Wiz Posted February 7, 2005 Share Posted February 7, 2005 Yeah, the Pats deserve credit for getting the job done (with nothing to spare) the past few years. However, because of the salary cap and free agency, there are no really exceptional teams in the nfl. Props to Belichick for getting the most out of his talent, but as far as NFL's greatest teams, the Pats aren't in the same category as the Steelers of the 70's, 49'ers of the 80's or even the Cowboys of the 90's. They're a dynasty in a forgettable era. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BF_in_Indiana Posted February 7, 2005 Share Posted February 7, 2005 I can't say I agree with that (totally). They beat two very good teams in their 3 Super Bowl appearances. St. Louis and PhillY were both very good teams. The Patriots could have played with teams from any era. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gantrules Posted February 7, 2005 Share Posted February 7, 2005 I agree BF. This team is prepared for every game. Over the last two seasons. 34-4. Over the last four. 58-16. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BF_in_Indiana Posted February 7, 2005 Share Posted February 7, 2005 Well the NFL as a WHOLE isn't what it used to be as far as talent, but the Patriots as a team do so many things so well. People called Miami a dynasty, the first Super Bowl team they had beat the worst combined batch of opponents for a Super Bowl Champion ever, but no one would debate how great they were. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wiz Posted February 7, 2005 Author Share Posted February 7, 2005 In terms of talent, they do not compare with great teams from other eras. I suppose you could say they are one of the greatest coached teams of all time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gantrules Posted February 7, 2005 Share Posted February 7, 2005 Wiz what are you trying to prove? The Pats just won their third SB in four years. We never can go back and see how Vince Lombardi would have strategized against the Pats. The Pats are a dynasty of their era. Unless someone comes out and wins four SB's in a row to close out the 00's the Pats are going to be remembered as the team of the 00's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BF_in_Indiana Posted February 7, 2005 Share Posted February 7, 2005 Philly will be back for more next year, I'll almost guarantee it. Actually if I had to bet on a Super Bowl champion next year, I'd take Philly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wiz Posted February 7, 2005 Author Share Posted February 7, 2005 Teams from different eras are often compared and the Pats, in terms of talent, do not compare. I believe that Belichick is light years ahead of all other coaches that he could be coaching the Cardinals next year and make them competitive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rayzer32 Posted February 7, 2005 Share Posted February 7, 2005 Teams from different eras are often compared and the Pats, in terms of talent, do not compare. I believe that Belichick is light years ahead of all other coaches that he could be coaching the Cardinals next year and make them competitive. 230463[/snapback] Next year should be the real test, once his assistants that have worked with him most of his coaching career are gone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thamus Posted February 7, 2005 Share Posted February 7, 2005 So what you are saying is what I fear? The salary cap is gonna hurt the NFL? Here me out. In the age of salary cap age, players are gonna stick with the teams that have a good reputation, best chance to win the championships. They will restucture at all cost. Certain teams will get a bad rep and always play bad, never quite being the best. There will be a pile of parity with the cream rising to the top. It is gonna do the exact opposite what will we all thought. Certain teams will always be successful, the others never quite good enough. Watch, there will be a lot more of the same teams winning. The "have's" will always be the "have's". The "not's" will always be heaped in the parity pile. Watch! Only time will tell. Things will be worse. People thought in the salary cap age, dynasties can't be built. I argue the exact opposite will happen! Shoot me if you want! It will be a wave of the future, players will take a hit for winning. It will be the best of things for the NFL. Seats will be full and a heap of teams will always "think" they have a shot. In reality, it will always be the teams with a good team! Don't screw it up Buffalo and blow it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ozymandius Posted February 7, 2005 Share Posted February 7, 2005 yes, the league is diluted when compared to the 70's... but someone's gotta win the title... how come no one else can win as consistently they deserve all the credit in the world Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thamus Posted February 7, 2005 Share Posted February 7, 2005 yes, the league is diluted when compared to the 70's... but someone's gotta win the title... how come no one else can win as consistently they deserve all the credit in the world 230472[/snapback] Because everybody else blows "brainfarts." In the land of idiots, they are king! "Connecticutt, emmmmm I mean Foxboro Yankee in the Superbowl" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
patswhiponthebills Posted February 7, 2005 Share Posted February 7, 2005 Teams from different eras are often compared and the Pats, in terms of talent, do not compare. I believe that Belichick is light years ahead of all other coaches that he could be coaching the Cardinals next year and make them competitive. 230463[/snapback] complete BS. were are those pitt teams from the 70's more talented? law and harrison are great NUFF SAID(asante and wilson are VERY talented?) i think most would take dillon and brady as there qb and rb over franco and bradshaw(guy who finished his career wih 2 more td passes then int's 212-210).branch is very talented,givens, brown plays different positions. seymour is dominant,bruschi is very talented. ect ect ect. and if those 2 teams were to match up as is,pats would flat out crush them. there bigger,stronger, faster,more dominant.pats d-line would outweigh pitts o-line by probably 40 pounds per man. --pitts best receiver is more famous for a few crazy catches (swann) then his actual skill. and before i go,talent ACTUALLY has nothing to do with how good you are,i seen guys run 4.3 40's and not be able to do anything on a football field. or guys with a 40 inch vertical leap play like garbage. you can be very talented,it has nothing to do with how good of a football player you will be winning in todays nfl is more difficult then any other era and is more impressive. you still have your 4-5 teams that are impressive(just like before the cap days). except the rest of the teams are a little better. in the 70's,there was probably 4-5 really good teams(like in this era) BUT the REST of the teams in the 70's(80's also) blew BRAIN FARTS.after the 4-5 great teams,the rest of the teams were so HORRIBLY below average,the game was over once that bad teams foot hit the ground after they got off the bus back before the salary cap days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rayzer32 Posted February 7, 2005 Share Posted February 7, 2005 complete BS. were are those pitt teams from the 70's more talented? law and harrison are great NUFF SAID(asante and wilson are VERY talented?) i think most would take dillon and brady as there qb and rb over franco and bradshaw(guy who finished his career wih 2 more td passes then int's 212-210).branch is very talented,givens, brown plays different positions. seymour is dominant,bruschi is very talented. ect ect ect. and if those 2 teams were to match up as is,pats would flat out crush them. there bigger,stronger, faster,more dominant.pats d-line would outweigh pitts o-line by probably 40 pounds per man. --pitts best receiver is more famous for a few crazy catches (swann) then his actual skill. and before i go,talent ACTUALLY has nothing to do with how good you are,i seen guys run 4.3 40's and not be able to do anything on a football field. or guys with a 40 inch vertical leap play like garbage. you can be very talented,it has nothing to do with how good of a football player you will be winning in todays nfl is more difficult then any other era and is more impressive. you still have your 4-5 teams that are impressive(just like before the cap days). except the rest of the teams are a little better. in the 70's,there was probably 4-5 really good teams(like in this era) BUT the REST of the teams in the 70's(80's also) blew BRAIN FARTS.after the 4-5 great teams,the rest of the teams were so HORRIBLY below average,the game was over once that bad teams foot hit the ground after they got off the bus back before the salary cap days. 230511[/snapback] Oh great the Pats troll retard is back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thamus Posted February 7, 2005 Share Posted February 7, 2005 ...after the 4-5 great teams,the rest of the teams were so HORRIBLY below average,the game was over once that bad teams foot hit the ground after they got off the bus back before the salary cap days. 230511[/snapback] But at least they could keep their players, pay them what they want and build into a winning team from scratch. Today the parity heap fills their seats. Salary cap will bring mediocrity and a few teams with a winning reputation will always get the "winning" good players because they will restucture to be on a "winner" What the Pats figured out is how to beat the salary cap downfalls! It might be good or bad, they are bucking the norm and players are accepting under fair market value. They are "low balling" all of us. Watch! Time will tell. As much as Bruschi is a great guy, he is setting the mode. The owners can't lose! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts