA and wouldn't have to deal with my stupid coworkers anymore.

 

[ErniesPinkStripes]

Super Bowl 52 easily, I live in PA and wouldn't have to deal with my stupid coworkers anymore.

 

[A Defiant Goose]

Sorry I mean repeat TWICE. Besides I’ve been on this forum a lot longer than you.

lol im just messing with you but the forum join date argument is hilaaaaarious

 

[SHOWTIME15]

The Steelers repeated twice.

Good catch. How about the only team to repeat in two different decades?

 

[A Defiant Goose]

Nice to think about but I doubt it plus he had already shot someone else prior to the lloyd murdrm iirc

Oh right I forgot about those. Man, Hernandez would've been great for a Netflix documentary. I bet Netflix could've convinced everyone he was innocent too lol

 

[A Defiant Goose]

46 because we were truly, absolutely the better team for the second time against a team that got every break and bounce imaginable - the 2011 Giants were OUTSCORED during the regular season while we went in the game with the best weapon in the NFL playing on one leg, AND had at least three fairly easy chances to put the game away (strip sack we didn’t recover, Brady’s crazy INT attempt to Gronk, the Welker drop).

In 52, were we really the better team with that defense? We got to face a team who lost their MVP level candidate and they were still at least equal overall, if not better. If we play that game 100 times they win at least 50 with Foles, and obviously more with Wentz.

This is a good perspective to have. I am not mad at all about 52 because I genuinely felt like the better team won. Their fans may be pricks about it (and I'd probably be too if my team had lost 10+ years ago to the same opponent in the SB) but for the most part it doesn't bother me a bit. Backup QB, backup LT, backup whatevers and still ran through the playoffs offensively. Hat tip to that one. But 2011 to that ****ing dope especially when Welker drops a ball he made in his sleep up to that point? The safety? The fact we had two WRs playing defense in the AFCCG? Ugh. Brutal. Not to mention it was in Indy, too. Would've been a total Colts fan d**k punch. Yea, gimme 46.

 

[Koma]

You can't go wrong with either choice, but I would go with SB 46. If the Patriots win that game, there are no claims like:

- The Giants own the Patriots in the Super Bowl.
- Brady can only win with an elite defense.
- Why the 10 year gap between SB wins?

Also, at the time of that game, you would have been able to say Brady had twice as many SB wins (4) as both Manning brothers combined with half the number of losses (1.) Obviously, that hypothetical would change in the future with Peyton going to Denver, but it would have been nice to say for a few years.

Ice_Ice_Brady brought up a few of them, but there were so many little things that didn't go the Patriots way in that game. If the officials don't call intentional grounding (resulting in a safety) on the first offensive play by New England, the Patriots defense isn't right back on the field after a 6 minute, 10 play drive and the Patriots don't start the game in a 9-0 hole. I get that it wasn't an absurd call, but we just watched a Super Bowl with 93 combined pass attempts and 0 holding calls. If the officials "let 'em play" on that grounding call, the Patriots probably win.

 

[SHOWTIME15]

I think the most important reason in favor of SB52 is that NE would have been the only team with two different dynasties (2001-2007 and 2014-2017).

 

[Bradyking12]

I think the most important reason in favor of SB52 is that NE would have been the only team with two different dynasties (2001-2007 and 2014-2017).

When did it end?

 

[MUFC7]

46. Simply because it was a Welker drop and freak catch from actually happening, although that D was SO bad.

Brady threw for over 500 yds and they played with their back up QB and still were the better team. They deserved that win.

 

[Triumph]

46

I was there