Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

Well I feel this is relevant especially because we could have an undefeated team. I do not think the Pats are the greatest team of all time. I feel there are a few teams out there that were better.

Ill name them.

89 49ers
94 49ers
92 Cowboys
78 Steelers
85 Bears
84 49ers

I'm biased....'99 Rams

If Brady wins another ring, the '07-08 Pats will be the greatest team

Originally posted by guy222
I'm biased....'99 Rams

If Brady wins another ring, the '07-08 Pats will be the greatest team

Correct, but they won't.

Right now, I say the 85 Bears.

Originally posted by BobbyD
Correct, but they won't.

Right now, I say the 85 Bears. I say the 89 49ers. You have to think about how these teams match up well with each other. They could throw it and pass it on you and the uttery dominated postseason.

Originally posted by quanchi112
I say the 89 49ers. You have to think about how these teams match up well with each other. They could throw it and pass it on you and the uttery dominated postseason.

Is a good choice, no doubt. I love Joe and Jerry. However, Joe needs to the time too to find Jerry. Against the 85 Bears, that might not have happened.

Originally posted by BobbyD
Is a good choice, no doubt. I love Joe and Jerry. However, Joe needs to the time too to find Jerry. Against the 85 Bears, that might not have happened. I think the would have definitely put up enough points to beat this team. Remember the west coast offense is centered around quick passing. They could definitely put the clamps on the Bears offense.

85 Bears...(this statement is prior to the Superbowl match...if Pats win it and defeat the Giants...then it's another story.)

Originally posted by BobbyD
Correct, but they won't.

Right now, I say the 85 Bears.

Taking Eli also

Great defense

Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
85 Bears...(this statement is prior to the Superbowl match...if Pats win it and defeat the Giants...then it's another story.) So even though the Pats havent thoroughly decimated the competition in the postseason you give them the nod. No one scored on the Bears tuill the Super Bowl. Thats called utter domination. The pats letting the Chargers hand around till the fourth quarter is pathetic. Rivers was beyond banged up and Lt sat out. The 89 niners and the 85 bears would stomp a mudhole in these Pats.

Originally posted by quanchi112
So even though the Pats havent thoroughly decimated the competition in the postseason you give them the nod. No one scored on the Bears tuill the Super Bowl. Thats called utter domination. The pats letting the Chargers hand around till the fourth quarter is pathetic. Rivers was beyond banged up and Lt sat out. The 89 niners and the 85 bears would stomp a mudhole in these Pats.

Good points. ...is exactly why the Giants should win, and why I'm picking them to win. They are flat out, no doubt about it, no rocket science, so easy to see that a casual fan can tell are playing the better football. The Chargers w/o LT, Gates, and healthy Rivers, is like playing the Dolphins. And the Pats barely survived.

This is reminiscient to the Steelers going a couple of years ago when they beat 3 road teams and got hot at the right time to win the Super Bowl. The outcome "should" be no different.

Originally posted by BobbyD
Good points. ...is exactly why the Giants should win, and why I'm picking them to win. They are flat out, no doubt about it, no rocket science, so easy to see that a casual fan can tell are playing the better football. The Chargers w/o LT, Gates, and healthy Rivers, is like playing the Dolphins. And the Pats barely survived.

This is reminiscient to the Steelers going a couple of years ago when they beat 3 road teams and got hot at the right time to win the Super Bowl. The outcome "should" be no different. Well I think to be considered the greatest you must simply dominate everyone postseason. The Pats havent done that.

The Giants are huge underdogs and if they win this could be the greatest upset in Nfl history.

Originally posted by quanchi112
So even though the Pats havent thoroughly decimated the competition in the postseason you give them the nod. No one scored on the Bears tuill the Super Bowl. Thats called utter domination. The pats letting the Chargers hand around till the fourth quarter is pathetic. Rivers was beyond banged up and Lt sat out. The 89 niners and the 85 bears would stomp a mudhole in these Pats.

That means nothing.

It doesn't mean 85 Bears > 07 Pats (this is coming from a Bears fan)

It COULD be taken as: Everyone but the Pats 07 > Everyone but the Bears 85.

Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
85 Bears...(this statement is prior to the Superbowl match...if Pats win it and defeat the Giants...then it's another story.)



My sentiments exactly

Originally posted by Citizen V
That means nothing.

It doesn't mean 85 Bears > 07 Pats (this is coming from a Bears fan)

It COULD be taken as: Everyone but the Pats 07 > Everyone but the Bears 85. Postseason domination is a huge factor. The Dolphins were also undefeated in 72 but would have gotten trounced by a number of teams. I put the 07 Pats up there but not in the top three. They should have decimated the Chargers. Their qb was banged up and their mvp wasnt in there.

89 Niners would have beaten the 85 Bears.

In the mid 90's, the Cowboys were practically the Bulls of football.

Originally posted by quanchi112
So even though the Pats havent thoroughly decimated the competition in the postseason you give them the nod. No one scored on the Bears tuill the Super Bowl. Thats called utter domination. The pats letting the Chargers hand around till the fourth quarter is pathetic. Rivers was beyond banged up and Lt sat out. The 89 niners and the 85 bears would stomp a mudhole in these Pats.

Originally posted by quanchi112
Well I think to be considered the greatest you must simply dominate everyone postseason. The Pats havent done that.

The Giants are huge underdogs and if they win this could be the greatest upset in Nfl history.

Originally posted by quanchi112
Postseason domination is a huge factor. The Dolphins were also undefeated in 72 but would have gotten trounced by a number of teams. I put the 07 Pats up there but not in the top three. They should have decimated the Chargers. Their qb was banged up and their mvp wasnt in there.

89 Niners would have beaten the 85 Bears.

Yeah, I think you made your point earlier about the Patriots quanchi...



Don't really have explain it everytime....

But you have to explain to us that the Patriots are doing well every time they win.

Originally posted by Smasandian
But you have to explain to us that the Patriots are doing well every time they win. They are just getting by. The best should wax the competition especially minus their star.

The 1976 Buccaneers.

0-14 Bucs were shut out 5 times, outscored by an average of 20 points per game (412-125 overall), QB Steve Spurrier only notched 7 TD passes, and when head John McKay was asked about his team's execution, he replied, "I'm all for it."

Now that was a great season.

Originally posted by quanchi112
Postseason domination is a huge factor. The Dolphins were also undefeated in 72 but would have gotten trounced by a number of teams. I put the 07 Pats up there but not in the top three. They should have decimated the Chargers. Their qb was banged up and their mvp wasnt in there.

89 Niners would have beaten the 85 Bears.

You haven't listened to a word I've said, have you?

Just because they aren't dominating every post season game, that doesn't make them any less of a team than the '85 Bears, because rather than being inferior to the Bears themselves; their opponents may have just been >>>> the team's the Bears played in 85.

Originally posted by Citizen V
You haven't listened to a word I've said, have you?

Just because they aren't dominating every post season game, that doesn't make them any less of a team than the '85 Bears, because rather than being inferior to the Bears themselves; their opponents may have just been >>>> the team's the Bears played in 85. Yeah because we all know the teams <<before the salary cap. Teams are weaker now than they were then. The Beras also had the number one ranked defense and either the number one or number 2 ranked offense.

This year there hasnt been one dominating defense to scare anyone. The Steelers were number one right? Their defense gave up all kinds of points.

Originally posted by quanchi112
Well I feel this is relevant especially because we could have an undefeated team. I do not think the Pats are the greatest team of all time. I feel there are a few teams out there that were better.

Ill name them.

89 49ers
94 49ers
92 Cowboys
78 Steelers
85 Bears
84 49ers

the 78 steelers are the only team i see possibly beating the patriots.

none of those teams had the offense the patriots possess.

Originally posted by quanchi112
So even though the Pats havent thoroughly decimated the competition in the postseason you give them the nod. No one scored on the Bears tuill the Super Bowl. Thats called utter domination. The pats letting the Chargers hand around till the fourth quarter is pathetic. Rivers was beyond banged up and Lt sat out. The 89 niners and the 85 bears would stomp a mudhole in these Pats.

the thing the patriots have done is that they've adjusted to situations in order to win. tom brady didn't have a good game at passing on Sunday, so they gave it to Maroney who took care of it.

i don't think any of the great teams could "blow-out" every single team that came in their way.
all great teams will have bad games and not do as well as advertised, but what makes them great is that they find a way to win.

For the Patriots to go undefeated in such a competitive league is very impressive.

Originally posted by TheGame17
the 78 steelers are the only team i see possibly beating the patriots.

none of those teams had the offense the patriots possess. Are you kidding me. The 94 niners had a phenomenal offense and a pretty damn good defense. They had the second best rush defense that year and had Deion Sanders and a pretty good secondary. The pats defense would break against Young and his offense. The 89 niners lit up the scoreboard in the postseason. They utterly dominated while the Pats only put up 21 against the Chargers.Trust me the Pats are great but couldnt beat any of the teams I listed.

Originally posted by TheGame17
the thing the patriots have done is that they've adjusted to situations in order to win. tom brady didn't have a good game at passing on Sunday, so they gave it to Maroney who took care of it.

i don't think any of the great teams could "blow-out" every single team that came in their way.
all great teams will have bad games and not do as well as advertised, but what makes them great is that they find a way to win.

For the Patriots to go undefeated in such a competitive league is very impressive. I do agree that it is impressive but the teams I named were better than them. Its that simple.

Originally posted by quanchi112
Are you kidding me. The 94 niners had a phenomenal offense and a pretty damn good defense. They had the second best rush defense that year and had Deion Sanders and a pretty good secondary. The pats defense would break against Young and his offense. The 89 niners lit up the scoreboard in the postseason. They utterly dominated while the Pats only put up 21 against the Chargers.Trust me the Pats are great but couldnt beat any of the teams I listed.

I understand, but the current league is competitive. You can't expect the patriots to score 40 to 50 points every single game.
DESPITE that, they still scored more points in a regular season than any other team in history.

Patriots have alot of weapons on the offense, such as the runnning with Maroney, deep pass to Moss, short pass to Welker, etc..
I agree their defense isn't on par, but its still one of the top defensive lines in the league.

I think they'd have enough to give those teams a run for their money.

tossup between the 78 steelers-heard a lot about them that they were dominating back then and 85 bears.

Originally posted by guy222
I'm biased....'99 Rams

the 99 Los Angeles Rams huh?

People worry too much about records and stats. Sure, perfect seasons are nice. But there's a reason the undefeated Dolphins never enter the conversation, and probably weren't even as good as others from their era (like the Steelers' SB teams).

I prefer just looking at a team. Like the Pats. Great offense, but not built for cold weather and the defense is decent but probably not even that good. I think a good pass rush and running game would not just beat them but embarrass them. Most of the teams on this list would beat them soundly. But it's because they have a good O-line, great receivers, and a league who would rather get beat slowly as they drop 8 in coverage than actually blitz, that they win.

Best all time? Not hardly. I think last year's Colts, the previous year's Steelers, hell the previous year's Pats...would all beat them at least 6/10.

85 Bears for me. I also like the 96 Packers and the 98 Broncos. Not mentioned enough in these sorts of conversations....and both would line up against the teams you normally hear (89 Niners, 70-something Steelers, 90-something Boys, etc.) and play fine.

I'll agree with you on that one.

The Pats do have some glaring weaknesses.

I always will figure that if the Pats were in a tougher division, they would atleast lost 1 game. It's really hard for a team that has two good teams in it to win all 6 games. Look at thier division, the worst team in the league and top 5 worst team in the league.

Originally posted by DigiMark007
People worry too much about records and stats. Sure, perfect seasons are nice. But there's a reason the undefeated Dolphins never enter the conversation, and probably weren't even as good as others from their era (like the Steelers' SB teams).

I prefer just looking at a team. Like the Pats. Great offense, but not built for cold weather and the defense is decent but probably not even that good. I think a good pass rush and running game would not just beat them but embarrass them. Most of the teams on this list would beat them soundly. But it's because they have a good O-line, great receivers, and a league who would rather get beat slowly as they drop 8 in coverage than actually blitz, that they win.

Best all time? Not hardly. I think last year's Colts, the previous year's Steelers, hell the previous year's Pats...would all beat them at least 6/10.

85 Bears for me. I also like the 96 Packers and the 98 Broncos. Not mentioned enough in these sorts of conversations....and both would line up against the teams you normally hear (89 Niners, 70-something Steelers, 90-something Boys, etc.) and play fine. For the most part I agree with you. People do worry to much about regular season records. Case and point. Do you remember the 99 Rams. Offense as clicking on all cylinders. They had an easy ass schedule for one which people tend to forget and two. They didnt really blow anyone out and didnt even score 20 in the nfc championship game. So when it mattered they still won but didnt even come close to dominating. I think the nfc championship game was 11-6 against the buc and the super bowl was decided by a yard.

Ok now when we swing back to the Pats. Sure their offense is all that but their defense lets teams drive on them all day. The offense slowed down dramatically against a Tomlinsonless Chargers team.

I think though digimark you left out some great niners teams. 84,89,94 comes to mind. 98 broncos I am impressed with you bringing them up because they were badass. Another team people forget about is the 91 redskins. They mauled teams as well. 86 Giants werent to shabby either.

Agreed quan. Though I try to leave out some of the obvious teams and attempt to give credit to those that I don't think get enough rep. But yeah, all those teams you mentioned are in the convo.

Originally posted by DigiMark007
Agreed quan. Though I try to leave out some of the obvious teams and attempt to give credit to those that I don't think get enough rep. But yeah, all those teams you mentioned are in the convo. Yes, I just wish some other people would realize that just because you own some cool records and are undefeated that it doesnt mean you are the most complete and greatest nfl team of all time.

Originally posted by quanchi112


The Giants are huge underdogs and if they win this could be the greatest upset in Nfl history.

While many would think that, I wouldn't.

Originally posted by BobbyD
Good points. ...is exactly why the Giants should win, and why I'm picking them to win. They are flat out, no doubt about it, no rocket science, so easy to see that a casual fan can tell are playing the better football. The Chargers w/o LT, Gates, and healthy Rivers, is like playing the Dolphins. And the Pats barely survived.

This is reminiscient to the Steelers going a couple of years ago when they beat 3 road teams and got hot at the right time to win the Super Bowl. The outcome "should" be no different.



I'm goooood.

Originally posted by BobbyD
While many would think that, I wouldn't. They were big underdogs. All the announcers and analysts already practically proclaimed New England the champs.

Originally posted by BobbyD


I'm goooood. I agree that the Pats and their win against the Chargers was laughable. I mean they won but the Chargers were without their best player...and the barely won. They were far from the greatest team of all time.

Originally posted by quanchi112
They were big underdogs. All the announcers and analysts already practically proclaimed New England the champs.

...which absolutely infuriates me as to why there are so many stupid f**ks in sports broadcasting, analysts, coaching and GM spots.

Believe me: there are many Joe Schmo civilians out there who can go toe to toe with a lot of these people, who only have these jobs for who they know--not what they know.

Originally posted by BobbyD
...which absolutely infuriates me as to why there are so many stupid f**ks in sports broadcasting, analysts, coaching and GM spots.

Believe me: there are many Joe Schmo civilians out there who can go toe to toe with a lot of these people, who only have these jobs for who they know--not what they know.

Agreed.

Backup QB with 80 IQ always gets the nod over 30-year fan who devotes every Sunday to getting the most out of each and every game.

The reason? People typically don't want to be "told" about football by someone who's never played at the professional level.

Preach it, brother.

clap

Originally posted by botankus
Agreed.

Backup QB with 80 IQ always gets the nod over 30-year fan who devotes every Sunday to getting the most out of each and every game.

The reason? People typically don't want to be "told" about football by someone who's never played at the professional level.


Which is arrogance on the fan side. The amount of work put in and amount of knowledge gained by even a backup QB with 80 IQ far far far dwarfs sitting on the couch with your boys watching the game every Sunday. You've seen players develop from rookies to Superstars on the flat screen, these people have lived with developing superstars. You've heard about lockerroom guys and such, they've seen them, first hand. You've learned through watching ESPN what makes a team great, they've played on these teams and seen it first hand.

Originally posted by BobbyD
...which absolutely infuriates me as to why there are so many stupid f**ks in sports broadcasting, analysts, coaching and GM spots.

Believe me: there are many Joe Schmo civilians out there who can go toe to toe with a lot of these people, who only have these jobs for who they know--not what they know. Good point, they usually are wrong. Nobody knows shit usually until the teams play it out. It was a huge upset though and you cant disagree with that. But the general feeling nationwide was that the Pats would win. We knew they stakced up well against the Pats but most thought the Pats would win in the end. Im happy as shit they didnt. Espn and the greatest of all time talk brainwashed a lot of people.

85 Bears. No contest

yeah I agree.its no contest.The 85 Bears.the 78 steelers would be a close second though.

Originally posted by Mr Parker
yeah I agree.its no contest.The 85 Bears.the 78 steelers would be a close second though. 89 niners would beat both of these teams.

Originally posted by Soops220
85 Bears. No contest Well, last year the analysts did this on espn and it came down to the 89 niners and the 85 bears. They sided with the 89 niners for obvious reasons.

i'm biased but i'll take the '92 cowboys, they had the number one offense and number one defense, the number three rated passer, number one rusher, and number one reciever, also they had like fourteen pro bowlers in one of the '90s seasons, i think it was '92 but don't take that as fact just yet, also they ousted a buffalo team that had gone and lost two superbowls prior.

and they repeated which i don't care who you are but thats tough to do, also you can argue that almost half of this team will go into the hall of fame eventually,

and look at who was on the team:

Troy aikman, bernie kosar, michael irvin, emmit smith, alvin harper, larry brown, ken norton jr., moose johnson, jay novacek, darren woodson, and in future years would get such names as deon sanders, charles haley, and herschel walker.


however i would also call it a tie with the '89 niners, because everything i listed about the cowboys, the niners have done and more, so unbiasedly i'd go with the niners, but you could make an argument that dallas is the best

It might just be that the average age of the forum is fairly low, but it's good that no one has really mentioned anyone before, say, 1980 as a legit contender for this. Dominant as some of them were (we'll use the Steelers as an example) they wouldn't stack up to modern standards. Would the 70's Steelers compete today? Absolutely. I feel like they could have a winning season in today's NFL. But would they be a dynasty? Not even close. Advances in the game, whether it's training techniques, steroids, etc. or improvements to strategy (playbooks were a fraction of what they are today), the game has just moved forward.

85 Bears are cliche, but I'll stay with them. Epic defense and running game = competitive and > most any team ever. I'll also reiterate the 98 Broncos and 96 Packers, who aren't mentioned enough (Pack had the best D in the league that year, for example, though most only remember Favre & Co.). I don't value stats so much as a simple eyeball test of teams, and seeing if they'd stack up.

i think the 07-08 patriots were the greatest team ever. despite the fluke that occured in the super bowl, they were the best.

Originally posted by TheGame17
i think the 07-08 patriots were the greatest team ever. despite the fluke that occured in the super bowl, they were the best.

They had very little run game and a suspect defense. The Giants showed that all you needed to do was run the ball and pressure Brady, and they were screwed. You don't think the 85 Bears could've done those two things better than the 07 Giants?! The most I'll grant them is best passing offense ever, and even that isn't certain.

It wasn't the 85 Bears that beat them, or the 90's Cowboys, or any other amazing team. It was the 07 Giants. I'm just happy they burst the bubble on what we could all see with our own eyes.

how could you put a team that lost the superbowl on the greatest single season team? i mean if you can get beat by a hot team then are you really a good team, or are the coaches the team.

for example, the browns versus the broncos, the browns were a great team, but they never beat the broncos in the post season during the late 80s because the broncos were the better team, and what i'm trying to say is the broncos walked into the game knowing they were going to win.

and about the steelers if they competed today would they not have the same advantages that players have today as well? chuck knoll may not have been an offensive powerhouse, but the defense was stacked and they had full rotations, this was during the 60 minute men, who played the entire game and they had rotations that snuffed the run out, and if you tried to pass mel blount and company were there to intercept, and the combination of Franco Harris and Rocky Bleier is just too much of a punch to stop consistently.

however, i'll agree that they would be like today's baltimore ravens (if they had Mcgahee and Lewis), bradshaw would not be as effective nowadays. he would turn out like a kyle boller or rex grossman. actually i would compare him to alex smith or at best a carson palmer.

Greatest single season NFL team in my opinion are the '72 Dophins

Originally posted by DigiMark007
It might just be that the average age of the forum is fairly low, but it's good that no one has really mentioned anyone before, say, 1980 as a legit contender for this. Dominant as some of them were (we'll use the Steelers as an example) they wouldn't stack up to modern standards. Would the 70's Steelers compete today? Absolutely. I feel like they could have a winning season in today's NFL. But would they be a dynasty? Not even close. Advances in the game, whether it's training techniques, steroids, etc. or improvements to strategy (playbooks were a fraction of what they are today), the game has just moved forward.

85 Bears are cliche, but I'll stay with them. Epic defense and running game = competitive and > most any team ever. I'll also reiterate the 98 Broncos and 96 Packers, who aren't mentioned enough (Pack had the best D in the league that year, for example, though most only remember Favre & Co.). I don't value stats so much as a simple eyeball test of teams, and seeing if they'd stack up. No the bears offense was too weak to stack up against the 89 niners. Their defense could easily shut down mcmahon and willie gault and clamp down the run. Bears running game was abysmal in the sbowl.

The three step drop that year would put up enough points against this blitz happy defense to get the win.

96 packers arent anywhere near the top imo.

Originally posted by BruceSkywalker
Greatest single season NFL team in my opinion are the '72 Dophins Not even in the top 7 imo.


Ill name more than a few teams that would have mopped the floor with them.
Well not all of these teams woul dhave mopped the floor wit them but I think the are all better than the 72 dolphins.

84 niners
89 niners
85 bears
94 niners
92 cowboys
98 broncos
03 pats
86 giants
91 redskins

Originally posted by quanchi112
No the bears offense was too weak to stack up against the 89 niners. Their defense could easily shut down mcmahon and willie gault and clamp down the run. Bears running game was abysmal in the sbowl.

Again, you're only counting the SB?? Why? Hell, the Bears dominated that SB. How is it that a curbstomp against teh Pats counts against them? They had one of the more feared running games ever.

As for the 96 Pack, they had the league's top defense that year, anchored by Reggie White in his prime. People forget that in the Brett Favre hype. Awesome pass offense, stifling D, and decent run game. Good coach, a feared returner whose name I forget (dude set the SB record in their win for return yards). All the pieces are there.

Also, you might want to tone down the Niners bias a bit. That list is reeking with it. It's ok to have 89 as the best ever, plenty do, but to have 3 of the top 4 is just humorously bad.

'03 Pats lost a game 31-0, scored 9 points against the Browns, and also needed a last-second FG to beat the Texans.

Even the '98 Falcons weren't that sloppy.

Originally posted by botankus
'03 Pats lost a game 31-0, scored 9 points against the Browns, and also needed a last-second FG to beat the Texans.

Even the '98 Falcons weren't that sloppy.

Truth.

One game does not a season make, but there's more than one indicator. If you're 14 point underdogs in the SB, even if you manage to win, it says something about that team's dominance (or lack of it).