NFL's 100 best teams of all time

[NFL-Solomon]

Seems to put waaaaaaaaay too much stock into postseason result for the most part. Losing in the SB seems to have frowned upon in an overly negative manner.

You don't lose on the biggest stage of your vocation.

That's why he's called Alexander the Great, not Alexander the mostly proficient.

 

[GNG]

This list, like your motha':

Another unhappy Pats fan...

 

[rmilia1]

This is, without a doubt... the dumbest post in the history of posts. lol. Holy shit.

You use how much a team "dominated" to determine "best team ever". That's the entire point of bringing up point differential, post-season dominance, etc.

This is true with any sport. Baseball and basketball too. How easily did they roll through the playoffs? How dominant were they in the regular season? 72-10 Bulls, Big Red Machine of the 70's, 27 Yankees, etc.

what was dominant 50 years ago would get destroyed now so by definition it can't be the best ever

And what would destroy those teams now... wouldn't be the same 50 years ago. So, what's your point?

Hank Aaron, Willie Mays or Babe Ruth probably never saw a 100 MPH fastball or breaking stuff like guys throw today. If they did, it was VERY rare. They were also inferiorly trained and conditioned. They would probably fair horribly if you tossed them into the fire tomorrow night in an MLB lineup. Does that mean they aren't three of the best ever to play? No.

You really need to cut your losses on this one.

So Wilt Chamberlain is the best basketball player ever because he was most dominant ?? Get real man . You can go wrestle 5th graders and pin them all for the rest of your life . Doesn't make you the best wrestler ever either . Team dominance doesn't mean shit other than that team was great for that era . Last year's Bengals would beat the 60s Packers by 5 TDs. Just the way it is

 

[GNG]

2007 Patriots are (#17)?

And the 1968 Jets (16) > 2004 Patriots (29) ?



Call me a homer, but this guy seems like a Patriot hater.

You're a homer.

 

[NFL-Solomon]

Footballoutsiders Regular Season DVOA of NFL Champions. Numbers are Overall, Offense, Defense (with lower numbers being better), S/T):

1 WAS 1991 56.9% 27.2% -21.1% 8.6%
2 GB 1962 47.9% 21.4% -20.7% 5.8%
3 GB 1961 46.0% 27.6% -11.6% 6.8%
4 CHI 1985 45.3% 12.5% -26.8% 6.0%
5 GB 1996 41.9% 15.2% -19.3% 7.4%
6 SEA 2013 40.0% 9.4% -25.8% 4.8%
7 MIA 1973 38.4% 19.5% -15.6% 3.3%
8 KC 1969 37.6% 7.3% -25.6% 4.6%
9 CLE1 1950 37.5% 14.9% -14.9% 7.7%
10 DAL 1971 36.3% 23.3% -11.3% 1.7%

They do mention that the Bears demolishing teams in the playoffs isn't factored in here so there is a good argument with their model for them being #1 overall. There aren't any Steelers or Niners teams on this list, though, so its definitely a weird list but it does seem to catch teams from different eras more than the one mentioned in this thread.

That's a joke, right?

 

[GNG]

Last year's Bengals would beat the 60s Packers by 5 TDs. Just the way it is

This would qualify as the dumbest comment you've ever made and you've made lots of dumb comments. I suggest you go to the political thread where you can post your nonsense.

 

[NFL-Solomon]

Want the best teams of the Super Bowl era (you know from when it wasn't a half league)?

Introducing ... The T.R.U.E. Metric

 

[NFL-Solomon]

This would qualify as the dumbest comment you've ever made and you've made lots of dumb comments. I suggest you go to the political thread where you can post your nonsense.

I wanna second that, but he's made some real dog slobber lickers before.

 

[Fountain City Blues]

Footballoutsiders Regular Season DVOA of NFL Champions. Numbers are Overall, Offense, Defense (with lower numbers being better), S/T):

1 WAS 1991 56.9% 27.2% -21.1% 8.6%
2 GB 1962 47.9% 21.4% -20.7% 5.8%
3 GB 1961 46.0% 27.6% -11.6% 6.8%
4 CHI 1985 45.3% 12.5% -26.8% 6.0%
5 GB 1996 41.9% 15.2% -19.3% 7.4%
6 SEA 2013 40.0% 9.4% -25.8% 4.8%
7 MIA 1973 38.4% 19.5% -15.6% 3.3%
8 KC 1969 37.6% 7.3% -25.6% 4.6%
9 CLE1 1950 37.5% 14.9% -14.9% 7.7%
10 DAL 1971 36.3% 23.3% -11.3% 1.7%

They do mention that the Bears demolishing teams in the playoffs isn't factored in here so there is a good argument with their model for them being #1 overall. There aren't any Steelers or Niners teams on this list, though, so its definitely a weird list but it does seem to catch teams from different eras more than the one mentioned in this thread.

It's really interesting how many people will tell you the 1968 Jets > 1969 Chiefs and that Joe Namath > Len Dawson. All I am gonna say about this one.

 

[GNG]

It's really interesting how many people will tell you the 1968 Jets > 1969 Chiefs and that Joe Namath > Len Dawson. All I am gonna say about this one.

You've said enough.

 

[rmilia1]

This would qualify as the dumbest comment you've ever made and you've made lots of dumb comments. I suggest you go to the political thread where you can post your nonsense.

Get . Real . It's 2 different eras . 2 different size and speed of men . It's like saying the 60s Celtics could beat an NBA team now . Shit it's even crazier than that .

I'm sure teams 30-50 years ago were very good compared to that era but the word "best " means best . Not most dominant or greatest comparatively . There shouldn't be a single team in the top 10 from more than 20 years ago

 

[GNG]

Get . Real . It's 2 different eras . 2 different size and speed of men . It's like saying the 60s Celtics could beat an NBA team now . Shit it's even crazier than that .

I'm sure teams 30-50 years ago were very good compared to that era but the word "best " means best . Not most dominant or greatest comparatively . There shouldn't be a single team in the top 10 from more than 20 years ago

Quit while you are behind. I read enough of your nonsense on the political threads without having to read your stupidity here. You are one of the least informed posters on SportsHoopla and only post to get a reaction.

 

[rmilia1]

Quit while you are behind. I read enough of your nonsense on the political threads without having to read your stupidity here. You are one of the least informed posters on SportsHoopla and only post to get a reaction.

Lol. The 60s NFL champion Packers lost to the college all stars after they won the title but they'd definitely beat a NFL team now lololololol

 

[boogiewithstu2007]

2007 Patriots are (#17)?

And the 1968 Jets (16) > 2004 Patriots (29) ?



Call me a homer, but this guy seems like a Patriot hater.

I agree, Pats should have some teams higher up...

 

[GNG]

Lol. The 60s NFL champion Packers lost to the college all stars after they won the title

How many Super Bowls have the Falcons ever won? Until they do you have no credibility here.

 

[boogiewithstu2007]

Only the 92 Cowboys team was listed and at 26 this list is just sad
no mention of the other 2 90's teams
This list was not done by a learned football observer

Agreed bro, one of those Cowboys teams in the 90’s should be cracking the top 10 hands down ...

 

[GNG]

I agree, Pats should have some teams higher up...

The 2007 Patriots lost to Eli Manning in the Super Bowl and you think they should be rated higher?

 

[GNG]

Agreed bro, one of those Cowboys teams in the 90’s should be cracking the top 10 hands down ...

I'm a Cowboys fan and they were good teams but none should be in the top 10 all time.

 

[boogiewithstu2007]

The 2007 Patriots lost to Eli Manning in the Super Bowl and you think they should be rated higher?

They did come minutes away from an undefeated season, which woulda put them in an argument for the best team ever... Sports can be brutal... but some of there title years they’ve had some strong teams...

 

[boogiewithstu2007]

I'm a Cowboys fan and they were good teams but none should be in the top 10 all time.

They’re close, some of those Cowboys teams in the 90’s were strong in every category... If not the top 10 VERY close...