| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
eo5686
Joined: 28 Aug 2010
Posts: 111
|
 Posted: Sun Jan 20, 2013 4:08 pm Post subject: Best teams to not win a super bowl? |
 |
|
|
Who are some of the best teams not to win it?
1987 49ers
1990 49ers
1990 Bills
1998 Vikings
2001 Rams
2005 Colts
2007 Patriots
2009 Vikings |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
GaTechRavens
Joined: 25 Nov 2006
Posts: 15565
Location: Knoxville, TN
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 20, 2013 4:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
09 Vikings don't really belong there. Above average for 12-4 standards I guess, but not on the level of those other teams.
For older teams: the '68 Colts, '69 Vikings, and '83 Redskins all deserve to be on there. I'd include the '06 Chargers and '11 Packers as well.
_________________
| ArrowheadRage58 wrote: | | I'd much rather be in our position now than the Ravens, that's for sure. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
vikingsrule
Joined: 15 Nov 2005
Posts: 39507
Location: Land of 10,000 Lakes!
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 20, 2013 4:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
Easily, the 1998 Vikings. That team was awesome. Amazing offense combined with an opportunistic defense.
That offense could do everything from running the ball down your throat, playing a methodical possession passing attack to airing it out to #84. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mse326
Joined: 19 Jan 2008
Posts: 13519
Location: LORK on the sig
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 20, 2013 4:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
I'm gonna throw out a unique choice.
A lot of these "best to never win" can be traced to an injury or 2. Along those lines I think one that gets lost is the 1991 Eagles.
Defensively they had one of the greatest ever finishing the year ranked 1 versus the pass and run.
What hurt them was Randall Cunningham getting hurt in the first game. He was coming off the best year of his career too in 1990 where not only was he a beast but the team was the 3rd ranked offense in points and yards. His replacement was Jim McMahon. But he certainly wasn't even as good as he was in Chicago. He only had 12 TDs to 11 INTs and the team had the 2nd most turnovers in the league. Their run game suffered with no one going over 500 yards and having a paltry team ypc of 3.1. Losing Cunningham's rushing ability was just as devastating as losing his passing. The team went from 3rd in points and yards in 1990 to 18th in points and 25th in yards.
They still ended up 10-6 but missed the playoffs with the Redskins going 14-2 and the Cowboys going 11-5. They unquestionably would have been better than the Cowboys. The Redskins were great and that would have been a great matchup. The Redskins were undisputedly the best that year but the Eagles would have challenged them with a healthy Cunningham. And frankly no other team in the NFC or AFC would have been close to those 2.
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
GaTechRavens
Joined: 25 Nov 2006
Posts: 15565
Location: Knoxville, TN
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 20, 2013 4:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| mse326 wrote: | I'm gonna throw out a unique choice.
A lot of these "best to never win" can be traced to an injury or 2. Along those lines I think one that gets lost is the 1991 Eagles.
Defensively they had one of the greatest ever finishing the year ranked 1 versus the pass and run.
What hurt them was Randall Cunningham getting hurt in the first game. He was coming off the best year of his career too in 1990 where not only was he a beast but the team was the 3rd ranked offense in points and yards. His replacement was Jim McMahon. But he certainly wasn't even as good as he was in Chicago. He only had 12 TDs to 11 INTs and the team had the 2nd most turnovers in the league. Their run game suffered with no one going over 500 yards and having a paltry team ypc of 3.1. Losing Cunningham's rushing ability was just as devastating as losing his passing. The team went from 3rd in points and yards in 1990 to 18th in points and 25th in yards.
They still ended up 10-6 but missed the playoffs with the Redskins going 14-2 and the Cowboys going 11-5. They unquestionably would have been better than the Cowboys. The Redskins were great and that would have been a great matchup. The Redskins were undisputedly the best that year but the Eagles would have challenged them with a healthy Cunningham. And frankly no other team in the NFC or AFC would have been close to those 2. |
Yes, but should they not be penalized for having a quarterback made of glass? Durability can't just be brushed off.
_________________
| ArrowheadRage58 wrote: | | I'd much rather be in our position now than the Ravens, that's for sure. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mse326
Joined: 19 Jan 2008
Posts: 13519
Location: LORK on the sig
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 20, 2013 4:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| GaTechRavens wrote: | | mse326 wrote: | I'm gonna throw out a unique choice.
A lot of these "best to never win" can be traced to an injury or 2. Along those lines I think one that gets lost is the 1991 Eagles.
Defensively they had one of the greatest ever finishing the year ranked 1 versus the pass and run.
What hurt them was Randall Cunningham getting hurt in the first game. He was coming off the best year of his career too in 1990 where not only was he a beast but the team was the 3rd ranked offense in points and yards. His replacement was Jim McMahon. But he certainly wasn't even as good as he was in Chicago. He only had 12 TDs to 11 INTs and the team had the 2nd most turnovers in the league. Their run game suffered with no one going over 500 yards and having a paltry team ypc of 3.1. Losing Cunningham's rushing ability was just as devastating as losing his passing. The team went from 3rd in points and yards in 1990 to 18th in points and 25th in yards.
They still ended up 10-6 but missed the playoffs with the Redskins going 14-2 and the Cowboys going 11-5. They unquestionably would have been better than the Cowboys. The Redskins were great and that would have been a great matchup. The Redskins were undisputedly the best that year but the Eagles would have challenged them with a healthy Cunningham. And frankly no other team in the NFC or AFC would have been close to those 2. |
Yes, but should they not be penalized for having a quarterback made of glass? Durability can't just be brushed off. |
The previous three seasons he started all 16 games. He started 15 the next season. He was still young and the hits hadn't piled up. This injury seemed to effect him the rest of his career (it was his ACL). At this point I don't think it's right to say he was made of glass. That didn't start till a couple years later after the hits piled up.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kiltman
Joined: 25 Nov 2007
Posts: 11021
Location: Flipadelphia
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 20, 2013 4:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
2004 Eagles, 1998 Vikings
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheKillerNacho
Joined: 10 Feb 2008
Posts: 7386
Location: New Jersey
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 20, 2013 4:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
IMO, its the 2007 Patriots and not even close.
_________________
With much cheese,
Nacho Simulation Football League |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
FourThreeMafia
Joined: 28 Sep 2006
Posts: 40049
Location: East of Sixburgh
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 20, 2013 4:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
Good choices listed.
1976 Steelers are definitely in the top 5 ever not to make it. They dealt with some key injuries that year and started off slow, but in their final 9 games of the regular season, gave up only 28 points over that span, including 5 shutouts, and were absolutely dominating every team they faced.
They dominated in the first round of the playoffs, but then simply had a bad week and lost to the Raiders.
I cant say they are the best team ever not to win it, but they are definitely near the very top.
_________________
| cluelessororke wrote: | | I am going to laugh in your face when they don't even sniff WR until day three of the draft |
Still waiting for your laugh.... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rich7sena
Joined: 12 Sep 2009
Posts: 1902
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 20, 2013 4:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| TheKillerNacho wrote: | | IMO, its the 2007 Patriots and not even close. |
I feel the same way...
This question should be asked excluding the 2007 Patriots.
_________________
FF's friendliest poster |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
broncos67
Joined: 28 Dec 2006
Posts: 18118
Location: Capitol Cit-ay
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 20, 2013 5:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
1996 Broncos. Very good team, and played way too loosely against Jacksonville.
_________________
Thanks, Tzimisce |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
andjordand
Joined: 03 Jun 2011
Posts: 402
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 20, 2013 5:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
2008 Lions
/end thread/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
roger murdock
Joined: 13 Dec 2010
Posts: 5215
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 20, 2013 5:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
2007 Pats for sure. They are the best team I have ever seen.
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
eo5686
Joined: 28 Aug 2010
Posts: 111
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 20, 2013 5:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| GaTechRavens wrote: | 09 Vikings don't really belong there. Above average for 12-4 standards I guess, but not on the level of those other teams.
For older teams: the '68 Colts, '69 Vikings, and '83 Redskins all deserve to be on there. I'd include the '06 Chargers and '11 Packers as well. |
I thought the 2009 Vikings were the complete team in the league that year. Really solid in all areas. Better than their record. Kind of like some of those 90's 12-4 Cowboy teams. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
x0x
Joined: 10 Jul 2008
Posts: 13906
Location: Oh Canada
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 20, 2013 5:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
1. 2007 Patriots
2. 1998 Vikings
3. 1990 49ers
4. 1997 Packers
5. 2001 Rams
In my time watching football. I'd add the 83 Skins from everything I've seen and heard. The 1987 49ers too.
_________________
Legends Never Die. They Breathe Through The New Generation.
100 Greatest Quarterbacks of All Time |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
