Do the Patriots make history with 16-0... (1 Viewer)

[Jason Wood]

In as much as any NFL stat, game our record "matters" (which if we're being honest the NFL doesn't mean much of anything in the grand scheme of things); OF COURSE going 16-0 "matters." As others have said, if they win the Super Bowl they will be squarely among the "best teams ever" arguments for decades to come; and will cement the Brady/Belichick legacy as among the true all-time greats. If they lose in the playoffs it will "matter" because it will be a "failure" of epic proportions.

 

[David Yudkin]

NE would be a great Arena football team, maybe the best ever. But in terms of great NFL teams they are not. The current NFL is pretty watered down with only a handful of "good" teams. This NE team would have been lucky to finish .500 in the NFC East back in the '80s/early '90s. I believe Jerry Glanville coined the phrase "chuck and duck".

While you are obviously overstating it quite a bit, the fact that 18 of the 32 teams are under .500 going into the last week of the season definitely gives merit to the argument that the Patriots have taken advantage of what is a pretty weak league overall this year; playing in a division where the others teams are a combined 11-34 has certainly helped, too.

You could make the argument that most of the time the league has a ton of mediocre teams or that a great team played in a mediocre division . . .For example, here are the records of some other great teams and the combined records of their division rivals.72 Dolphins 19-36-1 (.348)76 Raiders 20-36 (.357)78 Steelers 22-26 (.458) 81 49ers 17-31(.354)84 49ers 21-27 (.438)85 Bears 24-40 (.375)86 Giants 28-34-2 (.453)94 49ers 18-30 (.375)95 Cowboys 25-39 (.391)So these teams weren't good because their divisional foes were weak?

 

[Maroney=Speed]

NE would be a great Arena football team, maybe the best ever. But in terms of great NFL teams they are not. The current NFL is pretty watered down with only a handful of "good" teams. This NE team would have been lucky to finish .500 in the NFC East back in the '80s/early '90s. I believe Jerry Glanville coined the phrase "chuck and duck".

While you are obviously overstating it quite a bit, the fact that 18 of the 32 teams are under .500 going into the last week of the season definitely gives merit to the argument that the Patriots have taken advantage of what is a pretty weak league overall this year; playing in a division where the others teams are a combined 11-34 has certainly helped, too.

You could make the argument that most of the time the league has a ton of mediocre teams or that a great team played in a mediocre division . . .For example, here are the records of some other great teams and the combined records of their division rivals.72 Dolphins 19-36-1 (.348)76 Raiders 20-36 (.357)78 Steelers 22-26 (.458) 81 49ers 17-31(.354)84 49ers 21-27 (.438)85 Bears 24-40 (.375)86 Giants 28-34-2 (.453)94 49ers 18-30 (.375)95 Cowboys 25-39 (.391)So these teams weren'r good because their divisional foes were weak?

Nice.What about the 2001-Ravens,1981-Raiders, 2000-Rams and Denver 1998.Thanks

 

[FUBAR]

if they lose in the playoffs after going undefeated in the season, the fans will still think they made some sort of history and they will say - BEST ever-

Going undefeated in the playoffs isn't impressive, it happens every year.

 

[David Yudkin]

Nice.What about the 2001-Ravens,1981-Raiders, 2000-Rams and Denver 1998.Thanks

What about them?2000 Ravens 36-44 (.450)1980 Raiders 31-33 (.484)1999 Rams 20-44 (.313)1998 Broncos 28-36 (.438)

 

[Maroney=Speed]

Nice.What about the 2001-Ravens,1981-Raiders, 2000-Rams and Denver 1998.Thanks

What about them?2000 Ravens 36-44 (.450)1980 Raiders 31-33 (.484)1999 Rams 20-44 (.313)1998 Broncos 28-36 (.438)

Yep, what I thought. Raiders were a wild card team has was both the Ravens and Denver. I would think the 1980 Raiders might have the highest at .484. Now I ask is the 1980 Raiders the best team ever?

 

[Darth Cheney]

At all my fellow "Pats fans" who would try to spin a 16-0 regular season schedule with a loss in the playoffs as something great. What do you think the players would rather have? Fact is, if they lose on the playoffs ; this season will be more infamous than famous. Part of that I place on the high expectations many people have put on this very,very good football team...but alot of it I place on the overwhelming assault of "sports reporting" on this team. The media (particularly ESPN) has lifted this team to Mount Olympus hieghts and would now like nothing more than to see it fall. Why? Because it is the better story for the majority oftheir viewers...

 

[David Yudkin]

Here are the combined records of all divisional teams from all the Super Bowl winners . . .

75 Steelers 24-18 (.571)

69 Chiefs 29-24-3 (.545)

02 Bucs 25-22-1 (.531)

88 49ers 25-23 (.521)

91 Redskins 33-31 (.516)

90 Giants 32-32 (.500)

79 Steelers 24-24 (.500)

82 Redskins 18-18 (.500)

80 Raiders 31-33 (.484)

05 Steelers 23-25 (.479)

04 Patriots 23-25 (.479)

89 49ers 23-25 (.479)

01 Patriots 30-34 (.469)

93 Cowboys 30-34 (.469)

92 Cowboys 30-34 (.469)

83 Raiders 30-34 (.469)

77 Cowboys 26-30 (.464)

66 Packers 36-42-6 (.464)

06 Colts 22-26 (.458)

03 Patriots 22-26 (.458)

78 Steelers 22-26 (.458)

86 Giants 28-34-2 (.453)

97 Broncos 29-35 (.453)

00 Ravens 36-44 (.450)

87 Redskins 27-33 (.450)

98 Broncos 28-36 (.438)

71 Cowboys 23-30-3 (.438)

84 49ers 21-27 (.438)

74 Steelers 18-24 (.429)

67 Packers 15-21-6 (.429)

96 Packers 27-37 (.422)

73 Dolphins 22-34 (.393)

95 Cowboys 25-39 (.391)

85 Bears 24-40 (.375)

94 49ers 18-30 (.375)

76 Raiders 20-36 (.357)

81 49ers 17-31(.354)

72 Dolphins 19-36-1 (.348)

70 Colts 19-36-1 (.348)

68 Jets 17-37-2 (.321)

99 Rams 20-44 (.313)

07 Patriots 11-34 (.245)

The Patriots would certainly rank at the botom of the list if that percentage were to hold and the Pats went on to win this year. My point still holds that in most seasons teams would not have great divisional foes (only 5 times had division rivals had a winning record).

 

[Phurfur]

Here are the combined records of all divisional teams from all the Super Bowl winners . . .

75 Steelers 24-18 (.571)

69 Chiefs 29-24-3 (.545)

02 Bucs 25-22-1 (.531)

88 49ers 25-23 (.521)

91 Redskins 33-31 (.516)

90 Giants 32-32 (.500)

79 Steelers 24-24 (.500)

82 Redskins 18-18 (.500)

80 Raiders 31-33 (.484)

05 Steelers 23-25 (.479)

04 Patriots 23-25 (.479)

89 49ers 23-25 (.479)

01 Patriots 30-34 (.469)

93 Cowboys 30-34 (.469)

92 Cowboys 30-34 (.469)

83 Raiders 30-34 (.469)

77 Cowboys 26-30 (.464)

66 Packers 36-42-6 (.464)

06 Colts 22-26 (.458)

03 Patriots 22-26 (.458)

78 Steelers 22-26 (.458)

86 Giants 28-34-2 (.453)

97 Broncos 29-35 (.453)

00 Ravens 36-44 (.450)

87 Redskins 27-33 (.450)

98 Broncos 28-36 (.438)

71 Cowboys 23-30-3 (.438)

84 49ers 21-27 (.438)

74 Steelers 18-24 (.429)

67 Packers 15-21-6 (.429)

96 Packers 27-37 (.422)

73 Dolphins 22-34 (.393)

95 Cowboys 25-39 (.391)

85 Bears 24-40 (.375)

94 49ers 18-30 (.375)

76 Raiders 20-36 (.357)

81 49ers 17-31(.354)

72 Dolphins 19-36-1 (.348)

70 Colts 19-36-1 (.348)

68 Jets 17-37-2 (.321)

99 Rams 20-44 (.313)

07 Patriots 11-34 (.245)

The Patriots would certainly rank at the botom of the list if that percentage were to hold and the Pats went on to win this year. My point still holds that in most seasons teams would not have great divisional foes (only 5 times had division rivals had a winning record).

And only once were they below .313. Although I don't think this matters you have to be able to see the disparity here.

 

[David Yudkin]

And only once were they below .313. Although I don't think this matters you have to be able to see the disparity here.

I'm not suggesting that the Pats faced a powerhouse divisional schedule, but depending on the outcomes this week the Pats could have beaten 7 playoff teams this year (IND, SD, PIT, DAL with NYG, CLE, and WAS still in question).

 

[Maroney=Speed]

Here are the combined records of all divisional teams from all the Super Bowl winners . . .75 Steelers 24-18 (.571)69 Chiefs 29-24-3 (.545)02 Bucs 25-22-1 (.531)88 49ers 25-23 (.521)91 Redskins 33-31 (.516)90 Giants 32-32 (.500)79 Steelers 24-24 (.500)82 Redskins 18-18 (.500)80 Raiders 31-33 (.484)05 Steelers 23-25 (.479)04 Patriots 23-25 (.479)89 49ers 23-25 (.479)01 Patriots 30-34 (.469)93 Cowboys 30-34 (.469)92 Cowboys 30-34 (.469)83 Raiders 30-34 (.469)77 Cowboys 26-30 (.464)66 Packers 36-42-6 (.464)06 Colts 22-26 (.458)03 Patriots 22-26 (.458)78 Steelers 22-26 (.458) 86 Giants 28-34-2 (.453)97 Broncos 29-35 (.453)00 Ravens 36-44 (.450)87 Redskins 27-33 (.450)98 Broncos 28-36 (.438)71 Cowboys 23-30-3 (.438)84 49ers 21-27 (.438)74 Steelers 18-24 (.429)67 Packers 15-21-6 (.429)96 Packers 27-37 (.422)73 Dolphins 22-34 (.393)95 Cowboys 25-39 (.391)85 Bears 24-40 (.375)94 49ers 18-30 (.375)76 Raiders 20-36 (.357)81 49ers 17-31(.354)72 Dolphins 19-36-1 (.348)70 Colts 19-36-1 (.348)68 Jets 17-37-2 (.321)99 Rams 20-44 (.313)07 Patriots 11-34 (.245)The Patriots would certainly rank at the botom of the list if that percentage were to hold and the Pats went on to win this year. My point still holds that in most seasons teams would not have great divisional foes (only 5 times had division rivals had a winning record).

Great job David Yudkin as always.I agree with your point, mine as well.I still think the 85 Bears or the 75 Steelers were the best. Funny 75 Steelers are #1 on this list. I'm just saying.

 

[Phurfur]

And only once were they below .313. Although I don't think this matters you have to be able to see the disparity here.

I'm not suggesting that the Pats faced a powerhouse divisional schedule, but depending on the outcomes this week the Pats could have beaten 7 playoff teams this year (IND, SD, PIT, DAL with NYG, CLE, and WAS still in question).

Exactly that is why I don't think it matters. Looking at the entire season would be more telling.