Could the Steelers be the best team of the Decade?
by drinkyourmilkshake on Feb 4, 2009 5:28 PM EST
64 comments
As is usually the case with dym's contributions, the following is well researched, replete with cool photos, and a good discussion starter, even if there's no right or wrong answer. My take? We're not quite there just yet, as New England's got one more title and a touch more consistency to show off, not to mention a regular season for the ages in 2007. By the time the 2011 season starts though, I don't think there will be much of a discussion personally, as I see Pittsburgh winning one more in the next two years. - Blitz-
**********
After winning a world record 6th Superbowl trophy The Pittsburgh Steelers have become the greatest professional football team in NFL history and possibly the greatest franchise in professional sports. Mike Florio of The Sporting News also considers us "the team of the century." But next year could also give us another title to add to the mantle, "Team of the Decade".
Right now the consensus pick would likely be the New England Patriots, who without a Superbowl win from the Pittsburgh Steelers next year will be assured of this distinction. The Pittsburgh Steelers are the only team other than the Patriots to win multiple Super Bowls in the decade; the New England Patriots have won three Super Bowls in this decade and as all of you are aware the Steelers have only won two. With one more year left in the decade it still could be possible for our Steelers to be the first franchise to be consider team of the decade in two different decades, the 70’s and the 00’s.
The Packers claim the 1960’s, the Steelers claim the 70’s, the 49ers have the 80’s, and the Cowboys have the 90’s. If the Steelers are able to win Super Bowl XLIV, I would argue that they deserve to at least be ranked equally with the Patriots during the first decade of the new millennium.
The statistics for the Steelers and Patriots are very similar for the decade that has spanned seasons 2000 to 2008. In that time period the Steelers have an overall record of 94-49-1, which is a 65.3% winning percentage. During that same span the Patriots are 102-42, a winning percentage of 70.8%. In the entire decade so far the Steelers and the Patriots have posted losing records just one time each - Steelers 6-10 in 2003 and Patriots 5-11 record in Bill Belichick’s first season as head coach in 2000. The Patriots have won 6 division titles in the AFC East, while the Steelers have won 5 division titles; 4 in the AFC North and one in the now defunct AFC Central. Both teams have qualified for the playoffs a total of 6 times in the first 9 years of this decade.
In the Playoffs the Patriots again have a better overall record of 14-3 (82.4%), to the Steelers Playoff record of 10-4 (71.4%). The Steelers have reached the AFC title game 4 times, winning twice, while the Patriots have reached this game 5 times, and won 4 of those match-ups. The Steelers do have a 100% winning percentage in Super Bowls in this decade, while the Patriots have a 75% winning percentage thanks to the New York Giants.
Steelers players have made 39 appearances in the Pro-Bowl in the decade and Patriots players have made 30. Patriots players have been represented on the All-Pro team 13 times this decade and the Steelers have been represented 12 times. The Patriots have had an NFL MVP award given to one player and have received an NFL Offensive Player of the Year award, both for Tom Brady during their 2007 season. The Steelers James Harrison was voted 2008 NFL Defensive MVP.
The Steelers have been ranked number one in total defense 4 times during the decade and have been in the top 5 in total defense 5 out of 9 years, the Patriots have had a top 5 defense in just 1 of the 9 seasons this decade (2007). The Patriots have had the top ranked offense one time during the decade and have had a top 5 offense twice. The Steelers surprisingly have had a top 5 offense two times during the decade as well.
These stats show that right now the Patriots have a leg up on us is just about every statistical category, although with one season left the gap in records and statistics could become much smaller. The Steelers would need to win 8 more games than the Patriots in the 2009 season to match their regular season winning percentage. With the health of Tom Brady still questionable, an aging defense, and a division with three teams on the rise, this is entirely possible.
There is one intangible in many people’s minds that has already affected and will continue to effect how the Patriot’s "Dynasty" is remembered. SPYGATE. The infamous videotaping scandal has changed how the Patriots will be remembered forever, it has tainted their legacy and the New England franchise’s three Superbowl wins in the decade will always have an asterisk next to them for many fans of the league.
If Mike Tomlin was making this argument he would say "Pittsburgh Steelers football is 60 minutes long." So, we have one more year to knock off the Patriots as team of the decade. Having said all this I also realize that this argument is something Mike Tomlin would find incredibly useless, I can hear him saying already, "I walk by Six Lombardi trophies everyday on my way to work, not All decade made up awards."
So what say you BTSC, should the Steelers be the considered the Team of the Decade if we win the Super Bowl next year?
All statistics were taken from www.NFL.com, except the Probowl statistics were taken from http://www.pro-football-reference.com/ .
1 recs |
64 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
If the steelers win the superbowl next year I think that both teams will just have to learn to live with being co-TOD’s. With 7 lombardi’s, I think they would be happy to share.
Don't worry about the haters. Haters only hate.
by steelguy99 on Feb 4, 2009 4:03 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
I say yes
If the Steelers win next year, we should be the team of the decade, and yes, that would be due to the Spygate scandal.
Also, one correction. The Steelers did have a losing record (6-10) in 2003.
by WolfpackSteelersFan on Feb 4, 2009 5:44 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
None too happy with spygate myself, but given that it is glossed over constantly by the talking heads I sincerely doubt it will have any impact on their status.
Don't worry about the haters. Haters only hate.
by steelguy99 on Feb 4, 2009 6:03 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Talking heads
I agree, to an extent, but even though the talking heads don’t dwell on Spygate, it is still mentioned on a somewhat regular basis. The fact that it’s mentioned shows that there is a lingering taint in most people’s minds when they think of those Pats* SBs.
by WolfpackSteelersFan on Feb 5, 2009 11:35 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
hi wolfpack, top of the morning to ya :)
Still love seeing poeple write Pats*
by Blitzburgh on Feb 5, 2009 11:40 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Woops, dunno how i missed that one….sorry guys…
I'll drink your Milkshake, I'll drink it up!
by drinkyourmilkshake on Feb 4, 2009 6:06 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
no, no, no, no!
Dont get me wrong, i love the steelers and i think they are second to none when it comes to best NFL franchise ever, but the Pats clearly have this “All-decade” award in the bag. They will have Brady back in their lineup by the start of the season, they will have all the players they lost to injury, such as maroney and harrison. They play in a very vanilla AFC East (dolphins get the toughest schedule in NFL, jets are rebuilding, and the bills) so they will definitely be back in the playoff hunt with another shot to get to the super bowl. So barring any miraculous perfect season for the steelers being capped off with another Lombardi trophy, my vote goes to the New England Patriots for best team of the decade, regardless of their Spygate issue.
by steelersfan86 on Feb 4, 2009 6:46 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Derr?
Are you sure you love the Steelers? I mean, rrreeeeaaaaallllyyyy sure??
/just kidding. Kinda..
by tobiathan on Feb 4, 2009 8:10 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
yeah
i am… but i also know how to put things into perspective
I am a big hines fan, but im not saying he’s better than fitz
by steelersfan86 on Feb 4, 2009 8:45 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
apples and oranges (hines and fitz)
i’d still take hines over fitz for the intangibles. fitz may be a tecmo bowl player, but i don’t think youll ever find a consummate player like hines. he can coach, he can HIT, and he pisses the hell out of opposing teams just by smiling.
by SteelersVT on Feb 4, 2009 10:03 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Love to have both
Having both would be awesome. Basically, Fitz would be playing Holmes’ role. Of course, Holmes had better numbers than Fitz in the SB, so maybe we will see something like having both next year, as Holmes improves.
by WolfpackSteelersFan on Feb 5, 2009 11:38 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Maybe
But I think it goes Pats, Steelers, Giants
I would say that the only way Pittsburgh can usurp the top spot is by beating the Pats in next year’s AFC championship game and then winning the Super Bowl.
Ultimately, though, I don’t really know what any of this means. I’m gonna keep on loving the Steelers regardless of designation to teleological categories within randomly agreed upon units of measurement.
They’re definitely the team of the year. I’m willing to call them that. But Arizona could claim the same, even with the L.
by Fahey on Feb 4, 2009 6:54 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
As much as it pains me to say it .. there is no way we can be team of the decade ..
..for the following reasons:
1. Even if we win the SB next year we’d have both won 3 in the decade but remember the Pats have been to 4 SB’s this decade.
2. When it came to crunch time, they came into our house and TWICE beat us in the AFC championship game ..
More SB’s appearances and going through our house twice to do it, we can’t win that argument …
by Rash92 on Feb 5, 2009 5:34 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
You are forgetting spygate.
History has yet to fullly unfold.
by Jonny B. on Feb 5, 2009 10:23 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I HATE the Pats but you gotta forget about Spygate ..
..everyone tries to steal signals .. of course only the Pats turned it into a Steven Spielberg production company .. but no one will ever be able to prove how much went on and what happened so the only thing you can deal with is the facts, they got 3 Lombardi’s and the sons of bi*ches knocked us off twice on the way … the decade will be remembered as theirs ..
by Rash92 on Feb 6, 2009 5:59 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
NOT THE PATRIOTS!!!!!
I’m sorry but I can’t give this “Team of the Decade” award to the Patriots. 2 of their superbowls are questionable and controversial.
1) Spygate- I’m sick of people letting this issue slide and saying “spygate didn’t really give the Patriots that much of an advantage” well……IT GAVE THEM AN ADVANTAGE! I don’t know about you guys but any advantage that you get that goes against the rules of the league is “CHEATING!” I’m sorry but knowing the hand signals or whatever the other teams doing is almost the same as watching your opponent pick plays in Madden 09. They Cheated!!
2) The Tuck Rule- As much as I don’t like the Raiders, they got robbed in that game against the Patriots. That was a fumble and everyone knew it except for Patriot fans. If not for that call, the Patriots would not be in the superbowl.
My point is, the Patriots should only have one legitimate win, the others have * astericks. I’m not going to be biased and say that the steelers are the team of the decade but I can’t see any other team that is if you count SB wins and playoff appearances.
by SteelChad88 on Feb 4, 2009 7:00 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
The steelers were handed both superbowls by the refs, don’t you know that?
Just trying to be the “objective” opinion that will judge the team of the decade.
Don't worry about the haters. Haters only hate.
by steelguy99 on Feb 4, 2009 7:01 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Have to agree
and these aren’t just “jealous Steelers fan” asteriks: they’re legitimate.
Personally, having seem both Patriot “wins” against us in AFCCGs, it looked to me even back then that something funny was going on. I’ve never seen the Steelers be so thouroghly “outguessed” by opposing coordinators. In my mind, personally, the Patriots organization even cheated it’s players by allowing this question of systemic cheating to be posed with any real grounds for truth. The fact that the NFL so completely swept the entire episode under the rug just reinforces my disgust.
As to the “Tuck Rule”, i still think that is some serious BS. Until that moment, a fumble was a fumble; if a QB still hand his hand on the ball and got hit it was a fumble. Until somebody in the NE camp came up with the theorhetical concept of “forward motion of the arm”, that is. A part of me still feels like the Patriots took a LOT away from players, fans, and the spirit of “game play” by interjecting that kind of lawyer-think to the sport.
I’ll accept, really, their first Superbowl win. Even i was rooting for them that year, after they beat us. I hate to admit it now, but i was a passive Patriots fan early on. But, seeing what has transpired in the years since then, they are like Wall Street hedge-fund managers, lawyers, overpaid, cheating CEO-types that represent everything wrong in America, whereas the Steelers represent honesty, hard work, humility, determination, frugality and everything i and my whole family have worked so hard to stand for. In my world, the Steelers vs. the Patriots is a clash of cultures, not just football teams.
Team of the decade?
Depends on who you ask, IMHO.
by tobiathan on Feb 4, 2009 8:22 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Just a couple of links as you ride off on your high horse
Steelers support NFL’s response to spygate.
Givens takes Steelers out of game.
Former Steeler’s doctor embraced HGH.
Keep the faith!
by Marima on Feb 5, 2009 9:39 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Well, of course the Steeler organization supports the NFL response!
What’s done is done. NOBODY wants to strangle the Golden Goose.
by Jonny B. on Feb 5, 2009 10:28 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
My beef with the tuck rule
Here is why I think the tuck rule needs removed…
Lets say the ball was COMPLETELY tucked. As in now the QB is just standing there. But has not been brought down. Does that mean he is “unfumbleable?”
No. Because the rule only applies to a tuck in motion. So why is it a tucked ball can be fumbled, but a ball on its way to being tucked cant?
And how can we interpret the thoughts of a QB? We make effort to remove interpretive calls. How do you know the defender just didnt knock his arm inwards. Its way too subjective.
Basically the Pats lucked out by getting the benefit of a really retarded rule. And thats one of their SB’s right there. Then they cheated us out of the other 2.
by Mechem on Feb 4, 2009 10:29 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
in defense of the tuck
And how can we interpret the thoughts of a QB?
This is exactly why the rule is in place. Basically, if you start from the idea that if a QB loses the ball while throwing it, it’s an Incompletion, it then logically follows that you need to decide what constitutes a throwing motion. All the “tuck” rule really says is that if the football is moving forward it’s a throwing motion until such time as it has been tucked (or cocked back again). Admittedly, this gives the QB the benefit of the doubt, but otherwise you’d have refs trying to figure out at precisely which frame of an replay the QB decided to stop throwing the ball and had started to tuck the ball… In other words, you’d be trying to read the mind of the QB. The whole point of the tuck rule is that we need some arbitrary but objective method of determining when a throw starts and stops, and when you really think about it, the definition that makes sense is from the beginning of the ball moving forward to the time when the ball has been tucked away (or cocked again). There’s a reason the rule wasn’t changed after the “tuck rule game” and it’s because it’s a decent, if obscure and potentially confusing rule.
by RedBlackandGold on Feb 5, 2009 12:23 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Meh
I just think the bottom line should be this, if the arm is not throwing, and by that I mean overhead (or extended far sideways) and propelling the ball forward, with some measure of control, then it should be a fumble.
by Mechem on Feb 5, 2009 11:29 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Why not just say its a fumble while the QB has possesion. If the defensive contact before the ball is thrown causes a changed trajectory or the ball to be prematurely released then call it a fumble. Give something back to the defenses out there.
Also…if a QB gets to call a tuck type fumble an incomplete forward pass, shouldn’t it also be considered intentional grounding most of the time as the balls land right in the pocket most of the time?
by SCSteeler on Feb 10, 2009 8:34 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Technically
If a pass rusher has his mitts on the QB, there is no pocket.
by Varmint on Feb 10, 2009 1:36 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Good point, but still most of the time these fail to cross the line of scrimage and land in amongst the linemen.
Could an ineligible receiver penalty be called on a tuck type pass if it hit one of the ineligibles first?
Just wondering.
by SCSteeler on Feb 10, 2009 9:34 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Pats had the #4 ranked defense in 2007
by tha1andonly57@aim.com on Feb 4, 2009 7:46 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
sorry everyone, i should have done a better job with editing…
I'll drink your Milkshake, I'll drink it up!
by drinkyourmilkshake on Feb 4, 2009 8:24 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
no no
thats my title, remember? i didnt read very carefully before promoting.
very busy today after neglecting stuff after SB. this was a good topic i wanted us to talk about, but couldnt get to it. My job to edit final product! Though that said, it sure helps when I dont have to too much :)
by Blitzburgh on Feb 4, 2009 8:54 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Um because
They got so far up on people that they could just rush 4 and drop 7 and win every game.
Its impossible to have a balanced offense down 3 scores. So their offense WAS their defense.
Thats why they lost in the SB. They couldnt stop the Giants.
Defense wins games. Heck, Chicago would have won if they hadnt fumbled 13 times.
by Mechem on Feb 4, 2009 9:15 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
hold on there
That D had two potential HOFers in Seymour and Harrison. Plus they had guys like Adelius Thomas, Wilfork, and Samuel. So, they weren’t that bad. And they lost the SB because the Giants d-line got pressure on Brady all game long, which slowed their offense down, scoring only 14 points. They weren’t an elite defense, but still pretty good.
WE DEY!!!!!
by jr3131 on Feb 4, 2009 11:25 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Not as much last year
I agree their defense had a great run for a while. But in 07 they were not much of anything.
Regardless my point of defense wins games holds true to the Giants. And as I said would have held true to Chicago were it not for the plague of fumblitis.
by Mechem on Feb 5, 2009 11:30 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
A SB gives it to the Steelers
Ultimately, you are measured by how many titles you win. One more ties the Steelers with the Pats in Super Bowls and would tie them in AFC Championship games with the Pats assuming STeelers don’t beat the Pats in that game.
But Pittsburgh has a unique claim when it comes to comparing them to NE. Spygate especially taints this conversation because the Steelers suffered more than any team from Spygate if the two AFC Championship games are tainted. We can’t say for certain if spying made a difference, but in the case they tie for Super Bowls, the nod goes to the team that was victimized by potential cheating, not the one that benefited from it.
by CarlWeathersMustache on Feb 4, 2009 8:14 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
WWMTD?
I believe Coach T would say something along the lines of:
“So what? So they’ve won three in so many years? Who cares? How many decades of competitive success have they had? Do they push for a title nearly every season for four decades, a whole era, or have they jhust become a power in recent memory? When i think of the Pittsburgh Steelers i think of an organization committed to success and doing the right thing over the long hual, not just the last few years.”
Again- this is my guess of what Tomlin’s attitude would be. Or maybe i’m projecting my own attitude onto him. Either way this is how I see it.
by tobiathan on Feb 4, 2009 8:27 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
BTW
As to the “undefeated season”=
remember, the Steelers went 15-1 in ‘04. Given that the AFCCG they lost was tainted by Spygate, it’s puts them firmly in the same realm of accomplishment as last year’s Patriot team. It’s not like they’re 10-15 games better in the last 9 years. Maybe 2 or 3, a margin of error in many ways.
by tobiathan on Feb 4, 2009 8:31 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
It will be the Patriots
Quick Question: Does anyone remember who was the Coach of the decade for the Seventies?
If you said Chuck Noll, you would be wrong. Winning four Super Bowls was not enough for him to win the award. In fact, he also never one coach of the year.
No, the “Coach Of The Seventies” as decided by the Sports Witers was: Don Shula. The reason? The perfect season of course… Never mind that any of the four Steeler Super Bowl teams could have whipped that “perfect” Dolphin team. (Don’t believe the hype.. they weren’t that good. They only played ONE team above .500 all season, and didn’t have to play ANY playoff teams in their “perfect” run…)
No matter what happens next year, The Patriots will have been to more Super Bowls than the Steelers. They will have a better playoff record and a better regular season record (unless something incredibly strange happens).
That is all they will need for the writers to pick the Patriots. Sorry… there is no way we will be considered the Team of the Decade.
Tomlin got here one year too late for that to happen…
by MarkJoel66 on Feb 4, 2009 8:46 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
No NFL fan thinks of Shula and the Dolphins as the Team of the '70s unless your last name is Shula
The Steelers and Chuck Noll are clearly the Team of that decade, Don Shula’s perfect season notwithstanding. The Fins had a phenomenal season, unmatched ever, but when you talk about football in the 70’s it’s all Steelers.
Keep the faith!
by Marima on Feb 5, 2009 9:25 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
yeah, but we got a big honking dose of him all last season
and even some die-hard haters told us they hoped we’d win just to shut him up and get him off the TV.
Keep the faith!
by Marima on Feb 5, 2009 12:09 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Sorry to bust your bubble
I’m as big a Steeler fan as you’ll find, but Miami did beat Pitsburgh in the playoffs that year.
by babaganoosh on Feb 5, 2009 2:59 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Pats will be remembered
but not for the undefeated season: they’ll be remembered for blowing it in the 19th game against the inferior Manning.
by CarlWeathersMustache on Feb 5, 2009 5:09 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Heres the deal
The Rams, Ravens, Bucs, Colts, and Giants so far have been one shot deals.
The pats won 3, and the Steelers 2.
BUT!!! Two of the pats SB’s came following wins over Pittsburgh. Meaning Pittsburgh was RIGHT THERE.
On the contrary, the Pats had been eliminated in the Divisional round when we won SB XL, and were NOT EVEN IN THE PLAYOFFS this year.
On top of that. The Pats LOST a SB in this run.
Also, the Pats cheated.
I declare us the winner!
by Mechem on Feb 4, 2009 9:12 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
pats
we need a big win in the playoffs against Brady and the Pats. That would really clinch it for us, imo.
WE DEY!!!!!
by jr3131 on Feb 4, 2009 11:28 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah
A beat down in the AFCCG would ease some pain.
by Jonny B. on Feb 5, 2009 12:35 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Cept they wont be around
I highly doubt they make the AFCCG so we probably wont get a chance to avenge them.
But heck we did it this year in their house to the tune of an ass whooping.
by Mechem on Feb 5, 2009 11:31 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
The Pats accomplishments are tainted...
I dont count those AFCCG’s! I get so tired of people acting like the Pat’s didnt cheat! I remember watching those games and thinking that the Pat’s were just exploiting our blitz and Defense; that they just had our number…they had our plays and knew what we were doing. It’s easy to be all world(Brady) when you know what the defense is doing on a given play. Those guys were cheating and the league just glossed over the matter because they didnt want to suffer potential backlash from the fans. If it didnt give them a competitve advantage,then why do it?
In my honest opinion, I believe if we win next year, we at least deserve to be the team of the decade.
by Steeler Ric on Feb 5, 2009 10:11 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
I see your point in the ’04 AFCCG, but, IMO, the ’01 AFCCG was lossed due to extremely poor special teams play.
by Jonny B. on Feb 5, 2009 10:30 AM EST up reply actions 0 recs
By the way, Ben Rothlisberger’s 3 interceptions in ’04 had nothing to do with defensive signals that might have been taped from a different location than what is specified by the NFL.
Keep the faith!
by Marima on Feb 5, 2009 12:22 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
No
Those were from the strange radio signals that we’ve heard about. Must have been stealing the radio signal to his helmet. :)
by WolfpackSteelersFan on Feb 5, 2009 1:45 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
damn! forgot about that.
Keep the faith!
by Marima on Feb 5, 2009 2:07 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
yeah seriously
Beligenius is nothing without his pretty boy quarter back and his brilliant ways to beat the system.
Roethlisberger WAS a rookie, and I attribute some of those bad plays to him throwing the ball where he shouldnt. But still. Something was up yall.
by Mechem on Feb 5, 2009 3:19 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I see Marima has chimed in, but you guys should read the post on Pats Pulpit regarding this subject for an opposing viewpoint.
No one is going to acknowledge spygate in ten years in any substantive form or debate twenty years from now, just like the fact that some teams heavily juiced more than others is over looked. It’s all going to come down to the numbers, but there is no way that the Steelers will be looked at as the team of the decade. If the steelers win the SB though, we could stop the patriots from getting it, and is that really any worse?
Don't worry about the haters. Haters only hate.
by steelguy99 on Feb 5, 2009 10:55 AM EST reply actions 0 recs
No one is going to acknowledge spygate in ten years in any substantive form or debate twenty years from now
I don’t know about that. For one thing, from what I understood, steroids were pretty common throughout the league in the 70s. I know for a fact that Lyle Alzado was one of the more well known users. In this case, the league sent a letter warning the Pats about their illegal taping activity, and they still broke the rule.
We’ll see, but I know this. Fans for all other teams will have an easy criticism for the Pats if Pats fans start talking about their great run this decade.
by WolfpackSteelersFan on Feb 5, 2009 12:07 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
This is one of those debates neither of us can win. I hope to revisit this with all of you in 10 years on BTSC.
Don't worry about the haters. Haters only hate.
by steelguy99 on Feb 5, 2009 12:15 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
funny thing is that just like last year's "perfect season"
it never was brought up by the Patriots, players or front office. The media sunk their teeth into it and wouldn’t let go, asking everyone from Kraft, Belichick, and Brady on down about it every chance they got. Not a single player expanded on it even during that ridiculous “Road to Perfection” segment they started doing on NFL Network.
The fans aren’t building up a “team of the decade” argument here either. The national media outlets along with some wonderful supportive local writers that just love to stick the fork in and say the Pats are done (’cause this run has to end sometime, so why not now?) started writing about the Steelers being the best team so far this decade.
Hey, I have nothing but respect for the Steelers and our matchups (with the exception of this season’s roll-over) are always well worth the hype. If the Steelers win this coming year, and go through New England to do it, then lets talk.
Keep the faith!
by Marima on Feb 5, 2009 12:17 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
We’ll forget this years game in NE if you forget last year’s?
Okay, just kidding, never going to forget this years game in NE.
Don't worry about the haters. Haters only hate.
by steelguy99 on Feb 5, 2009 12:27 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
ouch
I think I’ll just lump this year’s debacle in with that Halloween game that stopped their winning streak at 21. Of course the loss had to come against Pittsburgh…any other team would have been better (except any team in our division obviously, and the Colts, and the Chargers.) aaah losing stinks any way you look at it.
Keep the faith!
by Marima on Feb 5, 2009 12:48 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Who knows what the future holds???
Maybe there is still evidence out there. Maybe not everyone who knows something has said everything yet. As time goes on, thewhole truth always has a way of coming up to the surface.
by Jonny B. on Feb 5, 2009 12:15 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Could
This is a silly debate with two years left in the decade. Both the Steelers and the Patriots, barring any significant injuries (hello starting quarterbacks!) will be two of the favorites to get to and win the super bowl again.
That being said, if this was the end of the decade (did I mention there are still two more seasons in this decade?) you’d have to go with the Pats. Steelers are obviously second best, nobody else is third. Steelers win one more, you have a debate. Steelers win two, the debate ends, or if the Pats win one more, the debate ends.
by worldtrip on Feb 5, 2009 2:11 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
