Mr Bean's front page post about Tomlin recently got me thinking about us becoming a new dynasty in football in general.
Bean touched on something that made me think bout the word Dynasty. And what it means for us.
When people name dynasties, they just usually think of the best team over the decade. Hence why we think of the Steelers in the 70's, 49ers in the 80's, Cowboys in the 90's, and recently (grr) the Pats of the 00's.
But in the midst of those teams, there are still 23 Super Bowls unaccounted for. Some have won a pair together like the Broncos and Dolphins. Many have a few wins scattered around like the Redskins, Raiders, and Packers. Still others have many losses and close calls, and yet a few havent even PLAYED in the Bowl.
That may be the NFL's definition. But my title is really more about us. Stiller Nation and its team. What is OUR definition of a Dynasty? And are these Steelers one? Will they be?
By the way this is one of my more serious and lengthy thought provoking poasts, so if you're looking for all the profanity and hate, please see the hate guide from before. I got it all out for now until Sept 11. BONUS HATE: We get to kill the Ravens in honor of killing Osama Bin Freaking Laden. That means clearly the Ravens hate America. And that Ray Lewis is probably Taliban, and Ed Reed's doo-rag is actually a Terror Hat! I hate em and they stank!
Had ya going there didn't I :)
When you zoom in on just your team, and forget all others for a second, your definition of dynasty may change. For a team like New York it could have just been enough to make another Bowl win after 20 years. But we have some serious history behind us to consider.
Our own team once produced 4 trophies in 6 years. Something which nobody has been able to duplicate. Does that put this team under a higher standard? I tend to argue no because I feel that its more about the continuity and identity of the actual team itself.
With that in mind, I think about people. People make a dynasty. They are iconic. Who doesn't envision Mean Joe, Chuck Noll, Bradshaw, and the rest of the gang when we hear the Steelers of the 70's. Think about the identity. For us, all 4 wins were more or less with the same people. That ties it all together.
Is it possible for you to really think ''steelers of the 2000's or Steelers of 05-15 and not feel so different about the teams that have won the super bowl? From the Chin to Tomlin, The Bus to Fumbles, Randle El tricks to Mike Wallace Bombs, FWP to Redman (not that I would dare offend Redman for fear of swift dropkicks to my stomach), Porter to Woodley, Haggans to Harrison, Faneca and that beautîful line to the revolving door we have had (save for pouncey omg!).
Consider all those different people and identities in just 4 years. Only 2 between championships. Is it really the same feeling you get as when you think "Steelers of the 70's?"
To me these Steelers have to win two more in a short time for me to feel this is a true Steeler or NFL dynasty. Even with one, I just can't bring 05 close enough to 08's team. Win one in 2011 and maybe 2012 or 13 with this core group, and I can picture the Steelers of the 10's being a real dynasty.
As it stands I cant help but just feel like 2005 was one of those beautiful magical years that sorta normally doesn't happen and probably was a real surprise. A blip on the radar though so to speak. I think this group now has something special. With all the beautiful long contracts in place, Ben, Mendy, Woodley, Harrison, Taylor, Hood, Heyward, Timmons, Polamalu, And lastly but not leastly, Mike Tomlin, you have a real image there. Thats a group of key starters and a Coach that isn't going to part for a long time. And we're set to do something big.
I could really see this team with all the new youth and explosiveness developing well under Tomlin and becoming the next Dynasty in the NFL. We'll have our share of contenders however. But I certainly think it will be down to the Packers and Steelers over the battle for NFL dominance. I think they'll be much like the Cowboys vs. Steelers, 1-2.
But what do you think? What's your definition of dynasty? Is there a simple Wins to years ratio? Is it judged by overall performance year in and out irregardless of rings? Or is it about the people and faces as I say? Speak up.