Top 10 SuperBowl Champions (1 Viewer)

[Assani Fisher]

1. 1985 Chicago Bears

2. 1978 Pittsburgh Steelers

3. 1984 San Francisco 49'ers

4. 1972 Miami Dolphins

5. 1992 Dallas Cowboys

6. 1999 St. Louis Rams

7. 2004 New England Patriots

8. 1996 Green Bay Packers

9. 1991 Washington Redskins

10. 1976 Oakland Raiders

I have a feeling I'm missing a really obvious team or 2, though..... 

dude..this list sucks..first of all, the GB Packers from 1996 do NOT belong on the list..two kick returns for TDs from Desmond Howard and a late unsportsmanlike penalty won the game for the Packers..nothing spectacular about that team, whatsoever..you don't think the 1985 Bears woulda crushed them? or the 2000 Ravens, or 1990 AND 1986 GIANTS??

con man.get with it...

as for Miami, they belong AT #1,no ifs,and,buts.only undefeated team ever, thats got to mean something.

2004 Patriots????? oh please..

Obviously you are too young to remember (or just too naiive ) to put the 1966 AND 1967 GB Packers on that list, the first SB winners, first to win back-2-back SB's and in dominating fashion..they blew out Oakland and KC in both games..

this list has to be changed:

how you can forget to put the 1986 Giants on it, is a travesty and an injustice!

definitely the 3rd greatest defense to ever win a SB, behind only the 1990 Ravens and the 1985 Bears...Phil Simms threw only 2(two) incomplete passes , a record that will stand for ALL TIME, IMO...

absolutely one of the best QB performances in the SB , EVER.

they thoroughly DOMINATED the hapless Denver team , 2 weeks after bashing the Faulty-Niners 49-0 in the NFC Championship Game...

cmon now..

As for the part I bolded.....yes, I think the 85 Bears would've won. That's why I put the Bears at #1! Um...the 96 Packers definetly DO belong on this list. First of all, Desmond Howard had ONE kickoff return for a TD, not 2. Secondly, those 96 Packers ranked #1 in points scored, #1 in points allowed, #1 in defense, and #5 in offense. Those are insane stats, and the Pack was dominant on eveyr level of the ball....including special teams. They're a part of the game too, so it's New England's fault that they couldn't cover Howard, anyway.

The 1966 and 1967 Packers were great but not as good as the 96 Packers. The 67 Packers were only 9-4-1, and Bart Starr had a bad season, so that automatically discounts them. The 1966 Packers were a great team, but I didn't include them because by then, the NFL was still very much ahead of the AFL....so I was reluctant to put them in the top 10 because they had such a big advantage in the SuperBowl. The 66 Packers were great, though, and I wouldn't have a problem wth anyone putting them on their top 10 list...I just decided not to.

I'll say right now though that neither the 66 or 67 Packers could match the 96 Packers....a big reason being that while the 66 and 96 Pack were both similiarily dominant, Brett Favre was simply better than Bart Starr was, and would make a difference.

The 86 Giants are very deserving, but in a top 10 list, you have to exclude SOME teams....and I just personally think that they weren't quite as good as the 10 I have.

I didn't put the 72 Dolphins at #1 because their passing attack was average. Amazing team, but not the absolute best IMHO.

Jous, you're clearly giving things due thought and trying not to let your personal bias slant things, and I respect that. A few questions:-Taking a look at my post comparing the 1992 Cowboys and 1991 Redskins, how can you have the 1992 Cowboys higher? What am I missing?

-Why on earth do you have the 1999 Rams so high? They played one team with a winning record in the regular season...and lost. Then they barely beat TB in the playoffs and barely beat Tenn in the Super Bowl. They were as "undominant" as possible. The NFL as a whole was down that year. If you remember the previous final 4 teams from the previous year were the Jets, Broncos, Vikings, and Falcons. Jamal Anderson, Elway, T Davis, Testaverde, and Cunningham didn't play the next year due to injuries or retirement. I believe that made the NFL very weak that year, and as a result a fairly average team won the super bowl.

-The 1998 Broncos belong on your list. They were 13-0 and almost had a perfect season. They killed everyone in the playoffs. Everyone knows about Elway and Davis, but consider just how dominant their D was in the playoffs: They gave up 3 TDs in the playoffs which were a one yard drive by the Jets following a blocked punt, a kickoff return TD, and a TD by the Falcons with less than 2 minutes remanining in the Super Bowl blowout when the Broncos starters had already been pulled....so pretty much their D didn't give up any meaningful TD drive in the playoffs.

 

[Jous]

1. 1985 Chicago Bears

2. 1978 Pittsburgh Steelers

3. 1984 San Francisco 49'ers

4. 1972 Miami Dolphins

5. 1992 Dallas Cowboys

6. 1999 St. Louis Rams

7. 2004 New England Patriots

8. 1996 Green Bay Packers

9. 1991 Washington Redskins

10. 1976 Oakland Raiders

I have a feeling I'm missing a really obvious team or 2, though..... 

dude..this list sucks..first of all, the GB Packers from 1996 do NOT belong on the list..two kick returns for TDs from Desmond Howard and a late unsportsmanlike penalty won the game for the Packers..nothing spectacular about that team, whatsoever..you don't think the 1985 Bears woulda crushed them? or the 2000 Ravens, or 1990 AND 1986 GIANTS??

con man.get with it...

as for Miami, they belong AT #1,no ifs,and,buts.only undefeated team ever, thats got to mean something.

2004 Patriots????? oh please..

Obviously you are too young to remember (or just too naiive ) to put the 1966 AND 1967 GB Packers on that list, the first SB winners, first to win back-2-back SB's and in dominating fashion..they blew out Oakland and KC in both games..

this list has to be changed:

how you can forget to put the 1986 Giants on it, is a travesty and an injustice!

definitely the 3rd greatest defense to ever win a SB, behind only the 1990 Ravens and the 1985 Bears...Phil Simms threw only 2(two) incomplete passes , a record that will stand for ALL TIME, IMO...

absolutely one of the best QB performances in the SB , EVER.

they thoroughly DOMINATED the hapless Denver team , 2 weeks after bashing the Faulty-Niners 49-0 in the NFC Championship Game...

cmon now..

As for the part I bolded.....yes, I think the 85 Bears would've won. That's why I put the Bears at #1! Um...the 96 Packers definetly DO belong on this list. First of all, Desmond Howard had ONE kickoff return for a TD, not 2. Secondly, those 96 Packers ranked #1 in points scored, #1 in points allowed, #1 in defense, and #5 in offense. Those are insane stats, and the Pack was dominant on eveyr level of the ball....including special teams. They're a part of the game too, so it's New England's fault that they couldn't cover Howard, anyway.

The 1966 and 1967 Packers were great but not as good as the 96 Packers. The 67 Packers were only 9-4-1, and Bart Starr had a bad season, so that automatically discounts them. The 1966 Packers were a great team, but I didn't include them because by then, the NFL was still very much ahead of the AFL....so I was reluctant to put them in the top 10 because they had such a big advantage in the SuperBowl. The 66 Packers were great, though, and I wouldn't have a problem wth anyone putting them on their top 10 list...I just decided not to.

I'll say right now though that neither the 66 or 67 Packers could match the 96 Packers....a big reason being that while the 66 and 96 Pack were both similiarily dominant, Brett Favre was simply better than Bart Starr was, and would make a difference.

The 86 Giants are very deserving, but in a top 10 list, you have to exclude SOME teams....and I just personally think that they weren't quite as good as the 10 I have.

I didn't put the 72 Dolphins at #1 because their passing attack was average. Amazing team, but not the absolute best IMHO.

Jous, you're clearly giving things due thought and trying not to let your personal bias slant things, and I respect that. A few questions:-Taking a look at my post comparing the 1992 Cowboys and 1991 Redskins, how can you have the 1992 Cowboys higher? What am I missing?

-Why on earth do you have the 1999 Rams so high? They played one team with a winning record in the regular season...and lost. Then they barely beat TB in the playoffs and barely beat Tenn in the Super Bowl. They were as "undominant" as possible. The NFL as a whole was down that year. If you remember the previous final 4 teams from the previous year were the Jets, Broncos, Vikings, and Falcons. Jamal Anderson, Elway, T Davis, Testaverde, and Cunningham didn't play the next year due to injuries or retirement. I believe that made the NFL very weak that year, and as a result a fairly average team won the super bowl.

-The 1998 Broncos belong on your list. They were 13-0 and almost had a perfect season. They killed everyone in the playoffs. Everyone knows about Elway and Davis, but consider just how dominant their D was in the playoffs: They gave up 3 TDs in the playoffs which were a one yard drive by the Jets following a blocked punt, a kickoff return TD, and a TD by the Falcons with less than 2 minutes remanining in the Super Bowl blowout when the Broncos starters had already been pulled....so pretty much their D didn't give up any meaningful TD drive in the playoffs.

Thanks, yeah I'm trying to not let any personal bias get in the way... *hates the Raiders and Cowboys, loves the Steelers* I actually am going to have the 91 Redskins higher than the Cowboys...there's been enough evidence for me to change it, I just haven't gotten around to posting my 2nd version of the list. I was aware of the stats advantage the Skins had over Dallas, but I gave Dallas the edge ebcause they had the mental edge of being a dynastic team....but I decided that the Redskins really weren't that far removed from their last few SuperBowls, still retaining many players, so I'll give them the benefit of the doubt.

The 1999 Rams had a very easy schedule, but IMO, they proved their worth as a great team with their next 2 seasons. In 2000, they proved the offense was for real by having arguably an even better offensive year and maybe one of the best offenses in history, and in 2001 they also would've had a top 10 (or clsoe to it) all-time team had they won the SuperBowl. If the Rams just won it in 1999 and then faded, I'd say they were a product of a weak schedule/environment....but IMHO they proved they were for real. I don't penalize them for having an easy schedule because that wouldn't be fair, as they have no control over it. As for their playoff run, they won a shootout against the Vikes more impressively than the score indicated, because the Vikings got some scores in garbage time. Against the Bucs, we still don't know who would've won the game even if the right call was made.....and the Titans were a pretty formidable foe even though they were a wildcard team.

But on another note, I'm definetly going to lower the Rams' ranking....probably put them at #10, and POSSIBLY knock them off the top 10.

I'm very tempted to include the 98 Broncos after hearing about the other teams "putting up garbage scores" against their defense. I, too, was scared away by the fact that the defense ranked average and allowed over 300 points, but I'm strongly considering including them if the "garbage time scores" happened as frequently as they are amde out to be.. I'll think about it

 

[Pat Patriot]

1. 1985 Chicago Bears

2. 1978 Pittsburgh Steelers

3. 1976 Oakland Raiders

4. 1972 Miami Dolphins

5. 1984 San Francisco 49ers

6. 1983 Los Angeles Raiders

7. 1986 New York Giants

8. 1966 Green Bay Packers

9. 1999 St. Louis Rams

10. 1998 Denver Broncos

We are not talking dynasties so I left any one individual Patriots/Cowboys teams off the list but collectively I think only the Steelers teams were better.

1985 Bears were the best team I've ever seen and anything before 1983 were teams that I've only seen highlights and read about. They should not have been beat that year and they had back to back shutouts in the NFC playoffs.

That said the 1978 Steelers may have began their decent in 1978 as a unit, but that team just had too many Hall of Famers and an air that they just couldn't be beat not to be my #2.

The 1976 Raiders were a beast. They beat a very good New England team then destroyed the Steelers before beating up the Vikings in the Super Bowl.

One omission from the first post was the 1983 Raiders who were a team I watched very closely that year as a Seahawks fan. They murdered Denver, Seattle, and the Redskins with a crazy hard hitting defense, a great running game, and a pinpoint passing attack. I really liked this team even though I hated every thing Raiders then and even now.

I also included the 1998 Denver Broncos who I think everyone just knew would repeat as champs. Great running game, what I consider the greatest QB ever, and a solid defense which just acted like a spider when they got ahead waiting for teams to fall into their web. They went 14-2, wrecked the Dolphins and then held off an inspired Jets squad. I think this team is underrated even when talking about past Super Bowl Champions.

I can't believe those Rams only won one title, and to leave an early Packers team off seems wrong. 49ers were teams that never really impressed me, but the 1984 team who went 15-1, pummeled the Bears and then whipped up on Miami was great. 1986 Giants were incredible.

Although they were a very good team, hard to put the 1976 Raiders that high. They were actually the 3rd best team in the AFC that year. The Patriots blew out the Raiders in the regular season and had them beat in the playoffs until a phantom roughing the passer call on the Pats. The Steelers were decimated by injuries that year when they played the Raiders in the playoffs.

 

[Mr. Vegas]

1. 1985 Chicago Bears

2. 1978 Pittsburgh Steelers

3. 1976 Oakland Raiders

4. 1972 Miami Dolphins

5. 1984 San Francisco 49ers

6. 1983 Los Angeles Raiders

7. 1986 New York Giants         

8. 1966 Green Bay Packers

9. 1999 St. Louis Rams

10. 1998 Denver Broncos

We are not talking dynasties so I left any one individual Patriots/Cowboys teams off the list but collectively I think only the Steelers teams were better. 

1985 Bears were the best team I've ever seen and anything before 1983 were teams that I've only seen highlights and read about.  They should not have been beat that year and they had back to back shutouts in the NFC playoffs. 

That said the 1978 Steelers may have began their decent in 1978 as a unit, but that team just had too many Hall of Famers and an air that they just couldn't be beat not to be my #2. 

The 1976 Raiders were a beast.  They beat a very good New England team then destroyed the Steelers before beating up the Vikings in the Super Bowl. 

One omission from the first post was the 1983 Raiders who were a team I watched very closely that year as a Seahawks fan.  They murdered Denver, Seattle, and the Redskins with a crazy hard hitting defense, a great running game, and a pinpoint passing attack.  I really liked this team even though I hated every thing Raiders then and even now. 

I also included the 1998 Denver Broncos who I think everyone just knew would repeat as champs.  Great running game, what I consider the greatest QB ever, and a solid defense which just acted like a spider when they got ahead waiting for teams to fall into their web.  They went 14-2, wrecked the Dolphins and then held off an inspired Jets squad.  I think this team is underrated even when talking about past Super Bowl Champions. 

I can't believe those Rams only won one title, and to leave an early Packers team off seems wrong.  49ers were teams that never really impressed me, but the 1984 team who went 15-1, pummeled the Bears and then whipped up on Miami was great.  1986 Giants were incredible.

Although they were a very good team, hard to put the 1976 Raiders that high. They were actually the 3rd best team in the AFC that year. The Patriots blew out the Raiders in the regular season and had them beat in the playoffs until a phantom roughing the passer call on the Pats. The Steelers were decimated by injuries that year when they played the Raiders in the playoffs.

Just goes to show you how good they were.They lost just 1 game that year.

Then went out and beat the team that beat them.

Then Killed Pitt. in the AFC Championship game.

Then Killed the Vikes.

So Yes top 10, more like top 5.

 

[Mr. Vegas]

1. 1985 Chicago Bears

2. 1978 Pittsburgh Steelers

3. 1976 Oakland Raiders

4. 1972 Miami Dolphins

5. 1984 San Francisco 49ers

6. 1983 Los Angeles Raiders

7. 1986 New York Giants

8. 1966 Green Bay Packers

9. 1999 St. Louis Rams

10. 1998 Denver Broncos

We are not talking dynasties so I left any one individual Patriots/Cowboys teams off the list but collectively I think only the Steelers teams were better.

1985 Bears were the best team I've ever seen and anything before 1983 were teams that I've only seen highlights and read about. They should not have been beat that year and they had back to back shutouts in the NFC playoffs.

That said the 1978 Steelers may have began their decent in 1978 as a unit, but that team just had too many Hall of Famers and an air that they just couldn't be beat not to be my #2.

The 1976 Raiders were a beast. They beat a very good New England team then destroyed the Steelers before beating up the Vikings in the Super Bowl.

One omission from the first post was the 1983 Raiders who were a team I watched very closely that year as a Seahawks fan. They murdered Denver, Seattle, and the Redskins with a crazy hard hitting defense, a great running game, and a pinpoint passing attack. I really liked this team even though I hated every thing Raiders then and even now.

I also included the 1998 Denver Broncos who I think everyone just knew would repeat as champs. Great running game, what I consider the greatest QB ever, and a solid defense which just acted like a spider when they got ahead waiting for teams to fall into their web. They went 14-2, wrecked the Dolphins and then held off an inspired Jets squad. I think this team is underrated even when talking about past Super Bowl Champions.

I can't believe those Rams only won one title, and to leave an early Packers team off seems wrong. 49ers were teams that never really impressed me, but the 1984 team who went 15-1, pummeled the Bears and then whipped up on Miami was great. 1986 Giants were incredible.

Wow, we agree on something.1. 1985 Chicago Bears

2. 1978 Pittsburgh Steelers

3. 1976 Oakland Raiders

4. 1984 San Francisco 49ers

5. 1983 Los Angeles Raiders

6. 1972 Miami Dolphins

7. 1966 Green Bay Packers

8. 1998 Denver Broncos

9. 1992 Dallas Cowboys

10. 2004 New England Patriots

 

[Pat Patriot]

1. 1985 Chicago Bears

2. 1978 Pittsburgh Steelers

3. 1976 Oakland Raiders

4. 1972 Miami Dolphins

5. 1984 San Francisco 49ers

6. 1983 Los Angeles Raiders

7. 1986 New York Giants          

8. 1966 Green Bay Packers

9. 1999 St. Louis Rams

10. 1998 Denver Broncos

We are not talking dynasties so I left any one individual Patriots/Cowboys teams off the list but collectively I think only the Steelers teams were better. 

1985 Bears were the best team I've ever seen and anything before 1983 were teams that I've only seen highlights and read about.  They should not have been beat that year and they had back to back shutouts in the NFC playoffs. 

That said the 1978 Steelers may have began their decent in 1978 as a unit, but that team just had too many Hall of Famers and an air that they just couldn't be beat not to be my #2. 

The 1976 Raiders were a beast.  They beat a very good New England team then destroyed the Steelers before beating up the Vikings in the Super Bowl. 

One omission from the first post was the 1983 Raiders who were a team I watched very closely that year as a Seahawks fan.  They murdered Denver, Seattle, and the Redskins with a crazy hard hitting defense, a great running game, and a pinpoint passing attack.  I really liked this team even though I hated every thing Raiders then and even now. 

I also included the 1998 Denver Broncos who I think everyone just knew would repeat as champs.  Great running game, what I consider the greatest QB ever, and a solid defense which just acted like a spider when they got ahead waiting for teams to fall into their web.  They went 14-2, wrecked the Dolphins and then held off an inspired Jets squad.  I think this team is underrated even when talking about past Super Bowl Champions.  

I can't believe those Rams only won one title, and to leave an early Packers team off seems wrong.  49ers were teams that never really impressed me, but the 1984 team who went 15-1, pummeled the Bears and then whipped up on Miami was great.   1986 Giants were incredible.

Although they were a very good team, hard to put the 1976 Raiders that high. They were actually the 3rd best team in the AFC that year. The Patriots blew out the Raiders in the regular season and had them beat in the playoffs until a phantom roughing the passer call on the Pats. The Steelers were decimated by injuries that year when they played the Raiders in the playoffs.

Just goes to show you how good they were.They lost just 1 game that year.

Then went out and beat the team that beat them.

Then Killed Pitt. in the AFC Championship game.

Then Killed the Vikes.

So Yes top 10, more like top 5.

If you watched the game you would know that they didnt BEAT the Patriots. The Pats were robbed. The Raiders were not the best team in the AFC that year so I dont know how you make them a top 5 team all-time.Thats ok, the Pats paid the Raiders back in spades in 2001. The Raiders were robbed.

 

[Mr. Vegas]

1. 1985 Chicago Bears

2. 1978 Pittsburgh Steelers

3. 1976 Oakland Raiders

4. 1972 Miami Dolphins

5. 1984 San Francisco 49ers

6. 1983 Los Angeles Raiders

7. 1986 New York Giants          

8. 1966 Green Bay Packers

9. 1999 St. Louis Rams

10. 1998 Denver Broncos

We are not talking dynasties so I left any one individual Patriots/Cowboys teams off the list but collectively I think only the Steelers teams were better. 

1985 Bears were the best team I've ever seen and anything before 1983 were teams that I've only seen highlights and read about.  They should not have been beat that year and they had back to back shutouts in the NFC playoffs. 

That said the 1978 Steelers may have began their decent in 1978 as a unit, but that team just had too many Hall of Famers and an air that they just couldn't be beat not to be my #2. 

The 1976 Raiders were a beast.  They beat a very good New England team then destroyed the Steelers before beating up the Vikings in the Super Bowl. 

One omission from the first post was the 1983 Raiders who were a team I watched very closely that year as a Seahawks fan.  They murdered Denver, Seattle, and the Redskins with a crazy hard hitting defense, a great running game, and a pinpoint passing attack.  I really liked this team even though I hated every thing Raiders then and even now. 

I also included the 1998 Denver Broncos who I think everyone just knew would repeat as champs.  Great running game, what I consider the greatest QB ever, and a solid defense which just acted like a spider when they got ahead waiting for teams to fall into their web.  They went 14-2, wrecked the Dolphins and then held off an inspired Jets squad.  I think this team is underrated even when talking about past Super Bowl Champions.  

I can't believe those Rams only won one title, and to leave an early Packers team off seems wrong.  49ers were teams that never really impressed me, but the 1984 team who went 15-1, pummeled the Bears and then whipped up on Miami was great.   1986 Giants were incredible.

Although they were a very good team, hard to put the 1976 Raiders that high. They were actually the 3rd best team in the AFC that year. The Patriots blew out the Raiders in the regular season and had them beat in the playoffs until a phantom roughing the passer call on the Pats. The Steelers were decimated by injuries that year when they played the Raiders in the playoffs.

Just goes to show you how good they were.They lost just 1 game that year.

Then went out and beat the team that beat them.

Then Killed Pitt. in the AFC Championship game.

Then Killed the Vikes.

So Yes top 10, more like top 5.

If you watched the game you would know that they didnt BEAT the Patriots. The Pats were robbed. The Raiders were not the best team in the AFC that year so I dont know how you make them a top 5 team all-time.Thats ok, the Pats paid the Raiders back in spades in 2001. The Raiders were robbed.

So don't take anything away from a great team.Raiders were robbed alots of times.

Denver fumble on the 1 yard line. They didn't call it a fumble or the Raiders go on to beat Dallas 27-10.

Just ask Seattle. But The Raiders were 13-1. That year.

Top 5 teams of all time.

 

[Texasmouth]

I can admit that. I can also admit that the early 90s Cowboys were better as a whole than the early 90s Redskins. I am not being a blatant homer- I can admit these things.But what do any of those things have to do with the fact that the 1991 Redskins were better than the 1992 Cowboys, better than the 1993 Cowboys, and better than the 1995 Cowboys??? Please stop avoiding the issue. PICK ANY ONE OF THOSE COWBOYS TEAMS AND DO A STATISTICAL COMPARISON TO THE 1991 REDSKINS. I already did one with the 1992 Cowboys, and you saw the results. But stop throwing out meaningless one liners that show you are just trying to avoid the issue. When I compared the 1991 Skins and 92 Cowboys, I did not do it from a homers perspective. I included EVERY SINGLE meaningful stat or fact I could find including ones that favored the Cowboys. I was not biased. I think you clearly are.

Of course I am biased. I am a Cowboys fan. Stats mean nothing. Take the stats from the Ravens super bowl year and compare them with any other team of the 90's. Does that mean every team from the 90's is better? No. Different years dictate different stats. There are a lot more factors than stats. Compare each player. I would take any one of the Cowboys super bowl teams agains that on 1991 Redskin team any day. Hell, the Redskins barely beat the Cowboys in the one game they beat them in 1991 and that team was no where near the same team in 92. No way that Redskin team beats any of the Cowboys Super Bowl teams. If that Redskin team was so great, what happened in 1992? or 93, 94, 95, etc when the Cowboys won like a decades worth of games without a Redskin victory. Call it biased all you want, I don't think the Redskins 91 team belongs on this list.

 

[Texasmouth]

Let me add that there is no way anyone can logically rate the top ten best teams ever without a little personal bias playing in. Whether it is homer bias or not is irrelevent.

I for one remember the Ravens super bowl team from not that many years ago as one of the most dominant teams on defense that I have ever seen, while the 85' Bears team I barely remember at all because I was 10 years old.

Everyone also has to take into account that the Salary cap teams and pre salary cap teams cannot be compared. Look at the offensive line of the Cowboys 90's teams alone. No way a team could keep a group like that together anymore.

 

[nygiants56]

fair point about 1996 packers..1 td from Howard..that was a special team, i'll give you that, but a top 10 SB winning team? borderline maybe..the 2004 Pats were too...just don't know if they'd stack up against the others..

as for the Giants in 1986, I'd take Harry Carson, Carl Banks, LT, big Jim Burt , against any offense or any team that played in any SB , ever..they'd beat anyone of them, maybe save for the 1985 Bears..Bellichick and Parcells coaching LT and Carson and Burt?? that was ALL-time great team...

I'm a gmen fan, gotta plug my boys, ya know?!

i'm not sure the 1991 Redskins with Mark Rypien don't belong there either, that was an amazing , absolutely dominant team..you could make a case for ANY Redskins SB winning team could count ...'82 Thiesmann and the Diesel? Doug Williams? Rypien?

not sure the 1999 Rams belong, they won the SB by a half yard. great offense, good defense, but I don't see that team beating Aikman's first SB winning team,

or the 1986 Giants, 1985 Bears , 2000 Ravens, etc..

Rams were great, just don't know about top ten..

what about the 1971 Cowboys with Staubach?

Definitely agree that the Broncos from 1998 belong on the list..

you should maybe make a list in two:

1 for the 1966-1980 teams, the for 1981-present??

as for the Packers, they won the 1965 championship and then the 1966 SB..won 3 championships in a row..1965-1966(sb), 1967(sb)...

 

[Assani Fisher]

1. 1985 Chicago Bears

2. 1978 Pittsburgh Steelers

3. 1976 Oakland Raiders

4. 1972 Miami Dolphins

5. 1984 San Francisco 49ers

6. 1983 Los Angeles Raiders

7. 1986 New York Giants         

8. 1966 Green Bay Packers

9. 1999 St. Louis Rams

10. 1998 Denver Broncos

We are not talking dynasties so I left any one individual Patriots/Cowboys teams off the list but collectively I think only the Steelers teams were better. 

1985 Bears were the best team I've ever seen and anything before 1983 were teams that I've only seen highlights and read about.  They should not have been beat that year and they had back to back shutouts in the NFC playoffs. 

That said the 1978 Steelers may have began their decent in 1978 as a unit, but that team just had too many Hall of Famers and an air that they just couldn't be beat not to be my #2. 

The 1976 Raiders were a beast.  They beat a very good New England team then destroyed the Steelers before beating up the Vikings in the Super Bowl. 

One omission from the first post was the 1983 Raiders who were a team I watched very closely that year as a Seahawks fan.  They murdered Denver, Seattle, and the Redskins with a crazy hard hitting defense, a great running game, and a pinpoint passing attack.  I really liked this team even though I hated every thing Raiders then and even now. 

I also included the 1998 Denver Broncos who I think everyone just knew would repeat as champs.  Great running game, what I consider the greatest QB ever, and a solid defense which just acted like a spider when they got ahead waiting for teams to fall into their web.  They went 14-2, wrecked the Dolphins and then held off an inspired Jets squad.  I think this team is underrated even when talking about past Super Bowl Champions. 

I can't believe those Rams only won one title, and to leave an early Packers team off seems wrong.  49ers were teams that never really impressed me, but the 1984 team who went 15-1, pummeled the Bears and then whipped up on Miami was great.  1986 Giants were incredible.

Wow, we agree on something.1. 1985 Chicago Bears

2. 1978 Pittsburgh Steelers

3. 1976 Oakland Raiders

4. 1984 San Francisco 49ers

5. 1983 Los Angeles Raiders

6. 1972 Miami Dolphins

7. 1966 Green Bay Packers

8. 1998 Denver Broncos

9. 1992 Dallas Cowboys

10. 2004 New England Patriots

The lack of the 1991 Redskins on these lists astounds me. Seriously, go look up the stats. Go look at their game log. Look at their scores. I think they are one of maybe 4 or 5 teams that have a legit claim as 'best team of all time'.

 

[Assani Fisher]

I can admit that. I can also admit that the early 90s Cowboys were better as a whole than the early 90s Redskins. I am not being a blatant homer- I can admit these things.

But what do any of those things have to do with the fact that the 1991 Redskins were better than the 1992 Cowboys, better than the 1993 Cowboys, and better than the 1995 Cowboys???

Please stop avoiding the issue. PICK ANY ONE OF THOSE COWBOYS TEAMS AND DO A STATISTICAL COMPARISON TO THE 1991 REDSKINS. I already did one with the 1992 Cowboys, and you saw the results. But stop throwing out meaningless one liners that show you are just trying to avoid the issue. When I compared the 1991 Skins and 92 Cowboys, I did not do it from a homers perspective. I included EVERY SINGLE meaningful stat or fact I could find including ones that favored the Cowboys. I was not biased. I think you clearly are.

Of course I am biased. I am a Cowboys fan. Stats mean nothing. Take the stats from the Ravens super bowl year and compare them with any other team of the 90's. Does that mean every team from the 90's is better? No. Different years dictate different stats. There are a lot more factors than stats. Compare each player. I would take any one of the Cowboys super bowl teams agains that on 1991 Redskin team any day. Hell, the Redskins barely beat the Cowboys in the one game they beat them in 1991 and that team was no where near the same team in 92. No way that Redskin team beats any of the Cowboys Super Bowl teams. If that Redskin team was so great, what happened in 1992? or 93, 94, 95, etc when the Cowboys won like a decades worth of games without a Redskin victory.

Call it biased all you want, I don't think the Redskins 91 team belongs on this list.

How do stats and results mean nothing? What else do you base your rating of players/teams on? IMO, a team is as good as they perform. One team may happen to have more talent, but if they aren't as well coached, disciplined, or motivated then they aren't as good.Ryan Leaf has more talent than 99% of the QBs in the world. Doesn't mean a thing.

If you want to say that some Cowboys teams had more talent than the 1991 Redskins, then I won't bother arguing that point because its impossible to reach a conclusion and we'll just be offering our biased homer opinions. So if you want to say that you'd take the Cowboys players over the Redskins, then I won't argue that. I will tell you that the Redskins had more pro bowlers than the Cowboys, so for whatever reason, they must have had more players playing at that pro bowl level. Maybe they were just more motivated. Maybe Coach Gibbs got the best out of them(very possible).

But if you compare how the 1991 Redskins performed on the field, they blow away any Cowboys team. That is what we must go by. Anything else is idle speculation.

The 1992 Redskins team wasn't as good. I'm not debating that at all.

P.S. I'm not sure what you're implying with your point about the Ravens. Under Dilfer, they outscored their opponents by a 3-1 margin! 3-1!!! Many super bowl champs didn't even outscore their opponents by a 2-1 margin, and I don't think any other team ever has done 3-1, although I could be wrong about that(I'm sure that no team in the past 21 years has done it...havn't looked further back than that). And then in the playoffs, their closest game was two touchdowns. I'm

 

[DoctorDetroit]

1. 1985 Chicago Bears

2. 1978 Pittsburgh Steelers

3. 1976 Oakland Raiders

4. 1972 Miami Dolphins

5. 1984 San Francisco 49ers

6. 1983 Los Angeles Raiders

7. 1986 New York Giants          

8. 1966 Green Bay Packers

9. 1999 St. Louis Rams

10. 1998 Denver Broncos

We are not talking dynasties so I left any one individual Patriots/Cowboys teams off the list but collectively I think only the Steelers teams were better. 

1985 Bears were the best team I've ever seen and anything before 1983 were teams that I've only seen highlights and read about.  They should not have been beat that year and they had back to back shutouts in the NFC playoffs. 

That said the 1978 Steelers may have began their decent in 1978 as a unit, but that team just had too many Hall of Famers and an air that they just couldn't be beat not to be my #2. 

The 1976 Raiders were a beast.  They beat a very good New England team then destroyed the Steelers before beating up the Vikings in the Super Bowl. 

One omission from the first post was the 1983 Raiders who were a team I watched very closely that year as a Seahawks fan.  They murdered Denver, Seattle, and the Redskins with a crazy hard hitting defense, a great running game, and a pinpoint passing attack.  I really liked this team even though I hated every thing Raiders then and even now. 

I also included the 1998 Denver Broncos who I think everyone just knew would repeat as champs.  Great running game, what I consider the greatest QB ever, and a solid defense which just acted like a spider when they got ahead waiting for teams to fall into their web.  They went 14-2, wrecked the Dolphins and then held off an inspired Jets squad.  I think this team is underrated even when talking about past Super Bowl Champions.  

I can't believe those Rams only won one title, and to leave an early Packers team off seems wrong.  49ers were teams that never really impressed me, but the 1984 team who went 15-1, pummeled the Bears and then whipped up on Miami was great.   1986 Giants were incredible.

Wow, we agree on something.1. 1985 Chicago Bears

2. 1978 Pittsburgh Steelers

3. 1976 Oakland Raiders

4. 1984 San Francisco 49ers

5. 1983 Los Angeles Raiders

6. 1972 Miami Dolphins

7. 1966 Green Bay Packers

8. 1998 Denver Broncos

9. 1992 Dallas Cowboys

10. 2004 New England Patriots

The lack of the 1991 Redskins on these lists astounds me. Seriously, go look up the stats. Go look at their game log. Look at their scores. I think they are one of maybe 4 or 5 teams that have a legit claim as 'best team of all time'.

Buffalo could have beaten them if they would have concentrated on football that week instead of bickering with each other. You are the same guy who throws around SOS as an important playoff predictor so I'll take their omission as a sign I'm on the right track. I don't think they were that special and all the teams I listed were better.

 

[Jous]

Mr. Vegas, care to explain why you think the 1983 Raiders deserve to be top 5???

 

[DoctorDetroit]

Did you watch the Raiders in that Super Bowl vs the defending Super Bowl Champions? It was the biggest ### kicking of its time and to tell you the truth, maybe ever given the quality of the teams. They had everything on that team and no one came close to them in the playoffs.

The thing people are forgetting is how many down years the NFL had between 1987 and 1996. There were just not very many evenly balanced teams like there are today or a cluster of good teams like in the 70s. The 49ers, Cowboys, and Bills were the only dominate teams of this era and most others were not even close. San Diego had no chance to beat the 49ers in the 95 Super Bowl. None. I am not including a team that really had no completion to get to and through the Super Bowl. Those Dallas teams were better than that 49ers teams and they also beat the strongest AFC team of the time in Buffalo as well.

Where is the metrics for the years between 1987 and 1997? The Detroit Lions with Eric Kramer as the QB was the second best team in the NFC in 1991. The Redskins had no competition.

I'm not writing this because I think I'm right either. I'm writing this for those of you who try to measure the strength of one team of an era vs another team of another era and leave out a whole bunch of details. It's video game crap and is for imagination purposes only. The 1969 Chiefs may have beaten them all but we'll just never know now will we.

 

[MLBrandow]

ESPN.com writer, Eddie Epstein came up with a forumla called "adjusted power index" which basically ranks all teams taking all factors into consideration. He explains his formula here.

I was surfing around there, and clicked on the "NFL Draft" link to the left...http://sports.espn.go.com/nfldraft/index

That's A Wrap

The 2003 NFL draft is over so it's time to hand out grades. Len Pasquarelli gave Baltimore, which traded to get quarterback Kyle Boller an "A-plus" during his reviews and grades for the AFC and NFC teams. Meanwhile, John Clayton made notice of certain teams failing to address needs in his 10 draft observations.

 

[Prime]

I'm jumping in a little late, but I wanted to respond to some of this madness here.

The 1991 Redskins were one of the best teams I have ever seen. I don't know if it was because I experienced it here in the Nation's Capital (or nearby in Md.), but it was clear to everybody that the Redskins were "Goin to the show!" from week 1. Definatly top 10, possible top 5 on their best day. They had a few veterans and gamers or ball hawks on D. Charles Mann had a banner year, and Rypien could throw no wrong.

But better then the 1992-1995 Cowboys? I don't think so. Hate them like everybody does, but they were LOADED with starpower (no phun intended), and playmakers at QB, RB, FB, WR, DE, OL, LB, CB, SS, and Special teams.

And please stop with the nonsense about the 1992 Cowboys being the best of the bunch. They were a great team, but I think the DL and defensive backfield were the worst of the 3 winning Superbowl teams. Sure Haley was great, but this is when I thinnk Jimmy Johnson started the trend of specilization we see everywhere in the NFL now. He just rotated the likes of Tony Cassilas, Danny Noonan, Jimmy Jones, and two very young DT's in Russle Maryland, and Leon Lett.

Contrary to what most people seem to believe, the 1995 team may be the very best of the lot for the simple accusition of a Prime Time Deion Sanders - In his prime. Especially when you consider the big name talent. Emmitt, Irvin, and Aikman all had their best years if I remember.

Those Redskin teams were very good, no a GREAT team, but they didn't have 1 star player. They had a lot of guys who were good guys and pretty solid players, but old Ogre looking Wilber Marshals and Kurt Gouveias couldn't hope to stop Emmitt and company. Irvin owned D. Green for most of the games they played. The hogs weren't even the original hags, and if they were, you really think they hold a candle to the enourmous Larry Allen/MarkStepnoski/MarkTunie/Erik Williams/Nate Newton's of the World?

P.S. - That long post compairing the Redskins 1991 season to the 1992 cowboys season is flawed. Not only is it totally different years and scheduels, it's based on some random writers formula.

 

[Jous]

The 1992 Cowboys team may not have been the best of the 3, (possibly the 1993 team having that honor) but I guarantee you that the 1995 team was certainly not the best. They were impressive all-around in terms of stars on the team, but they had one major weakness that automatically eliminates them form being an all-time best team IMO.

They were just average at stopping the run! They ranked 16th in run defense in 1995, but they allowed over 4 yards per carry by the opponent on the year. The main focus of every team year in and year out on defense is stopping the run, and while they weren't bad at it, they weren't good enough to warrent putting them in the top 10 teams ever.

The only reason they didn't lose mroe games was because the offense was so great that they forced other teams to abandon the run game because they ahd to play catch-up. On another note, they should ahve lost the Super Bowl were it not for 2 absolutely horrid Neil O'Donnell throws.

 

[Texasmouth]

Blah blah blah. Bunch of Cowboys haters, that's all.

No way most teams on that list measure up against any of the Cowboys Superbowl teams player for player.

Maybe the 1995 was ranked so low against the run because no one had a chance throwing the ball against them, ever think of that. That was an unreal secondary.

It doesn't matter who you are you are going to be personally biased in your opinion, Prime is a perfect example. Of coure you think the 1991 Redskins team was the best ever if you are a friggin fan and you live in the city! That seems a little obvious to me!

 

[Jous]

Blah blah blah. Bunch of Cowboys haters, that's all.

No way most teams on that list measure up against any of the Cowboys Superbowl teams player for player.

Maybe the 1995 was ranked so low against the run because no one had a chance throwing the ball against them, ever think of that. That was an unreal secondary.

It doesn't matter who you are you are going to be personally biased in your opinion, Prime is a perfect example. Of coure you think the 1991 Redskins team was the best ever if you are a friggin fan and you live in the city! That seems a little obvious to me!

Actually I did think of that, and it's not an option. According to the statistics, teams only ran the ball against the 1995 Cowboys NINETEEN more times all year than the 1993 Cowboys, and the 1995 Cowboys still had worse rushing defense statistics.....and also, the 1995 Boys had opponents throw for more TD's and a few more yards on them than the 1993 team.And if teams knew they couldn't throw the ball on the 1995 Cowboys, as you say, then that should've made the Cowboys' run defense even better! They knew teams would run at them, so why couldn't they stop it?

Look, I'm not saying the 1995 Boys were a weak team, I'm just saying they were the weakest of their 3 SuperBowl teams of the 90's. I'm not disrespecting your team either....their 1992 team is ranked pretty high for me.

 

[Jous]

I'm going to post my updated list of top 10 pretty soon, in case anyone cares...

 

[Jous]

1. 1978 Pittsburgh Steelers

2. 1985 Chicago Bears

3. 1984 San Francisco 49'ers

4. 1972 Miami Dolphins

5. 1991 Washington Redskins

6. 1996 Green Bay Packers

7. 1992 Dallas Cowboys

8. 1998 Denver Broncos

9. 2004 New England Patriots

10. See below

For #10, I'm trying to decide between the 1983 Raiders (I've been convinced about them) or the 1976 Raiders. Any Raidah fans care to tell me which of thsoe teams was better in their opinion? I'm leaning towards the 76 team because they finished with a better record, and because Kenny Stabler is very, very underrated IMO and much better than Plunkett was.

I decided to switch the Bears and Steelers....their defenses were both incredible and dominant, but I DO give the Bears a slight edge in defense. On offense I decided to switch to the Steelers. The Bears had Payton, but IMO McMahon and his WR's couldn't compare with Bradshaw, Stallworth, and Swann, and Franco Harris isn't exactly shabby either.

I bumped the 1999 Rams off in favor of the Broncos from 98.

I wasn't sure about the Patriots, but I kept them on because not only were they a team from a dynasty, but because theyr postseason run proved that despite statistics, they were better than other teams. They beat the best offensive team (Colts) by holding them to 3 points, beat the best defensive team (Steelers) by scoring 41 on them, and edged the team that had the best all-around stats (Eagles).

I'm open to more changes, so let's hear some comments....

 

[Mr. Vegas]

1. 1978 Pittsburgh Steelers

2. 1985 Chicago Bears

3. 1984 San Francisco 49'ers

4. 1972 Miami Dolphins

5. 1991 Washington Redskins

6. 1996 Green Bay Packers

7. 1992 Dallas Cowboys

8. 1998 Denver Broncos

9. 2004 New England Patriots

10. See below

For #10, I'm trying to decide between the 1983 Raiders (I've been convinced about them) or the 1976 Raiders. Any Raidah fans care to tell me which of thsoe teams was better in their opinion? I'm leaning towards the 76 team because they finished with a better record, and because Kenny Stabler is very, very underrated IMO and much better than Plunkett was.

I decided to switch the Bears and Steelers....their defenses were both incredible and dominant, but I DO give the Bears a slight edge in defense. On offense I decided to switch to the Steelers. The Bears had Payton, but IMO McMahon and his WR's couldn't compare with Bradshaw, Stallworth, and Swann, and Franco Harris isn't exactly shabby either.

I bumped the 1999 Rams off in favor of the Broncos from 98.

I wasn't sure about the Patriots, but I kept them on because not only were they a team from a dynasty, but because theyr postseason run proved that despite statistics, they were better than other teams. They beat the best offensive team (Colts) by holding them to 3 points, beat the best defensive team (Steelers) by scoring 41 on them, and edged the team that had the best all-around stats (Eagles).

I'm open to more changes, so let's hear some comments....

Your 2nd and 3rd ranked teams are 85 Chicago Bears and 84 San Francisco 49'ers .So the 83 Raiders should be in at least the top 10.

Answer to your question the 76 Raiders were better then the 83 team.

This is coming from a Raiders fan.

 

[uk3rings]

there should be two lists, before and after the cap's introduction.

 

[Capella]

No way most teams on that list measure up against any of the Cowboys Superbowl teams player for player.

It doesn't matter who you are you are going to be personally biased in your opinion, Prime is a perfect example. Of coure you think the 1991 Redskins team was the best ever if you are a friggin fan and you live in the city! That seems a little obvious to me!

 

[matt jones]

94 49ers for sure was one of the best.

 

[BassNBrew]

The 1992 Cowboys averaged 18.891 yards per kickoff returnThe 1991 Redskins averaged 18.897 yards per kickoff returnAdvantage: Redskins I'm sold.

 

[Prime]

No way most teams on that list measure up against any of the Cowboys Superbowl teams player for player.

It doesn't matter who you are you are going to be personally biased in your opinion, Prime is a perfect example. Of coure you think the 1991 Redskins team was the best ever if you are a friggin fan and you live in the city! That seems a little obvious to me!

Want to know what's funnier? He said I was being a Redskins homer when I am an obvious Cowboys fan. He must not have even read my post.

 

[MikeApf]

1991 Redskins?

Give me a break. One of the greatest teams in history? What a joke.

ESPN.com writer, Eddie Epstein came up with a forumla called "adjusted power index" which basically ranks all teams taking all factors into consideration. He explains his formula here.The 1992 Cowboys did not make the list of top 10 all time

The 1991 Redskins had the 5th highest ranking of all time

Advantage: Redskins

They won ONE superbowl and then what? Dallas went on to win two more.

Owned my ###.......

And if you count the 80s and not arbitrarily select your years, then the Skins add in 2 more super bowls and they're even. But who cares? Theres no point in that because this list is for individual years, not dynastys. If you want to say that the early 90s Cowboys were better than the early 90s Skins, I'll totally accept that.

But you're an obvious homer if you think that any of those Cowboys teams were better than the 1991 Redskins.

Please present an argument using stats and not your biased opinion for why you think that any of those Cowboys teams were better in that one year than the 1991 Redskins....I can't wait for this.

Dallas beat them that year......

Not saying that this prooves who is better but:In 1992

Dallas 23-10 over Washington

Washington 20-17 over Dallas

In 1993

Washington 35-16 over Dallas

Dallas 38-3 over Washington

In 1995

Washington 27-3 over Dallas

Washington 24-17 over Dallas

Ironically, in 1994, when Dallas didn't win the Super Bowl, they swept Washington that year.

Now obviously, Dallas was better than Washington in this time span. And yet, in the three Superbowl yeas...1992, 1993, and 1995, Washington beat Dallas 4 out of 6 times.

This clearly shows how ridiculous it is to argue, "Dallas beat them in 1991" as some sort of proof that the 91 Redskin team doesn't stack up with Dallas' Super Bowl teams. The same argument actually works against you even worse, since Dallas dropped 4 of 6 to Washington in the 3 years that Dallas won the SB right after (92,93, and 95). And even factoring in 1994 for continuity, the teams were dead even...

Again, not saying this shows Wash > Dallas, just wanted to say how arbitary this "Dallas beat Washington" argument is...

M

 

[Texasmouth]

No way most teams on that list measure up against any of the Cowboys Superbowl teams player for player.

It doesn't matter who you are you are going to be personally biased in your opinion, Prime is a perfect example. Of coure you think the 1991 Redskins team was the best ever if you are a friggin fan and you live in the city! That seems a little obvious to me!

Want to know what's funnier? He said I was being a Redskins homer when I am an obvious Cowboys fan. He must not have even read my post.

I am just saying people are biased by what they remember, if you lived in the city and you watched the games, whether you are a Redskins fan or not, you are biased because of what YOU saw and remember so it is what YOU think. Not you imparticular but you as a general term. And no, I didn't read your entire post.

 

[Texasmouth]

1991 Redskins?

Give me a break. One of the greatest teams in history? What a joke.

ESPN.com writer, Eddie Epstein came up with a forumla called "adjusted power index" which basically ranks all teams taking all factors into consideration. He explains his formula here.The 1992 Cowboys did not make the list of top 10 all time

The 1991 Redskins had the 5th highest ranking of all time

Advantage: Redskins

They won ONE superbowl and then what? Dallas went on to win two more.

Owned my ###.......

And if you count the 80s and not arbitrarily select your years, then the Skins add in 2 more super bowls and they're even. But who cares? Theres no point in that because this list is for individual years, not dynastys. If you want to say that the early 90s Cowboys were better than the early 90s Skins, I'll totally accept that.

But you're an obvious homer if you think that any of those Cowboys teams were better than the 1991 Redskins.

Please present an argument using stats and not your biased opinion for why you think that any of those Cowboys teams were better in that one year than the 1991 Redskins....I can't wait for this.

Dallas beat them that year......

Not saying that this prooves who is better but:In 1992

Dallas 23-10 over Washington

Washington 20-17 over Dallas

In 1993

Washington 35-16 over Dallas

Dallas 38-3 over Washington

In 1995

Washington 27-3 over Dallas

Washington 24-17 over Dallas

Ironically, in 1994, when Dallas didn't win the Super Bowl, they swept Washington that year.

Now obviously, Dallas was better than Washington in this time span. And yet, in the three Superbowl yeas...1992, 1993, and 1995, Washington beat Dallas 4 out of 6 times.

This clearly shows how ridiculous it is to argue, "Dallas beat them in 1991" as some sort of proof that the 91 Redskin team doesn't stack up with Dallas' Super Bowl teams. The same argument actually works against you even worse, since Dallas dropped 4 of 6 to Washington in the 3 years that Dallas won the SB right after (92,93, and 95). And even factoring in 1994 for continuity, the teams were dead even...

Again, not saying this shows Wash > Dallas, just wanted to say how arbitary this "Dallas beat Washington" argument is...

M

Yes, you are totally right, that was just my blatant attempt to cover up my obvious homerism.

 

[thesurfshop19]

1. 1978 Pittsburgh Steelers

2. 1985 Chicago Bears

3. 1984 San Francisco 49'ers

4. 1972 Miami Dolphins

5. 1991 Washington Redskins

6. 1996 Green Bay Packers

7. 1992 Dallas Cowboys

8. 1998 Denver Broncos

9. 2004 New England Patriots

10. See below

For #10, I'm trying to decide between the 1983 Raiders (I've been convinced about them) or the 1976 Raiders. Any Raidah fans care to tell me which of thsoe teams was better in their opinion? I'm leaning towards the 76 team because they finished with a better record, and because Kenny Stabler is very, very underrated IMO and much better than Plunkett was.

I decided to switch the Bears and Steelers....their defenses were both incredible and dominant, but I DO give the Bears a slight edge in defense. On offense I decided to switch to the Steelers. The Bears had Payton, but IMO McMahon and his WR's couldn't compare with Bradshaw, Stallworth, and Swann, and Franco Harris isn't exactly shabby either.

I bumped the 1999 Rams off in favor of the Broncos from 98.

I wasn't sure about the Patriots, but I kept them on because not only were they a team from a dynasty, but because theyr postseason run proved that despite statistics, they were better than other teams. They beat the best offensive team (Colts) by holding them to 3 points, beat the best defensive team (Steelers) by scoring 41 on them, and edged the team that had the best all-around stats (Eagles).

I'm open to more changes, so let's hear some comments....

I like pretty much all of your changes here. Downgrading the Bears is probably going to be unpopular since they're generally seen as #1, but it's not like you replaced them with the 1990 Giants or something! I like having the 2004 Pats on there since they're the most versatile champion I can remember. They didn't have the best numbers in the end but maybe that's because they were so strategic in how they beat different teams that in aggregate it doesn't add up?

I also think the 1996 Pack may be a little high. I look at the 1997 Super Bowl as the deciding factor between the 1996 Pack and 1998 Broncos (right or wrong), and therefore I have the 1998 Broncos ahead. Not a no-brainer by any means, though.

 

[Prime]

No way most teams on that list measure up against any of the Cowboys Superbowl teams player for player.

It doesn't matter who you are you are going to be personally biased in your opinion, Prime is a perfect example. Of coure you think the 1991 Redskins team was the best ever if you are a friggin fan and you live in the city! That seems a little obvious to me!

Want to know what's funnier? He said I was being a Redskins homer when I am an obvious Cowboys fan. He must not have even read my post.

I am just saying people are biased by what they remember, if you lived in the city and you watched the games, whether you are a Redskins fan or not, you are biased because of what YOU saw and remember so it is what YOU think. Not you imparticular but you as a general term.

And no, I didn't read your entire post.

Have a nice season guy.

 

[houndirish]

1. 1978 Pittsburgh Steelers

2. 1985 Chicago Bears

3. 1984 San Francisco 49'ers

4. 1972 Miami Dolphins

5. 1991 Washington Redskins

6. 1996 Green Bay Packers

7. 1992 Dallas Cowboys

8. 1998 Denver Broncos

9. 2004 New England Patriots

10. See below

For #10, I'm trying to decide between the 1983 Raiders (I've been convinced about them) or the 1976 Raiders. Any Raidah fans care to tell me which of thsoe teams was better in their opinion? I'm leaning towards the 76 team because they finished with a better record, and because Kenny Stabler is very, very underrated IMO and much better than Plunkett was.

I decided to switch the Bears and Steelers....their defenses were both incredible and dominant, but I DO give the Bears a slight edge in defense. On offense I decided to switch to the Steelers. The Bears had Payton, but IMO McMahon and his WR's couldn't compare with Bradshaw, Stallworth, and Swann, and Franco Harris isn't exactly shabby either.

I bumped the 1999 Rams off in favor of the Broncos from 98.

I wasn't sure about the Patriots, but I kept them on because not only were they a team from a dynasty, but because theyr postseason run proved that despite statistics, they were better than other teams. They beat the best offensive team (Colts) by holding them to 3 points, beat the best defensive team (Steelers) by scoring 41 on them, and edged the team that had the best all-around stats (Eagles).

I'm open to more changes, so let's hear some comments....

I still don't see how you can omit that '86 Giants club. At worst, they're the 9th best team. No way that 2004 Patriots team is ahead of them. The Giants had arguably the game's greatest defensive player ever, in the heart of his prime. Soon to be inducted Hall of Famer Harry Carson manned the middle and tackled everything that ran away from LT. The Defensive line was stout too.The Giants O-Line was a dominating group that executed the 1980's Bill Parcells gameplan to perfection. Run the ball down the other teams throat. Control the clock. Suffocate 'em on defense. The offense will never be remembered as an exciting one the way some of those Niners, Cowboys and Steelers units were, but should you really deduct for style points? That Giants offense was brutally effective. They wore defenses down by physically mauling them up front. When Mark Bavaro wasn't catching seam routes he was joining the blocking carnage in the trenches.

I've always felt, even with today's more complex offenses, that the path to the Super Bowl is most reliable when you can run the football and dominate on D. That '86 Giants team did both to perfection.

 

[Jous]

Yeah, I had a real tough timetrying to decide the final 2. I feel like I have to put in a Patirots team because they were a dynastic team, and thus had that aura of "can't be beaten" and had a huge mental edge over the competition, which automatically makes them much better despite their average statistics.

I'm thinking of putting the 86 Giants at #10 and bumping the Raiders, or putting the Giants at #9 and bumping the Pats down to #10.

It's a tough decision....because I also want to include a Raiders team, since they've had some incredible ones back in the day year after year.

I COULD just make it easier and just expand it to top 15 teams....

 

[houndirish]

Seeing as you're talking individual years, I think you just answered your own question. The Patriots team should gett the boot. The Dynsaty factor really doesn't come into play as you're judging the individual team, not the greatness of it's run. Based on that criteria I'd go with one of those Raiders clubs over New England too.

 

[Jous]

True, but they also had one of the most convincing playoff runs that you could have, and left no doubt how good they were. They destroyed one of the best offenses of all time by holding them to 3 points, scored 41 on one of the best defenses of the last decade, and beat out the Eagles were considered all-around the best team by many.

 

[houndirish]

True, but they also had one of the most convincing playoff runs that you could have, and left no doubt how good they were. They destroyed one of the best offenses of all time by holding them to 3 points, scored 41 on one of the best defenses of the last decade, and beat out the Eagles were considered all-around the best team by many.

The Giants hung 49 on Joe Montana's dynasty Niners while limiting SF to just 3 points. Then they shut out the Redskins 17-0 handing Gibbs the first shutout of his coaching career. They actually let the Broncos hang around a while before dominating the second half and taking the hardware.