PDA

View Full Version : The Most (and least) dominant NFL teams ranked.



Blackmallard
03-18-2007, 04:24 AM
The Most Dominant Teams of the New Millenium, Ranked Scientifically for Your Amusement!

by Schuyler Esau

A while back JJFLR came up with a rating system to gauge who the best overall teams of the decade were. It included the years from 2000-2006 and was scored like this:

#1) Regular season victories: 1 victory = 1 point
#2) Each Playoff Berth: Add 10 points
#3) Each Division Championship: Add 15 points
#4) Each Conference Championship: Add 20 points
#5) Each Super Bowl Championship: Add 50 points
#6) Each season with 4 or less victories: Deduct 10 points

I thought the results were interesting, but when I think of the run the Titans went on I’m not really interested in what happened after they got old, went to salary cap hell, and rebuilt, I’d rather just compare their good run to other team’s good runs to declare who had the most dominating team.

I kept the exact same point system, but changed how it was applied. Instead of taking every year from every team from 2000-2006 I took their best four consecutive years. I arrived at four years because it generally encapsulated teams’ dominant streaks the best. Almost no team’s per year point average improves by adding a fifth year, and it would cause many teams to add a transition or rebuilding year that does not really fit with their good team. It gets the Eagles four consecutive AFCC game appearances, the Pats three Superbowls, the Colts best four years, and captures many other runs well. There are some teams that the four consecutive years do not capture perfectly, but moving it to three or five makes it worse in general.

I did not make a sharp cutoff at 2000 since I felt it was arbitrary to say for instance that the Titans Superbowl appearance belonged to a different era since it happened in 1999, even though it was the exact same core of players that had a good run in the 00’s.

I separated the AFC and NFC rankings. I think the results apply better within conferences than they do across conferences since so many points come from playoff appearances and division titles, which the AFC and NFC do not compete with each other for.


AFC

I pretty much agree with the way the AFC came out. At the top there should not really be much debate, it is pretty cut and dry. I had forgotten how recently Oakland was actually a really good team, but doing this list reminded me.

1.http://www.pigskinheaven.com/gallery/files/9/2/0/patshelmet.gifPatriots 2001-2004 333 points

This is the only team with multiple championships on the list. They easily top the list despite missing the playoffs in 2002, which shows that three out of four ain’t bad. Adding their two good years after this would just drag down their average score per year. I always felt like their 2004 title was their best, it turns out that they defeated the next two champs on their way to it, who are also the next two teams on the AFC list.

48 wins 3 playoff berths 3 division titles 3 AFC championships 3 Superbowl wins

2.http://www.pigskinheaven.com/gallery/files/7/team_colts1_882286.gif Colts 2003-2006 220 points

These are the Manning/Dungy Colts at their best. What sets this team apart from the other single Superbowl winners is that they did not have a down year during their run accumulating at least 12 wins in each of these years and winning the division each time. This Colts team will be remembered as the best offense of its day. They are the clear cut number two team of this time period for now.

50 wins 4 playoff berths 4 div champs 1 AFC championship 1 Superbowl win

3. http://www.pigskinheaven.com/gallery/files/7/team_steelers1_366514.gifPittsburgh 2002-2005 172 points

These four years aren’t really one run in my mind. I think the 2006 season belongs with the Roethlisberger years more than the 02 and 03 ones, but the points work out better when you include their 2002 division title. The biggest common thread connecting the seasons are Bill Cowher being at the helm. The player who I think represents these four years best is Hines Ward, who was their leading receiver every year and became the all-time franchise leading receiver. They are only credited with two division championships, but they basically stole the division from the Bengals in 2005 by winning the Superbowl.

42 wins 3 playoff berths 2 division championships 1 AFC championship 1 Superbowl

4. http://www.pigskinheaven.com/gallery/files/7/ravenshelmet_154726.gifRavens 2000-2003 154 points

This is the defensive equivalent of the Colts offense. These Ravens will likely be remembered as the best defense of this era and are personified by MLB Ray Lewis. Just like Pittsburgh they won their Superbowl from a wildcard spot. There must be something wrong with the AFC North, they like to do things the hard way.

39 wins 3 playoff berths 1 division championship 1 AFC championship 1 Superbowl

5. http://www.pigskinheaven.com/gallery/files/7/raiders.jpg Raiders 1999-2002 136 pts
It may be a surprise to some that Oakland tops the AFC West, but it really isn’t even close. The Gruden/Gannon years are by far the best run of any AFC West team since Elway retired and it was capped off by a trip to the Superbowl sans Gruden. The next year Gannon broke his neck, everyone on the team got too old simultaneously and the Raiders franchise disbanded. Rumors persist that pro football may return to Oakland some day.

41 wins 3 playoff berths 3 division championships 1 AFC championship

6. http://www.pigskinheaven.com/gallery/files/9/2/0/titanshelmet.gifTitans: 1999-2002 124 points

These Titan’s run really extended to 03 where McNair won the league MVP and the Titans went 12-4. It is too bad that this team did not get their hands on a title, they had the total package but came up a little short. It feels like it is a bit forgotten that Tennessee was an elite AFC team not too long ago. If this list were based on my opinion instead of on a completely scientific point system I would put them above the Raiders.

44 wins 3 playoff berths 2 division championships 1 AFC championship

7. http://www.pigskinheaven.com/gallery/files/7/broncos.jpgDenver 2003-2006 87 pts

The Jake Plummer Era. This team reached its peak in 2005 when it finally won a playoff game. The most impressive thing about Denver in this decade has been that they do not really have down years. They have not had a single losing season this millennium. This time period was also marked by a RB turnstile with a different back leading the team in rushing each of these years. Denver entertained us every offseason by making exciting trades and free agent signings aquiring players such as Javon Walker, Champ Bailey, and the entire Browns defense.

42 wins 3 playoff berths 1 division championship

8.http://www.pigskinheaven.com/gallery/files/7/jets1_466395.gif Jets 2001-2004 80 points

The Jets may have the highest playoff berth to win ratio on the list making the playoffs in three of these four years without ever getting more than ten wins and getting a division title with a 9-7 record. Edwards also made the playoffs at 9-7 his first year coaching Kansas City, so he must be a master of not wasting regular season victories.

35 wins 3 playoff berths 1 division championship

9.http://www.pigskinheaven.com/gallery/files/7/chargers.jpg San Diego 2003-2006 79 pts

San Diego would jump a few spots if it was not weighted down by one truly putrid season in this span. These are the Schottenheimer/Tomlinson years. There is no doubt in my mind that this is the best team in this era that has not won a single playoff game.

39 wins 2 playoffs 2 division championships 1 season under 5 wins

10.http://www.pigskinheaven.com/gallery/files/7/dolphinshelmet_768011.gif Dolphins 2000-2003 76 points

In retrospect the Dave Wannstedt years don’t look half bad. He picked up over 40 wins in these four seasons. Notice that Dave was not nearly as efficient at converting wins into playoff appearances as Herm Edwards. Wannstedt managed to miss the playoffs with a 9-7 and a 10-6 record, Edwards would probably have made two playoff trips and taken home a division title after seasons like that.

41 wins 2 playoff berths 1 div championship

11.http://www.pigskinheaven.com/gallery/files/7/chiefs.jpg Chiefs 2003-2006 74 pts

2006 does not really belong with the rest of these years which would otherwise be the Vermeil/Green/Holmes team, but they squeaked into the playoffs in 2006 so I lumped it in there. Their only real season of note was 2003 when they began the year 9-0 and had their bid for perfection ended by the Bengals and a Chad Johnson guarantee. That was the first year I ever remember sportscasters talking so much about players being “X” factors and the player they were talking about was kick returner Dante Hall. I also remember that Marcus Camby of the New York Knicks was a huge “X” factor. This may be the offense most held back from accomplishing anything by its defense. Notice that while the AFC west did not have a single team in the top four of the AFC, they also do not have any in the bottom four.

39 wins 2 playoff berths 1 division championship

12.http://www.pigskinheaven.com/gallery/files/9/2/0/bengalshelmet.gif Bengals 2003-2006 60 points

The Bengals still only have one winning season in the last 16 years. Things are looking up for the team with their hot young offense and four consecutive seasons of .500 or better, but perhaps never before has the word “elite” been thrown around in reference to a team that has accomplished so little.

35 wins 1 playoff berth 1 div champ

13. http://www.pigskinheaven.com/gallery/files/7/team_jaguars1_617501.gifJaguars: 2003-2006 44 points

The Jaguars best year in this span is generally considered among fans to be “next” year.

34 wins 1 playoff berth

14.http://www.pigskinheaven.com/gallery/files/7/billshelmet_917746.gif Bills: 2002-2005 28 points

The team got shaken up and there was not a lot of continuity throughout this period. The high point for this team was probably anticipation of the 2005 season as they ended 2004 pretty hot. They are…uhh….the best team to not make the playoffs since 2000.

28 wins

15.http://www.pigskinheaven.com/gallery/files/9/2/0/brownshelmet.gif Browns 2001-2004 15 points

At least they aren’t the Texans.

25 wins 1 season under 5 wins

16.http://www.pigskinheaven.com/gallery/files/9/2/0/texanshelmet.gif Texans: 2003-2006 10 points

They are the Texans. Their highlight during this time period was recording their first and only win against the Colts. Their other franchise highlight was beating the Cowboys in their very first game, unfortunately it was not possible to include the year that happened in.

20 wins 1 season below 5 wins


NFC

One of the things that inspired me to write this was the debate over who had the most dominant NFC run of the decade the Eagles or the Bucs. The last formula said the Eagles, which I basically agreed with. Few teams have ever been as consistently good over such a long time. The way the other scoring system worked however heavily favored their run so I decided to see how they stacked up using this system. After reviewing my numbers I feel that we can state conclusively that the best NFC team of the era has been the:

1.http://www.pigskinheaven.com/gallery/files/7/rams.jpg Rams 1999-2002 194 points

The Greatest Show on Turf got worked over when the eras were split leaving 1999 in the wrong decade. This is the most dominant team to come out of the NFC in the time period we are looking at and is the only team aside from the Patriots to appear in multiple Superbowls. Faulk, Warner, Holt, and Bruce were the mainstays of this team under the coordination and coaching of Mad Mike Martz. Vermeil was head coach in their Superbowl win, but scooted afterward. Both my opinion and science have the Greatest Show on Turf as the third best team on this list behind the Patriots and Colts.

44 wins 3 playoff berths 2 division championships 2 NFC championships 1 Superbowl win

2.http://www.pigskinheaven.com/gallery/files/7/bucs.jpg Bucs: 1999-2002 182 points

It was close but Tampa’s run from 1999-2002 finished ahead of the Eagle’s four consecutive conference championship appearances by virtue of their ability to seal the deal in the Superbowl. Their Superbowl win was hardly a fluke, they were playoff regulars and accumulated over 40 wins during this span. This is the last three years of Dungy’s tenure and the first of Gruden’s. Tampa was a very defensive team, second only to the Ravens in terms of how much their defense carried their offense to success.

42 wins 4 playoff berths 2 division championships 1 NFC championship 1 Superbowl win

3.http://www.pigskinheaven.com/gallery/files/9/2/0/eagleshelmet.gif Eagles: 2001-2004 168 points

The Eagles and Titans are probably the two teams who using a four year sample instead of a five year sample hurts the most. They would also benefit greatly if getting to the NFC championship game was worth points. They have dominated their own division in recent years like no other team has.

48 wins 4 playoffs 4 div champs 1 NFC championship

4.http://www.pigskinheaven.com/gallery/files/9/2/0/seahawkshelmet.gif Seahawks 2003-2006 146 points

The Seahawks do not get a lot of street cred for being top dog in the AFC West, which has been pretty weak during their reign. I think the formula got it right rating this as the fourth strongest team in the NFC though, they have had some playoff success in addition to racking up regular season wins and division titles.

41 wins 4 playoff berths 3 division championships 1 NFC championship

5.http://www.pigskinheaven.com/gallery/files/7/packershelmet_135700.gif Packers 2001-2004 144 points

The Packers got here from one thing: regular season success. They won division title after division title, but never made much noise in the playoffs appearing in no NFC title games in this span. Note that they have forced me to type as many fours as they possibly could in their entry in honor of Brett Favre.

44 wins 4 playoff berths 4 divison championships

6.http://www.pigskinheaven.com/gallery/files/7/bears1_157928.jpg Bears 2003-2006 106 points

This team really came together starting in 2005 and the 2005-2008 Bears will have an excellent chance to surpass the Packers as the most dominant AFC North team of the 00’s. The Bears specialize in defense and getting poor quarterbacks great win loss records. They are in danger of making skeptics admit that returning a missed field-goal for a touchdown is anything other than a fluke.

36 wins 2 playoff berths 2 division championships 1 NFC championship

7.http://www.pigskinheaven.com/gallery/files/7/panthers.jpg Panthers 2003-2006 92 points

These guys can’t seem to string two good seasons together.

37 wins 2 playoff berths 1 division championship 1 NFC championship

8.http://www.pigskinheaven.com/gallery/files/7/Giants1_456410.jpg Giants 1999-2002 91 points

That’s right sportsfans, the most sustained greatness the Giants have achieved lately came with Kerry Collins under center. I’ll always remember this team for running back that kick in the Superbowl only to let the Ravens do the exact same thing on the next play.

36 wins 2 playoff appearances 1 division championship 1 NFC championship

9.http://www.pigskinheaven.com/gallery/files/7/49ers.jpg 49ers 2000-2003 70 points

What I remember most about this team is Garcia to Owens, and their vicotory over the Giants in the playoffs where New York botched a fieldgoal in the closing seconds. Apparently my memories of the Kerry Collins Giants mostly revolve around them being hapless.

35 wins 2 playoff berths 1 division championship

10.http://www.pigskinheaven.com/gallery/files/7/falcons.jpg Atlanta 2002-2005 68 points

If it weren’t for Michael Vick there sure wouldn’t be much to say about this team.

33 wins 2 playoff berths 1 division title

11.http://www.pigskinheaven.com/gallery/files/9/2/0/saintshelmet.gif Saints 2000-2003 59 points

This team’s run reminds me a lot of the Bengals under Lewis, only with no hype. They combine a good offense with a crappy defense to hover around .500, but they did put up one good year. I used their best four years with Haslett for the ranking since it included their first franchise playoff win, but chances are good that the Saints will be remembered for their years from 2006-09 more than what they did early in the decade.

34 wins 1 playoff berth 1 division title

12.http://www.pigskinheaven.com/gallery/files/7/vikings.jpg Vikings 2000-2003 56 points

The Vikings have consistently fallen short of the playoffs. These are the Culpepper to Moss years, I had thought they got better results than this as a duo. I also noticed while compiling this that in Culpepper’s best statistical season, 2004, Nate Burleson was his leading receiver. Culpepper was off the hook that year but the Vikings only mustered eight wins. I was at the Colts vs. Vikings game and Culpepper looked like the best athlete on the field. He is a really big guy, but he can MOVE and throw the ball. He did fumble the ball backwards about 20 yards in that game.

31 wins 1 playoff berth 1 division title

13.http://www.pigskinheaven.com/gallery/files/9/2/0/cowboyshelmet.gif Dallas 2003-2006 54 points

America’s team has generated more media coverage from less results than anyone else. There has not been much memorable about the Cowboys since the 90’s.

34 wins 2 playoff appearances

14.http://www.pigskinheaven.com/gallery/files/7/team_redskins1_320647.gif Washington Redskins 1999-2002 43 points

Normally I wouldn’t include a year from before 2000 unless it was clearly part of a team that stayed together in the 00’s, but this stretch perfectly captures the lack of consistency from the Redskins while also adding up to be their best run according to the formula. They had four different head coaches, three different passing leaders and three different receiving leaders during these four years. The Redskins rank pretty far down the list of dominance, but are a tier above the bottom teams.

33 wins 1 playoff appearance

15.http://www.pigskinheaven.com/gallery/files/7/cardinals.jpg Cardinals 2003-2006 10 points

The Cardinals are on the verge of achieving their fourth consecutive season with more than four wins since 1987-1990.

20 wins 1 season under 5 wins

16.http://www.pigskinheaven.com/gallery/files/9/2/0/lionshelmet.gif Lions 2002-2005 5 wins 9 points

These are the Joey Harrington years. On the bright side he put together the best string of Lion’s seasons since the 90’s. On the downside it ranks dead last in the NFL.

19 wins 1 season under 5 wins

Crunked
03-18-2007, 07:55 AM
Pats100's points above all others, I would say that is about right, that would account for the 2 SB titles they have over all the teams that have won 1 this decade, what I find most interesting, or most telling is not the top of each breakdown but at the mid point of the packs, the Bengals, the Jags, Panthers and Giants et al. There is not much from a point perspective that seperates those teams, and one simple playoff push (or in a few cases one more push) by any of those would have catapulted them into the top 3. Showing that the point totals sometimes seemed skewed but the parity is right there, very tangible for at least 8-10 clubs of each division.

Sascha
03-18-2007, 08:21 AM
Well, this should at least quiet down any Bronco fans who thought their team deserved higher placement. Sure, they were consistently good, but haven't found the success to be in the group with the PAts, Colts and Steelers.

But I doubt that this will make Eagle fans any quieter. The Eagles are 2-1 in the playoffs against the Bucs, and all three games were played during Tampa's 4 year stretch, so if you added some points for head-to-head play then maybe the Eagles take over 2nd place. But thank you for at least quieting the notion that the Bucs were a one year show. The best team we had was probably the one of '99 that barely lost in the NFCCG to the "greatest show on turf", followed that up with 2 more playoff appearances (btw only 5 teams on your list can claim 4 playoff appearances, and neither league's top team is included on that list) and then went on to the title in '02.

Great job BM

Blackmallard
03-18-2007, 01:00 PM
Pats100's points above all others, I would say that is about right, that would account for the 2 SB titles they have over all the teams that have won 1 this decade, what I find most interesting, or most telling is not the top of each breakdown but at the mid point of the packs, the Bengals, the Jags, Panthers and Giants et al. There is not much from a point perspective that seperates those teams, and one simple playoff push (or in a few cases one more push) by any of those would have catapulted them into the top 3.

Point seperations mean different things at different levels. A 20 point seperation among two different Superbowl teams may reflect a relatively minor difference, but a 20 point difference between teams like Buffalo and the Texans reflects a much bigger disparity in how good they were.

Blackmallard
03-18-2007, 01:05 PM
Well, this should at least quiet down any Bronco fans who thought their team deserved higher placement. Sure, they were consistently good, but haven't found the success to be in the group with the PAts, Colts and Steelers.

Like I said the biggest thing the Broncos accomplished is that they almost always pull off winning seasons. They haven't dominated their division, which is tough to do, but unlike the Ravens and Steelers who also didn't really dominate their division the Broncos haven't done anything in the Playoffs.

Blackmallard
03-18-2007, 01:18 PM
But I doubt that this will make Eagle fans any quieter. The Eagles are 2-1 in the playoffs against the Bucs, and all three games were played during Tampa's 4 year stretch, so if you added some points for head-to-head play then maybe the Eagles take over 2nd place.

Its true that the Eagles accomplished some things that do not get reflected by the formula. Like I said, if you gave out points just for getting to the NFCC it would help them a lot. Keep in mind that the Eagles also get a LOT of credit for their division titles over a bottom three that rarely even challenged them during their run.


But thank you for at least quieting the notion that the Bucs were a one year show. The best team we had was probably the one of '99 that barely lost in the NFCCG to the "greatest show on turf", followed that up with 2 more playoff appearances (btw only 5 teams on your list can claim 4 playoff appearances, and neither league's top team is included on that list) and then went on to the title in '02.

Great job BM

No one year fluke teams or inconsistent teams won the Superbowl. All of the Superbowl winners except Baltimore got at least 40 wins over a four year span and Baltimore had 39. It may take luck to get a Superbowl win, but you also need a very good team.

Tronix
03-18-2007, 02:43 PM
No one year fluke teams or inconsistent teams won the Superbowl. All of the Superbowl winners except Baltimore got at least 40 wins over a four year span and Baltimore had 39. It may take luck to get a Superbowl win, but you also need a very good team.




:brilliant: :brilliant: :brilliant: :brilliant: :brilliant: :brilliant: :brilliant:

:hail: :hail: :hail: :hail: :hail: :hail: :hail: :hail: :hail:

jjflr
03-18-2007, 04:22 PM
I'm glad to see something from my boy Mallard...........I will expect something from you on a weekly basis now..........:p

this is an interesting twist on an ingenious ranking method..........;)

It looks like you added the '99 regular season to your formula.........mine started with the 2000 regular season but I get where you're coming from..........

Blackmallard
03-18-2007, 05:20 PM
It looks like you added the '99 regular season to your formula.........mine started with the 2000 regular season but I get where you're coming from..........

I only used seasons from before 2000 if I felt that they were basically the same team from the 00's. You can't get an accurate picture of the Marshall Faulk Rams team if you divide it up right at the decade. I almost used all the way back to the 1998 seasons for the Vikings and Cardinals, but decided that the Plummer Cardinals and Dennis Green Vikings were both 90's teams.

|(evin|(olb|(ritik
03-19-2007, 12:28 PM
I dont disagree with the theory here, but I do disagree with the design. Im thinking your point totals awarded for certain accomplishments needs to be revisited for this to be accurate. Im sorry but the Bucs being considered the more DOMINANT team than the Eagles over a 4 year stretch where the Eagles were clearly the better team based on winning 1 game is ridiculous.

Furthermore note the difference in points totals (which by this design is supposed to indicate level of dominance) between the Eagles Superbowl opponent and the Bucs Superbowl opponent.

This thing is flawed.

Tronix
03-19-2007, 06:58 PM
I dont disagree with the theory here, but I do disagree with the design. Im thinking your point totals awarded for certain accomplishments needs to be revisited for this to be accurate. Im sorry but the Bucs being considered the more DOMINANT team than the Eagles over a 4 year stretch where the Eagles were clearly the better team based on winning 1 game is ridiculous.

Furthermore note the difference in points totals (which by this design is supposed to indicate level of dominance) between the Eagles Superbowl opponent and the Bucs Superbowl opponent.

This thing is flawed.

Phil its not like the Eagles we're heads and shoulders better than Tampa Bay, slightly better? maybe..but not so much that the one superbowl win doesn't put them over the edge..

you Eagle fans keep thinking the only difference is the one superbowl, but its not just that win, even if the Eagles performance could be summed up as an "8" the Bucs performance could be summed up as a "7", and then you factor the championship and it bumps the Bucs over the Eagles. Its not hard to understand,
I know its like kryptonite and nails on a chalk board all in one, for the Bucs to have something over Philly, but until you guys get a Lombardi, I'm not hearing it.
The whole idea was, and I said this on the last rating system post, if you count a decade as 2000 - 2007 (7 years, not a decade.) Then yes, the Eagles we're certainly better over that time. But if you count the decade as 1997 - 2007 which is what a decade should be, then the Bucs edge out the Eagles, because 97' through 00' we're pretty good years for the Bucs, as good or better than the Eagles had...

Blackmallard
03-19-2007, 07:17 PM
I dont disagree with the theory here, but I do disagree with the design. Im thinking your point totals awarded for certain accomplishments needs to be revisited for this to be accurate.

I didn't invent the point system, if I designed my own I may have changed it up a little. I left it the same so I could compare the results to JJFLR's 2000-2006 list. The actual point totals assigned to various accomplishments are somewhat arbitrary, and no matter what values you assign it isn't going to be perfect. Some people felt for instance that winning the Superbowl should be much more important than it was in this formula. I do not agree with all of the results it generated, especially if you try to compare across the conferences, which is why I split the conferences into two lists.

I did select four years as the cutoff for looking at teams. In the Eagles case that does not tell the whole story of their team's run. I picked four years because that is the length of time that fits most team's good streaks the best. I didn't like the results of the five year scale because you get a lot more situations like exist with the Bears already where it isn't really rating one team, but fragments of two fairly different teams. Its not like my four year cutoff is the end all be all of comparing teams. If you want to look at what the Eagles did over seven years with the same exact grading system JJFLR has that ranked as well and they came out third in the entire league.

BigBenCan7
03-19-2007, 07:49 PM
Furthermore note the difference in points totals (which by this design is supposed to indicate level of dominance) between the Eagles Superbowl opponent and the Bucs Superbowl opponent.

But how much different would those point totals be had the Eagles won and the Bucs lost? :shrugging:

The gap would be cut by 100, for those counting.

Blackmallard
03-19-2007, 08:10 PM
But how much different would those point totals be had the Eagles won and the Bucs lost? :shrugging:

The gap would be cut by 100, for those counting.

Actually just 90. The Bucs would lose 70 points from not winning the NFCC or the Superbowl and the Eagles would pick up another 20. If the Eagles had then won that Superbowl they would have picked up another 50 points and topped the Rams.

If Oakland beat the Eagles in that hypothetical Superbowl that would rocket them ahead of the Steelers to third in the AFC and fourth overall behind the Pats, Rams, and Colts.

BigBenCan7
03-19-2007, 08:13 PM
Actually just 90. The Bucs would lose 70 points from not winning the NFCC or the Superbowl and the Eagles would pick up another 20. If the Eagles had then won that Superbowl they would have picked up another 50 points and topped the Rams.

If Oakland beat the Eagles in that hypothetical Superbowl that would rocket them ahead of the Steelers to third in the AFC and fourth overall behind the Pats, Rams, and Colts.

Well, correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe we're talking about the Patriots and the Raiders (the teams that the Bucs and Eagles played in their Super Bowls).

If the Eagles had won, the Pats would have lost 50 points, and if the Raiders had won, they would have gained 50 points, which would be a grand total of 100 points.

Blackmallard
03-19-2007, 08:15 PM
Well, correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe we're talking about the Patriots and the Raiders (the teams that the Bucs and Eagles played in their Super Bowls).

If the Eagles had won, the Pats would have lost 50 points, and if the Raiders had won, they would have gained 50 points, which would be a grand total of 100 points.

Oh, I thought he meant the NFCC game between the Eagles and Bucs. If the Eagles had won that they would have been up near the Rams even if they lost the Superbowl and the Bucs would be around 100 points.

DWalker24
03-20-2007, 03:03 PM
These rankings suck! Just kidding bro, wait in about a few years and the Saints would be much higher than that crappy ass spot!

Tronix
03-20-2007, 05:01 PM
These rankings suck! Just kidding bro, wait in about a few years and the Saints would be much higher than that crappy ass spot!

The Saints are in line, they just kept getting "butted"...theres no defense for the past, all you can do is turn the page...think of it this way the Saints have a clean slate, its like having a expansion team with history...:D