PDA

View Full Version : The Great Debate: Super Steelers or Super Patriots*


HometownGal
01-27-2008, 07:00 AM
Hmmmmm - our own Steelers greats seem to feel if the Pats* win SBXLII, they will be equated with their 70's dynasty. :scratchchin:

I'd have to respectfully disagree for a variety of reasons which would take me a month to post, so I'm going to just leave it at that. Thoughts?

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/08027/852551-66.stm

The great debate: Super Steelers or Super Patriots

Sunday, January 27, 2008
By Ed Bouchette, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

Resolved: If the New England Patriots win Super Bowl XLII Sunday, would they be the equal of the Super Steelers?

Speaking for the affirmative: The Super Steelers.

New England's 21st century reign would make them a dynasty worthy of being ranked with the one from Pittsburgh in the 1970s if the Patriots win their fourth Super Bowl in seven seasons.

Who says? Many of those Steelers who won four Super Bowls in six seasons from January 1975 through January 1980 -- including four Pro Football Hall of Famers.

"I'll tell you what, four in seven in this era?" former linebacker Jack Ham said in admiration. "They're comparable."

"It's pretty impressive, I think," former cornerback Mel Blount said. "Especially with the way free agency works now and the salary cap, it's pretty impressive what their management and personnel people and coaches all have been able to do."

"I don't think you can compare any of the teams as best of all time because the game has changed," former wide receiver Lynn Swann said. "But certainly it's a tribute to their entire organization from [owner] Bob Kraft all the way down to the last player -- to play on a high level consistently and to be in the position they are today."

And former defensive tackle Joe Greene sees similarities between the Steelers of the 1970s and the Patriots of the young century.

"Our team, when we won the Super Bowls, we were the best, and these guys are the best now if they win. It's as simple as that. In terms of comparing, the best barometer is the approach that teams take, the attitude they have, and I think that's where you'll find it very similar. They are about the team first.

"We had our individuals, and we put them together collectively to have the success we had. I think this is probably true for this ballclub."

Ham, Blount, Swann and Greene are in the Pro Football Hall of Fame. They were part of a group of 22 Steelers players who earned four Super Bowl rings in the 1970s, when there was no free agency and no salary cap.

The Patriots would have just nine players with four Super Bowl rings if they defeat the New York Giants in Arizona next Sunday in the Super Bowl. The Patriots also would become the second undefeated NFL team in the 42-year history of the Super Bowl and the first to go 19-0.

The Steelers still would be the only team to win four Super Bowls in a six-season span, but the Patriots were the first to win three in four seasons. Like the Steelers in 1976 and 1977, New England did not return to the NFL championship game for two seasons until now.

"It's really a remarkable thing what the Patriots have accomplished, under the new rules of free agency," '70s Steelers free safety Mike Wagner said. "They've been able to do it with a number of different players at key positions over seven years. They struggled a couple of years ago with a number of injuries, but came close even then."

That was similar to what happened to the Steelers of 1976, when, going for an unprecedented third consecutive Super Bowl victory, they lost their starting backfield of Franco Harris and Rocky Bleier to injuries in their first playoff win. Without them, they lost the AFC championship game in Oakland.

"I just think that organization has done a tremendous job; it's obvious to everyone at this point in time," Wagner said of the Patriots. "I've been impressed with that staff and program for five years now."

Some of the '70s Steelers spoke of New England coach Bill Belichick the way they might their own coach, Chuck Noll. Belichick can join Noll as the only head coaches with 4-0 records in Super Bowls.

"When we watch football games," Wagner said, "we watch how disciplined players are -- are they doing what you think they should be doing. I think Belichick has gotten players to do what they're supposed to do without a whole lot of freelancing, and that is unique in that way. That was a large part of our success -- not just having great talent, but having great talent to do what the coaches wanted us to do."

None of the former Steelers displayed any jealousy about the Patriots approaching their accomplishments, nor did any wish them misfortune against the Giants. Another victory and they merely would welcome them to the club, if they're not already there with three Super Bowl victories in four seasons.

"The Steelers of my era, we have our place in history," Wagner said. "I met Ray Nitschke once, and I wasn't going to argue whether his Packers of the 1960s were better or not. If New England wins another Super Bowl, there's nothing in the cards that says they won't win down the road again. That's the thing about that franchise, they seem to have a pretty nice formula for success."

Ham believes part of that formula is how they deal with player turnover in the free-agency era and the two constants on their four Super Bowl teams -- Belichick and quarterback Tom Brady.

"They adapted [their game], as we adapted," Ham said. "There are a lot of similarities except the personnel. More than half of our team stayed through all four Super Bowls, and he's doing it with different players every year.

"It also seems like players want to come there, guys like Corey Dillon and Randy Moss. It seems like guys want to come there because winning championships are important to them. It seems like a lot of guys have bought into what he's selling."

Some thought the Patriots are similar to the San Francisco 49ers when they won four Super Bowls in nine years in the 1980s, then added a fifth in 1994. The Green Bay Packers won five NFL championships in seven seasons in the 1960s, including the first two Super Bowls. And the Dallas Cowboys, like the Patriots, won three Super Bowls in four years in the 1990s.

Those are the dynasties, one each decade, in the NFL's Super Bowl era.

Steelers chairman Dan Rooney, also in the Hall of Fame, said there were dynasties throughout NFL history and it would be hard to pick the best.

"I wouldn't rank anybody as 1-2-3-4," Rooney said. "I wouldn't rank them over the Bears of the '40s [with four NFL titles]. I'll say the Patriots belong in the list of dynasties, but I'm not for numbering them because it doesn't mean anything."

Joe Gordon, the Steelers' public relations director in the 1970s and 1980s, believes not only will the Patriots join that list of dynasties with a victory in Super Bowl XLII, but their 19-0 record would raise them to a higher level than the others.

"This would be the greatest season any team ever had, and it would have to be considered one of the greatest teams of all time," said Gordon. "To me, it's a far better team than the Dolphins were, because of free agency. There's greater parity now and they played more good teams.

"What they've done is phenomenal and compares favorably with the great Steelers teams, the 49ers' teams and the 1985 [Chicago] Bears -- they could compete with any of those teams."

Ham tends to agree with Gordon.

"That's a long haul to be able to go 19-0. I played this game and I can't fathom that; there's always one part of your team that loses a game. But this team has pulled out a couple games here, that's impressive. What the Dolphins did was great, but this is even better."

Blount, though, reminded everyone that the Patriots do not wear the crown just yet. They still have to play the Giants.

"I'll be interested to see what happens at the Super Bowl. I'm not ready to hand them the Lombardi Trophy yet. I think it's going to be a good game. I think they'll put up a good fight, and it's really up for grabs."

If they win, the Patriots will be hands-down a dynasty worthy of the '70s Steelers. So say those very same Steelers.

Atlanta Dan
01-27-2008, 07:26 AM
Nice to see the 70s Steelers take the high road and acknowledge the magnitude of the Pats accomplishments as opposed to the whining we hear from Shula and the 72 Dolphins any time a team has threatened their status as the only undefeated NFL team.

70s Steelers still act like champions.

83-Steelers-43
01-27-2008, 07:27 AM
Add Ron Cook to the list of hated Steeler media types. Thank God for those professionals at ESPN. I guess Cook is Himmler.....or Eichmann Preach? :wink02:

Patriots are best dynasty if they win
Sunday, January 27, 2008
By Ron Cook, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

The New England Patriots are one win away from becoming the greatest dynasty in NFL history.

How's that for getting to the point?

Better than the Packers of the 1960s, the Steelers of the '70s, the 49ers of the '80s and the Cowboys of the '90s.

You read it right.

Better than the Super Steelers.

Sorry.

A lot of people will rush to label the Patriots the best team of all time if they beat the New York Football Giants in Super Bowl XLII and finish 19-0, but it's hard to go there. The reason has nothing to do with the Patriots' overblown Spygate scandal early in the season and everything to do with the fact that it's impossible to compare individual teams from different eras. Yes, the Patriots are bigger, stronger, faster and better than the players from 10, 20, 30, 40 years ago. No clear-thinking person will argue that quarterback Tom Brady throwing to wide receiver Randy Moss next Sunday is not a more dangerous pass-catch combination than Green Bay's Bart Starr throwing to hung-over Max McGee in Super Bowl I. But that doesn't necessarily mean the Patriots are a better team in their era than the Packers were in theirs. Certainly, the Patriots aren't a better team than any of those great Steelers teams. They might not even be better than the ultimate one-year wonder, the 1985 Bears. Neither might the 1972 Dolphins, who went 17-0, for that matter.

But if the Patriots do finish a perfect season by beating the Giants, their dynastic run will be the most significant in NFL history. That would make four championships in seven years, not as good statistically as the Steelers' four-in-six run, but more impressive because of the circumstances of the two eras. It's much harder to win multiple championships in today's NFL.

The Steelers' dynasty -- like those in Green Bay, San Francisco and Dallas -- was built before free agency and the salary cap. Hall of Fame coach Chuck Noll knew exactly the kind of players he wanted. Personnel wizard Art Rooney Jr. and his staff did a marvelous job finding them. Once in place, the Steelers were able to keep those great players together for their entire careers. An astonishing nine made it to the Hall of Fame. There never has been a better collection of talent in the NFL, probably never will be.

The Patriots' dynasty is much different. Coach Bill Belichick and Brady are among the few key constants over the seven-year period. This is a franchise that has kept winning despite having to replace integral parts every year. It's not as if the Patriots' team this season is loaded with future Hall of Famers. How many would you say there are? Three, maybe? Brady, Moss and linebacker Junior Seau, who spent the best days of his career with the San Diego Chargers?

Brady, obviously, is the key. He will take a 14-2 postseason record into the Super Bowl and is nothing less than the greatest quarterback of all time, all due respect to Johnny Unitas, Joe Montana and the other 29 quarterbacks in the Hall of Fame. What makes Brady's success -- and his teams' success -- so amazing is that the Patriots have had three different leading rushers and five different leading receivers during their run. Until Moss joined them before this season, the Patriots' wide receivers were good, but not great. It's not as if Brady has been throwing to Lynn Swann and John Stallworth for seven years.

No matter how passionate you are about protecting the Super Steelers' legacy, you have to give the Patriots credit for a wondrous achievement.

You are awfully narrow-minded if you won't.

Of course, the Patriots still must win one more game to be anointed as the NFL's greatest dynasty. There's a chance the Giants will beat them. Maybe it's only a 1 percent chance, but it's a chance nonetheless.

If the Giants do pull off the greatest upset in Super Bowl history since Joe Willie Namath's Jets beat the Colts in Super Bowl III, the final words to this discourse will belong to the one and only Emily Litella, who frequently and famously said on the great "Saturday Night Live" television shows:

"Never mind."

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/08027/852362-87.stm

Atlanta Dan
01-27-2008, 07:44 AM
Typical Cook - selectively argue the facts in contending it is "much harder" to win multiple championships in today's NFL

Free agency undermines all teams - It is remarkable what the Pats have accomplished as free agency eats away at the roster every year, but because of free agency the Pats have not been required to run a gauntlet of other excellent teams every year to win.

During their run the Steelers had to deal with the 70s Raiders and 70s Cowboys in the playoffs (both teams made the NFL America's Game ranking of top 10 Super Bowl teams), were kept out of the Super Bowl by the 72 Dolphins (ranked as the #1 Super Bowl winner in the America's Game series), and annually had to deal with tough competition within the AFC Central (e.g. - in 1975 Bengals and Oilers were a combined 21-3 against the rest of the league and 0-4 against the Steelers)

Not exactly comparable to getting an annual bye to the playoffs by playing in the AFC East, having as your main playoff rivals during your run a Colts team that gagged in the first round at home 2 out of the last 3 years + a Steelers team with a very sketchy playoff history under Cowher, and meeting such legendary teams as the Donovan McNabb Eagles and Jake Delhomme Panthers in the playoffs.

In addition, with the flag football rules today a dominant QB is even more important to success - having Brady covers a lot of problems such as free agency losses that would not be so easily addressed if different pass coverage rules existed

Arguments can be made for the dominant team of any era - Cook of course does not have the time or inclination to make his arguments honestly.

Atlanta Dan
01-27-2008, 08:20 AM
I actually read something in the Boston Globe that is some what fairly written(I didn't think it possible).
It's a long article discussing all the greats and the fact that you really can't rank them or compare them.

http://www.boston.com/sports/football/patriots/articles/2008/01/27/great_unknown/?page=1



Excellent article (in the Boston Globe of all places:jawdrop:)

Thanks for the link :cheers:

skinart82
01-27-2008, 11:36 AM
When will people get it through there heads that the patriots are not as great as they seam. Remember if it wouldn't have been a coaching error by the ravens the pats would be 15-1! And I might be a little partial, but Ben is a much better qb, imagine if he was only sacked 10-15 times instead of 47. Down with the patriots!!!!!

jjpro11
01-27-2008, 12:10 PM
of course they are going to be comparable since they would be only the 3rd team to win 4 super bowls in a decade. i dont think any of the steelers players think they are any better though and neither do i. its nice to see them not acting like the 72 dolphins though. those guys have gotten pretty loony over the years.

Rhee Rhee
01-27-2008, 12:14 PM
Nice to see the 70s Steelers take the high road and acknowledge the magnitude of the Pats accomplishments as opposed to the whining we hear from Shula and the 72 Dolphins any time a team has threatened their status as the only undefeated NFL team.

70s Steelers still act like champions.

Very classy team...

all the dolphins especially mercury morris just whines and whines about how the pats are gonna lose and blah blah blah....

fact is the patriots team they assembled is quite impressive...

VTsteel
01-27-2008, 12:29 PM
Let me preface this response by mentioning my severe disdain for the Cheatriots . . .

Anyhow, are they comparable to the 70's Steelers? Absolutely!

Is what they've done these past 7 or 8 years incredible? Absolutely!

Should they win the Superbowl (or not) they will have done some truly "Dynasty" worthy things.

Now, I will be really impressed if they break their own record of 21 consecutive wins ('03-'04) - That, to me, was a truly great accomplishment. Not only did they win 21 in a row . . . They had to beat the Colts three times to do it (once in the AFC championship game) they beat the Titans twice (once in the divisional playoffs) and the Panthers in the Superbowl. (Their streak was busted up by none other than our beloved Steelers - Remember? :wink02: )

I don't know who they'll open their season with in '08 . . . But, should they win the Superbowl and win their first three games next year . . . I don't think anyone could argue their status in history.

BigBen403
01-27-2008, 07:14 PM
Even though they are a dynasty, I have no respect for the Pats, they are a classless organization with a bunch a whiny little babys. I truely hope the Giants bury tom brady and crew in the desert. It seems over the last few years brady has become more and more of a shit-talker on the field. Meanwhile Big Ben goes out takes a beating play tough and doesnt say much on the field and lets his play do the talking. As far as I'm concerned, The pats Can't Touch the SUPER STEELERS !!!!!!!!!

X-Terminator
01-27-2008, 11:44 PM
Put the Pats* in the 1970s, and they get smoked by the Steelers, Cowboys and Raiders. Hell, even the Vikings and Rams would kick their asses all over the field.

Not impressed.

Screw Boston.

Borski
01-27-2008, 11:59 PM
Go Giants so I don't have to hear about this crap anymore...I am sick of this crap

Galax Steeler
01-28-2008, 03:38 AM
It would be hard to beat the steelers of the 70's the way they won there supebowls back to back.

LambertIsGod58
01-28-2008, 08:39 AM
Even though they are a dynasty, I have no respect for the Pats, they are a classless organization with a bunch a whiny little babys. I truely hope the Giants bury tom brady and crew in the desert. It seems over the last few years brady has become more and more of a shit-talker on the field. Meanwhile Big Ben goes out takes a beating play tough and doesnt say much on the field and lets his play do the talking. As far as I'm concerned, The pats Can't Touch the SUPER STEELERS !!!!!!!!!

Let me first state that I am a Steelers fan...always have been always will be. That does not cloud my opinion or judgement. To compare Ben and Brady is laughable. Brady is 4x the QB Roethlisberger is. To take a pay cut or to forfeit a raise to make the team better? Maybe I don't watch enough football (which I highly doubt), but the only time I saw Brady talk shit was to Anthony Smith. And Smith brought that upon himself. And since when is talking shit a bad thing? When you can back it up? Brady can back it up. And IMO, Brady will go down as the greatest QB to ever play when he's done.

As far as the debate between the Steelers of the 70's and the Pats of the new millenium....I think that the Steelers are the better team. They put their team together from scratch in '69 when Noll took over. They did it through the draft. They didn't have free agency at their disposal like the game does today. And how many HOF players are on the Pats right now...? Brady, Moss and that's all I can conceivably think of. Steelers of the 70's boasts Bradshaw, Harris, Webster, Swann, Stallworth, Greene, Ham, Lambert and Blount. It's highly doubtful that NE will come up with half as many. And BTW, Seau doesn't count as he was a HOF'er before coming to NE.

BlastFurnace
01-28-2008, 09:18 AM
Let me first state that I am a Steelers fan...always have been always will be. That does not cloud my opinion or judgement. To compare Ben and Brady is laughable. Brady is 4x the QB Roethlisberger is. To take a pay cut or to forfeit a raise to make the team better? Maybe I don't watch enough football (which I highly doubt), but the only time I saw Brady talk shit was to Anthony Smith. And Smith brought that upon himself. And since when is talking shit a bad thing? When you can back it up? Brady can back it up. And IMO, Brady will go down as the greatest QB to ever play when he's done. .

Agree with everything you said about Brady. I can't stand the Patriots either, but Brady is clearly the best in football right now.

As far as the debate between the Steelers of the 70's and the Pats of the new millenium....I think that the Steelers are the better team. They put their team together from scratch in '69 when Noll took over. They did it through the draft. They didn't have free agency at their disposal like the game does today. And how many HOF players are on the Pats right now...? Brady, Moss and that's all I can conceivably think of. Steelers of the 70's boasts Bradshaw, Harris, Webster, Swann, Stallworth, Greene, Ham, Lambert and Blount. It's highly doubtful that NE will come up with half as many. And BTW, Seau doesn't count as he was a HOF'er before coming to NE.

The difference between the two teams is that the era's have made them different. If they win, then it's 4 in 7...we had 4 in 6 so the accomplishment will be comparable. The difference is that the 70's Steelers did it with the same core of guys, while the Patriots only have 4 guys on the entire team that will have 4 rings if they win and a lot fewer HOF'ers. Free agency changed that team so much over the past 7 years, where the Steelers were still recognizable from the 1974-75 team through the 1979-80 team where their run ended. You are right about Seau, he was a HOF'er before he ever got to NE. To me, the franchise may have had a ton of success, but since their team has changed so much over the last 7 years, I don't know if you can call the team a dynasty in the truest sense of the word. That isn't to diminish what they have accomplished in the past 7 years, because it is phenomenal.

I would love to see a game played between the 2007 Patriots and the 1978 Steelers.
All things being equal....nutrition, training, etc....it would be a heck of a game.

fansince'76
01-28-2008, 09:20 AM
I would love to see a game played between the 2007 Patriots and the 1978 Steelers.
All things being equal....nutrition, training, etc....it would be a heck of a game.

Under which set of rules? The rules of '78 or the glorified flag football rules of '07?

BlastFurnace
01-28-2008, 09:51 AM
Under which set of rules? The rules of '78 or the glorified flag football rules of '07?

I'd be interested in seeing two different games...one played with the 1978 rules and one played under current rules. Now I am playing the ultimate Fantasy Football game.

Steelerfreak58
01-28-2008, 10:37 AM
The game in the 70's was a much harder played game. Today's game is built for the offense to score. Hell its one reason in the 70's the "new" passing interference call was made and they called it the "Mel Blount" rule because he mauled recievers down the field and noone could catch anything thrown his way.

Football today is watered down and made easier to score TD's. Defense has it way harder on them now with so many types on new penalties able to be called against them and continue to move the chains for offenses.

That and I hate the Patriots with a passion!

memphissteelergirl
01-28-2008, 10:59 AM
I stopped reading Cook's article when he mentioned the "overblown" Spygate scandal. :shake01:

Dino 6 Rings
01-28-2008, 11:24 AM
All I can add to this is...

GO ELI

Dino 6 Rings
01-28-2008, 11:44 AM
But, if the Pats don't win...is it the biggest CHOKE in history?

19ward86
01-28-2008, 01:51 PM
these teams played in 2 completely different leagues. the 1970s was part of the football era where a 77 quarterback rating was one of the best in the league that year. 50% completion got teams to playoffs, and the game was dominated by running the ball and stopping the run. although both eras shared some aspects like running the ball is a good asset along with stopping the run as being another...but teams like the patriots,packers, and colts get away with having average running games but having QBs that have passer ratings over 95 consistently and completion ratings over 65%. the 70s were run first pass second, now it is go with what u got.

BlastFurnace
01-28-2008, 02:12 PM
these teams played in 2 completely different leagues. the 1970s was part of the football era where a 77 quarterback rating was one of the best in the league that year. 50% completion got teams to playoffs, and the game was dominated by running the ball and stopping the run. although both eras shared some aspects like running the ball is a good asset along with stopping the run as being another...but teams like the patriots,packers, and colts get away with having average running games but having QBs that have passer ratings over 95 consistently and completion ratings over 65%. the 70s were run first pass second, now it is go with what u got.

I know, but all things being equal....rules, nutrition, training...everything....I would love to see that game. It's impossible, but fun to think about.

Atlanta Dan
01-28-2008, 02:30 PM
Under which set of rules? The rules of '78 or the glorified flag football rules of '07?

It was not today's touch football rules but the rules had changed significantly by 1978 (no DL head slap/no DB contact after 5 yards).

Ironically those rules changes that were regarded as being designed to slow down the Steelers resulted in Bradshaw, Swann & Stallworth being turned loose.

The match-up of the best of 2 different eras would be the pre-rules changes '75 Steelers (IMO a better team than the '78 team - not as explosive on passing offense even thiough Swann had 11 TDs, but a running game with a younger Franco & defense at their peak) v. the 07 Pats.

fansince'76
01-28-2008, 02:45 PM
I know, but all things being equal....rules, nutrition, training...everything....I would love to see that game. It's impossible, but fun to think about.

Kinda meaningless, but a very fun website for anybody that isn't aware of it: http://www.whatifsports.com/nfl/

Preacher
01-28-2008, 03:50 PM
Great debate? You're joking, aren't you? AREN'T YOU!?

:chuckle:

memphissteelergirl
01-28-2008, 03:55 PM
Great debate? You're joking, aren't you? AREN'T YOU!?

:chuckle:

:sofunny::sofunny::sofunny:

DACEB
01-28-2008, 04:17 PM
Great debate? You're joking, aren't you? AREN'T YOU!?

:chuckle:

Hmmm, with enough HGH?!

We could put in a call to Rodney!

SteelersJW
01-31-2008, 07:18 PM
Fu*ck the patriots

DACEB
02-01-2008, 06:09 AM
Fu*ck the patriots

I could'nt agree more!!

Nothing would be finer than to see Brady lose to both Manning bros. in consecutive seasons, and watch him walk off the field with his head down.

fansince'76
02-04-2008, 11:47 AM
Patriots are best dynasty if they win
Sunday, January 27, 2008
By Ron Cook, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

The New England Patriots are one win away from becoming the greatest dynasty in NFL history.

How's that for getting to the point?

Better than the Packers of the 1960s, the Steelers of the '70s, the 49ers of the '80s and the Cowboys of the '90s.

You read it right.

Better than the Super Steelers.

Sorry.

A lot of people will rush to label the Patriots the best team of all time if they beat the New York Football Giants in Super Bowl XLII and finish 19-0, but it's hard to go there. The reason has nothing to do with the Patriots' overblown Spygate scandal early in the season and everything to do with the fact that it's impossible to compare individual teams from different eras. Yes, the Patriots are bigger, stronger, faster and better than the players from 10, 20, 30, 40 years ago. No clear-thinking person will argue that quarterback Tom Brady throwing to wide receiver Randy Moss next Sunday is not a more dangerous pass-catch combination than Green Bay's Bart Starr throwing to hung-over Max McGee in Super Bowl I. But that doesn't necessarily mean the Patriots are a better team in their era than the Packers were in theirs. Certainly, the Patriots aren't a better team than any of those great Steelers teams. They might not even be better than the ultimate one-year wonder, the 1985 Bears. Neither might the 1972 Dolphins, who went 17-0, for that matter.

But if the Patriots do finish a perfect season by beating the Giants, their dynastic run will be the most significant in NFL history. That would make four championships in seven years, not as good statistically as the Steelers' four-in-six run, but more impressive because of the circumstances of the two eras. It's much harder to win multiple championships in today's NFL.

The Steelers' dynasty -- like those in Green Bay, San Francisco and Dallas -- was built before free agency and the salary cap. Hall of Fame coach Chuck Noll knew exactly the kind of players he wanted. Personnel wizard Art Rooney Jr. and his staff did a marvelous job finding them. Once in place, the Steelers were able to keep those great players together for their entire careers. An astonishing nine made it to the Hall of Fame. There never has been a better collection of talent in the NFL, probably never will be.

The Patriots' dynasty is much different. Coach Bill Belichick and Brady are among the few key constants over the seven-year period. This is a franchise that has kept winning despite having to replace integral parts every year. It's not as if the Patriots' team this season is loaded with future Hall of Famers. How many would you say there are? Three, maybe? Brady, Moss and linebacker Junior Seau, who spent the best days of his career with the San Diego Chargers?

Brady, obviously, is the key. He will take a 14-2 postseason record into the Super Bowl and is nothing less than the greatest quarterback of all time, all due respect to Johnny Unitas, Joe Montana and the other 29 quarterbacks in the Hall of Fame. What makes Brady's success -- and his teams' success -- so amazing is that the Patriots have had three different leading rushers and five different leading receivers during their run. Until Moss joined them before this season, the Patriots' wide receivers were good, but not great. It's not as if Brady has been throwing to Lynn Swann and John Stallworth for seven years.

No matter how passionate you are about protecting the Super Steelers' legacy, you have to give the Patriots credit for a wondrous achievement.

You are awfully narrow-minded if you won't.

Of course, the Patriots still must win one more game to be anointed as the NFL's greatest dynasty. There's a chance the Giants will beat them. Maybe it's only a 1 percent chance, but it's a chance nonetheless.

If the Giants do pull off the greatest upset in Super Bowl history since Joe Willie Namath's Jets beat the Colts in Super Bowl III, the final words to this discourse will belong to the one and only Emily Litella, who frequently and famously said on the great "Saturday Night Live" television shows:

"Never mind."

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/08027/852362-87.stm

Way to cover all your bases as usual, Cook. What a hack.

lamberts-lost-tooth
02-04-2008, 11:55 AM
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/08027/852362-87.stm

Way to cover all your bases as usual, Cook. What a hack.

His usual "This is what I believe and your an idiot if you dont agree with me"....."UNLESS the opposite happens, then THAT is what I believe and your an idiot if you dont waffle on your opinion with me"

Dino 6 Rings
02-04-2008, 11:58 AM
There is no debate, the 70s Steelers never lost. Won 4 in 6 years, did it with the same QB and Coach and beat the Cowboys twice, who also won 2 superbowls in the same era. They beat the Vikings who went to 4 superbowls in the same era. They beat the Rams as well. So that equals the Pats win over the Panthers. Give the Vikings more credit then the Eagles, and the win over the Rams, that was special for the Pats. They didn't have to beat 2 time superbowl winners the Cowboys, so its over for them. The debate is done. They lost to Eli and the Giants and are now 3-3 in the Superbowl. That's not 5-0 (9ers) 5-3 (boys) or 5-1 (Steelers). So the only fans allowed to debate our franchise greatness are in Dallas and San Fran.

Bradshaw had to beat Staubach Twice and Tarkenton once.

Brady beat Warner, McNabb and who was the QB of the Panthers again? Delhoume?

Brady lost to Eli Manning. Game Set Match.

DACEB
02-04-2008, 12:03 PM
No debate, the country voted, it's unanimous.

THE STEELERS

Dino 6 Rings
02-04-2008, 12:15 PM
DACEB, you're up there in Mass, it must be a Great Day to not be a Pats fan. How much fun that must be, just handing out tissues to those cheating losers.

Providence Steel
02-04-2008, 12:51 PM
DACEB, you're up there in Mass, it must be a Great Day to not be a Pats fan. How much fun that must be, just handing out tissues to those cheating losers.

I watched the game last night with a room full of Pats fans. My grin went from ear to ear. I was happy for my brother, a Giants fan, I was happy for the Dolphins, so they can CONTINUE to stick it to the Patriots (Pats fans hate that!...I couldn't care less), I was happy for the Manning family because I really like those guys and I was happy because I've had to listen to all the local announcers anoint the undefeated Patriots as the greatest team of all time before they actually won the big game. All I have to say is 18-1 and the 1 was the MOST important game where you mustered 14 stinking points!!!

Eat your words, Tom Terrific!

Steelers rule.

Dino 6 Rings
02-04-2008, 12:56 PM
they are actually the 3rd best 18-1 team. The 18-1 Niners and 18-1 Bears actually won the Superbowl. HA HA HA!

Providence Steel
02-04-2008, 12:58 PM
they are actually the 3rd best 18-1 team. The 18-1 Niners and 18-1 Bears actually won the Superbowl. HA HA HA!

Thanks for that info, more ammo for my verbal jousts with Pats fans.

Today is a very happy day!

:banana::banana::banana:

Heres a toast to the 72 Dolphins, to the 07 Giants and to the greatest team ever to take the field,

The Pittsburgh Steelers!
:cheers::cheers::cheers:

Dino 6 Rings
02-04-2008, 04:30 PM
I have offically registered on a Pats Forum as Dino 5 Rings. They are awfully humble this morning in Pats land.

Funny how that happens after a huge Loss.

VTsteel
02-04-2008, 06:47 PM
they are actually the 3rd best 18-1 team. The 18-1 Niners and 18-1 Bears actually won the Superbowl. HA HA HA!

Agreed!

That game last night dropped the Patsies from any "greatness" conversation. They fell 4 wins away from that. The hype was there . . . People were drinkin' the kool-aid . . . and they CHOKED! :buttkick:



:yeehaw: ... steelers rule!

Ahh good times . . . goodtimes

RoethlisBURGHer
02-04-2008, 06:48 PM
I think with last night's loss, this offcially puts the Patriots dynasty below the Steelers dynasty.

Atlanta Dan
02-04-2008, 07:00 PM
I think with last night's loss, this officially puts the Patriots dynasty below the Steelers dynasty.

Still the best team of the decade but losing a SB definitely drops them below the Packers, Steelers & Niners (as well as the 90s Cowboys) in terms of the degree of dominance during their era

Isn't it great:toofunny:

BigBen403
02-04-2008, 07:21 PM
Doesnt Matter now folks, Steelers are the Greatest Ever. Pats shit the bed and I can't be happier, no we will have to wade through the waist deep creek of excuses by the classless pats fans !!!!!! Seems about right about a classess team, organization and fan base. Go Steelers !!!!

Rhee Rhee
02-04-2008, 08:24 PM
no question now who gets the nod... PITTSBURGH STEELERS!

Preacher
02-05-2008, 01:43 AM
no question now who gets the nod... PITTSBURGH STEELERS!

Absolutely!!

LambertLunatic
02-05-2008, 07:08 AM
Even had the Patriots won the SB, they still would not have been anywhere near as good as the Steelers of the 70's were. The pats ARE good, but if they had this talent level in the 70's, they'd have been the 4th best team of that decade. The Steelers, Raiders, and Cowboys of the 70's were all better than this decade's pats. As much as I hated the raiders, they WERE scary good, and IMO were the 2nd best team of all time (yes, even better than the 80's 49ers and 70's and 90's cowboys). Actually, I should say 2nd or 3rd best team of all time. I don't really remember the 60's packers.

HometownGal
02-05-2008, 07:45 AM
Pats shit the bed

That 's the best description of the Pats* chokejob I've read! :cheers::toofunny::toofunny:

This debate can now officially be put to rest. :tt02:

Dino 6 Rings
02-05-2008, 10:30 AM
Even had the Patriots won the SB, they still would not have been anywhere near as good as the Steelers of the 70's were. The pats ARE good, but if they had this talent level in the 70's, they'd have been the 4th best team of that decade. The Steelers, Raiders, and Cowboys of the 70's were all better than this decade's pats. As much as I hated the raiders, they WERE scary good, and IMO were the 2nd best team of all time (yes, even better than the 80's 49ers and 70's and 90's cowboys). Actually, I should say 2nd or 3rd best team of all time. I don't really remember the 60's packers.

Actually, I think the 70s Cowboys were better than the Raiders and if not for Bradshaw and the Steelers mastery of Staubach and the Boys, they could have been the 4 time winners that decade. They just had the bad luck of getting to play the greatest team ever...twice.

Providence Steel
02-05-2008, 01:51 PM
Here is another logo...

I used a few that were posted here before and kinda meshed them all together.

I really like the "*" for the dot on the "i"

Hope nobody minds me using their work for a mashup logo.

http://members.cox.net/manualstore/3.jpg

Dino 6 Rings
02-05-2008, 03:22 PM
Want something Funny...the 18-1 T-shirts being sold on the internet are already on back order. Now that's hilarious. No team has ever had their loss so celebrated.

Kind of says a lot about the team, if losing means that much to other teams fans.

Steelers are the Lords of the Rings.

fansince'76
02-05-2008, 03:26 PM
Want something Funny...the 18-1 T-shirts being sold on the internet are already on back order. Now that's hilarious. No team has ever had their loss so celebrated.

Kind of says a lot about the team, if losing means that much to other teams fans.

The bandwagoners don't see it that way - "it's all just jealousy," they say. Wrong. This level of hatred has more to do with just simple jealousy.

Dino 6 Rings
02-05-2008, 03:30 PM
Jealous of what? 3 rings and 3 losses?

No thanks, I'll take my FIVE rings and 1 loss (Stupid Neil)

fansince'76
02-05-2008, 03:32 PM
Jealous of what? 3 rings and 3 losses?

No thanks, I'll take my FIVE rings and 1 loss (Stupid Neil)

Well, they seemed to revel in being "hated" when they were going 16-0 earlier this season. They got their wish. Losing and getting their collective noses rubbed in shit over it was part of the risk of that approach. Now they don't like it so much. Too bad.

Dino 6 Rings
02-05-2008, 03:58 PM
for everyone of those Ef You touchdowns they had this year and all those pictures of Bill Bellicheat giving the finger to the league...

18-1

HA HA!

Super Steelers, 4 Superbowls in 6 years and Zero Superbowl Losses.

TheManOfSteel
02-05-2008, 05:58 PM
That is how we get down. Thought you knew?

TeeJay
02-05-2008, 08:22 PM
No debate?no contest. Sunday made sure of that! :sofunny:

I did get a very perverse sense of justice, watching the Giants celebrating. I just remembered all those Pats fans chanting ?guarantee? after the Pats/Steelers game.

You just knew half of them on Sunday were wearing their 19 ? 0 tee-shirts beneath their Jerseys! :yawn:

Dino 6 Rings
02-06-2008, 04:43 PM
Oh dang right! They did chant "gaurantee" during our game didn't they...

Not to mention the coach saying after the game "we've played against better safeties, I'll tell you that"

Haiku_Dirtt
02-07-2008, 12:50 AM
Well, they seemed to revel in being "hated" when they were going 16-0 earlier this season. They got their wish. Losing and getting their collective noses rubbed in shit over it was part of the risk of that approach. Now they don't like it so much. Too bad.

They did revel. And revel. And revel.

They did deny. And deny. And deny.

And now they want the 'martar status' because, in retrospect, they are coming to the conclusion that their antics as a 'renegade with a cause' holds more water than the harvard grad. who didn't fully understand the risk of 'shoveling ponzi mortgage schemes to the bottom of the fico spectrum'

Is it the fault of Congress that you enjoy anti-trust exemption too?

Nothing touches the 1980 USA hockey squad. But that Giant victory started to right the ship and oddly at a point in American History where a tsunami of change is unfolding.

F*** Bill and the Pats. Running up the score is so Bob Stoops. Karma.

SteelerFanInATL
02-09-2008, 03:13 PM
I guess we can put this comparison to rest. This is one of those times that an astric is needed next to their record.

* 18 - 1

* = Lost in the Super Bowl

Until a team equals what we did in the 70's in some form and then has as many Hall
of Famers as we do from the same era, then and only then can we even start to compare.

TeeJay
02-23-2008, 02:47 AM
But my answer to this question, and I did try and find the Coach Noll thread....but I failed, worse than a Patsie on any given Sunday ,is this:-:thumbsup:.

Chuck Noll......a man of Honour, intregrity, hard work, played hard but fair, loved his players and knew winning wasn't everything. As long as the players gave 100%. He wasn't the most successful manager in the History of the NFL in his formative years! But he EARNED the respect of everyone around him, and did it the hard way.

The bloke from the Cheating Rats.....no honour, no dignity. work goes out the window as you rely on the TV cameras for that, winning is everything, loves his players regardless of effort they put in assuming the Cameraman puts in 110%. Is still BUYING success regardless of how it happens. Wants everything the easy way!

Is still therefore easily behind Coach Noll in success.And always will be. Carry on cheating my friend....you'll NEVER have a Dynasty like that of the Steelers and Coach Noll. And even if you did, it would just be tainted. Do everyone a favour and retire (dis)gracefully from the game whilst you still can. The NFL has enough problem children on it's plate right now without you adding to it.

Ciao.(hugs) :tt02: