Mercury Morris on with Boers and Bernstein

[WhiteSoxfan1986]

There is ZERO chance the Patriots make the playoffs this year if Brady gets hurt.. I don't give a s*** who you think they would bring in, it wouldn't happen

 

Vinny and Brad? Man get the f*** out of here, and I am the one who is drinking?

 

My point is that the Dolphins weren't really hurt by Griese getting hurt because he wasn't that good.

[Texsox]

There is ZERO chance the Patriots make the playoffs this year if Brady gets hurt.. I don't give a s*** who you think they would bring in, it wouldn't happen

 

Vinny and Brad? Man get the f*** out of here, and I am the one who is drinking?

 

Zero chance?! So Brady was good for eight wins?! Sorry, its the NFL and with 22 guys on the field, no one makes that big of a difference. Its like saying Brady makes any .500 team a threat to go undefeated.

[Soxpranos]

The 2007 Patriots are still a better team than the 72 Dolphins anyway.

 

 

Says you.

 

The 2007 Giants are better then the 2007 patriots.

 

No football team is better than a perfect team, its unrealistic. it's impossible to prove that versus a team that no one beat.

 

So stop hating Mercury and the 72' fins.

 

WELCOME TO PERFECT VILLE

POPULATION 1

ESTABLISHED IN 1972

 

 

 

 

 

 

[T R U]

Zero chance?! So Brady was good for eight wins?! Sorry, its the NFL and with 22 guys on the field, no one makes that big of a difference. Its like saying Brady makes any .500 team a threat to go undefeated.

 

Ok well I think you are wrong

 

And no, its not like saying that at all.. Quarterback is the SINGLE most important position on the field at all times, and the Patriots would simply not be that good if they had Matt Cassel or Vinny Testaverde at QB for the majority of this season..

[witesoxfan]

Says you.

 

The 2007 Giants are better then the 2007 patriots.

 

No football team is better than a perfect team, its unrealistic. it's impossible to prove that versus a team that no one beat.

 

So stop hating Mercury and the 72' fins.

 

WELCOME TO PERFECT VILLE

POPULATION 1

ESTABLISHED IN 1972

 

The Giants were definitely better than the Patriots in week 17 :rolly

 

(waits for "but what about in the Super Bowl" followed by some stupid slogan some moron who shouldn't be allowed to talk in public anymore came up with)

 

The Giants played well, and the Patriots played like absolute dogs***, and the Pats still only lost by 3. The Patriots were and still are a far superior team to the Giants and I would bet very good money that the Patriots would beat them 19 out of 20 times.

 

And Mercury is still a moron.

[witesoxfan]

Ok well I think you are wrong

 

And no, its not like saying that at all.. Quarterback is the SINGLE most important position on the field at all times, and the Patriots would simply not be that good if they had Matt Cassel or Vinny Testaverde at QB for the majority of this season..

 

Testaverde went 2-4 on a pretty all around terrible Panthers team, which translates out to about 5-11 or 6-10. You give him the talent the Pats have on both sides of the ball, along with the coaching staff they have, and I bet they could have won the 8 or 9 games they needed to win to get the AFC East title.

[ZoomSlowik]

There's a difference between being perfect and not losing to the teams on your schedule. No one can ever really do the former, and the Dolphins are the only one to do the latter (though some will argue they had the 14-game schedule on their side).

 

We don't really know how things would turn out given any of the truly great teams a totally equal schedule, so I can't rule anyone out based on a hiccup or two. I just can't see a play here or there one way or the other in one or two game over the course of the year definitely swinging the argument. There's no real way to know who'd win if you threw the 72 Dolphins, the 85 Bears, the 07 Patriots, any one of those mid- later 70's Steelers' teams, the 80's San Francisco teams, and those early 90's Cowboys teams in a playoff format given obvious differences in competition, player size, and eras. All of them had quite a few damn good players and had some dominant runs/years.

 

Just looking at it on paper I don't think Miami matches up talent-wise with basically any of them, and the Bears arguably don't have enough offensive firepower to hang with the other teams either (could the defense carry them against other monstrous teams? Who knows). There's really no way to say without seeing them on the field though, which obviously could never happen.

Edited February 6, 2008 by ZoomSlowik

[Soxpranos]

The Giants played well, and the Patriots played like absolute dogs***, and the Pats still only lost by 3. The Patriots were and still are a far superior team to the Giants and I would bet very good money that the Patriots would beat them 19 out of 20 times.

 

You my friend don't know anything about football, the Giants had a very good defensive scheme versus the Patriots giving them all the dumps they wanted and eliminating the 15+ yard plays. You lose by 1 or by 3o its still a loss. The Patriots thought the same thing you are saying, but to bad the one game that counts is the one they lost. Don't tell me how many you won but when you win the big one.

 

And yeah the lost by 3 when the opening line was -13.5

 

Stick to baseball.

Edited February 6, 2008 by Soxpranos

[GoodAsGould]

The Patriots tied Miami's record as far as im concerned, they went undefeated long enough to cover the same span that Miami did.

[witesoxfan]

You my friend don't know anything about football, the Giants had a very good defensive scheme versus the Patriots giving them all the dumps they wanted and eliminating the 15+ yard plays. You lose by 1 or by 3o its still a loss. The Patriots thought the same thing you are saying, but to bad the one game that counts is the one they lost. Don't tell me how many you won but when you win the big one.

 

And yeah the lost by 3 when the opening line was -13.5

 

Stick to baseball.

 

Perhaps I shouldn't say the Patriots played like s***; perhaps I should just say Tom Brady played like s***. He missed probably 5-10 throws that he didn't miss all season. That's not just the Giants pressure that got to him, it was him sucking.

 

And I don't give a s*** what the opening line was or who was favored; as far as I'm concerned, if you win by 1 or by 21, it doesn't matter so long as you come out the victor (and I didn't put money on you). That means absolutely nothing to this argument whatsoever.

 

I would also like to hear a few more cliches too, if that's at all possible.

[Rowand44]

The Patriots tied Miami's record as far as im concerned, they went undefeated long enough to cover the same span that Miami did.

That's ridiculous.

[jackie hayes]

Says you.

 

The 2007 Giants are better then the 2007 patriots.

 

No football team is better than a perfect team, its unrealistic. it's impossible to prove that versus a team that no one beat.

 

So stop hating Mercury and the 72' fins.

 

WELCOME TO PERFECT VILLE

POPULATION 1 2 (at least)

ESTABLISHED IN 1972

 

Fixed.

[SoxFan1]

2007 Patriots > 1972 Dolphins

 

Not only did the Dolphins have a shorter schedule, but the win % of their opponents was sub-.500. I'm not going to say the Patriots team is the best all-time, but they are a better TEAM than those Dolphins, and it's not even a question.

 

They got out-coached (which is surprising for Belichick) and outplayed by the team who wanted it more. Patriots obviously didn't take the game seriously enough. See: Brady (We're only going to score 17?), Brady (cast on foot fiasco), Welker (I'm playing QB), Stallworth (I'm playing QB), etc.

[Texsox]

Ok well I think you are wrong

 

And no, its not like saying that at all.. Quarterback is the SINGLE most important position on the field at all times, and the Patriots would simply not be that good if they had Matt Cassel or Vinny Testaverde at QB for the majority of this season..

 

I agree, but 8 wins for Brady, that's huge. Forty plus guys go from Super Bowl and undefeated to 9-6 without one guy. That also means one guy can take a team from 9-6 to undefeated. I could see maybe 3 loses without Brady, possibly 4 and they make the playoffs with that record.

 

Are you saying Brady is that great of a QB or his backup is that bad? Any other QB capable of making that same impact on a team?

[Rowand44]

2007 Patriots > 1972 Dolphins

The Dolphins won the superbowl, NE didn't. I don't give a crap what NE did in the regular season, if they were THAT great they would have won the one that counted. Too bad.

[SoxFan1]

The Dolphins won the superbowl, NE didn't. I don't give a crap what NE did in the regular season, if they were THAT great they would have won the one that counted. Too bad.

The best team doesn't always win. It's whoever gets hot at the right time. If the Pats/Giants played 10 times, who do you think would win most of the games? And regular season record has a lot to deal with it. Let's say, hypothetically, that 6-10 team or 7-9 got into the playoffs and won the Super Bowl...are they better than the team that went 18-1?

 

The Super Bowl is and isn't the end-all, be-all. It is, in the sense that the last team standing is Champions, but it isn't in the case that the best TEAM doesn't always win. A quick example off the top of my head, this years Big Ten football results...

 

Ohio State beat Michigan, but lost to Illinois, that lost to Michigan...

 

The Pats beat the Giants in week 17, but lost to them in the final game. Would you say the Giants are a better team than the Patriots?

[Rowand44]

The best team doesn't always win. It's whoever gets hot at the right time. If the Pats/Giants played 10 times, who do you think would win most of the games? And regular season record has a lot to deal with it. Let's say, hypothetically, that 6-10 team or 7-9 got into the playoffs and won the Super Bowl...are they better than the team that went 18-1?

Nope. But the all time great teams win their championship no matter what. If New England was THAT good they would have won on Sunday. If you want to sit here and tell me that the 85 Bears or 89 Niners or one of the 70's Steelers teams were the greatest ever, I'd say that's debatable and you could at least make a case for them. This years Pats though? Nope. They lost when it mattered, they aren't one of the greatest teams ever, don't care what anyone says.

[SoxFan1]

Nope. But the all time great teams win their championship no matter what. If New England was THAT good they would have won on Sunday. If you want to sit here and tell me that the 85 Bears or 89 Niners or one of the 70's Steelers teams were the greatest ever, I'd say that's debatable and you could at least make a case for them. This years Pats though? Nope. They lost when it mattered, they aren't one of the greatest teams ever, don't care what anyone says.

Then I'll simply agree to disagree. The best teams don't always win, thats just the way it is.

 

EDIT: And I hate to defend the Pats so much, because I hate them, but you can't dismiss what they did because they didn't win 1 game. If the Super Bowl was a best of 3, 5, 7...NE wins.

[Texsox]

Nope. But the all time great teams win their championship no matter what. If New England was THAT good they would have won on Sunday. If you want to sit here and tell me that the 85 Bears or 89 Niners or one of the 70's Steelers teams were the greatest ever, I'd say that's debatable and you could at least make a case for them. This years Pats though? Nope. They lost when it mattered, they aren't one of the greatest teams ever, don't care what anyone says.

 

So you are placing every Super Bowl winning team ahead of this Pats team on the All-Time list?

[T R U]

I agree, but 8 wins for Brady, that's huge. Forty plus guys go from Super Bowl and undefeated to 9-6 without one guy. That also means one guy can take a team from 9-6 to undefeated. I could see maybe 3 loses without Brady, possibly 4 and they make the playoffs with that record.

 

Are you saying Brady is that great of a QB or his backup is that bad? Any other QB capable of making that same impact on a team?

 

The Patriots put together the type of season that you just don't see.. They werent that good, and it was just one of those things that will probably never happen again. Thats why I cant go with the Tom Brady makes another team go from 9-6 to undefeated.. however, Brady was the main reason that this team was even any good.

 

Brady played WAY over his head this year and put up one of the best QB statistical years ever, hes a career 63% comp passer and he was at 69 this year.. he threw for like 700 more yards than any other year in his career, his career high td passes was 28 it jumped all the way to 50 his career high passer rating was 92.6 jumping all the way to 117.2 this season..

 

His backup, Matt Cassel, is not a starting QB in this league. I mean maybe one day he could, but he has no experience and doesn't have the skill level right now to lead a team to the playoffs. Hell, when NE was pounding Miami they put him in and he threw and incomplete pass, and then followed it up by throwing an interception that got returned for a touchdown. And I don't want to hear about Randy Moss, Randy Moss doesn't make a QB great it takes a good QB to excel with Moss. Otherwise Oakland wouldn't have been such trash.

 

The QB position is getting very under appreciated in this discussion. If Tom Brady goes down in week 1 and is lost for the season, this team will have to rely on Matt Cassel until they could find someone else. Who? Good QBs aren't just sitting around out there. So they bring in Testaverde, ok, he isn't going to lead a team to the playoffs. No chance. So now instead of their offense pummeling people, they will probably fall to middle of the pack at best, which in turn exposes their overrated defense. Teams wont have to rely on throwing non stop to make up for the score differential, they can play their own ball.

 

Tom Bradys success this season single handedly put NE head and shoulders above the rest of the league. This team isnt even 18-0 if he puts up his career averages. They would be more like 12-4 or 13-3. Now lets take Tom Brady out of the equation and NE has to play with Matt Cassel or Vinny Testaverde or whoever else they pick up off the left overs pile. They win maybe, MAYBE, 8 games this season. I just see no way that they can make the playoffs.

 

You have to at least have a decent QB to make the playoffs in the NFL. And the Patriots don't have the running game to carry a team that lacks that. They also don't have the dominate defense to overcome it as well.

 

 

[Soxpranos]

The Dolphins won the superbowl, NE didn't. I don't give a crap what NE did in the regular season, if they were THAT great they would have won the one that counted. Too bad.

 

You my friend , hit it on the dot. Let the others conjure up anything, the bottom line is the 72' Dolphins were undefeated and won the Super Bowl to seal it. Coach Shula and his staff didn't need to tape the opposing teams red zone offense prior to the game.

 

Bottom line, it doesn't matter what we think. The proof is in the pudding, the Dolphins finished a perfect season and no one else has done it.

3 teams have finished 18-1 and the Patriots are the 3rd team to do it. Only one finished with the big "0".

[False Alarm]

The best teams don't always win, thats just the way it is.

who gives a f*** about this platonic best team people keep talking about? hardware is what matters. the giants (and the '72 dolphins, '85 bears, and 39 other teams) have it; the patriots don't. the best SB champs are indusputably all-time great teams. the pats are the best runner-up in NFL history. so they're a cool footnote and that's pretty much it. bein sure deep down that he was on the best team ever ain't gonna keep seau warm at night.

 

As much as I don't care for the 72 Dolphins annual celebration when the last undefeated team loses...

yasny this is a common misperception and i feel like peeps are pretty unfair to the '72 dolphins because of it. other than the bears game in 1984, when they were all present and probably did a toast with the whole team, it's just a couple guys. from yesterday's miami herald:

Buoniconti said that for about the past 15 years, he and Anderson have met for a toast after the final unbeaten team lost. They spoke by phone Sunday night, and Anderson said they ''will get together sometime this week and probably will have a drink.'' But contrary to perception, most of the team do not participate in the toast.

http://www.miamiherald.com/616/story/406426.html

 

finally, i'm a DIEHARD dolphins fan, and i hate morris. he's the bad apple of the '72 team and a self-serving prick who's ruining their rep just to keep his name in print and scavenge a few used-car-dealership endorsements or some s***. (although he probably would've been pretty fun to watch play.)

[witesoxfan]

f***.yes.

[kapkomet]

The 2007 Patriots are still a better team than the 72 Dolphins anyway.

I absolutely HATE the '07 Patriots, but there hasn't been a truer statement on this thread then this one right here ^^.

 

I would say a 1-15 Dolphins team of 2007 would SMOKE the '72 Dolphins. But whatever, because some people can't handle the truth.

[T R U]

I absolutely HATE the '07 Patriots, but there hasn't been a truer statement on this thread then this one right here ^^.

 

I would say a 1-15 Dolphins team of 2007 would SMOKE the '72 Dolphins. But whatever, because some people can't handle the truth.

 

Well no s*** Kap

 

Its different periods, teams these days would smoke teams of the old days based purely on the fact of athletes are better, game planning is better, there is better preparation for the players.. better equipment, its just how the game evolves..

 

No one is arguing the players aspect of this, but as a team the 72' Dolphins are the only ones who have gone undefeated.. thats why they are the best team of all time