ThurmasThoman Posted January 21, 2013 Posted January 21, 2013 I hate the pats* however their accomplishments are undeniable unless your a conspiracy theorist. since the patriots last superbowl win, the steelers have 2 superbowls and the giants have 2 superbowls the patriots owned the first part of the 2000s, for sure. ANNNNND that was a decade ago. the rest of the football world has moved on--are bills fans ready to yet?
Punch Posted January 21, 2013 Posted January 21, 2013 since the patriots last superbowl win, the steelers have 2 superbowls and the giants have 2 superbowls the patriots owned the first part of the 2000s, for sure. ANNNNND that was a decade ago. the rest of the football world has moved on--are bills fans ready to yet? Does that tarnish their run though? Or does it merely mean that arguably it's over?
boyst Posted January 21, 2013 Posted January 21, 2013 so who's "era" is this? If the Giants made the playoffs this year you could argue that it was their "dynasty." There are not supreme teams in the NFL that get it done, the best team in the NFL is - sadly - the Patriots. they still beat teams, they still knock teams out of the playoffs.
stinky finger Posted January 21, 2013 Posted January 21, 2013 Between this, and your last comment about the AFCE being gimmes.... There's a certain degree of self loathing in being a bills fan for you, eh? By your standards we've been unsuccessful at best and seemingly pathetic most of the time by your own measure. Ummmm....that would be correct. Pretty obvious, no? Love to watch the Pats lose... Still they have owned the Bills. Which is why you love to see them lose. It would suck to have success measured only by Super Bowl wins. That is how THEY are measured.
disco Posted January 21, 2013 Posted January 21, 2013 Basically what they've done is allow for a hell of a lot of "yeah, buts" when talking about how good they've been. Must drive Patriots fans crazy.
buckeyemike Posted January 21, 2013 Posted January 21, 2013 Three Super Bowl wins in four years. No one else has done that. So, yes, they have to be considered a dynasty from 2001-2004. However, since then the Pats* have had more than their share of playoff failures. The best night I ever saw on this board was five years ago, and we all know what that was. Tom Brady is 36, Belichick is 60 and will be 61 before the season starts. I think the long, slow decline of the New England Patriots began tonight.
stinky finger Posted January 21, 2013 Posted January 21, 2013 That is just complete and utter nonsense. Both the Jets and Dolphins had numerous 9-10-11 win seasons in the last 11 years since the Patriots started their run. Yeah.......they've been challenged yearly by their division opponents. Tom Brady is 36, Belichick is 60 and will be 61 before the season starts. I think the long, slow decline of the New England Patriots began tonight. Hopefully not toooo long, eh?
jjmac Posted January 21, 2013 Posted January 21, 2013 Not long ago, the *Pats seemed to have one of the all-time great dynasties of all-time. Since then, they posted a perfect regular season, only to lose in the SB. Got caught in the spygate scandal. Lost another SB to the Giants and now have lost the AFC title game at home to the Ravens. How do you think history will judge the Belichick/Brady era? Will they win another SB? Discuss... I'll be happy just to see them lose their strangle hold on the AFC East.
Punch Posted January 21, 2013 Posted January 21, 2013 That is how THEY are measured. Yes, because they are a great franchise that consistently wins. Don't you want to be measured that way?
Mark Vader Posted January 21, 2013 Posted January 21, 2013 Their defense continues to let them down. Excellent point. We can talk about the cheating all day long. Putting that aside for now, when the Patriots lost all those veteran players on defense during their Super Bowl winning years, it greatly affected the team. They still have not replaced guys like Ty Law, Tedy Bruschi, Rodney Harrison, & Richard Seymour.
PromoTheRobot Posted January 21, 2013 Posted January 21, 2013 Excellent point. We can talk about the cheating all day long. Putting that aside for now, when the Patriots lost all those veteran players on defense during their Super Bowl winning years, it greatly affected the team. They still have not replaced guys like Ty Law, Tedy Bruschi, Rodney Harrison, & Richard Seymour. They never replaced Randy Moss either. And now Randy has a shot at another ring. Bellicheat hasn't hit all home runs on personnel moves either. PTR
stinky finger Posted January 21, 2013 Posted January 21, 2013 Yes, because they are a great franchise that consistently wins. Don't you want to be measured that way? Yes. Yes I do.
B-Man Posted January 21, 2013 Posted January 21, 2013 (edited) Three Super Bowl wins in four years. No one else has done that. XXVII Jan. 31, 1993 Rose Bowl Dallas 52, Buffalo 17 XXVIII Jan. 30, 1994 Georgia Dome (Atlanta) Dallas 30, Buffalo 13 XXIX Jan. 29, 1995 Joe Robbie Stadium San Francisco 49, San Diego 26 XXX Jan. 28, 1996 Sun Devil Stadium (Tempe, Ariz.) Dallas 27, Pittsburgh 17 Edited January 21, 2013 by B-Man
Punch Posted January 21, 2013 Posted January 21, 2013 Yes. Yes I do. Me too. XXVII Jan. 31, 1993 Rose Bowl Dallas 52, Buffalo 17 XXVIII Jan. 30, 1994 Georgia Dome (Atlanta) Dallas 30, Buffalo 13 XXIX Jan. 29, 1995 Joe Robbie Stadium San Francisco 49, San Diego 26 XXX Jan. 28, 1996 Sun Devil Stadium (Tempe, Ariz.) What's this now?
buckeyemike Posted January 21, 2013 Posted January 21, 2013 (edited) XXVII Jan. 31, 1993 Rose Bowl Dallas 52, Buffalo 17 XXVIII Jan. 30, 1994 Georgia Dome (Atlanta) Dallas 30, Buffalo 13 XXIX Jan. 29, 1995 Joe Robbie Stadium San Francisco 49, San Diego 26 XXX Jan. 28, 1996 Sun Devil Stadium (Tempe, Ariz.) Oops, you're right. One of two teams to do it. The Cowboys won Super Bowls 27, 28, and 30. It's late and I'm too lazy to type Roman Numerals. Edited January 21, 2013 by TheFourHorsemen
Punch Posted January 21, 2013 Posted January 21, 2013 Oops, you're right. One of two teams to do it. Aaah, he didn't list them correctly, but he's right.
BRAWNDO Posted January 21, 2013 Posted January 21, 2013 Three Super Bowl wins in four years. No one else has done that. So, yes, they have to be considered a dynasty from 2001-2004. However, since then the Pats* have had more than their share of playoff failures. The best night I ever saw on this board was five years ago, and we all know what that was. Tom Brady is 36, Belichick is 60 and will be 61 before the season starts. I think the long, slow decline of the New England Patriots began tonight. They still have the clearest path to the AFC East Title next year, but eventually they will slow down
Best Player Available Posted January 21, 2013 Posted January 21, 2013 Three Super Bowl wins in four years. No one else has done that. So, yes, they have to be considered a dynasty from 2001-2004. However, since then the Pats* have had more than their share of playoff failures. The best night I ever saw on this board was five years ago, and we all know what that was. Tom Brady is 36, Belichick is 60 and will be 61 before the season starts. I think the long, slow decline of the New England Patriots began tonight. Pretty much the same comments about the imminent decline,That people wrote after they lost the super bowl last year. This year they lost the AFC championship. I would not bet today, that the pats* won't be there next year. Deep in the playoffs. And sweeping at least one AFCE team next year.
Mark Vader Posted January 21, 2013 Posted January 21, 2013 They never replaced Randy Moss either. And now Randy has a shot at another ring. Bellicheat hasn't hit all home runs on personnel moves either. PTR That is true as well. However, the Patriots offense continues to thrive with soon-to-be ex-Patriot Wes Welker, Rob Gronkowski, Aaron Hernandez & Brandon Lloyd. Whereas the defense at many times looks suspect. Remember the Bills put up 31 points on them the second time they played this year.
Recommended Posts