Weakest Super Bowls Champs

[LabattBlue]

How many days until the start of the season? Hurry please!

[BF_in_Indiana]

That honor would probably go to the 1970 Baltimore Colts.

[BillsGuyInMalta]

As good as that Ravens Defense in 2000 was, should they REALLY be proud over beating that Giants team?

[BuffOrange]

As good as that Ravens Defense in 2000 was, should they REALLY be proud over beating that Giants team?

364857[/snapback]

 

Yeah, but there defense was historically great + a decent running game.

Tampa's defense was very good - not as great - and they had an average QB, mediocre OL, average WR's and a lousy running game. I'm still trying to figure out how they won.

[KnightRider]

With expansion and free agency, I doubt any of the Pats teams could even beat the 1990 Dolphins.

 

When a team's biggest star is the coach, the talent pool is pretty diluted...

[Kelly the Dog]

Actually, all three of those could be true. It is diminished slightly, SURELY Bills fans would call it a dynasty, and who cares, lets get this season started.

 

The difference between the Pats being a dynasty, and the Bills being four-time losers, could easily be that Adam Viniteri made a 48 or so yard field goal by a foot with little time remaining, and Scott Norwood missed a 48 or so yard field goal by a foot with little time remaining.

[ganesh]

Yeah, but there defense was historically great + a decent running game. 

Tampa's defense was very good - not as great - and they had an average QB, mediocre OL, average WR's and a lousy running game.  I'm still trying to figure out how they won.

364992[/snapback]

 

Because they played the Raiders....a team run by the players rather than

the rookie coach.....that actually cost them the championship...