In 92, I believe the NFL was a better product. I believe this because at the time, you could have a team that went three deep at every position. You can't do that in this day and age. I have never really believed that the Pats were a dominating team offensively. Good, yes, but not great. I also think that it's stupid to compare last years team to our champoinship teams. If you want to compare the Pats 01, 03 or 04 teams, then that's fine but not the 07 team. They are not deserving. They may have gone 16-0 in the regular season but the line for 2nd best starts there at the door. You don't get to sit at the table unless it says championship after your name. 19-1, while very impressive, don't cut it in a discussion of champions.
This is what I would say about those teams.
2001
16-13 over Oakland in the Divisional Playoffs. The Brady Rule
24-17 over Pittsburgh in the Conference Championship.
20-17 over the Rams in the Super Bowl. AV won that game.
2003
17-14 over the Titans in the Divisional Playoffs.
24-14 over the Colts in the Conference Championship.
32-29 over Carolina in the Super Bowl. AV won that game again.
2004
20-3 over Indy. They dominated the Colts in the Divisional.
41-27 over Pittsburgh. They dominated the Steelers in the Conference.
24-21 over Philly. Anybody but Philly and they probably lose. Eagles are the consimate chock artist organization in professional sports. Any QB who can keep his lunch down probably beats them. Only TO showed up in that game. Even still, AV won it for them again.
1992
34-10 over Philly. We curshed them. Those were the Reggie White, Clyde Simmons, Jerome Brown teams. Divisional Game.
30-20 over San Fran. Probaby the 2nd best team in the league by a considerable margin. We beat them in SF convincingly. Conference Game.
52-17 over the Bills. HOF QB, RB and WR talent on that offense. Best Defense in the league IMO. We crushed them. Super Bowl.
1993
27-17 over GB. We owned possibly the greatest QB (statistically speaking) in the history of the game. Really was not close. Divisional Game.
38-21 over San Fran. Again, we dominated what was probably the 2nd best team in the league at the time. HOF QB, HOF WR, convincingly. Conference Championship.
30-13 over the Bills. Not as one sided but again, we dominated them. Was never really in doubt. Not even close. Super Bowl.
1995
30-11 over Philly. Again, we owned one of the truely great defenses in the history of the NFL. Our OL dominated them. Divisional Game.
38-17 over Packers. Broken record stuff but again, we simply dictated to Brett Favre and that Green Bay offense. Conference Game.
27-17 over Pittsburgh. Closest game we played in playoffs or Championship throughout our run. Having said that, it was still never really close or even in doubt. We never trailed in that game. Heck, two of the 4 quarters of that football game, we held the Steelers scoreless. It is only considered close because we were so dominant in all of our previous victories. It was never really close. Super Bowl.
Compare the two championship runs and you see that the Cowboys were truely dominant. Where as, the Pats, while great, needed Vini to win every one of there championships. Without that kicker, they probably never make this discussion.
The truth is the truth in that regard.
I have said this many times. I have seen great teams. I have seen teams that might even be better, in certain phases of the game, then our great teams of the early 90s. Having said that, I have never seen a unit more dominating then our OL of those years. They simply could impose there will on any opposing unit. I have never seen any defense that could stand against them. I consider the Philly Defense of that same period to be the best defensive line I've ever seen. They were owned. As great as Seymour and Wilfork might be, they are not even in the same league with The great Reggie White, Simmons or Brown.
The San Francisco Offense of that same period were light years better then any offense New England has ever fielded in the history of there organization. Brady is a great QB but it just doesn't compare. Young (HOF), Rice (perhaps the greatest WR of all time), Brent Jones (Probably future HOF TE), Ricky Watters, Tom Rathman, John Taylor? San Francisco was by far, a better team IMO, then New England. I give New England there due but IMO, they were not even as good as those San Francisco teams we beat to get to the Super Bowl.
It's a matter of where the league is at then and now. The league, IMO, was simply better then then now. To me, all the rest is BS. I believe that those early 90s teams are the best ever. I don't believe that any team could defeat them because I don't believe that any defense is good enough to stop that OL. Defensively, we more then held our own with one of the greatest offenses in the history of the game in San Fran. You can't tell me that we would be overmatched by any offense that has played in any Super Bowl, ever.
This is what I believe. When you break down all the teams, I just believe that those teams are better than anybody. Only the 85 Bears make me wonder and really, not even them because I believe that, while they had great players on defense, we knew how to beat that 46. That's the biggest advanatage that team had IMO and we understood it because of Ryan and the Eagles. Seriously, I just think they were the best an nobody will ever convince me differently.
