PDA

View Full Version : USA Today's All-Time Super Bowl Team


fansince'76
01-25-2007, 10:15 PM
Agree with most of the picks, by and large, but a few left me scratching my head. Gene Upshaw made it at guard, but Art Shell is left off at tackle? The Steelers are very well-represented, though. :tt02:

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/football/super/2007-01-23-sw-all-super-bowl-team_x.htm

(Sorry, article was too long to fit in this post)

Atlanta Dan
01-25-2007, 10:25 PM
Steelers certainly are well represented, but, as usual, Noll gets overlooked, with the nod going to Walsh as all time Super Bowl HC, based on this logic:

He went three-for-three in Super Bowl trips probably would have won a fourth had he not walked away after the 1988 season. George Seifert won the Super Bowl the following year with Walsh's team.

As opposed to going three-for three and then actually, as opposed to probably, winning your fourth to go four-for-four? I guess those teams coached themselves and Noll just showed up post-game for the presentation of the Lombardi Trophy.

fansince'76
01-25-2007, 10:30 PM
Steelers certainly are well represented, but, as usual, Noll gets overlooked, with the nod going to Walsh as all time Super Bowl HC, based on this logic:

He went three-for-three in Super Bowl trips probably would have won a fourth had he not walked away after the 1988 season. George Seifert won the Super Bowl the following year with Walsh's team.

As opposed to going three-for three and then actually, as opposed to probably, winning your fourth to go four-for-four? I guess those teams coached themselves and Noll just showed up post-game for the presentation of the Lombardi Trophy.

Like I said, I agreed with MOST of the picks - this is one of the ones I didn't. Noll was overlooked his entire coaching career - he never won NFL Coach of the Year while he was here, either.

Atlanta Dan
01-25-2007, 10:40 PM
Understand completely - these lists are subjective and Walsh is a very defensible choice. Like the rankings of SB teams, these rankings are great jumping off points for debate and nobody is going to have identical lists.

Only completely off the wall observation I noted in the article , unless it was intended to be humorous, was this explanation of choosing Steve Young (a very good choice) as one of the backup QBs:

A tough choice over Joe Namath, Terry Bradshaw and Earl Morrall.

Earl Morrall???!!! Jets 16-Colts 7
NM

sumo
01-25-2007, 10:40 PM
But none of the Steelers count because they all do steroids - sorry I gotta get this out of the way so maybe hardwork will just bypass this thread - nothing to see hear mr hardwork - steroids has already been brought up - please move along...

fansince'76
01-25-2007, 10:41 PM
Understand completely - these lists are subjective and Walsh is a very defensible choice. Like the rankings of SB teams, these rankings are great jumping off points for debate and nobody is going to have identical lists.

Only completely off the wall observation I noted in the article , unless it was intended to be humorous, was this explanation of choosing Steve Young (a very good choice) as one of the backup QBs:

A tough choice over Joe Namath, Terry Bradshaw and Earl Morrall.

Earl Morrall???!!! Jets 16-Colts 7
NM

Didn't Morrall also play most of SB V for the Colts, after Unitas went out with an injury?

fansince'76
01-25-2007, 10:43 PM
But none of the Steelers count because they all do steroids - sorry I gotta get this out of the way so maybe hardwork will just bypass this thread - nothing to see hear mr hardwork - steroids has already been brought up - please move along...

I've already addressed him at length on that issue on the other thread he hijacked. He brings it up here, he'll be ignored - by me at least.

sumo
01-25-2007, 10:56 PM
I've already addressed him at length on that issue on the other thread he hijacked. He brings it up here, he'll be ignored - by me at least.

Ok - the USA article is a little hard to follow - did you see what they said about the Qb position? - they couldn't see Bradshaw and Namath playing back-up, so they put Young at no. 2 because he was used to backing up Montana anyway? - hello? at the LB position they could name 4 starters for four lb positions like they do in probowls but instead they name 1 out side and 1 middle? the rest are reserves? - oh well - still interesting and the Steelers are well represented overall - I like that they listed Stallworth ahead of Swann - I have always thought that Stallworth took a backseat to Swann even though he averaged 24.5 yards a catch and had some huge TDs ...

fansince'76
01-25-2007, 11:00 PM
I like that they listed Stallworth ahead of Swann - I have always thought that Stallworth took a backseat to Swann even though he averaged 24.5 yards a catch and had some huge TDs ...

IMHO, Stallworth, not Bradshaw, was the real MVP of SB XIV, and I've heard Bradshaw say this himself as well.

PisnNapalm
01-25-2007, 11:06 PM
Pardon me for a second here but that is un=F***ing believable. Noll is the only coach with 4 rings and he doesn't get the HC position? I know half the NFL plays the freaking "West Coast" offense BS, but come on!

*grumbles*

hardwork
01-25-2007, 11:32 PM
Pardon me for a second here but that is un=F***ing believable. Noll is the only coach with 4 rings and he doesn't get the HC position? I know half the NFL plays the freaking "West Coast" offense BS, but come on!

*grumbles*


Walsh was the better coach because he had less to work with. One of the members in here felt that the Steelers kicking team from the 70s was even better then the Steelers regular ofensive and defensive teams now. Very high praise indeed. I suspect the Patriots regular units could beat your old kicking team though.

Black@Gold Forever32
01-26-2007, 12:09 AM
They got the starter right at MLB. Nobody is better then Jack Lambert. But Ray Lewis as the backup? What a f'ing joke. What about Willie Lanier or Ray Nitschke? They both played two Super Bowls where Ray Lewis only played in one. Plus I would take Mike Singletary over Ray-Ray. When will people stop over-rating Ray Lewis?

sumo
01-26-2007, 01:20 AM
They got the starter right at MLB. Nobody is better then Jack Lambert. But Ray Lewis as the backup? What a f'ing joke. What about Willie Lanier or Ray Nitschke? They both played two Super Bowls where Ray Lewis only played in one. Plus I would take Mike Singletary over Ray-Ray. When will people stop over-rating Ray Lewis?

I agree - think of all the great MLBs to ever play in the Superbowl - what about Carson from the Giants also played in 2 and he's a HOfer and he's better than Lewis - or Howley from the Cowboys - got the MVP even though he was a defensive player on the losing team - also better than Ray-Ray..

3 to be 4
01-26-2007, 07:11 AM
Walsh was the better coach because he had less to work with. One of the members in here felt that the Steelers kicking team from the 70s was even better then the Steelers regular ofensive and defensive teams now. Very high praise indeed. I suspect the Patriots regular units could beat your old kicking team though.


You know who had even less than Walsh to work with? And He won 3 SB's too?

You cant compare the talent level between the 70's Steelers and this era Patriots. And the 2001 Patriots winning the SB was probably the best coaching job EVER.

Bill Belichick got robbed!! He definatly should have been named HC with Noll and Walsh humble assistants.

When the game is over they can carry him off the field as the look up to their mighty king.

Godfather
01-26-2007, 08:41 AM
They got the starter right at MLB. Nobody is better then Jack Lambert. But Ray Lewis as the backup? What a f'ing joke. What about Willie Lanier or Ray Nitschke? They both played two Super Bowls where Ray Lewis only played in one. Plus I would take Mike Singletary over Ray-Ray. When will people stop over-rating Ray Lewis?

Nobody else had Ray's killer instinct.

PisnNapalm
01-26-2007, 09:15 AM
BAH! Noll will always be screwed because "he had all the talent". *finger* to that. Who coached "all that talent" to play hard and to never accept losing?

I'm done with this thread. It's pissing me off too much.

fansince'76
01-26-2007, 10:27 AM
BAH! Noll will always be screwed because "he had all the talent". *finger* to that. Who coached "all that talent" to play hard and to never accept losing?

I'm done with this thread. It's pissing me off too much.

Not to mention who drafted and put all that talent together to begin with?

augustashark
01-26-2007, 11:06 AM
I don't understand, did they expect Noll to win 6 or even 7 SB's?????

You have to be kidding, look at the teams we beat through those years, Oakland, Miami, Houston and then the best from the NFC (Cowboys)!!!!!!!! Hell if it was'nt for Noll then Landry would have more then likely won a couple of more and he would be coaching this so called team.

I would put that crop of AFC contenders up against any of the NFC teams in the 80's or 90's and especially those walsh years.

sumo
01-26-2007, 01:21 PM
I don't understand, did they expect Noll to win 6 or even 7 SB's?????

You have to be kidding, look at the teams we beat through those years, Oakland, Miami, Houston and then the best from the NFC (Cowboys)!!!!!!!! Hell if it was'nt for Noll then Landry would have more then likely won a couple of more and he would be coaching this so called team.

I would put that crop of AFC contenders up against any of the NFC teams in the 80's or 90's and especially those walsh years.

dude forget Noll - I just want to tell you how much I appreciate your avatar - I thought I was the only one

sumo
01-26-2007, 01:44 PM
'Walsh had less to work with' - what an intelligent statement that is - the 49ers from that era were loaded - before free agency hit and all the salary cap stuff, the 49ers were becoming the New York Yankees of the NFL.....

Atlanta Dan
01-26-2007, 03:04 PM
Well, if the logic that determines "best coach" is which SB coach had the least to work with, I guess the obvious choice of best SB coach is Ray Malavasi in a landslide, since that 1979 Rams team and its 9-7 reacord came in last in the ESPN ranking of SB teams. :smile: