Why register with the Steelers Fever Forums?
 • Intelligent and friendly discussions.
 • It's free and it's quick. Always.
 • Enter events in the forums calendar.
 • Very user friendly software.
 • Exclusive contests and giveaways.

 Donate to Steelers Fever, Click here
 Our 2014 Goal: $450.00 - To Date: $450.00 (100.00%)
 Home | Forums | Editorials | Shop | Tickets | Downloads | Contact Pittsburgh Steelers Forum Feed Not Just Fans. Hardcore Fans.

Go Back   Steelers Fever Forums > Steelers Football > Pittsburgh Steelers


Steelers Fever Fan Shop

Doc's Sports Get FREE NFL Picks and College Football picks as well as Football Lines like live NFL Lines and updated NFL Power Rankings all at Doc's Sports Service.

Steelers

An important history lesson for you TRUE Steelers fans!

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 11-05-2010, 04:16 PM   #11
Riddle_Of_Steel
Head Coach
 
Riddle_Of_Steel's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Escondido, CA
Posts: 1,955
Gender: Male
Member Number: 13727
Thanks: 2
Thanked 887 Times in 442 Posts
Default Re: Are the 2005-2010 Steelers a dynasty?

Are the 2005-2010 Steelers a dynasty?

Even if they don't win the SB this year, I think you can make a strong case for the Steelers being a dynasty, even now. If they do win this year, it is a sure thing.

I will admit though, I have no idea though what the official definition of a dynasty is, or if an official definition even exists.

Look at it this way-- this is the salary cap era. Teams are not supposed to be able to repeat, the rules (especially since about 1997) are specifically made to try and prevent that and prevent dynasties. The only team this decade that was able to win back-to-back Superbowls, was the Pats, and we already know they cheated to some degree or another, so they should not be used as a metric as to how successful a team can be during the salary-cap era. Besides the Pats, only one team has managed multiple Superbowls in a short period of time this decade-- the Steelers. While we have had the off year following each victory, the Steelers have been consistently dominant in most phasesof the game, and have one of the best win percentages the last few decades.

The days of a dynasty being 4 or 5 Superbowl wins with some back to back ones, are LONG GONE. If your team manages to win one Superbowl this decade, you are doing good. If your team wins more than one in a short time span of 3 or 4 years, they should be in a serious discussion about dynasties. if they manage that, plus an overall dominant performance over the long run, they should be considered a dynasty.
__________________
GO STEELERS!!
"On the S-2-7 train"
Riddle_Of_Steel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-2010, 04:20 PM   #12
lionslicer
Team President
 
lionslicer's Avatar
 

Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,371
Gender: Male
Member Number: 12850
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default Re: Are the 2005-2010 Steelers a dynasty?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Riddle_Of_Steel View Post
Sorry, lionslicer, but I beg to differ, strongly.

The Pats actually got busted for the exact same thing in 2005. The Green Bay coaching staff caught a Patriots assistant on their sideline taping them from a location that was strictly prohibited by the rules (the whole Spygate scandal was not that he was filming, but the location they were filming from) during a game, and complained to the commissioner, who of course did nothing except to issue a league-wide memo re-iterating the clearly worded rules about taping opponents' sidelines (we can't single out BB now, can we?).

What the Patriots did was against the rules in 2001, just as it was against the rules in 2007, and still against the rules today.
I believe the rule says you may tape anywhere and anything on the field as long as you don't use the tapes during the game. As in you can't tape a team one week, and when you face them, pull a TV on the sideline and watch the tape during the game.

Now that wasn't what the rule ment, but the rule is very vague.

Here's the thing people don't get. The guys on the sideline filming teams were wearing patriot gear and were givin permission to stand on the sideline by the home team. It wasn't like they snuck in, or jumped on the field from the stands, the teams knew what was happening and allowed it because they too also did this. The Commish knew that the rule was very vague and sent the memo out, all the coaches stopped except Billichick which is why he was caught and fined. But he wasn't stripped of his rings, because if he was, you'd have to strip Parcells of his... And Jimmy Johnsons of his... It would totally discredit a lot of great teams in history... And Parcells would probably kill Goodell if he did that.
lionslicer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-2010, 04:46 PM   #13
TRH
Living Legend
 
TRH's Avatar
 

Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Bath, Ohio
Posts: 4,849
Gender: Male
Member Number: 17206
Thanks: 124
Thanked 313 Times in 217 Posts
Default Re: Are the 2005-2010 Steelers a dynasty?

Quote:
Originally Posted by lionslicer View Post
The 49ers dynasty should really be from 81 to 98. They made 16 playoff appearances in 18 seasons. Only had 1 season below .500 Only 1 season with less than 10 wins. 11 seasons with over 10 wins.

They totally dominated the NFL. They should have won more superbowls, but because of the quarterback controversy between Young and Montana, they had a couple games Montana could have won in the playoffs to take them to the superbowl, but they kept Young in there who lost the game. And vice-versa.


Agreed.
The recent Patriots, who are not a dynasty and far from one, are not even close to this. That said, neither are the 05-10 Steelers yet.
TRH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-2010, 07:26 PM   #14
steelerchad
Team President
Supporter
 

Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 2,284
Member Number: 5792
Thanks: 9
Thanked 478 Times in 231 Posts
Default Re: Are the 2005-2010 Steelers a dynasty?

Quote:
Originally Posted by lionslicer View Post
The 49ers dynasty should really be from 81 to 98. They made 16 playoff appearances in 18 seasons. Only had 1 season below .500 Only 1 season with less than 10 wins. 11 seasons with over 10 wins.

They totally dominated the NFL. They should have won more superbowls, but because of the quarterback controversy between Young and Montana, they had a couple games Montana could have won in the playoffs to take them to the superbowl, but they kept Young in there who lost the game. And vice-versa.
Don't agree. They only won 1 SB after 89 and that was with a different QB 6 years after there previous one. So from 89-98 they won 1 SB. You can't count that time as their dynasty as the Cowboys were winning 3 Superbowls right in the middle of it.
steelerchad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-2010, 08:29 PM   #15
ZoneBlitzer
Team President
 
ZoneBlitzer's Avatar
 

Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 2,376
Gender: Male
Member Number: 16775
Thanks: 339
Thanked 759 Times in 390 Posts
My Mood: Mellow
Default Re: Are the 2005-2010 Steelers a dynasty?

No. Too spread out and inconsistent play.
ZoneBlitzer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-2010, 12:33 AM   #16
MikeHaullace
Starter
 
MikeHaullace's Avatar
 

Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 574
Member Number: 16733
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Cool Re: Are the 2005-2010 Steelers a dynasty?

A simple, matter-of-fact no.
MikeHaullace is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:06 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Shoutbox provided by vBShout v6.2.1 (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging v3.0.8 (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd. Runs best on HiVelocity Hosting.
Navbar with Avatar by Motorradforum
no new posts