Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

I have to agree with Jim on this one. That team should be ranked in the top 20 IMO. I also think they have to be one of, if not THE greatest team to not win the super bowl. 

Edited by DocLawless
  • Like (+1) 4
Posted

I haven’t seen the entire list, but I would have a hard time putting more than a handful of teams in the post-free agency, watered-down NFL ahead of them

  • Like (+1) 2
Posted (edited)
1 minute ago, ILBillsfan said:

The amount of stars on that team is crazy good.  I still remember the discussion about Thurman Thomas possibly winning the superbowl MVP he was that dominate.  

 

He would have won the MVP...nobody knew they could vote for a losing player, all the voters thought the player needed to come from the winning team.

Edited by matter2003
  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
9 minutes ago, DocLawless said:

I also think they have to be one of, if not THE greatest team to not with the super bowl. 

 

I hope no ex-players or fans have any pride in that. Losers lose etc.

Posted (edited)

I think 35 is pretty fair I guess coming from National media/NFL 

 

The 'super bowl win' barrier is so tough to crack in a 'better than' argument when it comes to anything in this league.  the fact that they are ranked better than so many Superbowl and Championship winners is pretty incredible.  I disagree that the Patriots in 2003 were better than the 90 Bills though

Edited by May Day 10
  • Like (+1) 2
Posted
48 minutes ago, Seven-N-Nine said:

 

I hope no ex-players or fans have any pride in that. Losers lose etc.

Why are you always like that?  You must be, outside of Jerry Sullivan, one of the most miserable people around.  Keep your negative shtick to yourself.  You have no pride whatsoever!

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Posted
1 hour ago, DocLawless said:

I have to agree with Jim on this one. That team should be ranked in the top 20 IMO. I also think they have to be one of, if not THE greatest team to not with the super bowl. 

That's an interesting question.  Is the 1990 Bills the best team since the merger not to win the Super Bowl? 

 

They would certainly have to be in the running and on the very short list of finalists for that, uh, honor.

 

 

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
1 minute ago, Nextmanup said:

That's an interesting question.  Is the 1990 Bills the best team since the merger not to win the Super Bowl? 

 

They would certainly have to be in the running and on the very short list of finalists for that, uh, honor.

 

 

I mean, the 18-1 Pats? Come on man.

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
1 hour ago, Rico said:

I haven’t seen the entire list, but I would have a hard time putting more than a handful of teams in the post-free agency, watered-down NFL ahead of them

Good point.

 

Also, I think #35 is too low for a simple reason: at that time, we were literally changing the game of football with one of the most lethal offenses seen to date.

 

That team was so electric and dangerous offensively that, in the AFC Championship game against the Raiders, the Raiders had to burn a timeout literally out of fear and panic, and simply not knowing what was happening to them.  

 

I'm not totally sure I've ever seen a T/O taken in a game of that importance, in that same way, since.

 

Any team that does that to their opponent with a revolutionary playing style has to be better than the 35th best team of all time IMO.

 

The raw innovation of the hurry up/K-Gun has to get more credit than that IMO.

 

 

 

Just now, BringBackOrton said:

I mean, the 18-1 Pats? Come on man.

Are you suggesting the 18-1 Pats are better?  A salary cap team with free agency to deal with?

 

You think that Pats team had 7 or 8 guys going to the HOF?

 

 

  • Like (+1) 2
Posted
4 minutes ago, Nextmanup said:

Good point.

 

Also, I think #35 is too low for a simple reason: at that time, we were literally changing the game of football with one of the most lethal offenses seen to date.

 

That team was so electric and dangerous offensively that, in the AFC Championship game against the Raiders, the Raiders had to burn a timeout literally out of fear and panic, and simply not knowing what was happening to them.  

 

I'm not totally sure I've ever seen a T/O taken in a game of that importance, in that same way, since.

 

Any team that does that to their opponent with a revolutionary playing style has to be better than the 35th best team of all time IMO.

 

The raw innovation of the hurry up/K-Gun has to get more credit than that IMO.

 

 

 

Are you suggesting the 18-1 Pats are better?  A salary cap team with free agency to deal with?

 

You think that Pats team had 7 or 8 guys going to the HOF?

 

 

We had 7-8 guys go to the HoF because we went to 4 Superbowls. Yeah, I think the 2007 Pats thrash the 93 Bills. Just like every SB matchup.

Posted

What I would do to have the '90 Bills play today's Patriots!  The Patriots would get crushed.  There is no way Brady and company could compete with the talent that team had.

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
2 hours ago, BringBackOrton said:

I mean, the 18-1 Pats? Come on man.

 

Come on what?   The 1990 Bills played 7 games against teams that won 12+ games in the regular season, including all 3 playoff games.   NE* played ONE in 2007, and ZERO in the playoffs.

 

Bills' division opponents in 1990 averaged 6.5 wins that year.

NE*'s division opponents in 2007 averaged 4.

 

2007 Pats* are the most overrated team ever.  They get mythical status because they didn't rest their starters in week 17 (when the GIants nearly beat them anyway)?

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted

Regardless of what happened in the Super Bowl, I would put the 2007 Patriots far ahead of the 2007 Giants on this list though. 2007 Giants were a mediocre team that got hot at the right time.

  • Like (+1) 2
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, KD in CA said:

 

Come on what?   The 1990 Bills played 7 games against teams that won 12+ games in the regular season, including all 3 playoff games.   NE* played ONE in 2007, and ZERO in the playoffs.

 

Bills' division opponents in 1990 averaged 6.5 wins that year.

NE*'s division opponents in 2007 averaged 4.

 

2007 Pats* are the most overrated team ever.  They get mythical status because they didn't rest their starters in week 17 (when the GIants nearly beat them anyway)?

The 2007 Pats had a point differential of 315. 1990 Bills had a differential of 165. That’s a large difference.

 

Brady and Moss set insane records that year.

Edited by BringBackOrton
  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
4 hours ago, BringBackOrton said:

I mean, the 18-1 Pats? Come on man.


it should have been quite obvious....

 

9 minutes ago, Phil The Thrill said:


Such an awesome team.  This group deserved a Super Bowl Championship


got taken to the cleaners by Parcells and Belichick and a Giants team that wanted it WAY MORE that day

 

×
×
  • Create New...