Are the Giants the best ever??

[Iago33]

Okay, check my logic here:
If the New York Giants hadn't made a touchdown on the last drive (if say the prayer of a pass had been intercepted), the Patriots would have won and would have been anointed the best ever by many in the media. Therefore, since the Giants beat that "best ever" team, wouldn't it follow that the Giants can be called the "best ever"?

Is my logic flawed?

Or are media-types flawed in their premature and shortsighted coronation of the Patriots?

 

[Doomsday101]

Okay, check my logic here:
If the New York Giants hadn't made a touchdown on the last drive (if say the prayer of a pass had been intercepted), the Patriots would have won and would have been anointed the best ever by many in the media. Therefore, since the Giants beat that "best ever" team, wouldn't it follow that the Giants can be called the "best ever"?

Is my logic flawed?

Or are media-types flawed in their premature and shortsighted coronation of the Patriots?

Giants are the best in 2007. Best ever? I don't think they are there by a long shot right now. Had the Pats won I could at least see an argument because they had already won 3 out of the last 4 SB and this would have been 4 out of the last 5 with a perfect record. Giants won a SB and that is a big deal but best ever, No

 

[Bach]

It's flawed in that a perfect season in 2007 wouldn't mean the Pats were the best ever.

The Pats are a real good team, but this FA/cap era is more watered down than previous era's. I truly believe the Cowboys of the early 90's would have beaten this Pats team be double digits, and likely so would've the 49ers and even Bills of that era. Also the Bears of '85 were much better, imo.

Conversely, you put this Pats team in the early to mid 90's and there's no way they go undefeated or close to it. That would've been fun though, to see them in the same division as the Bills who won the AFC 4 straight years back then.

So no, the Giants beating a real good Pats team of '07 doesn't make them the best since the Pats clearly weren't the best ever.

 

[redster]

Best ever? Probably not. Top 5? Absolutely. This Giants team beat a team that was about to go 19-0, which is a spectacular feat.

 

[THUMPER]

Or are media-types flawed in their premature and shortsighted coronation of the Patriots?

I take it this is a rhetorical question.

 

[Big Dakota]

 

[tyke1doe]

Okay, check my logic here:
If the New York Giants hadn't made a touchdown on the last drive (if say the prayer of a pass had been intercepted), the Patriots would have won and would have been anointed the best ever by many in the media. Therefore, since the Giants beat that "best ever" team, wouldn't it follow that the Giants can be called the "best ever"?

Is my logic flawed?

Or are media-types flawed in their premature and shortsighted coronation of the Patriots?

First, I don't think anyone in the media crowned the Patriots as the best ever. I think the discussion was that if they won the Super Bowl they would be the best ever. Maybe they assumed that the Pats would win and were a little hasty calling them the "best ever," but I think that was always dependent upon them winning the Super Bowl. At best you can say they had the "best regular season" ever based on their 16-0 record.

Second, the "best ever" designation has to do with the overall season, not just a perfect season. And that overall season must conclude with a Super Bowl victory. The Giants are the best team in 2007, but they can't be considered the "best ever" because they didn't have the overall consistency throughout the season as some of the other "best evers" did, such as the 15-1 Bears, the 14-2 Niners, the 13-3 Cowboys, the 14-2 Steelers, the 15-1 Niners. The 16-0 Pats were in that position. But we now know that the Patriots weren't the "best ever" because they didn't close the deal.

 

[THUMPER]

Best ever? Probably not. Top 5? Absolutely. This Giants team beat a team that was about to go 19-0, which is a spectacular feat.

All I have to say to that is: "On any given Sunday...".

The Giants were the best team last Sunday but they were far from being the best team of 2007 let alone one of the top-5 all time. We beat them twice so what does that say about us?

 

[Doomsday101]

Best ever? Probably not. Top 5? Absolutely. This Giants team beat a team that was about to go 19-0, which is a spectacular feat.

Top 5? I would think the Packers or the 60's, Steelers of the 70's, 49er's of the 80's, Cowboys of the 90's and the Pats in 2000's would be at the top of the list then throw in some others that were able to pull of back to back like Denver as well as the Dolphins with back to back and the perfect season would clearly rank about the Giants. What the G-men did was impressive but I don't see them as a top 5 as for the best team ever

 

[tyke1doe]

It's flawed in that a perfect season in 2007 wouldn't mean the Pats were the best ever.

The Pats are a real good team, but this FA/cap era is more watered down than previous era's. I truly believe the Cowboys of the early 90's would have beaten this Pats team be double digits, and likely so would've the 49ers and even Bills of that era. Also the Bears of '85 were much better, imo.

Conversely, you put this Pats team in the early to mid 90's and there's no way they go undefeated or close to it. That would've been fun though, to see them in the same division as the Bills who won the AFC 4 straight years back then.

So no, the Giants beating a real good Pats team of '07 doesn't make them the best since the Pats clearly weren't the best ever.

Though there's no way to prove those scenarios, I agree with you. Those other teams were so balanced on offense and defense, particuarly the Cowboys and Niners.

And the Bears defense was so dominant (and we know defense wins championships) that their mediocre to good offense would have offset any advantage the Pats would have gained in offense.

The Pats defense isn't good enough for that team to have beaten the Niners, Cowboys and possibly the Bills.

 

[tyke1doe]

Top 5? I would think the Packers or the 60's, Steelers of the 70's, 49er's of the 80's, Cowboys of the 90's and the Pats in 2000's would be at the top of the list then throw in some others that were able to pull of back to back like Denver as well as the Dolphins with back to back and the perfect season would clearly rank about the Giants. What the G-men did was impressive but I don't see them as a top 5 as for the best team ever

I couldn't put them as a top 5 either.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Chaminade beat Ralph Sampson and Virgina (also touted as the best team ever at the time), 77-72 back in 82 I think it was.

Was Chaminade then the best team ever?

 

[The Panch]

This game didnt prove that the Giants are the best ever. It just proved that not only were the Pats not the best ever, they werent even the best this season.

 

[THUMPER]

Though there's no way to prove those scenarios, I agree with you. Those other teams were so balanced on offense and defense, particuarly the Cowboys and Niners.

And the Bears defense was so dominant (and we know defense wins championships) that their mediocre to good offense would have offset any advantage the Pats would have gained in offense.

The Pats defense isn't good enough for that team to have beaten the Niners, Cowboys and possibly the Bills.

The thing about those 1985 Bears was that they DID have a good offense, it was just mostly a running offense based on Walter Payton and not much passing except for occasional bombs to Willie Gault or dumpoffs to their TE Moorehead.

They controlled the clock and kept their defense fresh by leading the league in rushing with 2781 yards and 27 rushing TDs. They ran the ball 610 times while only attempting 432 passes. They were also 2nd in scoring (the Chargers with Coryell and Fouts were #1 by 11 points).

People always under rate their offense because their defense was SO dominant but it was a very good offense.

 

[Silverstar]

Okay, check my logic here:
If the New York Giants hadn't made a touchdown on the last drive (if say the prayer of a pass had been intercepted), the Patriots would have won and would have been anointed the best ever by many in the media. Therefore, since the Giants beat that "best ever" team, wouldn't it follow that the Giants can be called the "best ever"?

Is my logic flawed?

Or are media-types flawed in their premature and shortsighted coronation of the Patriots?

The Pats cheated regardless and the Gnats only scored 17 points winning by 3. Neither are deserving of being one of the top 5 teams of all time. Any way you slice it, they are just not deserving of anything but what they got....the all time scoring record for the Pats and a 3rd SB title for the Gnats.

 

[Canadian BoyzFan]

I guess the Baltimore Ravens of this year must be the 4th or 5th best of all time because they almost beat the Pats. :rollseyes:

 

[DallasDomination]

any given sunday is what happened here...Pats are still the better team just not on that Sunday.

Give the Giants the Sb hey deserve it..But best ever or top 5, even top 10?...Buahahahahaa I dont think I've seen this bad of a Sb champ in a long time..Except maybe the steelers of recent memory.

 

[The Panch]

any given sunday is what happened here...Pats are still the better team just not on that Sunday.

If they were the better team, they would've won. Its not what you do in the regular season, its what you do in the post season that defines you. Funny how even this franchise doesnt seem to understand that.

 

[zeromaster]

The Gnats aren't the best ever, and this post is not the worst ever.

But it's trying...

 

[big dog cowboy]

The Giants were the best team last Sunday but they were far from being the best team of 2007 let alone one of the top-5 all time. We beat them twice so what does that say about us?

You really don't want me to answer that question.