Jump to content

Patriots Lovefest on ESPN......


cåblelady

Recommended Posts

"The Nine Point Dynasty"

237852[/snapback]

 

True dynasties hold up to the test of time. If the Pats cease to win and play in championship games, then years from now people will scrutinize them for thier narrow victories in SB's, their lack of HOF wothy players and lack of statistical dominance.

 

The Patriots defense is ahead of it's time in terms of it's clever disguises and ability to cover up weaknesses, but the brilliance of scheming does not necessarily hold up to test of time. Ten years from now every decent team in the league might be as sophisticated defensively.

 

I'm not trying to take anything away from them, they are a great team in the truest sense of the word team. But so were the Dolphins of the early 70's, and when people talk about dynasties and great teams, they always jump to those Packers, Steelers, Niners, Cowboys and sometimes even Redskins before they start to give credit to the only team to run the table for an entire NFL season. Of all the multiple championship teams, these Pats most compare to those Fish.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can not compare Packers, Steelers and 49ers. those teams played without free agency or with just Plan b free agency. How many titles would they have won if the had a salary cap and free agency to deal with. One maybe 2 but no more. Free agency would have torn those teams apart. High profile agents and players with large egos and web sites would have bolted both places had they the chance. remember the Steelers of the 70s were the best dynasty in football but the also had one of the most frugal owners in the NFL and were is lowest paid. I think only the Cowboys can be compared to the Pats because of the salary cap and free agency. The cowboys were the better team.

 

 

The Pats of the 2001/2003 and 2004 Superbowl years were the best teams ever if this is how you define teams

 

Were they the most talented team ever, of course not be if you define team by being a group of players that played up to or above their talent level then the 2001 Pats have to be that team. They upset the Rams in what has to be the 2nd greatest upsets in NFL history. That team played far above their talent level. People talk about the tuck rule but forget that the Steelers went to the SB on Franco Harris's immaclulate reception.

 

If you define the team concept as players that are willing to go beyond their egos and play above expectations after losing a number of starters to injuries then the 2004 Pats have to be that team

 

because of salary cap and FA the Pats have to be compared to teams in the future not any in the past In my opinion, with the drive for NFL parity, I do not think we will be seeing the SB teams winning by dormanating an opponent like we saw in the past. I think you will see that teams will find it hard to just go back to the SB

 

Look at the 49ers under Young, they had winning seasons but only got to the SB once

those teams were very talentd but lost players and coaches.

 

There is no doubt that the Pats will suffer with the loss of OC and DC coaches. Like other winning teams, they will eventully lose palyers to FA. It will be very hard for them to repeat this year, everything has to come to and end. But they also will strive to be competive and have a good chance to go to the playoffs for a number of years. this is what all teams want

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...