A Patriots "Dynasty" requires Hall of Fame players. Where are they?

[MikeG]

Here are the Steelers

Bradshaw
Swann
Greene
Lambert
Stallworth
Ham
Russell
Webster
Blount
Harris

Now thats a DYNASTY.

[Lizardking]

1. SuperBowl Commercials

Did anybody notice how many commercials had CHIMPS in them? I counted at least 3.

[burythehatchet]

2. The Patriot's accomplishment is far greater than previous

"dynasties". Why? Because in this day and age free agency and collective bargaining agreements have led to a much greater degree of independence among players. So to win 3 bowls in 4 years I think is a far more challenging task in 2005 that it was when the steel curtain was dominating. What Belichek has succeeded in doing is creating a team patterned after Billy Beane's Oakland A's. i.e., role players who do their within an institutional game plan. The parts are interchangeable. Hell, they lost both their corners this years.

[MikeG]

3. Excuses. Excuses. Where's the players?

[MikeG]

4. You need to examine the 1974 Steeler Draft.

We got Swann, Stallworth, Webster and Lambert.

Eat That.

[burythehatchet]

7. I don't NEED to do anything of the sort, and I'm not hungry

so do you have any substantive response to my well thought out comments or are you just pounding your chest and living in the past. Regarding your list of players drafted in 1974, how many teams did they play for?

[MikeG]

28. If they win FOUR they're a dynasty. Otherwise, forget it.

[burythehatchet]

30. fine...looks like we'll be sparring through baseball season as well.

Lets go Mets....

[pmbryant]

5. 3 titles in 4 years means the players are there

No doubt many of them will be in the Hall eventually.

--Peter

[MikeG]

6. Two. Brady and Vinatieri. That's it.

[trotsky]

8. What's your obsession with the Pats and the word "dynasty"?

I'm not a Pats fan, but winning 3 championships in 4 years WITH the NFL's parity rules in place spells D-Y-N-A-S-T-Y to me, HoF players or not.

Why does it apparently cause you convulsions to even think about?

[WilliamPitt]

16. Kinda sad, isn't it.

[Mills Street]

9. Future Hall of Famers from the Patriots

Brady
Dillon
Seymour
Bruschi
Vinatieri
Law

Probably others who just managed to play with the team for the past few years.

Winning superbowls can come from great coaching, instead of great players, but winning superbowls gets players into the hall of fame. Believe me, I am from WI and a certain team from my area has enough hall of famers by way of their coaching, rather than raw player talent.

[HuckleB]

11. Exactly.

The current Patriots remind me of the Packers of the '60s like no other team since.

[HuckleB]

10. Hmm. I don't see why Hall of Famers are necessary for a dynasty.

It's a team sport, and the Patriots play like a dynasty team. That's really all that matters.

[MikeG]

21. Every other dynasty had them. Which is why the Patriots aren't

[HuckleB]

25. Sorry, but your logic doesn't follow.

You've taken a meaningless item and attempted to apply it where it has no meaning.

The Patriots are every bit a dynasty.

I'm sorry that it pains you so to live with that.

[MikeG]

26. They also didn't make the playoffs in 2002.

Where's the dominance?

The Steelers made the playoffs every year from 1972 to 1979.

NO DYNASTY.

[HuckleB]

36. Boy, it really hurts you right down to the bone, doesn't it?

The PATRIOTS are a DYNASTY!

:evilgrin:

[OneBlueSky]

12. last I heard, football was a team sport . . .

and the fact that the Patriots are winning without a plethora of "superstars" makes them an even greater team than those that relied on the marquee players . . . and whoever said that you need superstars to be considered a dynasty? . . . and just who determines who's a dynasty and who's not? . . . and frankly, who cares? . . .

[sniffa]

13. it's just mikeg

moving the goaL posts again, and again. next year it wiLL be, "it's not a dynasty unLess your team's coLors are bLack and goLd"

[Ravenseye]

14. MikeG Come On

I love the Steelers and always will but give some respect to the Patriots.

They ARE a dynasty. They'll have hall of fame players, but give them time. That's like saying in 1980 that the Steelers weren't a dynasty because they didn't have any Hall of Fame players.

The Patriots have joined the elite dynasties of the NFL. The Green Bay Packers, The Steelers, The Cowboys, The 49ers...and yes The Patriots.

Besides I disagree. You don't need any Hall of Fame players to be a dynasty. The dynasty is team derived. The Patriots won 3 out of 4. They're in the club. End of story.

[MikeG]

22. Only two are making the Pro Bowl. What does that tell you.

Not a dynasty.

[Ravenseye]

31. It tells me nothing of the sort.

All it tells me is that you're acting more like a Boston fan than a Pittsburgh fan.

Grow up. They're a dynasty. It doesn't take anything away from the Steelers. Be big about it. IF someone says somethign stupid like the Steelers weren't a dynasty, feel free to smack them around, but to say that the Patriots winning 3 of 4 aren't a dynasty simply because they don't have any hall of fame players, because they're all currently playing.

That's just....well it's not dumb....it's just spiteful and mean.

[Arkana]

37. Check the AFC roster again, lumpy

Dillon and Bruschi are going too, in place of Edgerrin James and Ray Lewis.

That would make four. GO PATRIOTS!

[WilliamPitt]

15. Spread out across the far-superior AFC

The Eagles had a bunch of pro-bowlers because the NFC sucks so bad it bends light.

Once and future Patriots pro-bowlers, just for the record:

Tom Brady (Super Bowl MVP x2, three-time champion)
Deion Branch (Super Bowl MVP)
Adam Vinateri
Willie McGinnest
Corey Dillon
Ty Law
Troy Brown
Richard Seymour
Rodney Harrison
Tedy Bruschi
Ted Washington (who helped us win the super bowl last year before he was traded)

I think you need to build yourself a time machine and get yourself back to the Carter administration. Clearly, the brave new world of Patriots dominance has you all a-twitter.

[Done]

17. 2 years ago the NFC's Bucks destroyed the Raiders.

Now the AFC has won two super bowls by a total of 6 points. This is dominance?

[WilliamPitt]

18. Look at the whole league

Better yet, look who made the playoffs. Patriots/Jets/Steelers/Colts v. the Eagles and six days of rain. There were sub-500 teams in contention for a berth this year.

[MikeG]

27. Watch your team finish under .500 next year.

[WilliamPitt]

45. Keep dreaming

The same team is coming back next year. As for the Steelers, well...

[MikeG]

20. They're mostly scrubs. Brady and Vinatieri maybe.

The rest, nope.

[WilliamPitt]

23. LOL

Yeah. Three-time-champs-in-four-years scrubs.

You are, I think, the bitterest man on DU.

I'll be waiting patiently for your next twelve whiner threads about the Pats as I plan to attend yet another victory parade.

SCOREBOARD.

[MikeG]

24. Send us a Democrat who can win first.

[WilliamPitt]

32. He was better than Tom Ridge

Thanks for that, since we're playing this dumb game.

[MikeG]

35. I don't follow that one. But enjoy your Super Bowl.

And when my Steelers kick your Patriot's ass next fall.

I'll be yapping up a storm.

[DaveinMD]

19. Brady, Viniterri, Harrison

are hall of famers. Maybe Ty Law.

[MikeG]

29. That doesn't make them a dynasty. Sorry.

[DaveinMD]

34. Their championships make them a dynasty

You have an axe to grind. Just admit they are a dynasty, but not as good as the Steelers of the 70s and move on.

[Baclava]

33. I gotta give them props...

Yes, they're a dynasty.

But one of little consequence.

I said before the season...they win the SB this year they are a dynasty...I don't think they are as good a team as last year...and maybe not as good as 2001 even...but I have a problem with putting them up with the greatest of all time.

I would rate all of these teams above these Pats...

60s packers
70s steelers
70s cowboys
80s 49ers
90s cowboys
90s packers
90s broncos

I also think their run is over...9-7 at best next year without the men behind the curtain...but really...

Who gives a fuck?. The season's over and now its time to talk about the draft.

(I'm working on my next sure fire first round mock)

[StopTheMorans]

38. who made you the "dynasty metric" guy?

the steelers won theirs in a league with fewer teams and with no salary cap? dynasty? hardly, the patriots are a dynasty.

[sniffa]

39. the pats are not a dynasty

a dynasty requires the team to have bLack and goLd coLors.

[StopTheMorans]

40. oh yeah, i forgot, that's the metric of a dynasty, black and gold uniforms

and not winning a championship in 30 years...

[sniffa]

41. oh snap!

hey, you going to the parade? i'm so sick of these things, but i'm gonna suck it up again and go see the champs. :P

[StopTheMorans]

42. nah, to tell you the truth, they're getting old, i think i'll just stay at

work. besides, i'd have to look at the whole team instead of focusing on individuals because the patriots don't have any great players, and we all know that football isn't a team sport, and that teams don't make dynasties, individual players do <sarcasm off>

[mark414]

43. i think it's even more impressive

that they DON'T have a roster chock full of hall of famers, because they still manage to just whip everyone's ass

and this is coming from someone who rooted against them

[ProfessorGAC]

44. Of Course! In The 70's You Could Do That

Your definition, however, leaves some room for improvement, since the economic & fiscal structure of the game has changed RADICALLY since the Steelers were dominant. To suggest that Hall of Fame credentials are what sets a dynasty is completely unrealistic in today's NFL.

Also, how many of them were in the Hall Of Fame at the time they were dominant? Oh yeah! NONE! So, you're argument only carries water if you didn't think they were a dynasty then, and that you began thinking of them as a dynasty only after they got all those guys in the Hall. Thus, you contradicted yourself!

Sorry, but your premise would seem to fail the logic test.
The Professor

[MalachiConstant]

46. is that somewhere inherent in the definition?

i wasn't aware of that. i actually think that makes the patriots a better team. perhaps the steelers had better starpower, but the pats have shown that they don't need superstars. they can lose starters and still win.

by the way, players can't be nominated for the hall until after their retirement.

[Career Prole]

47. Absolutely correct!

Hell, the Pats only make it to the Pro Bowl as an afterthought (of course, after Robert Edwards I'd prefer they stayed away from the Losers' Bracket Bowl).
It's only three Super Bowls out of the first four in the new millenium and that doesn't make a dynasty.
The statistics from the same period just spell dominance, not dynasty.

I appreciate your idea, Big Mike!
Now instead of worrying about my present-day Celts, I'll just live in the Celtic glory years and point out the shortcomings of today's leaders against those Celtics. :hi: