Kitos Corner : ('Patriots Dynasty?')
"The Pats are dominating in a very weak NFL - probably the weakest the NFL
has been in 30 years. Before this year, 5 consecutive Super Bowl champs did not make the playoffs the previous season. 03/04 - Pats, 02/03 - Tampa Bay,
has been in 30 years. Before this year, 5 consecutive Super Bowl champs did not make the playoffs the previous season. 03/04 - Pats, 02/03 - Tampa Bay,
01/02 - Pats, 00/01 - Baltimore; 99/00 - Rams.
The current NFL does not have a Super-Rivalry. The 60s was full of
Cowboys-Packers - 70s was Cowboys-Steelers - 80s was Niners, Bears, Giants,
and Skins. 90s was Niners-Cowboys, Redskins, and Giants. The NFC won18
consecutive Super Bowls. Remember the late 80s, early 90s games between
Dallas/Skins or Dallas/Niners. Those were like Super Bowls. I can't
remember there has been a game like that in a long time.
Look at the NFC East from the 90s. Dallas had to get through a solid NY
team (with Parcells for part of the 90s), a VERY solid Redskins team (with
Joe Gibbs), a tough Eagles team (with Buddy Ryan and Randall Cunningham).
But they had to do more then just get out of their division. They also had
to beat the Holmgren led Packers with a Brett Favre in his prime, a Niners
team that was with HOFer Steve Young and effective Jerry Rice in the NFC to
get to the SB. In the AFC, there was a solid KC team with Joe Montana, a
tough Oakland team, and a Buffalo team that owned the entire (weak) AFC.
There were some cup cakes that Dallas played (Arizona, New Orleans, Cincy,
Chicago, etc...) but the tougher teams were much tougher and a lot more
talented than the current teams. The teams 10 and 20 years ago had much
more depth (thanks to no salary cap) and put a much better team on the
field. It was more difficult to win more than 13 games a year. This decade
it seems like 5 teams a year do it with ease. Look at Pittsburgh. A rookie
QB and they lose 2 games.
Who is in New England's division? Miami (yikes), Buffalo (eewwww), and the
NY Jets (decent every other year). Rich Kotite could win the division
coaching the Pats. Also, who else in the league is championship material
the past 3 or 4 years? Pick one team from the past 4 years that you think
could compete the Cowboys, Niners, Bills, Packers, or Redskins of the late
80s, early 90s. I can't. The teams from this decade, like the Rams and
Colts, have a great but finesse offense and a weak defense. The standard
defense of the Boys or Niners of the 90s would squash those teams. They
sure did to the Oilers and Falcons when they were Run&Shoot'n it.
Another valid point is that Dallas reached 4 consecutive League
Championship games, going 3/4. It would have been 4/4 if Switzer didn't let
the team sleep walk through the first quarter and give up 21 points off of
turnovers in 6 minutes. I would think a solid dynasty would be at least the
top 2 or 3 teams in their conference for a stretch of 4 years. New England
didn't even make the playoffs two years ago. Not even top 6 of their
conference. If they're such a good team, how could they not even make the
playoffs that 1 year. Also, you would think a dynasty would have a streak
of winning their division. Dallas always managed to win the toughest
conference every year. New England maybe 2/4. At least one SB year they won
it as a wild card (I think) and then the year they didn't make the
playoffs.
Bottom line - Free Agency has weakened the level of competition in the NFL.
Gone are the days of the true dynasties of the
Packers-Steelers-Niners-Cowboys. Any team can make the playoffs in any year
and it has brought more fanfare to the league. I don't think the NFL is
upset about this fact. But the NFL has realized that they need these
dynasties for marketing. The league needs a team that will always be great.
All leagues need a one team that will be the "one to beat." MLB - Yankees -
NFL - Cowboys, Niners or (for now) the Pats; NBA - Lakers. And it seems
that the NFL has fallen in love with ESPN - and what city does ESPN love
more than anything - .... Boston. New England has received a lot of help
along the way to the 3 Lombardis. I won't go into it too deeply, but why
haven't teams tried to interview their coaches earlier - they obviously
got a lot of help against the Gruden-led Raiders in the snow bowl - and
Viniateri's remote control football.
The reason the Pats are successful is because they had a superior front
office that signed close-to-superstar players for average joe salaries for
long term, and held the leagues best coaching staff together. These are
the same reasons Dallas and S.F. were so successful too. Jim Walsh and
Seifert had Mike Shanahan, Mike Holmgren, Steve Marriuci, Ray Rhodes, etc..
as assistant coaches. Dallas had Dave Wannstedt, Norv Turner, Dave Campo,
and Butch Davis too as well as many others. All of the ones I listed went
on to become a HC somewhere else. It didn't hurt that they had Troy Aikman
and Joe Montana/Steve Young either.
But now it's over - Romeo Cremel (Defensive Coordinator) is going to
Cleveland and Charlie Weis (O.C.) is gone to Notre Dame. It's too bad
there aren't more teams trying to be as successful as these guys. Jerry
Jones should take some notes. Hopefully Parcells gets some balls and cleans
up his coaching staff. First step should be to fire Zimmer. The D
coordinator stinks IMO.” - Kitos
The current NFL does not have a Super-Rivalry. The 60s was full of
Cowboys-Packers - 70s was Cowboys-Steelers - 80s was Niners, Bears, Giants,
and Skins. 90s was Niners-Cowboys, Redskins, and Giants. The NFC won18
consecutive Super Bowls. Remember the late 80s, early 90s games between
Dallas/Skins or Dallas/Niners. Those were like Super Bowls. I can't
remember there has been a game like that in a long time.
Look at the NFC East from the 90s. Dallas had to get through a solid NY
team (with Parcells for part of the 90s), a VERY solid Redskins team (with
Joe Gibbs), a tough Eagles team (with Buddy Ryan and Randall Cunningham).
But they had to do more then just get out of their division. They also had
to beat the Holmgren led Packers with a Brett Favre in his prime, a Niners
team that was with HOFer Steve Young and effective Jerry Rice in the NFC to
get to the SB. In the AFC, there was a solid KC team with Joe Montana, a
tough Oakland team, and a Buffalo team that owned the entire (weak) AFC.
There were some cup cakes that Dallas played (Arizona, New Orleans, Cincy,
Chicago, etc...) but the tougher teams were much tougher and a lot more
talented than the current teams. The teams 10 and 20 years ago had much
more depth (thanks to no salary cap) and put a much better team on the
field. It was more difficult to win more than 13 games a year. This decade
it seems like 5 teams a year do it with ease. Look at Pittsburgh. A rookie
QB and they lose 2 games.
Who is in New England's division? Miami (yikes), Buffalo (eewwww), and the
NY Jets (decent every other year). Rich Kotite could win the division
coaching the Pats. Also, who else in the league is championship material
the past 3 or 4 years? Pick one team from the past 4 years that you think
could compete the Cowboys, Niners, Bills, Packers, or Redskins of the late
80s, early 90s. I can't. The teams from this decade, like the Rams and
Colts, have a great but finesse offense and a weak defense. The standard
defense of the Boys or Niners of the 90s would squash those teams. They
sure did to the Oilers and Falcons when they were Run&Shoot'n it.
Another valid point is that Dallas reached 4 consecutive League
Championship games, going 3/4. It would have been 4/4 if Switzer didn't let
the team sleep walk through the first quarter and give up 21 points off of
turnovers in 6 minutes. I would think a solid dynasty would be at least the
top 2 or 3 teams in their conference for a stretch of 4 years. New England
didn't even make the playoffs two years ago. Not even top 6 of their
conference. If they're such a good team, how could they not even make the
playoffs that 1 year. Also, you would think a dynasty would have a streak
of winning their division. Dallas always managed to win the toughest
conference every year. New England maybe 2/4. At least one SB year they won
it as a wild card (I think) and then the year they didn't make the
playoffs.
Bottom line - Free Agency has weakened the level of competition in the NFL.
Gone are the days of the true dynasties of the
Packers-Steelers-Niners-Cowboys. Any team can make the playoffs in any year
and it has brought more fanfare to the league. I don't think the NFL is
upset about this fact. But the NFL has realized that they need these
dynasties for marketing. The league needs a team that will always be great.
All leagues need a one team that will be the "one to beat." MLB - Yankees -
NFL - Cowboys, Niners or (for now) the Pats; NBA - Lakers. And it seems
that the NFL has fallen in love with ESPN - and what city does ESPN love
more than anything - .... Boston. New England has received a lot of help
along the way to the 3 Lombardis. I won't go into it too deeply, but why
haven't teams tried to interview their coaches earlier - they obviously
got a lot of help against the Gruden-led Raiders in the snow bowl - and
Viniateri's remote control football.
The reason the Pats are successful is because they had a superior front
office that signed close-to-superstar players for average joe salaries for
long term, and held the leagues best coaching staff together. These are
the same reasons Dallas and S.F. were so successful too. Jim Walsh and
Seifert had Mike Shanahan, Mike Holmgren, Steve Marriuci, Ray Rhodes, etc..
as assistant coaches. Dallas had Dave Wannstedt, Norv Turner, Dave Campo,
and Butch Davis too as well as many others. All of the ones I listed went
on to become a HC somewhere else. It didn't hurt that they had Troy Aikman
and Joe Montana/Steve Young either.
But now it's over - Romeo Cremel (Defensive Coordinator) is going to
Cleveland and Charlie Weis (O.C.) is gone to Notre Dame. It's too bad
there aren't more teams trying to be as successful as these guys. Jerry
Jones should take some notes. Hopefully Parcells gets some balls and cleans
up his coaching staff. First step should be to fire Zimmer. The D
coordinator stinks IMO.” - Kitos
posted by Jake @ 3:01 PM
0 comments
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home