It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Newz Forum: FOOTBALL: Dean's List: Dynasty, Destiny and Density: The Story of Super Bowl XXXIX

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 1 2005 @ 11:54 AM
link   
Forget about "dynasty" and "destiny." The theme of Super Bowl XXXIX just might be "density"...
 

When asked to name the Patriots' cornerbacks this past Thursday, Freddie Mitchell dropped the ball. "Twenty-two, 25 and 37," affirmed the Eagles wide-out. "I'm on a need to know basis. I need to know the numbers, and that's it. I don't want to know the names. I guarantee the numbers are right." That's nice, Freddie, but I guarantee there's no #25 on the New England roster. And #37 Rodney Harrison? He's a safety. Guaranteed...

New England everyman Troy Brown is a WR playing DB. Mitchell, on the other hand, is a DB playing WR...

It's widely believed that a team that's won three Super Bowls in four years is a dynasty. But if that's the case, the Steelers of the '70s don't even qualify. Pittsburgh, after all, won in '74, '75, '78 and '79. That's four times in six years, but not three in four at any given point. This is not to say that the Steel Curtain wasn't a dynasty, no, no. It's just that maybe a dynasty should be defined as three championships in five years, not four...

But wait. The 49ers of the '80s are a dynasty by all accounts, and they never won three times in four years either, never mind three in five. They did, however, win three times in six years and four in nine, with Super Bowl wins in '81, '84, '88 and '89...

The Cowboys of the '90s, however, did manage to capture three championships in four years, with wins in '92, '93 and '95. At least they fit the alleged parameters...

Still, no team appearing in its third Super Bowl in a given decade has ever lost after winning the first two. This seems to be the truest definition of the dynasty: A team that wins every Super Bowl, of which there are at least three, in which it appears during a period of less than ten years...

So it seems the whole dynasty thing is a work in progress. We won't know until 2008 at the earliest if Belichick and the Patriots fit the bill, if you will...

But if the Eagles win this Sunday, the Patriots will have to defend their dynasty position with the black eye of having lost a Super Bowl, something with which none of the previous regimes had to contend...

During a press conference this past Monday, Coach Belichick laid out his strategy for the Super Bowl. "If you don't score, I don't think you can win," he said. "There's no question defense is important. So are offense and special teams. And you can't turn the ball over." Belichick was also quick to note that "not losing" and "scoring more points than the Eagles" would be high on his priority list for Sunday's game...

Way back in 1970, sophomore head coach John Madden brought the Oakland Raiders to the brink of the Super Bowl only to fall to the Baltimore Colts in the AFC championship. Then, from 1973 to 1975, Madden and the Raiders lost three consecutive conference title games. Sound familiar, Philadelphia? But Madden persevered, and the Silver and Black were Super Bowl XI Champions in 1976. The following season, the Raiders once again fell one game short of the season finale. Today, we don't remember how Madden lost five conference championship games in eight years. We selectively recall how he molded the Raiders into a dominant franchise and won it all when he finally had the chance. So give Andy Reid and the Eagles their due. And win or lose in Super Bowl XXXIX, give them time. History demands it...

On a lighter note, Reid is trying to become the first mustachioed head coach not named Mike to win a Super Bowl and just the third overall. Mikes Holmgren and Ditka won with the '96 Packers and '85 Bears, respectively. I'm Dean Christopher...

[Edited on 2/1/05 by deanchristopher]




posted on Feb, 2 2005 @ 07:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by deanchristopher
It's widely believed that a team that's won three Super Bowls in four years is a dynasty. But if that's the case, the Steelers of the '70s don't even qualify. Pittsburgh, after all, won in '74, '75, '78 and '79. That's four times in six years, but not three in four at any given point. This is not to say that the Steel Curtain wasn't a dynasty, no, no. It's just that maybe a dynasty should be defined as three championships in five years, not four...

But wait. The 49ers of the '80s are a dynasty by all accounts, and they never won three times in four years either, never mind three in five. They did, however, win three times in six years and four in nine, with Super Bowl wins in '81, '84, '88 and '89...

The Cowboys of the '90s, however, did manage to capture three championships in four years, with wins in '92, '93 and '95. At least they fit the alleged parameters...


Disappointingly, none of the above teams had any connection with Joan Collins.



Still, no team appearing in its third Super Bowl in a given decade has ever lost after winning the first two. This seems to be the truest definition of the dynasty: A team that wins every Super Bowl, of which there are at least three, in which it appears during a period of less than ten years...

So it seems the whole dynasty thing is a work in progress. We won't know until 2008 at the earliest if Belichick and the Patriots fit the bill, if you will...

But if the Eagles win this Sunday, the Patriots will have to defend their dynasty position with the black eye of having lost a Super Bowl, something with which none of the previous regimes had to contend...


The Washington Redskins of the 1980's were close to being a co-dynasty, an errent pass from Joe Theismann and benching Marcus Allen being the difference.



During a press conference this past Monday, Coach Belichick laid out his strategy for the Super Bowl. "If you don't score, I don't think you can win," he said. "There's no question defense is important. So are offense and special teams. And you can't turn the ball over." Belichick was also quick to note that "not losing" and "scoring more points than the Eagles" would be high on his priority list for Sunday's game...


He is the best at dealing with the media. He doesn't bow to the pressures of giving away too much, just providing the obvious answers. That is huge in his team's success.



posted on Feb, 2 2005 @ 07:08 PM
link   
dy·nas·ty Audio pronunciation of "dynasty" ( P ) Pronunciation Key (dn-st)
n. pl. dy·nas·ties

1. A succession of rulers from the same family or line.
2. A family or group that maintains power for several generations: a political dynasty controlling the state.


[Middle English dynastie, from Old French, from Late Latin dynasta, lordship, from Greek dunasteia, from dunasts, lord. See dynast.]dy·nastic (d-nstk) adj.
dy·nasti·cal·ly adv.

dictionary.com


TRD

posted on Feb, 6 2005 @ 09:12 PM
link   
Now are they a Dynasty?



posted on Feb, 6 2005 @ 09:27 PM
link   
well, since there is no set definition, it's your own decision. For me, to be a dynasty, you should dominate a decade, which they haven't done, yet. But they seem primed to do so.




top topics
 
0

log in

join