Dynasty - the poll

[Hbomb]

Championships. In fact their first two Superbowls weren't called Superbowls when played.

But they never did 5 in a row. But do have the most.

 

[Hbomb]

OK. Pre-SB era. So your definition is 4 titles in a row or more. Fair enough.

To be honest I thought they had 5 in a row.

 

[Hbomb]

It seemed they were beating the Giants for the crown every year in the early 60s.


It was only twice.

 

[boogiewithstu2007]

Too early to say, BUT Seattle's D is intact and Russ having another playoff run and experience behind him with more weapons to work with, I think the Seahawks look better right now than they did going into last year... That young Pats team in the early 2000's was very similar to this Seahawks team ... Good young QB, Good solid defense .... Seahawks have a shot, time will tell ....

 

[Scooby-Doo]

To be honest I thought they had 5 in a row.

They may have. I don't know, nor do I care.
I would be happy seeing my team win one SB. Screw this dynasty shit.

 

[Beaker]

They have as good a chance as any team, but a lot of things have to break your way in the NFL, and not just with health

Single elimination playoffs mean that the best team does not always win it all. Hell, the last time my Packers won the Super Bowl they went 10-6 and were a 6 seed. I do not think they were the best team that year (although, fun fact! The 2010 Packers were never down by more than 7 points the entire year. Pretty crazy stat). Then, the next year they went 15-1, were the best team all year and lost their first playoff game. The 2007 Pats were the best team and did not win. The 1999 Vikings were the best team and did not win.

And in the NFC right now you have the Packers, Cowboys and Cardinals (so long as they do not have me playing QB for them) who will all be really good. In the AFC the Colts will be contending for the next decade, the Pats will continue to win, Denver has a year or 2 left in the tank and the Ravens and Steelers are always hanging around.

It is just so hard to win a Super Bowl in the NFL and championships are what make dynasties.

So I give this about a 10% chance, and I mean that as a compliment to the Seahawks.

 

[HaroldSeattle]

When the Seahawks won the SuperBowl, all I heard that in the salary cap era it's nearly impossible not to fall off a cliff and miss the play offs, never mind returning to the SuperBowl for another go at it.
Times have changed, back to back SB appearances rarely happen, if the Seahawks return for a third......well that obviously is something special in this era. Call it what you want and yes, I think they have a shot to do that. Love the roster right now. Seems fully loaded and ready for another run.

 

[NWPATSFAN]

LOL @ Mouthieinc

"Why do you guise start all these threads about the Pats? I'm so confused."

I was going to start a thread about the Titans. But, I fell asleep before I started it.

 

[NWPATSFAN]

They have as good a chance as any team, but a lot of things have to break your way in the NFL, and not just with health

Single elimination playoffs mean that the best team does not always win it all. Hell, the last time my Packers won the Super Bowl they went 10-6 and were a 6 seed. I do not think they were the best team that year (although, fun fact! The 2010 Packers were never down by more than 7 points the entire year. Pretty crazy stat). Then, the next year they went 15-1, were the best team all year and lost their first playoff game. The 2007 Pats were the best team and did not win. The 1999 Vikings were the best team and did not win.

And in the NFC right now you have the Packers, Cowboys and Cardinals (so long as they do not have me playing QB for them) who will all be really good. In the AFC the Colts will be contending for the next decade, the Pats will continue to win, Denver has a year or 2 left in the tank and the Ravens and Steelers are always hanging around.

It is just so hard to win a Super Bowl in the NFL and championships are what make dynasties.

So I give this about a 10% chance, and I mean that as a compliment to the Seahawks.

Can you play QB? If so the Cards could've used you last year. If that was the case we may not even be having this discussion as Seattle may not have made the POs had AZ won those games?

 

[boogiewithstu2007]

They have as good a chance as any team, but a lot of things have to break your way in the NFL, and not just with health

Single elimination playoffs mean that the best team does not always win it all. Hell, the last time my Packers won the Super Bowl they went 10-6 and were a 6 seed. I do not think they were the best team that year (although, fun fact! The 2010 Packers were never down by more than 7 points the entire year. Pretty crazy stat). Then, the next year they went 15-1, were the best team all year and lost their first playoff game. The 2007 Pats were the best team and did not win. The 1999 Vikings were the best team and did not win.

And in the NFC right now you have the Packers, Cowboys and Cardinals (so long as they do not have me playing QB for them) who will all be really good. In the AFC the Colts will be contending for the next decade, the Pats will continue to win, Denver has a year or 2 left in the tank and the Ravens and Steelers are always hanging around.

It is just so hard to win a Super Bowl in the NFL and championships are what make dynasties.

So I give this about a 10% chance, and I mean that as a compliment to the Seahawks.

Sometimes it comes down to who's healthy at the right time... I mean you have to have the talent, but you also need your good players out their ... I think that Packers team that didn't make it at 15-1 just didn't have the defense... I"m not sure what the injury situation was for the Pack at that time, but I know their defense was just non existent down the stretch ... Their offense carried them ... When the Pack won it all at the 6th seed their D was playing at a much higher level....

 

[NWPATSFAN]

When the Seahawks won the SuperBowl, all I heard that in the salary cap era it's nearly impossible not to fall off a cliff and miss the play offs, never mind returning to the SuperBowl for another go at it.
Times have changed, back to back SB appearances rarely happen, if the Seahawks return for a third......well that obviously is something special in this era. Call it what you want and yes, I think they have a shot to do that. Love the roster right now. Seems fully loaded and ready for another run.

You're correct on it is something special going back-back-back. However, as other posters have mentioned it takes a lot of ifs to stay relevant. If posters were saying the salary cap would kill you the very next year that was stupid. However, IMO to be dominant, relevant or a Dynasty? That should take 10 years of consistent winning divisions and confrences. The Hawks are starting to see the cap squeeze, Otherwise Wag and RW would be signed. Irving wants more... They have lost players to cap issues (meaning the team didn't want to pay what others offered). That is a loss to the cap.
O line wasn't fixed in FA. So it's a coin flip on whether rookies can step up and help that issue from last year.

I have to give RW credit. He was smart taking out an insurance policy. 40 sacks on a mobile QB last season ouch..

 

[NWPATSFAN]

To me Dynasty means multiple consecutive Titles.

Yankees.
Canadians.
Packers.


There are many mini runs including Patriots.

What about the Celtics?

 

[NWPATSFAN]

Too early to say, BUT Seattle's D is intact and Russ having another playoff run and experience behind him with more weapons to work with, I think the Seahawks look better right now than they did going into last year... That young Pats team in the early 2000's was very similar to this Seahawks team ... Good young QB, Good solid defense .... Seahawks have a shot, time will tell ....

Right on good post. Not being a homer and made some valid points. Wish more posters would back up their talk with some facts and or reasoning.

 

[The Derski]

Cowherd was talking about dynasties in his show recently and he only considers a dynasty as 3 or more consecutive titles. I kinda agree. Maybe I'll take 3 outta 4 but you can't just start calling everything a dynasty nowadays. The Seahawks will have to win the next two SBs and that would be 3 outta 4. Possible but not likely.

 

[Southieinnc]

Cowherd was talking about dynasties in his show recently and he only considers a dynasty as 3 or more consecutive titles. I kinda agree. Maybe I'll take 3 outta 4 but you can't just start calling everything a dynasty nowadays. The Seahawks will have to win the next two SBs and that would be 3 outta 4. Possible but not likely.

Patriots had 3 of 4 and were certainly a dynasty but as we kept winning The SB was not to be. Got there but just out of reach. Felt good to get there and we just missed in 2012 season. We really didn't belong there. We were over-achievers. Some more good seasons were debatable but ended with a win in SB 49. Do you look at the totality of the last 15 years with it's faults and wins or do you look at 2002 - 2005 as a dynasty and a new one beginning - just like the Seahawks?

 

[Sgt Brutus]

Distance between 07 and 14 is too great to be called a dynasty or even a start of one

 

[Southieinnc]

Distance between 07 and 14 is too great to be called a dynasty or even a start of one

Huh?

 

[Sgt Brutus]

Huh?

Talking about the Seahawks

Guess it was 05 and 13, the time between superbowl wins

 

[Sgt Brutus]

Cowherd was talking about dynasties in his show recently and he only considers a dynasty as 3 or more consecutive titles. I kinda agree. Maybe I'll take 3 outta 4 but you can't just start calling everything a dynasty nowadays. The Seahawks will have to win the next two SBs and that would be 3 outta 4. Possible but not likely.

Heat only won 2 but 4 straight NBA finals appearances, does that count?

I was listening to that cowherd seg too, good poinrs he made

 

[Southieinnc]

Talking about the Seahawks

Guess it was 05 and 13, the time between superbowl wins

Oh, I hear you. Seattle fans are generally not calling this a dynasty, they are saying they are "in the middle of one" What the hell is wrong with that? It may not get there but they have a lot better chance of getting there shortly than _______!!!!!!