Rogah, there is probably no perfect scoring system or methodology but I think the CBS scoring system is not glaringly wrong. As you know it attempted to award franchises for historical success and consistency. In the NFL that is difficult when evaluating teams during the Super Bowl era. Personally, I prefer the CBS method because it does reward teams for playoff success short of a SB win and not SB wins exclusively. Consider, for a wildcard team such as the 85 Patriots, they had to win three road games to make it to the SB. That was quite an accomplishment in and of itself. And hey, just for lining up against the 85 Bears should count for 5 points. Certainly, a SB victory is the ultimate goal and barometer of success. However, consider the 1970s Vikings or the 1990s Bills. They each had to beat a lot of good, playoff-tested teams to reach their respective SBs. The 74 Vikings played well defensively vs that Pittsburgh team but the offense could do nothing vs the Steel Curtain. Still, Minnesota should get credit for reaching the SB that year and for reaching three others that decade. The 90 Bills were "this close" to beating the NYG in SB 25, just missing on Norwood's FG that would have won it. The 91-93 Bills played a truly great, but often overlooked, Washington team followed by two dominant Dallas teams. The 90s Bills teams went 9-0 in the AFC playoffs (if memory serves me correctly) to get the honor to play in four consecutive SBs. I think that shows consistent excellence in the regular season to earn those playoff berths and consistent excellence in dominating their conference in the early 90s. But, from the 84 Niners to the 96 Packers, the NFC pretty much owned the AFC, and so the Bills - unfortunately for them - had to face three SB teams from the NFC that would have beaten the vast majority of AFC SB teams from SB 1-49. Personally, I think 5 of the top 6 greatest SB teams came from the NFC during that era: 84 Niners, 85 Bears, 89 Niners (possibly the best team ever), 91 Skins, 92 Cowboys (I put the 78 Steelers in the top 6). When the 78 Cowboys lost SB 13 to the Steelers, I think that was worth 5 points; certainly, that Dallas team would have beat many SB winners (including, I believe any of the four NE SB winners over the past 14 years), and in fact, I believe it was an ESPN poll that had the 78 Cowboys as the highest rated SB losing team among its list of the greatest teams of the SB era, and the 78 Cowboys were ranked ahead of most SB winning teams. I believe Lombardi trophies is only one part of the equation. Divisional and conference titles should also count because they do tell, as in the case of Dallas, Pittsburgh, SF, NE, in particular, a long-term standard of excellence. This exercise - I think we can all agree - would be much easier in the NHL or MLB where no matter what set of criteria one would use, the Canadians and Yankees would undoubtedly be the two elite franchises of their respective sports. Still, I believe you asked about taking 1 SB win (Bucs) or 4 SB losses (Vikings or Bills) and for me, it is easy: give me the SB win. Why? Because nothing hurts as much as a SB loss. I'm still hurting over the Blackhawks losing to the LA Kings last year or Italy losing to Brazil on penalty kicks in the 94 World Cup but nothing in sports compares to losing SB 13 vs the Steelers. Even beating Pittsburgh in SB 30 does not come close to making up for the loss in 78. Then again, that SB determined the NFL team of the decade. No other SB match-up has ever decided team of the decade. So, I guess my wounds run deep when it comes to SB losses. But if you ask me what is the greater accomplishment - winning one SB or winning four division titles, four conference titles and losing four SBs to some of the best teams ever - I'd have to say the latter.
