Patriots dynasty equal to earlier dynasties?

[Mo.Raider]

Disclaimer: I am not bashing a very good Patriots team that just beat my beloved Raiders on Thursday night. I respect what they and especially Bill Belichick (was supposed to have been coaching the Raiders right now) have done in recent years. Managing to put modern day pro athletes in a "team first" state of mind is an impressive accomplishment. 35 wins in 39 tries since 2003 is equally impressive but …

I was wondering, mind you after a stinging loss to the Patriots on Thursday night, why I don’t put the modern Patriot dynasty on the same level as say the Cowboys, 49ers or Steelers dynasties. I didn’t feel like the Raiders were playing this powerhouse football team, but rather more like a fellow franchise on a roll. Is it because some of those dynasties were pre-cap, or is it just because these were some of the dynasties of my youth?

I just can’t imagine any of the Super Bowl Champion Patriot teams stacking up well against say a talent laden Cowboy teams of “93 and 94”. The Cowboys destroyed a sub dynasty Bills team in two Super Bowls, and the 49ers crushed an Elway led Broncos team in “90”, while the Patriots squeaked by in each of their Super Bowls by three points. Am I just another person guilty of not giving the Patriots there proper due, or is the NFL on a little bit of a talent thin era?

[SirFozzie]

try doing the Cowboys or 49ers in Salary Cap Land.

Can't be done.

well, the 49'ers did at the beginning of the salary cap, but that's because they broke the rules quite thoroughly.

Just sayin

[flere-imsaho]

As a Patriots fan, I'm a bit biased. But I'll say that before almost every game, I'm a bit worried about their prospects. That's not something you really could have said about those other teams in their prime.

The reason? Like Fozzie said, the salary cap.

Those other teams assembled teams that just steamrolled everyone until the very end of the playoff season. That's simply not possible these days, so a lot of the Patriots' games do stay closer, but they still manage to win almost all of them.

As to the age old "would the Patriots beat those teams", it depends.

If you take today's Patriots, transport them back in time to the early 90s, and have them play the Cowboys, the Patriots would destroy them. Ten years is a long time in football and today's players are stronger and faster, and the teams employ much more complex schemes on offense & defense.

If you take today's Patriots, and assemble an amalgam of the late-70s Steelers with players of today, there's no doubt the Patriots would lose, assuming you could get all of those superstars to work together.

[j51]

The Cowboys had to deal with the salary cap for 2 out of 3 championships, and if not for the 49ers putting a torch to the rulebook as mentioned above, they would have won 4 in a row.

They dominated Favre's Packers (HOF QB & champion), dominated Kelly's Bills (HOF QB), and beat Young's 49ers (HOF QB & champion) 2/3 times, all of which were better than any team today. I'd say thats a little more impressive than field goaling past guys like Jake Delhomme, Kordell Stewart, & Rich Gannon.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by flere-imsaho

If you take today's Patriots, transport them back in time to the early 90s, and have them play the Cowboys, the Patriots would destroy them. Ten years is a long time in football and today's players are stronger and faster, and the teams employ much more complex schemes on offense & defense.

Yeah, if today's Patriots played the 90s Cowboys, they'd kill 'em because Smith and Aikman are probably both over 40 now and let's not even talk about those Steelers teams- probably have a couple of guys who aren't even of this mortal coil any more. Wait, that's not what we were talking about

SI

[timmynausea]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

Yeah, if today's Patriots played the 90s Cowboys, they'd kill 'em because Smith and Aikman are probably both over 40 now and let's not even talk about those Steelers teams- probably have a couple of guys who aren't even of this mortal coil any more. Wait, that's not what we were talking about

SI

You're missing the point. In the late 70's most of the current Patriots were toddlers. The Steelers would literally send them home crying to their mamas.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by timmynausea

You're missing the point. In the late 70's most of the current Patriots were toddlers. The Steelers would literally send them home crying to their mamas.

Aw, nuts. You're right.

SI

[Draft Dodger]

those other dynasties were a massive collection of talent. Those 70's Steelers were like an all-star team at every position, and, of course, didn't lose star players like a seive.

the Patriots win because of great coaching, scouting, and roster management. They certainly have good players, but they wont have the number of Hall of Famers (or even Hall of Fame candidates) as the other teams do. And, they've turned over their roster pretty significantly since the first superbowl win. That's why they don't get the same props - they aren't as "sexy" as the star-laden teams. I actually think they could hold their own with all of those teams, but they wont get the same props, even if they make it 3 straight.

[flere-imsaho]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

Yeah, if today's Patriots played the 90s Cowboys, they'd kill 'em because Smith and Aikman are probably both over 40 now and let's not even talk about those Steelers teams- probably have a couple of guys who aren't even of this mortal coil any more. Wait, that's not what we were talking about

What part of "transport back in time" did you not understand?

[JeeberD]

Please. Because the Emmitt Smith who ran nearly 1000 yards last year as a 36 year old wouldn't have been able to run on the Patsies when he was 12 years younger...

[Mo.Raider]

If you take today's Patriots, transport them back in time to the early 90s, and have them play the Cowboys, the Patriots would destroy them. Ten years is a long time in football and today's players are stronger and faster, and the teams employ much more complex schemes on offense & defense.

I agree with all that the cap has made a tremendous impact on team chemistry/talent quality, but I can't get on board with the quote above. In fact I think it might be exactly the opposite because of the ability to sign/draft stars and keep them long term. The schemata hasn't changed enough in ten years to affect the outcome either. Football is cyclical and the newest fad tends to be something that has been tinkered with and then shelved for the next latest "style" of football. I think the bigger, faster argument might be tangible say if you pit a Super Bowl I version of Green Bay vs New England, but I would argue strongly for the chances of even an "83-84" Raiders club over a modern New England. Of course I am very biased, and that club holds very dear to me, but I can't imagine the bigger, stronger Pats holding up well to Lyle Alzado, Howie Long and company.

I guess maybe in the long run it isn’t the talent that is lacking in the modern game, but the continuity, or the ability to keep a very strong core nucleus of players.

[Daimyo]

You can't really compare teams from different eras directly... the rules that the Cowboys, Steelers, 49ers, etc were built under are totally different than the rules of today. However, if you adjust for the environment and compare what the Patriots have done to the rest of the league to what those other teams did I don't think there is anyway you can say the Pats are inferior.