Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

SUPERBOWL LIII super official real thread thingy...

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by gerontion View Post
    Not even close to the best dynasty ever. The Boston Celtics won 11 titles in 13 years. The Oilers won 5 Cups in 7 years. The Leaf won 6 Cups in 10 years. The Canadiens won 5 Cups in 5 years. The Islanders won 4 Cups in 4 years. The Lakers won 5 titles in 9 years. The Bulls won 6 titles in 8 years. The Packers won 5 titles in 7 years. The Steelers won 4 titles in 6 years. The 49ers won 4 titles in 9 years. The Yankees won 8 titles in 16 years. After that, they won 8 titles in 12 years. The UCLA Bruins won 10 titles in 12 years. Alabama won 5 titles in 9 years. The UConn Huskies won 8 titles in 15 years.

    By the way, what's with the exclamation points? Are you happy or excited the Pats have done so well?
    how about best NFL dynasty? Better than 49ers and Steelers. Maybe the 1940's Browns would be better.

    The Pats have dominated for 18 years. 9 SBs (6 wins) and 4 conference championships including 8 SBs or AFCCG in a row and 3 SB wins in 5 years plus another 3 SB wins in 4 years before that. They only missed the AFCCG 5 out 18 years. They didn't do it with the same players like the Steelers did (for the most part) and they did it with different systems and players year in and year out. 1 year it's a 2 TE system with hernandez and Gronk. Another year it's a deep ball game with Moss and Welker. Another year it's power running with Corey Dillon. I highly doubt any of us will ever see anything like that again. Every game the Pats win is watching history unfolding before our eyes. I don't care if you love em or hate em, they are a great team and if anyone can't recognize that, then I would not consider them a fan of football.


    Edit...Sporting News has them ranked #3 best Dynasty behind MJs Bulls and John Woodens Bruins.
    Last edited by broncos SB2010; 02-04-2019, 07:09 PM.
    sigpic

    Comment


    • Originally posted by L.M. View Post
      I don't understand how Broncos fans can also be such devoted P*ts fans but different strokes I guess.

      Dislike is generational and passed down. Folks are explaining to their kids now that the P*ts were caught in two cheating scandals, plus various sports commentators still mention it and look on them dubiously so that will be remembered, and asterisks will remain on a tarnished legacy. I also suspect that more details on their illicit activities will eventually come out after Belicheat retires and Kraft passes, when the threats and bribes expire.
      Never said I was a Pats fan. I do respect them though. You can't say the 70's Raiders and Steelers were great teams even though they were the biggest competition of the day?
      sigpic

      Comment


      • Originally posted by broncos SB2010 View Post
        how about best NFL dynasty? Better than 49ers and Steelers. Maybe the 1940's Browns would be better.

        The Pats have dominated for 18 years. 9 SBs (6 wins) and 4 conference championships including 8 SBs or AFCCG in a row and 3 SB wins in 5 years plus another 3 SB wins in 4 years before that. They only missed the AFCCG 5 out 18 years. They didn't do it with the same players like the Steelers did (for the most part) and they did it with different systems and players year in and year out. 1 year it's a 2 TE system with hernandez and Gronk. Another year it's a deep ball game with Moss and Welker. Another year it's power running with Corey Dillon. I highly doubt any of us will ever see anything like that again. Every game the Pats win is watching history unfolding before our eyes. I don't care if you love em or hate em, they are a great team and if anyone can't recognize that, then I would not consider them a fan of football.


        Edit...Sporting News has them ranked #3 best Dynasty behind MJs Bulls and John Woodens Bruins.
        And I think that's ridiculous. I would certainly put them as the top NFL dynasty of all-time. But the Yankees won 6 World Series in 8 years from 1936 to 1943. Then they won 5 in a row from 1949 to 1953 (6 in 7 years if you go back to 1947) and then 4 in 5 years from 1996 to 2000.

        The Montreal Canadiens won 5 straight Stanley Cups from 55-56 to 59-60 and were in the Finals every year from 51-52 to 59-60, with the 2 losses in 53-54 and 54-55 being in 7 games. They also won 4 cups in a row 75-75 to 78-79.

        Followed by the Islanders 4 in a row and then (as much as I hate them, mainly cause Calgary was 2nd best in the NHL for several of the years) the Oilers dynasty of 5 in 7 years.

        As a society we seem to suffer from an extreme case of recency bias, and I think the Sporting News listing them as the 3rd best Dynasty of all-time is an example of that. No disrespect to their run, because it's been amazing, but how can that be on the same level as 4 and 5 championships in a row?

        Comment


        • Originally posted by broncos SB2010 View Post
          Never said I was a Pats fan. I do respect them though. You can't say the 70's Raiders and Steelers were great teams even though they were the biggest competition of the day?
          That's the same as me. I actually hate the Pats a great deal (not as much as I hate KC and McVay's cult of personality) but I have gained a tremendous amount of respect for them. Their run has been phenomenal, and just respecting what they've done doesn't make someone a fan of that team. It just means that we can respect a terrific accomplishment when we see it.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by broncos SB2010 View Post
            Never said I was a Pats fan. I do respect them though. You can't say the 70's Raiders and Steelers were great teams even though they were the biggest competition of the day?
            I'd respect them more without the cheating scandals. Brady and Belichick are great, but also dirty.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by broncos SB2010 View Post
              how about best NFL dynasty? Better than 49ers and Steelers. Maybe the 1940's Browns would be better.

              The Pats have dominated for 18 years. 9 SBs (6 wins) and 4 conference championships including 8 SBs or AFCCG in a row and 3 SB wins in 5 years plus another 3 SB wins in 4 years before that. They only missed the AFCCG 5 out 18 years. They didn't do it with the same players like the Steelers did (for the most part) and they did it with different systems and players year in and year out. 1 year it's a 2 TE system with hernandez and Gronk. Another year it's a deep ball game with Moss and Welker. Another year it's power running with Corey Dillon. I highly doubt any of us will ever see anything like that again. Every game the Pats win is watching history unfolding before our eyes. I don't care if you love em or hate em, they are a great team and if anyone can't recognize that, then I would not consider them a fan of football.


              Edit...Sporting News has them ranked #3 best Dynasty behind MJs Bulls and John Woodens Bruins.
              Even Jordan's Bulls pale in comparison to Russell's Celtics.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by gerontion View Post
                I'd respect them more without the cheating scandals. Brady and Belichick are great, but also dirty.
                That's what should go on their busts in lieu of an asterisk.

                "They were great. They were dirty."
                To infinity...and beyond.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Saddletramp View Post
                  I personally would say Kansas but I get your point.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Butler By'Note View Post
                    And I think that's ridiculous. I would certainly put them as the top NFL dynasty of all-time. But the Yankees won 6 World Series in 8 years from 1936 to 1943. Then they won 5 in a row from 1949 to 1953 (6 in 7 years if you go back to 1947) and then 4 in 5 years from 1996 to 2000.

                    The Montreal Canadiens won 5 straight Stanley Cups from 55-56 to 59-60 and were in the Finals every year from 51-52 to 59-60, with the 2 losses in 53-54 and 54-55 being in 7 games. They also won 4 cups in a row 75-75 to 78-79.

                    Followed by the Islanders 4 in a row and then (as much as I hate them, mainly cause Calgary was 2nd best in the NHL for several of the years) the Oilers dynasty of 5 in 7 years.

                    As a society we seem to suffer from an extreme case of recency bias, and I think the Sporting News listing them as the 3rd best Dynasty of all-time is an example of that. No disrespect to their run, because it's been amazing, but how can that be on the same level as 4 and 5 championships in a row?
                    One of the big differences in modern teams and those old teams are lack of FA and no salary cap so they kept their players for years. Once they had a great team, it was much easier to keep it.

                    The 1940's/1950's Browns were in the championship game 10 times in a row and won 7 yet no one talks about them as one of the best dynasties.
                    Last edited by broncos SB2010; 02-05-2019, 06:12 AM.
                    sigpic

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by broncos SB2010 View Post
                      One of the big differences in modern teams and those old teams are lack of FA and no salary cap so they kept their players for years. Once they had a great team, it was much easier to keep it.

                      The 1940's/1950's Browns were in the championship game 10 times in a row and won 7 yet no one talks about them as one of the best dynasties.
                      I do.

                      10 characters
                      "Stultum est timere quod vitare non potes." ~ Publilius Syrus

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by swingarm View Post
                        I personally would say Kansas but I get your point.
                        Yep that looks very familiar, almost exactly like the drive to Cheyenne..

                        Comment


                        • The Patriots won six championships in eighteen years. The 1932-46 Chicago Bears won six championships in fifteen years spearheading a major innovation in the game (T Formation) along the way. The 1929-44 Green Bay Packers won six championships in sixteen years including three in a row (1929-31) And, of course, the previously mentioned Cleveland Browns won seven championships in ten years. Lombardi's Packers won five championships in seven years.
                          Last edited by samparnell; 02-05-2019, 06:57 AM.
                          "Stultum est timere quod vitare non potes." ~ Publilius Syrus

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by samparnell View Post
                            The Patriots won six championships in eighteen years. The 1932-46 Chicago Bears won six championships in fifteen years spearheading a major innovation in the game (T Formation) along the way. The 1929-44 Green Bay Packers won six championships in sixteen years including three in a row (1929-31) And, of course, the previously mentioned Cleveland Browns won seven championships in ten years. Lombardi's Packers won five championships in seven years.
                            To be fair, the NFL had only 10 teams when the Bears won their championships. There's 32 teams today. It's easier to beat 9 other teams than it is to beat 31 other teams.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by lvbronx View Post
                              To be fair, the NFL had only 10 teams when the Bears won their championships. There's 32 teams today. It's easier to beat 9 other teams than it is to beat 31 other teams.
                              Are you saying the Patriots defeated thirty-one teams this past season? If so, I did not know that.

                              Don't shoot the messenger.
                              "Stultum est timere quod vitare non potes." ~ Publilius Syrus

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by samparnell View Post
                                Are you saying the Patriots defeated thirty-one teams this past season? If so, I did not know that.

                                Don't shoot the messenger.
                                No I'm not saying that at all. I said they had to compete against 31 other teams for a championship. The fact is it's easier to win a league with 10 teams than with 32 teams. At random, one team has a 10% chance of winning the championship and the other has about a 3% chance.

                                How hard would it be to win a league with only one team in it?

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X