Most dominant NFL franchise ever?

[ghst187]

Im die-hard silver and blue but I have to say I dont think the 92 team could beat those Bears, sorry. I think some Cowboy fans give some hindisght dominance to the 92 team.

go down the rosters on those two teams....
I think we have big advantages at:
QB and passing offense
CB
OL (they made rules because E Williams was so dominant, he'd have destroyed Perry)
DE
TE
WR (they made rules just because Irvin was so dominant)

Bears may get a nods at:
LB....
DL...maybe

no way the Bears D lays a hand on Troy without an 8 or 9 man blitz in which case Harper, Irvin, or Novacek roll up monster numbers.
I also don't see McMahon being able to do much downfield against our secondary and passrush. Just like always, we would win in the trenches on both offense and defense and our skill players were better than theirs at most positions. Irvin vs Gault, Novacek vs ??, Aikman vs McMahon....no real comparison.
I think a lot of people give too much credit to the '85 Bears. I watched all their games that season. I remember them well. I'm not saying they weren't one of the best all time teams but I think they would get more of my consideration had they been able to repeat or if they would've played a decent team in the SB. I think the early 90's Buffalo teams would've been a great matchup for them but no way am I buying that they could beat any 92-95 Dallas team.

 

[Mentos]

go down the rosters on those two teams....
I think we have big advantages at:
QB and passing offense
CB
OL (they made rules because E Williams was so dominant, he'd have destroyed Perry)
DE
TE
WR (they made rules just because Irvin was so dominant)

Bears may get a nods at:
LB....
DL...maybe

no way the Bears D lays a hand on Troy without an 8 or 9 man blitz in which case Harper, Irvin, or Novacek roll up monster numbers.
I also don't see McMahon being able to do much downfield against our secondary and passrush. Just like always, we would win in the trenches on both offense and defense and our skill players were better than theirs at most positions. Irvin vs Gault, Novacek vs ??, Aikman vs McMahon....no real comparison.
I think a lot of people give too much credit to the '85 Bears. I watched all their games that season. I remember them well. I'm not saying they weren't one of the best all time teams but I think they would get more of my consideration had they been able to repeat or if they would've played a decent team in the SB. I think the early 90's Buffalo teams would've been a great matchup for them but no way am I buying that they could beat any 92-95 Dallas team.

They did beat the Cowboys 44-0 in Dallas that year.

I have the 1985 Bears, 1994 49ers, and 1991 Commanders over the 92, 93, and 95 Cowboys.

 

[peplaw06]

Do the simple math then: Going 18-46 over 4 years = 28.1%, the next lowest is the Bucs at 39.5%. They are far and away the worst team.

The good news is that they are likely to improve over the next few years.

Are you strictly talking about W-L records here?? If so, that's my bad. I was under the impression that we were taking playoff appearances and championships into account.

No the Texans haven't made the playoffs in their 4 years (since 2002), but the Saints haven't made the playoffs since 2000, Cards since 1998, Lions since 1999... at the same time none of these teams have ever won (or made it to) a Super Bowl.

It's all 0%, but 6, 7, or 8 years of 0% is worse than 4 years of 0%.

 

[THUMPER]

Are you strictly talking about W-L records here?? If so, that's my bad. I was under the impression that we were taking playoff appearances and championships into account.

No the Texans haven't made the playoffs in their 4 years (since 2002), but the Saints haven't made the playoffs since 2000, Cards since 1998, Lions since 1999... at the same time none of these teams have ever won (or made it to) a Super Bowl.

It's all 0%, but 6, 7, or 8 years of 0% is worse than 4 years of 0%.

It's a combination of factors including regular season record, playoff appearances, division titles, conference championships, SB appearances, and SB wins and weighed by the number of years in the league.

The Saints, Cards, and Lions are the next 3 worst teams in my rankings.

 

[lurkercowboy]

The 1992 Cowboys would crush the '85 Bears, and just about every other team that ever was

I would pay big $ to watch that game.

 

[ghst187]

They did beat the Cowboys 44-0 in Dallas that year.

I have the 1985 Bears, 1994 49ers, and 1991 Commanders over the 92, 93, and 95 Cowboys.

the '85 Cowboys were not the '92 Cowboys. That has no bearing on the argument at hand. The '92 Boys beat the '92 Bears...what does that prove in relation?
'85 Miami Dolphins almost hung 40 points on the defense that many people claim to be the greatest of all time.

The 1994 49ers!!!?!?!? are you kidding me?!?!?!?!:bang2:
They weren't even the best team in the NFC that year. Replay that game on a neutral field and Dallas wins 9 out of 10x. 3 INTs and several obvious and critical PIs that weren't called on Deion right in front of the ref and even then the 69ers had to hold their breath. Steve Young should never have gotten a ring. Guess it helps to play in a perennially garbage division so they could get homefield and home refs every year.

'91 Skins were pretty tough but you're high if you think Mark Rypien, Earnest Byner, and Gary Clark were in the same league as Aikman, Emmitt, and Irvin.
In fact, it was those same Cowboys that beat them for their first L that
year.

PS, People forget about the '93 Cowboys. Look at the list of PB'ers from that team...pretty remarkable. We lost 4 games that year, 2 because and only because Emmitt held out and a third because Leon Lett dove for a blocked field goal in the snow.

 

[jackrussell]

flies in the face of reality?!? huh? what part isn't reality? the fact that its true?

Just because you say it doesn't make anything true.

you're saying that if the '85 Bears played in '92, then they would be the same size, weight, and speed as the '92 Cowboys? I don't think that was what people were arguing...

Yes, and vice versa. It's 7 years, no one shaved a second off the 40 time, no one benched 400 pounds 30 more times. If you don't understand the statement 'it's all relative', so be it. And I'm not arguing anything. You said the Cowboys would DESTROY the '85 Bears, and I said it would be a good game, and it would.

Its also important to note that the Bears weren't good enough to repeat, let alone 3 peat or get 3 in 4 years.

Important to who? What's interesting is you say FA made the league watered down and made for less than great Super Bowl Champions since, yet, claim Denver(post FA) was head and shoulders above those '85 Bears.

Wilt would get pounded and abused by Shaq in his prime. abused.

Nope.

 

[Mentos]

the '85 Cowboys were not the '92 Cowboys. That has no bearing on the argument at hand. The '92 Boys beat the '92 Bears...what does that prove in relation?
'85 Miami Dolphins almost hung 40 points on the defense that many people claim to be the greatest of all time.

The 1994 49ers!!!?!?!? are you kidding me?!?!?!?!:bang2:
They weren't even the best team in the NFC that year. Replay that game on a neutral field and Dallas wins 9 out of 10x. 3 INTs and several obvious and critical PIs that weren't called on Deion right in front of the ref and even then the 69ers had to hold their breath. Steve Young should never have gotten a ring. Guess it helps to play in a perennially garbage division so they could get homefield and home refs every year.

'91 Skins were pretty tough but you're high if you think Mark Rypien, Earnest Byner, and Gary Clark were in the same league as Aikman, Emmitt, and Irvin.
In fact, it was those same Cowboys that beat them for their first L that
year.

PS, People forget about the '93 Cowboys. Look at the list of PB'ers from that team...pretty remarkable. We lost 4 games that year, 2 because and only because Emmitt held out and a third because Leon Lett dove for a blocked field goal in the snow.

I'm not a Cowboys fan (nor am I a Bears, 49ers, or Commanders fan). I admit I wanted to get a dig in with that 44-0 score (and remember the Cowboys were a good team that year).
I am coming from a non-bias viewpoint here and the '92 Cowboys simply were not better than the '85 Bears, '94 49ers, or '91 Commanders. I came to this conclusion from watching all those teams play. Then I looked at an assortment of stats. My opinion did not change. Then I read "Dominance" by Eddie Epstein and my opinions were pretty much confirmed. I strongly recommend that book to anyone who is interested in reading about the greatest pro football teams. The 1971 Cowboys made the book. The 1992 Cowboys received honorary mention.

 

[Bob Sacamano]

I was arguing with a friend who is die-hard Giants fan. He has been voicing his opinion, in his arrogant New Jersey way, that the Giants dominated the Cowboys the last two seasons, and in his skewed opinion, are the better franchise. He wants me to honor the fact that they are division champs. I countered by saying that only matters in the playoffs (the Giants were roasted 0-23) and that this is a new year and reminded him of the head to head record of 51-35-2 and 5 Superbowl wins to their 2 and 8 conference championships to their 3. That got me thinking, with all the list that seem to be the sports writing norm these days, how could you argue against the Cowboys being the most dominant NFL franchise in the Superbowl era? I don't think one can do it in a logical way. I knowing I'm kind of preaching to the choir here, but if anyone can point out a counter argument one might use I would appreciate it. To further extend the argument I would have to say that The Cowboys are the most dominate franchise in the history of the NFL because I do believe that about any team in the NFL today would beat any championship team in say the 1950"s. Of course, that up for debate.

the COwboys have 5 NFL championships, tied for most all-time, they also have the most playoff appearances in the Super Bowl era, can't recount how many that is, been to 9 Super Bowls, yeah, I'd say they are the most dominant franchise

 

[DallasDW00ds0n]

that would be us...

 

[Billy Bullocks]

I'm talking about the franchise not individual teams. I'm talking about the magic of the star.

You could argue a good case for Pittsburgh and SF. That's about it. Washington falls into above average. Sorry guys, Gibbs with his 3 rings is nice and all, but 5 trumps that. Not to mention Dallas won theirs in teh70's and then teh 90's...SF owned the 80's...Pittsbrugh owned hte 70's, made it to a SB in the 90's and won one in 2006.

 

[LittleBoyBlue]

Without a doubt the most dominant franchise in NFL history IS the Dallas Cowboys

 

[NotReally]

Dallas has played in the most. The 49ers have never lost. Pittsburgh had 4 in 6 years. Those are the only team in the discussion for dominant, but I don't think there is an obvious choice.

I'm always amused by 49er fans that say, "We're the best, because we've never lost in the SuperBowl." as if that proves something. They never seem to want to listen to me when I explain to them that means they were #1, 5 times and ever other time they were #3 or lower, while we were #1, 5 times and three other times we were #2, a level they never achieved outside their 5 SB years. For some strange reason they just don't seem to get it.

 

[LittleBoyBlue]

I'm always amused by 49er fans that say, "We're the best, because we've never lost in the SuperBowl." as if that proves something. They never seem to want to listen to me when I explain to them that means they were #1, 5 times and ever other time they were #3 or lower, while we were #1, 5 times and three other times we were #2, a level they never achieved outside their 5 SB years. For some strange reason they just don't seem to get it.

BUY OR SELL

I am buying!

 

[Doomsday101]

I would stack Dallas accomplishments over any team in the NFL, Dallas saw success in the 60's, 70's a little in the 80's and of course the 90's. We have seen this team go to 8 SB winning 5 and have played in some of the all time great games in the history of the NFL.

 

[cowboywho?]

Back when 49ers was in their prime they were the most dominant team.

 

[LittleBoyBlue]

Back when 49ers was in their prime they were the most dominant team.

Just by posting "back when" it is clear you dont understand the thread and its title.

Try again?

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Of the SuperBowl Era, I'd have to say the Steelers have been the most dominate team. New England could change that if they win another one anytime soon. Our run of the early 90s was cut short. So to was Green Bay. They easily could have been the most dominating team but the SuperBowl started a bit to late into there run. The Packers won the NFL title in 61, 62, 65 and then the SuperBowl in 66 and 67.

 

[Doomsday101]

Back when 49ers was in their prime they were the most dominant team.

True over about a 10 year span the 9ers were very successful, Dallas success went well beyond a 10 year span.

 

[Established1971]

go down the rosters on those two teams....
I think we have big advantages at:
QB and passing offense
CB
OL (they made rules because E Williams was so dominant, he'd have destroyed Perry)
DE
TE
WR (they made rules just because Irvin was so dominant)

Bears may get a nods at:
LB....
DL...maybe

no way the Bears D lays a hand on Troy without an 8 or 9 man blitz in which case Harper, Irvin, or Novacek roll up monster numbers.
I also don't see McMahon being able to do much downfield against our secondary and passrush. Just like always, we would win in the trenches on both offense and defense and our skill players were better than theirs at most positions. Irvin vs Gault, Novacek vs ??, Aikman vs McMahon....no real comparison.
I think a lot of people give too much credit to the '85 Bears. I watched all their games that season. I remember them well. I'm not saying they weren't one of the best all time teams but I think they would get more of my consideration had they been able to repeat or if they would've played a decent team in the SB. I think the early 90's Buffalo teams would've been a great matchup for them but no way am I buying that they could beat any 92-95 Dallas team.

they gave up a total of 10 points in 3 post season games and lost 1 mere game to an extremely motivated and very good team that season, they were a juggernaut, I wish the 92 Boys would beat them but I would not put money on it if it were somehow possible to bend time and have such a game