What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

2005 Steelers... (1 Viewer)

Raider Nation

Devil's Advocate
Below is a list of the last 20 teams who won the Super Bowl before Pittsburgh. By my estimation, the '05 Steelers were better than maybe two of those teams, and I have bolded the two teams. Am I being fair? Do you dispute this assertion?

Super Bowl 39 - Patriots

Super Bowl 38 - Patriots

Super Bowl 37 - Bucs

Super Bowl 36 - Patriots

Super Bowl 35 - Ravens

Super Bowl 34 - Rams

Super Bowl 33 - Broncos

Super Bowl 32 - Broncos

Super Bowl 31 - Packers

Super Bowl 30 - Cowboys

Super Bowl 29 - 49ers

Super Bowl 28 - Cowboys

Super Bowl 27 - Cowboys

Super Bowl 26 - Redskins

Super Bowl 25 - Giants

Super Bowl 24 - 49ers

Super Bowl 23 - 49ers

Super Bowl 22 - Redskins

Super Bowl 21 - Giants

Super Bowl 20 - Bears

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Raider Nation

Devil's Advocate
BTW, definitely positively not fishing.

The Steelers won this year, and they did so in convincing fashion. They deserve to be the champions. Not hating on Steeltown -- just asking a question. :shrug:

 

f360spyder

Footballguy
Not completely sure if they're the weakest, but I think the entire season of below-average officiating won't help their mark in history

 

jonnyincali

Footballguy
Below is a list of the last 20 teams who won the Super Bowl before Pittsburgh. By my estimation, the '05 Steelers were better than maybe two of those teams, and I have bolded the two teams. Am I being fair? Do you dispute this assertion?

Super Bowl 39 - Patriots

Super Bowl 38 - Patriots

Super Bowl 37 - Bucs

Super Bowl 36 - Patriots

Super Bowl 35 - Ravens

Super Bowl 34 - Rams

Super Bowl 33 - Broncos

Super Bowl 32 - Broncos

Super Bowl 31 - Packers

Super Bowl 30 - Cowboys

Super Bowl 29 - 49ers

Super Bowl 28 - Cowboys

Super Bowl 27 - Cowboys

Super Bowl 26 - Redskins

Super Bowl 25 - Giants

Super Bowl 24 - 49ers

Super Bowl 23 - 49ers

Super Bowl 22 - Redskins

Super Bowl 21 - Giants

Super Bowl 20 - Bears
are you sure they are not better than the Trent Dilfer-led Ravens? and Im guessing that the Bucs are better since they dismantled Da Raiders.
 

Raider Nation

Devil's Advocate
Below is a list of the last 20 teams who won the Super Bowl before Pittsburgh. By my estimation, the '05 Steelers were better than maybe two of those teams, and I have bolded the two teams. Am I being fair? Do you dispute this assertion?

Super Bowl 39 - Patriots

Super Bowl 38 - Patriots

Super Bowl 37 - Bucs

Super Bowl 36 - Patriots

Super Bowl 35 - Ravens

Super Bowl 34 - Rams

Super Bowl 33 - Broncos

Super Bowl 32 - Broncos

Super Bowl 31 - Packers

Super Bowl 30 - Cowboys

Super Bowl 29 - 49ers

Super Bowl 28 - Cowboys

Super Bowl 27 - Cowboys

Super Bowl 26 - Redskins

Super Bowl 25 - Giants

Super Bowl 24 - 49ers

Super Bowl 23 - 49ers

Super Bowl 22 - Redskins

Super Bowl 21 - Giants

Super Bowl 20 - Bears
are you sure they are not better than the Trent Dilfer-led Ravens? and Im guessing that the Bucs are better since they dismantled Da Raiders.
Not only aren't they better than the Ravens, but I have Baltimore's 2000 squad as one of the BEST Super Bowl champions of the last 20 years. I've lost as much money as anyone here over the past several years, but one HUGE score I made was on Super Bowl XXXV. After seeing Baltimore's defense completely rape the Raiders in Oakland in the AFC Championship game, there was no question in my mind that I would never see easier money than when the opening line of Baltimore -3 vs. the Giants in the S.B. was posted. There was no way that Giants team was going to move the ball on the Ravens. The number was nice and low beacuse the G-men were fresh off a 41-0 home pounding of the heartless Vikings.I have never seen an easier wager before or since.

As for the 2002 Bucs team, IMO they would have beaten the '05 Steelers.

 

Ghost Rider

Footballguy
I am not sure I would say they are the worst of the past 20 years, but they are definitely near the bottom. Their run through the AFC playoffs was awesome, but their unimpressive Super Bowl win combined with the fact that they were a 6th seeded wild card does not help their cause. Does it really matter, though? I mean, they are the champs right now and that is the most important thing.

And for what it's worth, I think the 2000 Ravens and 2002 Bucs would have both dismantled the 2005 Steelers in the Super Bowl. Pittsburgh would have been lucky to score against those defenses the way both were playing.

 

Raider Nation

Devil's Advocate
Does it really matter, though? I mean, they are the champs right now and that is the most important thing.
Of course it doesn't matter. I already conceded that. It's merely a question.What else do we have to do around here until April 29th... :D

 

Ghost Rider

Footballguy
Does it really matter, though? I mean, they are the champs right now and that is the most important thing.
Of course it doesn't matter. I already conceded that. It's merely a question.What else do we have to do around here until April 29th... :D
Oh, I know. Mine was more of a rhetorical question than anything. And this thread will inevitably aggravate some of the diehard Steelers fans, so that will be fun to watch. :D
 

Frenchy Fuqua

Footballguy
:fishing: ...but I've got some time to kill so I'll bite. Don't confuse the sloppiness of the Super Bowl with the Steelers being a weak Super Bowl winner.

1) No team in the history of the NFL had ever won 3 road playoff games prior to winning the Super Bowl.

2) Consider the teams they defeated in the playoffs and their record at the time :

at Cincinnati (11-5)

at Indy (14-2)

at Denver (14-3)

vs. Seattle (15-3)

That's 4 wins, three on the road againt teams that combined to go 54-13 (.806) prior to losing to the Steelers. No other team in NFL history can match that postseason run.

3) The Steelers are a combined 31-7 over the past 2 seasons, tops in the NFL(postseason incluced).

Top 5 Records 2004-2005

Pittsburgh 31-7

Indy 27-8

NE 28-9

Denver 24-11

Seattle 24-12

4) The Steelers are a different team with Roethlisberger at the helm. They were 13-3 in games he started this year and are 27-4 in games he's started the past two seasons, 3-3 in games he hasn't. If Roethlisberger had been healthy they'd have likely gone 13-3 this year, winning at home vs. Jax (Maddox started) and at Balt (Maddox started). The Steelers loss at Indy came on Roethlisberger's first game back after injury. The result was much different when he returned to Indy in January.

5) In their playoff run the Steelers went up against the 1st (Sea), 2nd (Indy), 4th (Cincy) and 7th (Den) highest scoring offenses in the NFL. Those four teams averaged 26.7 points per game in 64 regular season games. In four postseason games against the Steelers D, none of these teams broke 20 points. They averaged 15.5 points, 11 below their season average.

6) The Steelers Offense went up against the 2nd (Indy), 4th (Den), 7th (Sea) and 22nd (Cin) best defenses in terms of fewest points allowed. Those four teams allowed an average of 17.6 points per game in 64 regular season games but in four games against the Steelers averaged 26. 8 points allowed, more than 9 points over their average.

7) The Steelers could easily have won all four of their postseason games by more than 10 points. If Polamalu's dropped INT is ruled a catch the Steelers maintain their 11 point lead and probably add to it. If Bettis scores from the 1 instead of fumbling the Steelers go up 10. The Steelers won their other three playoff games by 14, 17 and 11...pretty impressive.

8) Finally, the Steelers made this tremendous run in a year where the AFC was clearly the dominant conference...proven by the fact that they as the AFCs #6 seed were favored in the Super Bowl against the #1 seed from the NFC.

 

Chase Stuart

Footballguy
Hey RN,

Where would you rank the 2004 Steelers on this list?
Slightly ahead of the '68 Jets.
Thanks for the helpful response.Chase
You were serious? :confused: If so, they would be last on the list.I only listed S.B. winners. The '04 Pittsburgh team matters little.
Yes, I was serious.Assuming the '04 Steelers won the Super Bowl where would you rank them?

Or just placing that team among this list of Super Bowl winners, where would they go?

Which team was better, the '04 or '05 team and why?

 

Raider Nation

Devil's Advocate
Hey RN,

Where would you rank the 2004 Steelers on this list?
Slightly ahead of the '68 Jets.
Thanks for the helpful response.Chase
You were serious? :confused: If so, they would be last on the list.I only listed S.B. winners. The '04 Pittsburgh team matters little.
Yes, I was serious.Assuming the '04 Steelers won the Super Bowl where would you rank them?

Or just placing that team among this list of Super Bowl winners, where would they go?

Which team was better, the '04 or '05 team and why?
That's a difficult hypothetical to carry out, because I didn't SEE them win it all.The '04 team (15-1) was clearly a better regular season team, but the '05 team won when it mattered most. I'd have to think on your questions a bit longer.

 

Stillers Jr.

Footballguy
:fishing: ...but I've got some time to kill so I'll bite. Don't confuse the sloppiness of the Super Bowl with the Steelers being a weak Super Bowl winner.

1) No team in the history of the NFL had ever won 3 road playoff games prior to winning the Super Bowl.

2) Consider the teams they defeated in the playoffs and their record at the time :

at Cincinnati (11-5)

at Indy (14-2)

at Denver (14-3)

vs. Seattle (15-3)

That's 4 wins, three on the road againt teams that combined to go 54-13 (.806) prior to losing to the Steelers. No other team in NFL history can match that postseason run.

3) The Steelers are a combined 31-7 over the past 2 seasons, tops in the NFL(postseason incluced).

Top 5 Records 2004-2005

Pittsburgh 31-7

Indy 27-8

NE 28-9

Denver 24-11

Seattle 24-12

4) The Steelers are a different team with Roethlisberger at the helm. They were 13-3 in games he started this year and are 27-4 in games he's started the past two seasons, 3-3 in games he hasn't. If Roethlisberger had been healthy they'd have likely gone 13-3 this year, winning at home vs. Jax (Maddox started) and at Balt (Maddox started). The Steelers loss at Indy came on Roethlisberger's first game back after injury. The result was much different when he returned to Indy in January.

5) In their playoff run the Steelers went up against the 1st (Sea), 2nd (Indy), 4th (Cincy) and 7th (Den) highest scoring offenses in the NFL. Those four teams averaged 26.7 points per game in 64 regular season games. In four postseason games against the Steelers D, none of these teams broke 20 points. They averaged 15.5 points, 11 below their season average.

6) The Steelers Offense went up against the 2nd (Indy), 4th (Den), 7th (Sea) and 22nd (Cin) best defenses in terms of fewest points allowed. Those four teams allowed an average of 17.6 points per game in 64 regular season games but in four games against the Steelers averaged 26. 8 points allowed, more than 9 points over their average.

7) The Steelers could easily have won all four of their postseason games by more than 10 points. If Polamalu's dropped INT is ruled a catch the Steelers maintain their 11 point lead and probably add to it. If Bettis scores from the 1 instead of fumbling the Steelers go up 10. The Steelers won their other three playoff games by 14, 17 and 11...pretty impressive.

8) Finally, the Steelers made this tremendous run in a year where the AFC was clearly the dominant conference...proven by the fact that they as the AFCs #6 seed were favored in the Super Bowl against the #1 seed from the NFC.
Well done Frenchy...I couldn't have done better myself.

I have never seen a championship team that more people try to discredit as much as the 2005 Steelers. If it's not the refs "handing" them the SB, it's the sloppy play...everyone conveniently leaves out the Indy win and the sheer and utter domination of the Broncos....and Roethlisbergers 101.7 2005 playoff passer rating...

 
Last edited by a moderator:

T Love

Footballguy
They definitely deserve to be counted near or at the bottom of the list since they wouldn't have won the Super Bowl without the 12th man they had on the field throughout the game wearing stripes. All of the other teams on the list won a fairly officiated game.

 

Buckeyedawgs

Footballguy
They would have never won the first playoff game if they hadn't knocked out Palmer's knee. And they got away with that too.

I don't know about worst team in history but luckiest!

I have always hated them. And always will. I wanted to punch that idiot ref thru the TV when he stood there over Palmer dumbfounded after the dude blew out Palmers knee 5 seconds after he thru the ball!! Then next play I was even more pissed as Cincy got a flag on a perfect sideling hit!

Why do refs fear COWHEAD? He is nothing but a slobering punk too!

 

Frenchy Fuqua

Footballguy
They would have never won the first playoff game if they hadn't knocked out Palmer's knee. And they got away with that too.

I don't know about worst team in history but luckiest!

I have always hated them. And always will. I wanted to punch that idiot ref thru the TV when he stood there over Palmer dumbfounded after the dude blew out Palmers knee 5 seconds after he thru the ball!! Then next play I was even more pissed as Cincy got a flag on a perfect sideling hit!

Why do refs fear COWHEAD? He is nothing but a slobering punk too!
Who dey think gonna beat dem Bengals? :ptts: :towelwave:

 

cracKer

Shawn Culcasi
I don't know about worst team in history but luckiest!
I think it's safe to say that every Super Bowl champ was very lucky to some degree. It takes help in many different forms to bring home the hardware.
 

Jous

Footballguy
I'm not saying that the 2005 Steelers were among the best SB champs recently, but they certainly weren't bad.....they were the best team in the NFL in 2005, so that means SOMETHING.

But the main thing I want to ask is, why is this Steelers team receiving such crap about being lucky with officiating and/or opposing team's injuries? (I.E. Palmer in the playoffs)?

Need I remind you of these recent things that aren't talked about anymore.......

The 2000 Ravens won the AFCCG over Oakland after knocking Rich Gannon out with an absolutely blatant cheap shot....much worse than what happened to Palmer.

The 2001 Patriots were handed the divisional playoff win, they shouldn't have even BEEN in the SuperBowl. Not to mention that while they were playing the Rams, there was a strong case of referee favoritism for the Pats. Look it up, there's tons of websites with video clips of blatant personal fouls and holding by the Pats that they were never flagged on.

The 2003 Patriots very likely should NOT have gotten past Indy in the AFCCG. They committed at least 5 huge pass interferences at crucial times, and were never flagged. The league even admitted that were were "several pass interference flags that should have been thrown" later on, if you remember.

....and all that is just off the top of my head from recent times. I'm sure there's many similiar cases further in the past.

The moral of the story? Nearly every single SuperBowl champ has some luck, and/or officiating mistakes may be made in their favor. You can't discredit the teams because of it. Pittsburgh is the defending champion, and they absolutely deserve to be the defending champs.

 

Jous

Footballguy
So basically, if we're going to start throwing around ideas of discrediting champions because of POSSIBLE referee mistakes or their opponents' injuries, then we may as well dethrone probably 1/2 of every SuperBowl winner ever.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

cracKer

Shawn Culcasi
The 2001 Patriots were handed the divisional playoff win, they shouldn't have even BEEN in the SuperBowl. Not to mention that while they were playing the Rams, there was a strong case of referee favoritism for the Pats. Look it up, there's tons of websites with video clips of blatant personal fouls and holding by the Pats that they were never flagged on.

The 2003 Patriots very likely should NOT have gotten past Indy in the AFCCG. They committed at least 5 huge pass interferences at crucial times, and were never flagged. The league even admitted that were were "several pass interference flags that should have been thrown" later on, if you remember.
I like the way you think :thumbup:
 

purestrength

Footballguy
The 2003 Patriots very likely should NOT have gotten past Indy in the AFCCG. They committed at least 5 huge pass interferences at crucial times, and were never flagged. The league even admitted that were were "several pass interference flags that should have been thrown" later on, if you remember.
Believe me, I'll never forget the travesty of officiating that scarred that game.
 

Chris Smith

The Head Goon!
Worst Super Bowl team...

Best Super Bowl team...

Who Cares? They still get to call themselves "Super Bowl Champs"

For what it is worth, they are likely not in the top half of teams that have won over that span but you aren't up against the teams that won in other years but rather just the teams during your own run.

Worst or best though that run they made through the playoffs on the road against the best the AFC had to offer was outstanding. They deserve major props for that.

 

BassNBrew

IBL Representative
They're better then the Pats team that got lucky McNabb got tired.

They're better then the Pats team that got lucky Kasay kicked the ball OB.

They're better then the Pats team that got lucky on the bogus tuck play.

 

The Reverend

Footballguy
:fishing:   ...but I've got some time to kill so I'll bite.  Don't confuse the sloppiness of the Super Bowl with the Steelers being a weak Super Bowl winner.

1) No team in the history of the NFL had ever won 3 road playoff games prior to winning the Super Bowl.

2) Consider the teams they defeated in the playoffs and their record at the time :

at Cincinnati  (11-5)

at Indy (14-2)

at Denver (14-3)

vs. Seattle (15-3)

That's 4 wins, three on the road againt teams that combined to go 54-13 (.806) prior to losing to the Steelers.  No other team in NFL history can match that postseason run.

3) The Steelers are a combined 31-7 over the past 2 seasons, tops in the NFL(postseason incluced). 

Top 5 Records 2004-2005

Pittsburgh 31-7

Indy 27-8

NE 28-9

Denver 24-11

Seattle 24-12

4) The Steelers are a different team with Roethlisberger at the helm.  They were 13-3 in games he started this year and are 27-4 in games he's started the past two seasons, 3-3 in games he hasn't.  If Roethlisberger had been healthy they'd have likely gone 13-3 this year, winning at home vs. Jax (Maddox started) and at Balt (Maddox started).  The Steelers loss at Indy came on Roethlisberger's first game back after injury.  The result was much different when he returned to Indy in January.

5) In their playoff run the Steelers went up against the 1st (Sea), 2nd (Indy), 4th (Cincy) and 7th (Den) highest scoring offenses in the NFL.  Those four teams averaged 26.7 points per game in 64 regular season games.  In four postseason games against the Steelers D, none of these teams broke 20 points.  They averaged 15.5 points, 11 below their season average. 

6) The Steelers Offense went up against the 2nd (Indy), 4th (Den), 7th (Sea) and 22nd (Cin) best defenses in terms of fewest points allowed.  Those four teams allowed an average of 17.6 points per game in 64 regular season games but in four games against the Steelers averaged 26. 8 points allowed, more than 9 points over their average.

7) The Steelers could easily have won all four of their postseason games by more than 10 points.  If Polamalu's dropped INT is ruled a catch the Steelers maintain their 11 point lead and probably add to it.  If Bettis scores from the 1 instead of fumbling the Steelers go up 10.  The Steelers won their other three playoff games by 14, 17 and 11...pretty impressive.

8) Finally, the Steelers made this tremendous run in a year where the AFC was clearly the dominant conference...proven by the fact that they as the AFCs #6 seed were favored in the Super Bowl against the #1 seed from the NFC.
Well done Frenchy...I couldn't have done better myself.

I have never seen a championship team that more people try to discredit as much as the 2005 Steelers. If it's not the refs "handing" them the SB, it's the sloppy play...everyone conveniently leaves out the Indy win and the sheer and utter domination of the Broncos....and Roethlisbergers 101.7 2005 playoff passer rating...
Seriously, to say the 2005-2006 Steelers ranked as one of the worst SB teams recently means that the NFL as a whole was one of the worst NFLs in recent history. They dominated the very best teams in the AFC in the playoffs on the road. It's a shame that the NFC didn't bring much competition to the party. If they had, then this question may not have even been considered.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

H.K.

Footballguy
:fishing: ...but I've got some time to kill so I'll bite. Don't confuse the sloppiness of the Super Bowl with the Steelers being a weak Super Bowl winner.

Consider the teams they defeated in the playoffs and their record at the time :

at Cincinnati (11-5)

at Indy (14-2)

at Denver (14-3)

vs. Seattle (15-3)

That's 4 wins, three on the road againt teams that combined to go 54-13 (.806) prior to losing to the Steelers. No other team in NFL history can match that postseason run.
This is really all that needs to be said. The 2005 title run was impressive because they had to beat the absolute best competition to do it. No other team has had as difficult a slate to get it done, so that alone puts them out of conversation as one of the worst teams to win it all.
 

AhrnCityPahnder

Yinz-o-riffic
Seriously, to say the 2005-2006 Steelers ranked as one of the worst SB teams recently means that the NFL as a whole was one of the worst NFLs in recent history.
This, in a nutshell was what I came to post. Within the final 8 weeks of the season (incl. post season), they defeated the AFC's #1, 2 and 3 seeds and the NFC's #1 and #2 seeds. There were a couple borderline calls that went their way in the Superbowl, but they overcame a call that was WAY worse than anything in the superbowl in the AFCDG (Polamalu's overturned INT vs Indy). I know you can apply this logic to any year/SB champ in the NFL -- but there were some very good teams this year -- no one argues that. Pittsburgh beat them all. It's not like this year there was one powerhouse team that everyone feared and Pit avoided them in the playoffs....they plowed straight through the cream of the crop.

I've never been very good at the imaginary "The 1957 Browns would have killed the '1996 Packers" guessing games, but there's only a handful of the past 20 SB winners that I think would have blown the '05 Steelers out. They could have either won or had close games with ~15 of those teams. So no, I don't think they're the worst. But I'm a homer, of course. So take it for what it's worth.

 

Ghost Rider

Footballguy
I don't think anyone is denying that Pittsburgh's run through the AFC playoffs wasn't impressive, but I do not like the implication that it somehow makes them better Super Bowl champs than teams who dominated enough in the regular season to ensure themselves "easier" opponents in the playoffs.

Frenchy, two things:

1) What Pittsburgh would have done in the games if Roethlisberger hadn't missed them is irrelevant, unless you want us to go back and look at every other Super Bowl winner and add wins to them, too, because of a key injury. Teams deal with injuries every year. It is part of the sport.

2) Pittsburgh's 2004 record means nothing in this discussion. We are talking how good of a Super Bowl champion the Steelers are compared to other recent winners. We are not talking about the best two year runs.

 

AhrnCityPahnder

Yinz-o-riffic
1) What Pittsburgh would have done in the games if Roethlisberger hadn't missed them is irrelevant, unless you want us to go back and look at every other Super Bowl winner and add wins to them, too, because of a key injury. Teams deal with injuries every year. It is part of the sport.
It is, without a doubt. But to say that a team losing their franchise QB falls under the same umbrella of "oh, that team had injuries" As the team who had to plug in a backup RG for a few games -- I'm not buying it. Hell, ask Cincy fans their opinion on this. Losing your QB is critical and often devastating. Not the same is said for a team with other random injuries. How many Superbowl champs playout without their QB for 4 games? I'll go look now. If anyone else wants to look at other skill positions with injuries for those teams, knock yourselves out.
 

AhrnCityPahnder

Yinz-o-riffic
OK, so for teams that won the superbowl in the last 20 yrs, and missed their starting QB due to injury (I'm not talking about mid year QB controversies like the 87 Skins with shroeder and williams, or the 200 Ravens with banks and dillhole, etc):

2002 Brad Johnson did not start in three games (this may be due to QB controversy with Shaun King and Rob Johnson -- I don't remember and don't want to exclude it without being sure)

1998 Elway did not start in three games.

1992 Aikman missed two games.

1990 Phil Simms missed two games

Joe Montana missed

2 games in 1988

3 games in 1989

That is it. No Superbowl-winning team in this window we're looking at, prior to the Steelers, ever lost their starting QB for as many games during the regular season that the 05 Steelers did. So if you're going to knock them for their regular season record, just keep that in mind.

 

AhrnCityPahnder

Yinz-o-riffic
I don't think anyone is denying that Pittsburgh's run through the AFC playoffs wasn't impressive, but I do not like the implication that it somehow makes them better Super Bowl champs than teams who dominated enough in the regular season to ensure themselves "easier" opponents in the playoffs.
Also, for the record, I'm not arguing that this makes them better, either. I'm just saying it doesn't concretely mean they are worse.
 

Noahs Troopers

Footballguy
In the salary cap era, get ready for many weak champions. I do agree with Pitt being one of the weaker winners, but I do credit their complete domination in the playoffs and superbowl, they beat all of the best teams and did it convincingly, Pittsburgh deserved their trophy cause they earned it.

 

Ghost Rider

Footballguy
Okay then, if we are going to give Pittsburgh extra credit for their regular season because they were without Roethlisberger for four games (and were 2-2 in those games with the two losses coming against a team they barely beat at home WITH Roethlisberger and against another playoff team), then shouldn't we take away a little credit for the playoff win over the Bengals since they were without Palmer for the entire game except one play? You cannot have it one way and not the other.

Note: Elway technically only missed three games in '98, but he barely played in the week 10 game against San Diego (he attempted 3 passes) and did not play much in the week 3 game against Oakland either.

And for the record, of the teams listed in the first post in this thread, the following Super Bowl champions are all, IMO, clearly better than the 2005 Steelers:

Super Bowl 39 - Patriots

Super Bowl 38 - Patriots

Super Bowl 37 - Bucs

Super Bowl 35 - Ravens

Super Bowl 33 - Broncos

Super Bowl 32 - Broncos

Super Bowl 31 - Packers

Super Bowl 29 - 49ers

Super Bowl 28 - Cowboys

Super Bowl 27 - Cowboys

Super Bowl 26 - Redskins

Super Bowl 24 - 49ers

Super Bowl 23 - 49ers

Super Bowl 22 - Redskins

Super Bowl 21 - Giants

Super Bowl 20 - Bears

So, the way I see it, they are one of the bottom five of the last 21 years.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

jetpack

Footballguy
In the salary cap era, get ready for many weak champions. I do agree with Pitt being one of the weaker winners, but I do credit their complete domination in the playoffs and superbowl, they beat all of the best teams and did it convincingly, Pittsburgh deserved their trophy cause they earned it.
Interesting thread. So, what do we mean by "weaker"? No one has tried to define it so it's basically anyone's personal interpretation of why one Superbowl winner is "weaker" than any other Superbowl winner. That brings in alot of bias (i.e. Steelers were lucky), alot of selective memory (i.e I don't remember the officiating being this bad), and alot of "gut feeling". But not alot of concrete evidence for comparing any of these teams. I'd prefer someone pick a stronger criteria to use if they're going to make these kinds of blanket comparisons. Something like Offensive + Defensive ranking or whatever and go with that. Just my two cents.
 

bostonfred

Footballguy
This, in a nutshell was what I came to post. Within the final 8 weeks of the season (incl. post season), they defeated the AFC's #1, 2 and 3 seeds and the NFC's #1 and #2 seeds. There were a couple borderline calls that went their way in the Superbowl, but they overcame a call that was WAY worse than anything in the superbowl in the AFCDG (Polamalu's overturned INT vs Indy).
The Steelers couldn't beat the Patriots. Denver did the Steelers a huge favor. Denver was the team that most people felt was the most likely to beat the Pats this year, and even then, the Steelers were fortunate to see the Broncos get some calls in that game. Look, there's nothing wrong with admitting that the NFL decided to reward Rooney for his decades of hard work with a Superbowl.

 

Godsbrother

Footballguy
They would have never won the first playoff game if they hadn't knocked out Palmer's knee. And they got away with that too.

I don't know about worst team in history but luckiest!

I have always hated them. And always will. I wanted to punch that idiot ref thru the TV when he stood there over Palmer dumbfounded after the dude blew out Palmers knee 5 seconds after he thru the ball!! Then next play I was even more pissed as Cincy got a flag on a perfect sideling hit!

Why do refs fear COWHEAD? He is nothing but a slobering punk too!
Obviously you are looking through striped glasses but I really don't understand why Bengals fan automatically assume they would have won if Palmer hadn't gotten hurt. Palmer completed his first pass for 60 yards before he got hurt but if you remember he looked pretty impressive on his first 2 drives when the Bengals lost at home to the Steelers by 14 points earlier in the season. In fact Palmer played his worst game of the season against the Steelers in Cincy.

And don't forget that Kitna twice gave the Bengals two-digit leads but the defense blew them. It wasn't the lack of Palmer that lost the game as much as poor play by the defense.

Would the Bengals have beaten the Steelers if Palmer had not gotten hurt? We'll never know. But to automatically to say they would have looks like an extreme case of homerism.

 

jetpack

Footballguy
Here's one criteria:

Total Offensive and Defensive Yards Ranking through Free Agency period.

Team OFF DEF

Steelers 16 4

Pats 8 9

Pats 18 7

Bucs 24 1

Pats 19 24

Ravens 16 1

Rams 1 7

Broncos 3 12

Broncos 1 4

Packers 5 1

Cowboys 7 8

49ers 1 8

 

Frenchy Fuqua

Footballguy
I recall many similar threads about the Patriots after they won their first Super Bowl. Three Super Bowls later they are a dynasty. Hard to predict that type of success for any team but the Steelers are in position to make a similar run. They have only 2 starters over the age of 30: center Jeff Hartings and ILB James Farrior. Their two best players, Roethlisberger and Polamalu are under 25. Outside of CB Ike Taylor all of their other starters are locked up through 2007. If you didn't like the Steelers last year, give them another shot in 2006.

 

fred_1_15301

Footballguy
This, in a nutshell was what I came to post.  Within the final 8 weeks of the season (incl. post season),  they defeated the AFC's #1, 2 and 3 seeds and the NFC's #1 and #2 seeds.  There were a couple borderline calls that went their way in the Superbowl, but they overcame a call that was WAY worse than anything in the superbowl in the AFCDG (Polamalu's overturned INT vs Indy). 
The Steelers couldn't beat the Patriots. Denver did the Steelers a huge favor. Denver was the team that most people felt was the most likely to beat the Pats this year, and even then, the Steelers were fortunate to see the Broncos get some calls in that game. Look, there's nothing wrong with admitting that the NFL decided to reward Rooney for his decades of hard work with a Superbowl.
The most obvious :fishing: trip ever. But I am looking forward to see the reaction to this one :D
 

Godsbrother

Footballguy
The Steelers couldn't beat the Patriots. Denver did the Steelers a huge favor. Denver was the team that most people felt was the most likely to beat the Pats this year, and even then, the Steelers were fortunate to see the Broncos get some calls in that game.

Look, there's nothing wrong with admitting that the NFL decided to reward Rooney for his decades of hard work with a Superbowl.
First off, the Steelers absolutely crushed the Broncos, the same team that beat the Patriots by 14 points the week before. I love how everyone knows who the winner would be in hypothetical games. Too bad you aren't as good predicting the outcome of real games, you could make a killing in Vegas.Secondly, it was really nice of the other NFL playoff teams (including the Pats) to follow their scripts in order for the NFL to reward Rooney. :thumbup:

 

AhrnCityPahnder

Yinz-o-riffic
This, in a nutshell was what I came to post. Within the final 8 weeks of the season (incl. post season), they defeated the AFC's #1, 2 and 3 seeds and the NFC's #1 and #2 seeds. There were a couple borderline calls that went their way in the Superbowl, but they overcame a call that was WAY worse than anything in the superbowl in the AFCDG (Polamalu's overturned INT vs Indy).
The Steelers couldn't beat the Patriots. Denver did the Steelers a huge favor. Denver was the team that most people felt was the most likely to beat the Pats this year, and even then, the Steelers were fortunate to see the Broncos get some calls in that game. Look, there's nothing wrong with admitting that the NFL decided to reward Rooney for his decades of hard work with a Superbowl.
:fishy:
 

bostonfred

Footballguy
1) No team in the history of the NFL had ever won 3 road playoff games prior to winning the Super Bowl.
That's because good teams usually aren't six seeds.
2) Consider the teams they defeated in the playoffs and their record at the time :

at Cincinnati (11-5)

at Indy (14-2)

at Denver (14-3)

vs. Seattle (15-3)

That's 4 wins, three on the road againt teams that combined to go 54-13 (.806) prior to losing to the Steelers. No other team in NFL history can match that postseason run.
They beat Cinci when they took out the quarterback at the start of the game. That wasn't an 11-5 team they beat. EVERYONE beats Indy in the playoffs. It's just a matter of who gets there first. And the refs gave them the win against Seattle. But otherwise, that's a pretty impressive run.
3) The Steelers are a combined 31-7 over the past 2 seasons, tops in the NFL(postseason incluced).

Top 5 Records 2004-2005

Pittsburgh 31-7

Indy 27-8

NE 28-9

Denver 24-11

Seattle 24-12
That's a nice way of saying, remember last year when they had a good team? I think most people would agree that the 2004 Steelers were better than the 2005 version, except Roethlisberger's playoff run.
4) The Steelers are a different team with Roethlisberger at the helm. They were 13-3 in games he started this year and are 27-4 in games he's started the past two seasons, 3-3 in games he hasn't. If Roethlisberger had been healthy they'd have likely gone 13-3 this year, winning at home vs. Jax (Maddox started) and at Balt (Maddox started). The Steelers loss at Indy came on Roethlisberger's first game back after injury. The result was much different when he returned to Indy in January.
Are you bragging about beating Manning in the playoffs? And forgetting that the Steelers tried to give the game away? Polamalu intercepted that ball. But he shouldn't have lost control of it, either. And I don't think I have to remind you about Bettis's fumble on the goal line trying to get a score they didn't need.
5) In their playoff run the Steelers went up against the 1st (Sea), 2nd (Indy), 4th (Cincy) and 7th (Den) highest scoring offenses in the NFL. Those four teams averaged 26.7 points per game in 64 regular season games. In four postseason games against the Steelers D, none of these teams broke 20 points. They averaged 15.5 points, 11 below their season average.
That's strange. I would have sworn I saw Seattle score another touchdown.
6) The Steelers Offense went up against the 2nd (Indy), 4th (Den), 7th (Sea) and 22nd (Cin) best defenses in terms of fewest points allowed. Those four teams allowed an average of 17.6 points per game in 64 regular season games but in four games against the Steelers averaged 26. 8 points allowed, more than 9 points over their average.
The Bengals were deflated after losing their QB on the first pass play, the Colts almost won the game on defense, the Broncos had been beaten up the previous week, and let's not talk about the officiating.
7) The Steelers could easily have won all four of their postseason games by more than 10 points. If Polamalu's dropped INT is ruled a catch the Steelers maintain their 11 point lead and probably add to it. If Bettis scores from the 1 instead of fumbling the Steelers go up 10. The Steelers won their other three playoff games by 14, 17 and 11...pretty impressive.
If Bettis scored from the 1 instead of fumbling it? Do you think the Steelers are the only team that would have benefitted from an actual turnover getting turned into a score? What about the Patriots/Broncos game with the phantom pass interference in the end zone? Or a sure TD for the Seahawks allegedly being out of bounds? This is not a good game for a Steelers fan to play.
8) Finally, the Steelers made this tremendous run in a year where the AFC was clearly the dominant conference...proven by the fact that they as the AFCs #6 seed were favored in the Super Bowl against the #1 seed from the NFC.
The AFC being the dominant conference in a weak NFL doesn't mean that the Steelers were a top all-time team. The Broncos were led by Plummer, who has never had an interceptionless playoff game. Cinci lost their QB in a playoff game. The Colts were led by a Manning. The Patriots were hurt. The Jaguars weren't a playoff team by week 18. The Redskins got in because the Eagles screwed up the Owens situation. The Panthers were between running backs. The Bucs were overrated. The Bears had no quarterback. The Giants had another Manning. And the Seahawks got jobbed by the refs. Every team had issues. The Steelers were fortunate to survive the season healthier than the rest of them, and catch some lucky bounces along the way.

 

Ghost Rider

Footballguy
Would the Bengals have beaten the Steelers if Palmer had not gotten hurt? We'll never know. But to automatically to say they would have looks like an extreme case of homerism.
Very true. Just like we do not know what the Steelers record would have been had Roethlisberger played every game last season, so the only thing we can do is evaluate them based on their 11-5 wild card record and their playoff run resulting in a Super Bowl win.
First off, the Steelers absolutely crushed the Broncos, the same team that beat the Patriots by 14 points the week before. I love how everyone knows who the winner would be in hypothetical games. Too bad you aren't as good predicting the outcome of real games, you could make a killing in Vegas.
I agree that it is fruitless to speculate on games that never happened, but it goes without saying that some teams matchup better with others. Denver matches up a lot better against New England than Pittsburgh does, so you cannot say Pit beat Denver and Denver beat NE, so that automatically means Pitt would have beaten NE. The same can apply to Denver and Indy. Denver does not matchup well vs. Indy, so I do not agree with those who said that Denver would have beaten Indy had the Colts somehow beaten Pitt in the divisional round.
 

fred_1_15301

Footballguy
1) No team in the history of the NFL had ever won 3 road playoff games prior to winning the Super Bowl.
That's because good teams usually aren't six seeds.
2) Consider the teams they defeated in the playoffs and their record at the time :

at Cincinnati  (11-5)

at Indy (14-2)

at Denver (14-3)

vs. Seattle (15-3)

That's 4 wins, three on the road againt teams that combined to go 54-13 (.806) prior to losing to the Steelers.  No other team in NFL history can match that postseason run.
They beat Cinci when they took out the quarterback at the start of the game. That wasn't an 11-5 team they beat. EVERYONE beats Indy in the playoffs. It's just a matter of who gets there first. And the refs gave them the win against Seattle. But otherwise, that's a pretty impressive run.
3) The Steelers are a combined 31-7 over the past 2 seasons, tops in the NFL(postseason incluced). 

Top 5 Records 2004-2005

Pittsburgh 31-7

Indy 27-8

NE 28-9

Denver 24-11

Seattle 24-12
That's a nice way of saying, remember last year when they had a good team? I think most people would agree that the 2004 Steelers were better than the 2005 version, except Roethlisberger's playoff run.
4) The Steelers are a different team with Roethlisberger at the helm.  They were 13-3 in games he started this year and are 27-4 in games he's started the past two seasons, 3-3 in games he hasn't.  If Roethlisberger had been healthy they'd have likely gone 13-3 this year, winning at home vs. Jax (Maddox started) and at Balt (Maddox started).  The Steelers loss at Indy came on Roethlisberger's first game back after injury.  The result was much different when he returned to Indy in January.
Are you bragging about beating Manning in the playoffs? And forgetting that the Steelers tried to give the game away? Polamalu intercepted that ball. But he shouldn't have lost control of it, either. And I don't think I have to remind you about Bettis's fumble on the goal line trying to get a score they didn't need.
5) In their playoff run the Steelers went up against the 1st (Sea), 2nd (Indy), 4th (Cincy) and 7th (Den) highest scoring offenses in the NFL.  Those four teams averaged 26.7 points per game in 64 regular season games.  In four postseason games against the Steelers D, none of these teams broke 20 points.  They averaged 15.5 points, 11 below their season average. 
That's strange. I would have sworn I saw Seattle score another touchdown.
6) The Steelers Offense went up against the 2nd (Indy), 4th (Den), 7th (Sea) and 22nd (Cin) best defenses in terms of fewest points allowed.  Those four teams allowed an average of 17.6 points per game in 64 regular season games but in four games against the Steelers averaged 26. 8 points allowed, more than 9 points over their average.
The Bengals were deflated after losing their QB on the first pass play, the Colts almost won the game on defense, the Broncos had been beaten up the previous week, and let's not talk about the officiating.
7) The Steelers could easily have won all four of their postseason games by more than 10 points.  If Polamalu's dropped INT is ruled a catch the Steelers maintain their 11 point lead and probably add to it.  If Bettis scores from the 1 instead of fumbling the Steelers go up 10.  The Steelers won their other three playoff games by 14, 17 and 11...pretty impressive.
If Bettis scored from the 1 instead of fumbling it? Do you think the Steelers are the only team that would have benefitted from an actual turnover getting turned into a score? What about the Patriots/Broncos game with the phantom pass interference in the end zone? Or a sure TD for the Seahawks allegedly being out of bounds? This is not a good game for a Steelers fan to play.
8) Finally, the Steelers made this tremendous run in a year where the AFC was clearly the dominant conference...proven by the fact that they as the AFCs #6 seed were favored in the Super Bowl against the #1 seed from the NFC.
The AFC being the dominant conference in a weak NFL doesn't mean that the Steelers were a top all-time team. The Broncos were led by Plummer, who has never had an interceptionless playoff game. Cinci lost their QB in a playoff game. The Colts were led by a Manning. The Patriots were hurt. The Jaguars weren't a playoff team by week 18. The Redskins got in because the Eagles screwed up the Owens situation. The Panthers were between running backs. The Bucs were overrated. The Bears had no quarterback. The Giants had another Manning. And the Seahawks got jobbed by the refs. Every team had issues. The Steelers were fortunate to survive the season healthier than the rest of them, and catch some lucky bounces along the way.
Uh--Isn't this the case for all superbowl winners? :rolleyes:
 

fred_1_15301

Footballguy
1) No team in the history of the NFL had ever won 3 road playoff games prior to winning the Super Bowl.
That's because good teams usually aren't six seeds.
2) Consider the teams they defeated in the playoffs and their record at the time :

at Cincinnati  (11-5)

at Indy (14-2)

at Denver (14-3)

vs. Seattle (15-3)

That's 4 wins, three on the road againt teams that combined to go 54-13 (.806) prior to losing to the Steelers.  No other team in NFL history can match that postseason run.
They beat Cinci when they took out the quarterback at the start of the game. That wasn't an 11-5 team they beat. EVERYONE beats Indy in the playoffs. It's just a matter of who gets there first. And the refs gave them the win against Seattle. But otherwise, that's a pretty impressive run.
3) The Steelers are a combined 31-7 over the past 2 seasons, tops in the NFL(postseason incluced). 

Top 5 Records 2004-2005

Pittsburgh 31-7

Indy 27-8

NE 28-9

Denver 24-11

Seattle 24-12
That's a nice way of saying, remember last year when they had a good team? I think most people would agree that the 2004 Steelers were better than the 2005 version, except Roethlisberger's playoff run.
4) The Steelers are a different team with Roethlisberger at the helm.  They were 13-3 in games he started this year and are 27-4 in games he's started the past two seasons, 3-3 in games he hasn't.  If Roethlisberger had been healthy they'd have likely gone 13-3 this year, winning at home vs. Jax (Maddox started) and at Balt (Maddox started).  The Steelers loss at Indy came on Roethlisberger's first game back after injury.  The result was much different when he returned to Indy in January.
Are you bragging about beating Manning in the playoffs? And forgetting that the Steelers tried to give the game away? Polamalu intercepted that ball. But he shouldn't have lost control of it, either. And I don't think I have to remind you about Bettis's fumble on the goal line trying to get a score they didn't need.
5) In their playoff run the Steelers went up against the 1st (Sea), 2nd (Indy), 4th (Cincy) and 7th (Den) highest scoring offenses in the NFL.  Those four teams averaged 26.7 points per game in 64 regular season games.  In four postseason games against the Steelers D, none of these teams broke 20 points.  They averaged 15.5 points, 11 below their season average. 
That's strange. I would have sworn I saw Seattle score another touchdown.
6) The Steelers Offense went up against the 2nd (Indy), 4th (Den), 7th (Sea) and 22nd (Cin) best defenses in terms of fewest points allowed.  Those four teams allowed an average of 17.6 points per game in 64 regular season games but in four games against the Steelers averaged 26. 8 points allowed, more than 9 points over their average.
The Bengals were deflated after losing their QB on the first pass play, the Colts almost won the game on defense, the Broncos had been beaten up the previous week, and let's not talk about the officiating.
7) The Steelers could easily have won all four of their postseason games by more than 10 points.  If Polamalu's dropped INT is ruled a catch the Steelers maintain their 11 point lead and probably add to it.  If Bettis scores from the 1 instead of fumbling the Steelers go up 10.  The Steelers won their other three playoff games by 14, 17 and 11...pretty impressive.
If Bettis scored from the 1 instead of fumbling it? Do you think the Steelers are the only team that would have benefitted from an actual turnover getting turned into a score? What about the Patriots/Broncos game with the phantom pass interference in the end zone? Or a sure TD for the Seahawks allegedly being out of bounds? This is not a good game for a Steelers fan to play.
8) Finally, the Steelers made this tremendous run in a year where the AFC was clearly the dominant conference...proven by the fact that they as the AFCs #6 seed were favored in the Super Bowl against the #1 seed from the NFC.
The AFC being the dominant conference in a weak NFL doesn't mean that the Steelers were a top all-time team. The Broncos were led by Plummer, who has never had an interceptionless playoff game. Cinci lost their QB in a playoff game. The Colts were led by a Manning. The Patriots were hurt. The Jaguars weren't a playoff team by week 18. The Redskins got in because the Eagles screwed up the Owens situation. The Panthers were between running backs. The Bucs were overrated. The Bears had no quarterback. The Giants had another Manning. And the Seahawks got jobbed by the refs. Every team had issues. The Steelers were fortunate to survive the season healthier than the rest of them, and catch some lucky bounces along the way.
The jealousy and homerism in your posts are so blatant it's actually comical......
 

bostonfred

Footballguy
The jealousy and homerism in your posts are so blatant it's actually comical......
I'll buy homerism, but what do I have to be jealous of? In fact, I almost feel bad for Steelers fans. Pats fans went through the same kinds of things in 2001. Fortunately, it turns out that they were undeniably one of the all time great teams. The Steelers may turn out to be the same. I've said before I have a lot of respect for Roethlisberger, and I think he could turn out to be a very good quarterback when all is said and done. And I was happy to see Bettis win one. I'm just saying I can understand why people might question it.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top