|
Post by Speed Racer on Feb 3, 2009 9:50:02 GMT -5
The Steelers defense is not one of the best of all time. They struggled agaisnt a one trick pony team. Now granted that team does it well. But they throw the ball and that's it. They dont run worth a crap. Last yrs rendition of the Pats and Giants beat Pittsburgh if they played this yr. This was just one of those yrs where no team really rised to the top. Pittsburgh took advantage of it and won. Congrats to them but to include them in any discussion of all time anything is ridiculous. And that was a hold in the endzone,watch it from the snap. He does get bullrushed yea and gets his ass kicked. But on his way down he grabs the jersey of the DL and pulls him down too. Now he was slick about it, he let go once he felt him lose his balance to make it look like he didnt hold but he did no question. And you don't know that. Pittsburgh went 12-4, played a really tough schedule, and beat an extremely hot team in the Super Bowl. It's incredibly difficult to compare teams from year to year. This Steelers team is no fluke - they did just win 2 SB's in four seasons. They are also set up well to be a contender again next year. Throughout the season Pittsburgh had one of the best defenses ever. They went 14 straight games without allowing an opponent to have 300 yards of total offense. That's ridiculous. It's unheard of in an era of football that protects the offenses we're currently seeing. Plus, the Steelers defense came up with a 100-yard TD in the Super Bowl. The Steelers defense carried the team to the playoffs and stepped up time and time again throughout the playoffs. Nobody rose to the top? Why? Because the Patriots or the Cowboys weren't the story of the league? It seemed to me like the Steelers rose to the top. I've yet to see a replay where he actually grasped the defenders jersey. He had his arm across his chest but never grasped the jersey.
|
|
|
Post by Speed Racer on Feb 3, 2009 9:52:38 GMT -5
Hahaha that's not the norm Yeah, I know. Just trying to make a point. The simple fact that a team can afford to give an offer like that is ridiculous. And I agree that it can be overcome by good management, but it automatically gives teams like the Yankees, Red Sox, Cubs, etc. an advantage over others. The Rays may have just made a great run but the sad reality of it is that their current team will be dispersed amongst the wealth of the league in two to three years time. Low-budget teams have to adopt by the book that says it's fine to make it to the big show once every six or seven years. After that, blow it up and start the process again.
|
|
|
Post by Rocky on Feb 3, 2009 9:53:43 GMT -5
The Steelers defense is not one of the best of all time. They struggled agaisnt a one trick pony team. Now granted that team does it well. But they throw the ball and that's it. They dont run worth a crap. Last yrs rendition of the Pats and Giants beat Pittsburgh if they played this yr. This was just one of those yrs where no team really rised to the top. Pittsburgh took advantage of it and won. Congrats to them but to include them in any discussion of all time anything is ridiculous. And that was a hold in the endzone,watch it from the snap. He does get bullrushed yea and gets his ass kicked. But on his way down he grabs the jersey of the DL and pulls him down too. Now he was slick about it, he let go once he felt him lose his balance to make it look like he didnt hold but he did no question. And you don't know that. Pittsburgh went 12-4, played a really tough schedule, and beat an extremely hot team in the Super Bowl. It's incredibly difficult to compare teams from year to year. This Steelers team is no fluke - they did just win 2 SB's in four seasons. They are also set up well to be a contender again next year. Throughout the season Pittsburgh had one of the best defenses ever. They went 14 straight games without allowing an opponent to have 300 yards of total offense. That's ridiculous. It's unheard of in an era of football that protects the offenses we're currently seeing. Plus, the Steelers defense came up with a 100-yard TD in the Super Bowl. The Steelers defense carried the team to the playoffs and stepped up time and time again throughout the playoffs. Nobody rose to the top? Why? Because the Patriots or the Cowboys weren't the story of the league? It seemed to me like the Steelers rose to the top. I've yet to see a replay where he actually grasped the defenders jersey. He had his arm across his chest but never grasped the jersey. Statistics are all relative to the era. Offenses are better now and put up more points. Whatever this year's Steelers team did could easily be more impressive than former teams defensively. Not saying that it is because I don't have the stats/looked at them, but yeah, can't discredit them. How many points did the 2000 Ravens allow per game?
|
|
|
Post by Rocky on Feb 3, 2009 9:56:58 GMT -5
Hahaha that's not the norm Yeah, I know. Just trying to make a point. The simple fact that a team can afford to give an offer like that is ridiculous. And I agree that it can be overcome by good management, but it automatically gives teams like the Yankees, Red Sox, Cubs, etc. an advantage over others. The Rays may have just made a great run but the sad reality of it is that their current team will be dispersed amongst the wealth of the league in two to three years time. Low-budget teams have to adopt by the book that says it's fine to make it to the big show once every six or seven years. After that, blow it up and start the process again. Yah, I agree with you. I think that the way baseball is set up - no cap, some big market teams that severely out-spend everyone - could obviously be improved. Even though the Yankees actually cut payroll this off-season it's still pretty ridiculous that anyone can add three hugely expensive free agents. Baseball is pretty interesting though in that a lot of teams do overcome this. They don't sustain it (the individual teams), but they come around more often than I'd expect given the rules. 2003 Marlins, last year's Rays, 07 Rockies, etc. The parity year-to-year is actually pretty good. The White Sox won the 2005 WS? WTF? Marlins in 03, Detroit making the WS in 06, 83 win Cards winning it, all of the wild card teams that make/win the WS. It could be a lot worse.
|
|
|
Post by easy on Feb 3, 2009 9:59:12 GMT -5
And you don't know that. Pittsburgh went 12-4, played a really tough schedule, and beat an extremely hot team in the Super Bowl. It's incredibly difficult to compare teams from year to year. This Steelers team is no fluke - they did just win 2 SB's in four seasons. They are also set up well to be a contender again next year. Throughout the season Pittsburgh had one of the best defenses ever. They went 14 straight games without allowing an opponent to have 300 yards of total offense. That's ridiculous. It's unheard of in an era of football that protects the offenses we're currently seeing. Plus, the Steelers defense came up with a 100-yard TD in the Super Bowl. The Steelers defense carried the team to the playoffs and stepped up time and time again throughout the playoffs. Nobody rose to the top? Why? Because the Patriots or the Cowboys weren't the story of the league? It seemed to me like the Steelers rose to the top. I've yet to see a replay where he actually grasped the defenders jersey. He had his arm across his chest but never grasped the jersey. Statistics are all relative to the era. Offenses are better now and put up more points. Whatever this year's Steelers team did could easily be more impressive than former teams defensively. Not saying that it is because I don't have the stats/looked at them, but yeah, can't discredit them. How many points did the 2000 Ravens allow per game? 10.3PPG
|
|
|
Post by Rocky on Feb 3, 2009 10:00:24 GMT -5
Statistics are all relative to the era. Offenses are better now and put up more points. Whatever this year's Steelers team did could easily be more impressive than former teams defensively. Not saying that it is because I don't have the stats/looked at them, but yeah, can't discredit them. How many points did the 2000 Ravens allow per game? 10.3PPG Crazy. And they somehow figured out Kerry Collins in the super bowl, which might be more impressive!
|
|
|
Post by Speed Racer on Feb 3, 2009 10:16:45 GMT -5
Yeah, I know. Just trying to make a point. The simple fact that a team can afford to give an offer like that is ridiculous. And I agree that it can be overcome by good management, but it automatically gives teams like the Yankees, Red Sox, Cubs, etc. an advantage over others. The Rays may have just made a great run but the sad reality of it is that their current team will be dispersed amongst the wealth of the league in two to three years time. Low-budget teams have to adopt by the book that says it's fine to make it to the big show once every six or seven years. After that, blow it up and start the process again. Yah, I agree with you. I think that the way baseball is set up - no cap, some big market teams that severely out-spend everyone - could obviously be improved. Even though the Yankees actually cut payroll this off-season it's still pretty ridiculous that anyone can add three hugely expensive free agents. Baseball is pretty interesting though in that a lot of teams do overcome this. They don't sustain it (the individual teams), but they come around more often than I'd expect given the rules. 2003 Marlins, last year's Rays, 07 Rockies, etc. The parity year-to-year is actually pretty good. The White Sox won the 2005 WS? WTF? Marlins in 03, Detroit making the WS in 06, 83 win Cards winning it, all of the wild card teams that make/win the WS. It could be a lot worse. Yep. I agree with pretty much everything you said. It's just a shame to me that the league makes it so difficult for small-market teams to have any sustained run of success. As a fan, I'm sure it's infuriating (I don't even know the feeling because the Pirates can't even manage that small run). You'd just get a nice attachment to all of your favorite players, the team is really starting to gel, and then they all sign in big markets for 3 trillion dollars a year.
|
|
GMGreggor
All-Star
Houston Rockets
Posts: 5,726
|
Post by GMGreggor on Feb 3, 2009 11:06:04 GMT -5
First off the Steelers winning 6 SB's has nothing to do with this argument since they're spread out over 30 yrs.
There will always be teams that have ggod records. Parity in the context that teams will go from the worst record to the SB. Then not make platoffs the next yr, thats parity.
It used to be any given Sun one team can beat another regardless of record. Now it's any given yr any team could win the SB regardless of record. That my friends is parity. Coaching is much more important now than it used to be. Stud players switch teams now,older still very good role players are cut due to cap. They play a balanced sced. now. The bad teams play other bad teams except for teams in their divisioin. Did'nt used to. Every team feels like they have a shot now. Beleive me 20,30 yrs ago teams knew they didnt have a chance in hell until they could string together a few great drafts.
Great off lines take yrs to jell. That's why this has become a much more blitzing lg. Teams take advantage of that. You guys are all probably too young to understand it but the quality of TEAM play has went down, not up.
|
|
|
Post by easy on Feb 3, 2009 11:25:41 GMT -5
First off the Steelers winning 6 SB's has nothing to do with this argument since they're spread out over 30 yrs. I'm pretty sure Maniac said that in the last 6 years Steelers/Patriots have dominated the Superbowls, not that the Steelers have won 6
There will always be teams that have ggod records. Parity in the context that teams will go from the worst record to the SB. Then not make platoffs the next yr, thats parity. What's so bad about that? If you're the best team in the league one season and you lose the best QB on your team, and everyone is old(see New England) why would you attribute that to parity? A team can go from worst to first and vice versa thanks to many variables. Like I said before you have to look no further than the Patriots who luckily had a good enough team in place to still finish 11-5 and somehow miss playoffs
It used to be any given Sun one team can beat another regardless of record. Now it's any given yr any team could win the SB regardless of record. That my friends is parity. Coaching is much more important now than it used to be. Stud players switch teams now,older still very good role players are cut due to cap. They play a balanced sced. now. The bad teams play other bad teams except for teams in their divisioin. Did'nt used to. Every team feels like they have a shot now. Beleive me 20,30 yrs ago teams knew they didnt have a chance in hell until they could string together a few great drafts.
-Coaching is more important now? LOL how so? The Cowboys hired Wade Philips, if coaching were so important why would they hire someone like Philips who was always considered to be a mediocre HC? How is it more important now? Bill Parcells was still a hot commodity back in the day, as well as Belichek, Mora, etc. That is the dumbest statement I ever heard. How is coaching NOT important to begin with? So the Lions have a shot every year, come on?
Didn't the Cardinals not have a chance in hell until they started stringing together some great drafts and having a good Free Agency? see:Boldin, Fitzgerald, Hightower, Rodgers-Cromartie, Leinart, Pope, Rolle, Dansby, Dockett, Antonio Smith via draft Edge, Warner, etc via Free Agency.
and as far as balanced scheduling goes if you didn't nkow the NFL switches from easy to tough schedule for each and every team out there. Now go back, check Pittsburgh's schedule and tell me that they didn't have a tough schedule, are you kidding me? unreal.
Great off lines take yrs to jell. That's why this has become a much more blitzing lg. Teams take advantage of that. You guys are all probably too young to understand it but the quality of TEAM play has went down, not up. It has always taken great offensive lines years to jell, I don't get what the point of this statement is? The NFL has ALWAYS been about team play. Have you ever watched a Baltimore Ravens game and watch how they play marvelously as a TEAM on defense? Or even the Steelers for that matter? Or what about the Patriots? You mean to tell me they play as individuals on that team? Really? Greg, your arguements are totally untrue and just prove as to why Cowboys fans no ZERO about football.
|
|
|
Post by Funky George! on Feb 3, 2009 11:42:46 GMT -5
irst off the Steelers winning 6 SB's has nothing to do with this argument since they're spread out over 30 yrs. I will reply to this in bold right next to your paragraph.There will always be teams that have ggod records. Parity in the context that teams will go from the worst record to the SB. Then not make platoffs the next yr, thats parity. I started doing it for no good reason.It used to be any given Sun one team can beat another regardless of record. Now it's any given yr any team could win the SB regardless of record. That my friends is parity. Coaching is much more important now than it used to be. Stud players switch teams now,older still very good role players are cut due to cap. They play a balanced sced. now. The bad teams play other bad teams except for teams in their divisioin. Did'nt used to. Every team feels like they have a shot now. Beleive me 20,30 yrs ago teams knew they didnt have a chance in hell until they could string together a few great drafts. It's a very sophisticated way of making my very sophisticated points.Great off lines take yrs to jell. That's why this has become a much more blitzing lg. Teams take advantage of that. You guys are all probably too young to understand it but the quality of TEAM play has went down, not up. I know everything about footb
|
|
|
Post by Apollo on Feb 3, 2009 13:18:34 GMT -5
LOL
|
|
|
Post by Apollo on Feb 3, 2009 13:19:13 GMT -5
The Steelers are a good team.
|
|
GMGreggor
All-Star
Houston Rockets
Posts: 5,726
|
Post by GMGreggor on Feb 3, 2009 13:27:58 GMT -5
First off the Steelers winning 6 SB's has nothing to do with this argument since they're spread out over 30 yrs. I'm pretty sure Maniac said that in the last 6 years Steelers/Patriots have dominated the Superbowls, not that the Steelers have won 6My bad, I misunderstood. You did'nt address my point here. The point is it did'nt used to happen because there was'nt parity. Lotta crap in this reply. Cowboys hired Phillips because Jones wants a yes man. And they did'nt win the SB did they? What's your point here exactly? My point in a nutshell is the talent is spread out much more than it used to be because of FA and the cap so coaching is more important than ever. You see it differently? Teams,defenses,off line etc before FA played together for sometimes a decade. Now you're gonna sit there and tell me the teams that lose players every yr to the cap or FA play as cohesively? You're an idiot,I dont know how else to put it.
|
|
|
Post by easy on Feb 3, 2009 13:42:48 GMT -5
Injuries have always decimated a teams season. Many teams were not as good as they could have been because of injuries. Just because "any team" can make it any given year is that such a detriment? If anything that makes the league more competitive knowing that you need to give a 100 and 10 percent every year in order to make it to the playoffs.
Again, why is that such a bad thing? If there is so much more parity now than ever before why is the record only 6 championship(Steelers) in over 85 years of NFL existence? Shouldn't the top teams be at 10-15 Superbowls at this point, since as you put it, back in the day teams could keep their dynasties without having to cut their old serviceable vets?
Again, I’ll ask why have the Patriots despite Free Agent casualties and injuries been able to be as prominent as they have been? As well as the Steelers?
The Patriots lost Asante Samuel to free agency and were they really that bad defensively this year?
What about the Ravens and all their free agency casualties throughout the past 3 or 4 seasons? How are they still so good? Same as the Buccaneers. We lost a lot of big pieces but we still are among the top 10 defenses in the league season after season and that my friend is why COACHING above all other aspects is so much more important than you think.
|
|
|
Post by Rocky on Feb 3, 2009 14:19:38 GMT -5
Super Bowl 1 back in 1924 was definitely my favorite.
|
|
GMGreggor
All-Star
Houston Rockets
Posts: 5,726
|
Post by GMGreggor on Feb 3, 2009 14:22:51 GMT -5
I swear I dont think you read. I said coaching is more important now than ever.
Take a look at past division winners before 1995 or so,and especially in the 70's as opposed to now. You'll see teams string together yrs of dominance whereas now there's a different division winner in every division every yr it seems like. Whatever though.
I've been watching football a helluva lot longer than you and I know what I've seen. The only argument that really holds water is the guys are much bigger and faster now than before. But thats better nutrition,exercise and time to do it and very much based on steroids and HGH. Let the older teams have the same things and they'd be just as big and fast. look at the size of the older guys, they were just as tall. Just not bulked up.
|
|
|
Post by Rocky on Feb 3, 2009 14:25:22 GMT -5
NFC South worst to first every season = parity.
|
|
|
Post by easy on Feb 3, 2009 14:32:49 GMT -5
Super Bowl 1 back in 1924 was definitely my favorite. "superbowl" didn't happen until 1967.
|
|
|
Post by Rocky on Feb 3, 2009 14:38:18 GMT -5
Super Bowl 1 back in 1924 was definitely my favorite. "superbowl" didn't happen until 1967. Ya, which is why no one should have 10-15 super bowls, LOL. "Shouldn't the top teams be at 10-15 Superbowls at this point," - Christian Martinez
|
|
|
Post by easy on Feb 3, 2009 14:40:56 GMT -5
I swear I dont think you read. I said coaching is more important now than ever. Take a look at past division winners before 1995 or so,and especially in the 70's as opposed to now. You'll see teams string together yrs of dominance whereas now there's a different division winner in every division every yr it seems like. Whatever though. I've been watching football a helluva lot longer than you and I know what I've seen. The only argument that really holds water is the guys are much bigger and faster now than before. But thats better nutrition,exercise and time to do it and very much based on steroids and HGH. Let the older teams have the same things and they'd be just as big and fast. look at the size of the older guys, they were just as tall. Just not bulked up. So you're rebuttal quite simply is, you're older than me so you're more experienced? Great one! Again, so what if there's a different division winner ever year? Why is that so bad? A lot of it has to do with the change since the expansion Texans to 8- 4 team divisions. That is probably why you think is so much "parity" going on... but an 11-5 team like the Patriots probably would not have missed out on the playoffs and a 9-7 team like the Cardinals gotten in if the divisions were set-up pre-Texans expansion, it's a guess but I'll bank on that. Regardless, how do you explain the Steelers and Patriots dominance? The two have been in the Superbowl 8 of the past 10. With the majority being New England? Where's the parity?
|
|
|
Post by easy on Feb 3, 2009 14:42:08 GMT -5
"superbowl" didn't happen until 1967. Ya, which is why no one should have 10-15 super bowls, LOL. "Shouldn't the top teams be at 10-15 Superbowls at this point," - Christian Martinez That's 43 superbowls.. Steelers have 6. That's only 7%. According to Greg, the same teams won it every year "back in the day." If there is so much parity, only today, why weren't the great teams of back in the day like the Cowboys, Steelers, Packers etc more victorious?
|
|
|
Post by Johnny "B. Good" Stamos on Feb 3, 2009 14:51:15 GMT -5
Looks like we really need a sim.
|
|
|
Post by easy on Feb 3, 2009 14:54:03 GMT -5
andrea's bday you inconsiderate asshole.
|
|
|
Post by Rocky on Feb 3, 2009 14:56:17 GMT -5
andrea's bday you inconsiderate asshole.
|
|
GMGreggor
All-Star
Houston Rockets
Posts: 5,726
|
Post by GMGreggor on Feb 3, 2009 15:03:25 GMT -5
No, their was a bigger gap between the good teams and the bad back in the day. Those Cowboys,Steelers,Raiders,Vikings and Rams teams were stacked. They changed rules because the Steelers defense was so damn dominant. I think in 1976, (I'm going on memory here)the Steelers went 8 straight games without allowing a TD. Thats dominance. Dont compare this to that. And dont think there was'nt plenty of talent on offense in those days because there was. There's not as many consistently good/dominant teams now. When a team became good they were built slowly through the draft and usually was good for awhile.
The Patriots have been good because of Brady and Belichik. Steelers organization has been good for a long time. They've had the same owners forever and put the right people in positions to succeed. I think in this era, a great coach and a great QB is imperative to consistent success. There is no rule that is infallible comparing era's. But you used to not see nearly as many blown coverages,blown blocking assignments,wrong routes, etc I dont think as you do now. There's no stats to measure that, just experience.
|
|