Jump to content

Where Do the 2013 Seahawks Rank All Time?


footbull3196

Where do the 2013 Seattle Seahawks rank all time?  

23 members have voted

  1. 1. Where do the 2013 Seattle Seahawks rank all time?



Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, August4th said:

how did the 85 bears only make it to one SB ..were they also one of the youngest teams that yr too? I think I read that somewhere

Ditka. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Danger said:

It's all for naught, they didn't win the Super Bowl, I wouldn't put them this high.

I wouldn't put them on there at all. Why celebrate chokers?

That's like saying the Bills had the greatest dynasty of all time because they went to the SB 4 times in a row even though they lost all 4.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Thomas5737 said:

Yeah he was 18-3 as the Bears starter over the next 3 years (23TD 23INT) but he missed a lot of time and Payton retired.

The defense was even better in 1986 and they were 14-2 but they blew it in the playoffs so no one cares, which is also why the 2007 Patriots take a bit of a hit. A 15-1 SB winning 2007 Patriot team would be remembered more highly than the 16-0 team. Even though being 16-0 is a great achievement and will make you one of the best regular season teams of all time if you don't back that up in the playoffs you would expect them to take a hit in the all-time rankings.

Disagree that a 15-1 Super Bowl Patriots team would be remembered more highly. It's been over 10 years and everyone still talks about the 2007 Patriots like it's the greatets or one of the greatest teams they ever saw. They already carved their place in history. If you want to knock them in rankings, I can respect that. However as a Patriot fan I would say that I would never consider any of the teams that won the Super Bowl (several that went 14-2) over the 2007 team. 2004 is the closest and only one that has an argument because of how well balanced they were and they honestly might be the best Super Bowl winning team of the decade AND I STILL think I'd rank the 2007 team above them. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, lancerman said:

Disagree that a 15-1 Super Bowl Patriots team would be remembered more highly. It's been over 10 years and everyone still talks about the 2007 Patriots like it's the greatets or one of the greatest teams they ever saw. They already carved their place in history. If you want to knock them in rankings, I can respect that. However as a Patriot fan I would say that I would never consider any of the teams that won the Super Bowl (several that went 14-2) over the 2007 team. 2004 is the closest and only one that has an argument because of how well balanced they were and they honestly might be the best Super Bowl winning team of the decade AND I STILL think I'd rank the 2007 team above them. 

So you think that the 2007 team would be viewed more highly had they lost to the Giants late in the regular season in what a close game but then beat them in the SB? It isn't only thought of highly because they were undefeated in the regular season, although it does have a lot to do with it but more so it was 589 points scored with the Brady/Moss combination. They weren't special in the post season though compared to the 85 Bears who didn't give up a point until the SB where they won by 36 points or something like that. If the 2007 team beat the Giants 46-10 in the SB even though they lost to them in the regular season I would rank them higher and I think many others would.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Thomas5737 said:

So you think that the 2007 team would be viewed more highly had they lost to the Giants late in the regular season in what a close game but then beat them in the SB? It isn't only thought of highly because they were undefeated in the regular season, although it does have a lot to do with it but more so it was 589 points scored with the Brady/Moss combination. They weren't special in the post season though compared to the 85 Bears who didn't give up a point until the SB where they won by 36 points or something like that. If the 2007 team beat the Giants 46-10 in the SB even though they lost to them in the regular season I would rank them higher and I think many others would.

Idk that's a good question. Super Bowl is the ultimate goal but only one team in history went 16-0 since the schedule changed and only two in the Super Bowl era had a perfect regular season. That suggests that the latter is harder to accomplish. I agree the Bears would be up there and they had a dominant post season.  The Bears and maybe the 89 Niners are the only teams I really think the 07 Patriots would be an overall toss up with. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/4/2018 at 3:33 AM, Thomas5737 said:

compared to the 85 Bears who didn't give up a point until the SB where they won by 36 points or something like that. If the 2007 team beat the Giants 46-10 in the SB even though they lost to them in the regular season I would rank them higher and I think many others would.

To be fair, the 85 Bears played against Tony Eason and a washed up Steve Grogan that was being held together by glue and duct tape in the Super Bowl. They also played against Dieter Brock in the NFC Championship as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/3/2018 at 11:12 PM, EliteTexan80 said:

McMahon, too.

Kinda? I guess you could rack it up to his unavailability. But he never should have started the '89 NFC Championship Game, or he should have been pulled once it was clear he was too rusty to give the Bears an honest chance to win (which was pretty much right away). So, that's really on Ditka. That 9ers squad is one of the best in history IMO, but if Tomczak starts that game, the Bears have a good shot. Also, in the '85-'86 playoffs, Flutie had absolutely no reason to take the field vs. the Redskins. Fuller or Tomczak could have won that game.

Go Ditka! :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/2/2018 at 4:50 PM, footbull3196 said:

I have them at #16, behind the 1994 49ers and ahead of the 1999 Rams.  If you want to see my top 20 list, here it is btw

 

1. 1985 Chicago Bears (15-1)

2. 1972 Miami Dolphins (14-0)
 
3. 1984 San Francisco 49ers (15-1)
 
4. 1978 Pittsburgh Steelers (14-2)
 
5. 1989 San Francisco 49ers (14-2)
 
6. 1991 Washington Redskins (14-2)
 
7. 2007 New England Patriots (16-0)
 
8. 1976 Oakland Raiders (13-1)
 
9. 1966 Green Bay Packers (12-2)
 
10. 2004 New England Patriots (14-2)
 
11. 1992 Dallas Cowboys (13-3)
 
12. 1996 Green Bay Packers (13-3)
 
13. 1975 Pittsburgh Steelers (12-2)
 
14. 1998 Denver Broncos (14-2)
 
15. 1994 San Francisco 49ers (13-3)
 
16. 2013 Seattle Seahawks (13-3)
 
17. 1999 St. Louis Rams (13-3)
 
18. 1986 New York Giants (14-2)
 
19. 1973 Miami Dolphins (12-2)
 
20. 1968 Baltimore Colts (13-1)

I think you have the 2013 Seahawks in the right vicinity on this list. And while the 1972 Dolphins have the unique achievement of a perfect season, I have to go with my eyes and several members of those great Dolphins teams and go with the 1973 version as the stronger team. That unit was more impressive in the postseason as well. Either way, the 1978 Steelers would have have been too much for Miami to handle. The 1972-73 Dolphins had a tough time beating a developing Steelers team, and this was before Pittsburgh added Lambert, Webster, Swann, Stallworth, and Bradshaw matured as QB.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, LaserFocus said:

I think you have the 2013 Seahawks in the right vicinity on this list. And while the 1972 Dolphins have the unique achievement of a perfect season, I have to go with my eyes and several members of those great Dolphins teams and go with the 1973 version as the stronger team. That unit was more impressive in the postseason as well. Either way, the 1978 Steelers would have have been too much for Miami to handle. The 1972-73 Dolphins had a tough time beating a developing Steelers team, and this was before Pittsburgh added Lambert, Webster, Swann, Stallworth, and Bradshaw matured as QB.

Yup. The 1973 Dolphins we’re regarded as the superior team by the players and most people. The 72 season was chalked up to more of a schedule thing. It’s just back then their wasn’t sentimentality over things like that.

edit: also awww this is cute, we finally agreed on something 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...