Philadelphia Eagles: Dynasty In The Making?

[Kiwibrown]

no one talks of the 80's-90's skins as a football dynasty, I know it was over a decade or close too it, but 3 superbowls in 10 years is pretty legit. 

[Kiltman]

15 minutes ago, Kiwibrown said:

no one talks of the 80's-90's skins as a football dynasty, I know it was over a decade or close too it, but 3 superbowls in 10 years is pretty legit. 

there often is even more than just championship wins that go into it I think, but i think the other two dynastic franchises (Cowboys and Niners) were the biggest reason they don't get love

I was born in that era so couldn't really appreciate it....but I wonder where that era of the NFC East ranks in best divisions ever.

[Kiwibrown]

3 minutes ago, Kiltman said:

there often is even more than just championship wins that go into it I think, but i think the other two dynastic franchises (Cowboys and Niners) were the biggest reason they don't get love

I was born in that era so couldn't really appreciate it....but I wonder where that era of the NFC East ranks in best divisions ever.

they had the Eagles who were dominant as well

[Kiltman]

2 minutes ago, Kiwibrown said:

they had the Eagles who were dominant as well

yea it's like when the least successful team was often dominant in the regular season had one of the best Athletes the leagues had at QB and one of the league's best defenses of all time....it's hard to argue against that ha

that'd be an interesting discussion, I wonder what other eras would be up there

[Kiwibrown]

2 minutes ago, Kiltman said:

yea it's like when the least successful team was often dominant in the regular season had one of the best Athletes the leagues had at QB and one of the league's best defenses of all time....it's hard to argue against that ha

that'd be an interesting discussion, I wonder what other eras would be up there

the peyton manning of the NFC East - the S'Bowl. 

[Kiltman]

1 hour ago, TENINCH said:

Right now the NFC is too strong for any dynasties.

certainly seems like it...but it could go the way of the AFC in the 200s and the same teams seem to be the only ones making it to the championship/super bowl

Given the markets and fandoms involved it's gonna be a fun fight for the next at least 5/6 years. Gonna be a lot more fun games to watch

[Forge]

36 minutes ago, Kiwibrown said:

no one talks of the 80's-90's skins as a football dynasty, I know it was over a decade or close too it, but 3 superbowls in 10 years is pretty legit. 

The problem is with Washington is that they overlapped with the 49ers for the most part. I'm not sure what the standard is on "multiple dynasties" during a given era, but the 49ers simply had the better claim as "THE" dynasty during that time frame. 

[SteelKing728]

On 6/24/2018 at 4:10 PM, Ketchup said:

It’s so damn hard to build an actual dynasty like the Pats in this era. What we have seen with them will be very rare. First comparison would be GB after they won their SB. Young franchise QB with a great defense. Well that fell apart rather quickly with injuries and the defense regressing. Another example would be Seattle. Young franchise QB with an elite defense. Like GB, they would stay consistent but they would never be able to win that second ring. Seattle obviously came closer then GB. My point, after they both won the SB, everyone saw a potential dynasty and it ultimately didn’t happen. Why? Because it’s so damn hard to win multiple Super Bowls in this era because of the salary cap and free agency. Philadelphia has a terrific young team with a young franchise QB that I think will easily be top 5 from here on out so it’s onviously possible. Expecting it though, that’s where I run into my issue. 

The closest thing to the Patriots dynasty would have been the NY Giants.

[Heinz D.]

2 hours ago, JaguarCrazy2832 said:

In the last 20 years which teams were a dynasty? Its pretty much NE and that’s it right?...by those standards it fits too

Yeah...the Patriots are pretty much it. Seahawks came close.

1 hour ago, Kiwibrown said:

no one talks of the 80's-90's skins as a football dynasty, I know it was over a decade or close too it, but 3 superbowls in 10 years is pretty legit. 

I'd say they count. Three different quarterbacks, too. Pretty crazy. 

1 hour ago, Forge said:

The problem is with Washington is that they overlapped with the 49ers for the most part. I'm not sure what the standard is on "multiple dynasties" during a given era, but the 49ers simply had the better claim as "THE" dynasty during that time frame. 

I don't see why there couldn't be multiple dynasties, but then again, the whole thing is really subjective. I'd peg the Bills with their four consecutive SB losses as a dynasty, of sorts, too...

[Ketchup]

4 minutes ago, SteelKing728 said:

The closest thing to the Patriots dynasty would have been the NY Giants.

Nothing in this era comes even remotely close to the Patriots dynasty. 

[Heinz D.]

1 minute ago, Ketchup said:

Nothing in this era comes even remotely close to the Patriots dynasty. 

When you consider how long the Patriots have been good, wow, it's almost from any era, isn't it? It's nuts. 

[Kiwibrown]

@Heinz D. one contrasting factor is the 9ers changed football and the Redskins were reasonably conventional at the time.

[Heinz D.]

1 minute ago, Kiwibrown said:

@Heinz D. one contrasting factor is the 9ers changed football and the Redskins were reasonably conventional at the time.

I agree, to an extent, but that doesn't necessarily detract from a Redskins dynasty. Just makes the 9ers more historically significant. 

[Kiwibrown]

30 minutes ago, Heinz D. said:

I agree, to an extent, but that doesn't necessarily detract from a Redskins dynasty. Just makes the 9ers more historically significant. 

I agree. The Bill Walsh 9ers are still reflected upon while the redskins aren’t. They accomplished a similar feat.

[Malfatron]

29 minutes ago, Kiwibrown said:

I agree. The Bill Walsh 9ers are still reflected upon while the redskins aren’t. They accomplished a similar feat.

the 49ers had more star power