Best SB Winner Since 2010

[Nabbs4u]

2013 Seattle (Historically Great Defense)

2017 Eagles (Top 5 Offense/Defense)

2015 Broncos (Historically Great Defense/Broke Down Manning)

[lancerman]

1 hour ago, BayRaider said:

2013 Seattly by far

2009 Saints

2017 Eagles

2010 Packers

2015 Broncos

2012 Ravens

2016 Patriots 

2014 Patriots

2011 Giants

2011 Giants were not that good at all honestly. Hot in the playoffs. 

2014/2016 Patriots both had a cupcake schedule, and an easy path in the playoffs both years as well. 

This just shows me that you have no clue what you are talking about. The 2014 Patriots had one of the toughest schedules the Pats have probably had this decade and was noted multiple times how ridiculous their stretch of games was mid season. They actually at the end of the season had a top 4 strength of schedule. https://www.teamrankings.com/nfl/ranking/schedule-strength-by-other?date=2015-02-02

Week 5: Bengals 10-5-1 (wildcard team)

Week 8: Broncos 12-4 (tied for best record in the league). This was when Denver was still playing at their 2013 level. 

Week 11: Colts 11-5. This was and still is Luck's peak year and that team was on fire. A lot of people thought this would be the year the Colts made a real championship push.

Week 12: Lions 11-5. Top 3 defense in DVOA, considered to have the leagues best pass rush. 

Week 13: Packers 12-4 (tied for best record in the league). MVP year for Rodgers, Lacey's break out and best year as an RB and GB had one of their better defenses. Tight game that the Packers barely edged out in Lambau. 

Week 14: Chargers 9-7. Rivers was having a great year. 

They played Manning, Luck, Stafford, Rodgers, and Rivers in consecutive games. They played 5 playoff teams in the regular season two of which were in a 4 way tie (with the Pats and Seahawks) for best record in the league. Hell the Bills went 9-7 that year had the 2nd best defensive DVOA outside of Seattle,  held Rodgers' offense to 13 points and were considered one of the best defenses in football. They had to play that team twice as well. Miami also went 8-8 that year. So only one team in their whole division had a losing record. 

11 of their 16 games were were against teams that were .500 or better. And over the course of the season including playoffs they played every team that got a first round bye (Seattle, Denver, Green Bay), 3 wild card teams across both divisions (Ravens, Lions, Bengals) and then another division winner in the Colts. Of the 11 teams that made the playoffs (outside the Patriots) that year, the Patriots played 7 out of that 11 during the regular season. 

So it's comically wrong to suggest the 2014 Patriots had a cupcake schedule. And this isn't the first time you tried to say this either.

I'll give you that the 2016 New England Patriots having a relatively easy schedule. But the reality is the 2016 New England Patriots had the best defense in points and the 2nd best offense in points, had the best record in the league, and literally the only reason they didn't go undefeated was because they had to start a 3rd string QB against the Bills and Seattle had an end of game goal line stand (aka a suspension and an end of game goal line stand were their only losses) so it's very dubious to call them week as well. 

[lancerman]

17 minutes ago, Nabbs4u said:

2013 Seattle (Historically Great Defense)

2017 Eagles (Top 5 Offense/Defense)

2015 Broncos (Historically Great Defense/Broke Down Manning)

Broncos offense was complete trash. Also the Eagles is recency bias. Just off the top of my head the 2014 Patriots were the top offense and the 2nd best defense in the league that year (based off the methodology you are basing it on) and they played a much more difficult schedule

[Nabbs4u]

3 hours ago, lancerman said:

Broncos offense was complete trash. Also the Eagles is recency bias. Just off the top of my head the 2014 Patriots were the top offense and the 2nd best defense in the league that year (based off the methodology you are basing it on) and they played a much more difficult schedule

Last I checked, the Patriots didn't win the SB accomplishing the same thing "Without" their Starting QB, LT, MLB, RB, K, ST Ace for most of the Season.

Hence "Better Team"! Recency bias be damned.

[lancerman]

8 hours ago, Nabbs4u said:

Last I checked, the Patriots didn't win the SB accomplishing the same thing "Without" their Starting QB, LT, MLB, RB, K, ST Ace for most of the Season.

Hence "Better Team"! Recency bias be damned.

2014 Patriots would have wrecked the Eagles.

[Nabbs4u]

11 hours ago, lancerman said:

19 hours ago, Nabbs4u said:

Last I checked, the Patriots didn't win the SB accomplishing the same thing "Without" their Starting QB, LT, MLB, RB, K, ST Ace for most of the Season.

Hence "Better Team"! Recency bias be damned.

2014 Patriots would have wrecked the Eagles.

Guess I'm glad then that it was the 2017 Patriots instead.

Not a chance in hell they even make the SB without Brady and 5 other Starters ,which was the point.

[lancerman]

23 minutes ago, Nabbs4u said:

Guess I'm glad then that it was the 2017 Patriots instead.

Not a chance in hell they even make the SB without Brady and 5 other Starters ,which was the point.

2017 no. 2014 had Jimmy G at back up. And had Revis in the secondary. Much better overall team. 

Brady/Gronk/Edelman/White/Blount/Vereen/Amendola/Lafell/Revis/Browner/Collins/Hightower/Jones/Wilfork/McCourty/Chung. 

Also 2014 was a much deeper year for the NFL overall and the Patriots played a hell schedule

[Nabbs4u]

5 hours ago, lancerman said:

2017 no. 2014 had Jimmy G at back up. And had Revis in the secondary. Much better overall team. 

Brady/Gronk/Edelman/White/Blount/Vereen/Amendola/Lafell/Revis/Browner/Collins/Hightower/Jones/Wilfork/McCourty/Chung. 

Also 2014 was a much deeper year for the NFL overall and the Patriots played a hell schedule

So Jimmy as a Rookie was going to do what no Rookie QB has ever done in NFL History? 

Without the 3 highlighted above, Nate Soldier, Matt Slater , Gostkowski and your best CB Revis (Darby for Us) for 10 gms?

Come on now?? Look at those names highlighted and tell me again with a straight face? Eagles 53+ was easily better. 

[O'Doyle Rules]

Eagles this year was not a better team than the 2014 pats. Just stop.

[lancerman]

7 hours ago, Nabbs4u said:

So Jimmy as a Rookie was going to do what no Rookie QB has ever done in NFL History? 

Without the 3 highlighted above, Nate Soldier, Matt Slater , Gostkowski and your best CB Revis (Darby for Us) for 10 gms?

Come on now?? Look at those names highlighted and tell me again with a straight face? Eagles 53+ was easily better. 

The Eagles 53 man wasn't better. Take out Revis and we would probably just put in Butler who the very next year was are number 1 CB. Slater's incredible but his real value is on special teams and most of our guys every year can play special teams. Soldier would be the only questionable one, but Scar... so...

The 2014 Patriots were sneakily as stacked as any Patriots team assembled on both sides of the ball. 

The 2017 Eagles did not want to play the 2014 Patriots. Think about the defense you played. Add Chandler Jones, Ninkovitch, and Wiflork on the line. That would normally be enough to make a difference.... but there's more.... LB corp with a healthy Hightower and Collins. Then Revis (probably the best CB of his era) and Browner in the secondary, even Arrington would be a massive upgrade over everyone we fielded against the Eagles at the CB position save Gilmore (but Revis is a diamond compared to Gilmore so who cares). Then on offense you are dealing with Edelman and Blount (you know a little something about him). Vereen was as good if not better than any of the receiving backs we had (and we still had White).

Oh and lets not kid ourselves, the league was a lot stronger in 2014. The 2014 Packers and Seahawks were better than any team the Eagles had to deal with in the NFC. Hell even the 2014 Cowboys with Romo and Murray having that all star season were overall stronger than nearly every team save the Eagles this year in the NFC. And in the AFC when the Patriots played them, the Broncos were still on fire and as good as their 2013 selves until Manning fell apart down the stretch of the season. And that's not even going into how much more depth their was with teams like the Cardinals, Bengals, Ravens, etc. 

If you put the 2017 Patriots and 2017 Eagles  in place of their 2014 counterparts, neither makes the Super Bowl.

It's recency bias.

 

[Kip Smithers]

The Eagles this year were by far the best team in the league with their starting QB. Without him they were still the best it’s not recency bias. It would still be a shootout if you were to hypothetically put the 14 Patriots against this seasons Eagles. The only team in the NFC in recent memory that is good as the Eagles or better are the 13 Seahawks, the 12 49ers. That’s about it. 

[lancerman]

20 minutes ago, Kip Smithers said:

The Eagles this year were by far the best team in the league with their starting QB. Without him they were still the best it’s not recency bias. It would still be a shootout if you were to hypothetically put the 14 Patriots against this seasons Eagles. The only team in the NFC in recent memory that is good as the Eagles or better are the 13 Seahawks, the 12 49ers. That’s about it. 

It would not be a shootout. You're going to have guys like Jones and Nink rushing the passer. Revis in the backfield shutting down whoever was on him and Browner doing the same thing with safety help like they did all year. You're going to have a run stuffer like Wilfork dealing with Ajayi and Blount. And you have Collins and Hightower in the linebacker corp raising hell. It's a night and day difference.

The 2014 Patriots defense was better at EVERY SINGLE LEVEL than the 2017 defense. The 2017 Eagles wouldn't have even been the best offense they played.. They held the Broncos to 21 points and that was with Manning still playing at his 2013 level (and better than Wentz and Foles), Thomas, Sanders, Julius Thomas, and Welker and CJ Anderson. They also held a Packers team to 26 in Lambeau with Rodgers playing at an MVP level (also better than Wentz and Foles) Jordy, Adams, Cobb, and Eddie Lacey having his best year. 

As far as the NFC let's see......

Falcons had the top 7 all time offense last year. Panthers went 15-1. Seattle was only slightly worse in 2013 had the same defensive pieces just a little banged up and on offense Wilson developed into a better QB, still the number 1 offense in the league, and they had Lynch the whole year who was having one of his best years as well. 2013 Seattle obviously. 2011 had the 15-1 Packers team. 2009 had that dominant Saints team. 

And let's be honest, when your QB plays likes Foles did in the playoffs, you can't really pull the "oh they won with a back up". Do you know what the money odds would have been on Wentz or any other QB performing better than Foles did in the playoffs? Not good. 

[Kip Smithers]

Yes it would have been a shootout because Eagles o-line is still comfortably better. That’s the biggest reason why they’re so good. The Eagles went up against a Vikings defense which is better than the 2014 Pats defense and shredded them. Rather than looking at the players, look at the match ups. You rattling off names means little to nothing. You should’ve learned that by now. SB48 is a shining example of that.

[Nabbs4u]

3 hours ago, Kip Smithers said:

Yes it would have been a shootout because Eagles o-line is still comfortably better. That’s the biggest reason why they’re so good. The Eagles went up against a Vikings defense which is better than the 2014 Pats defense and shredded them. Rather than looking at the players, look at the match ups. You rattling off names means little to nothing. You should’ve learned that by now. SB48 is a shining example of that.

 Kip shhhhhh,  I'm enjoying the nonsensical rant. ? 

I think He, like most of the Sports World is still in utter shock of Just how Good, this Eagles "Team" as a whole actually turned out to be. To of accomplished what they did from a Injury standpoint proves how strong they were 1 thru 53.

So that part of his recency bias claim, holds true! At least for himself that's is.

[Bolts223]

3 hours ago, Kip Smithers said:

Yes it would have been a shootout because Eagles o-line is still comfortably better. That’s the biggest reason why they’re so good. The Eagles went up against a Vikings defense which is better than the 2014 Pats defense and shredded them. Rather than looking at the players, look at the match ups. You rattling off names means little to nothing. You should’ve learned that by now. SB48 is a shining example of that.

The Vikings clearly didn't show up to that game at all. The Eagles also put up 15 points against a slightly above average Falcons defense, so what's your point?

The 2017 Eagles were a very good team, but I really don't think there is any argument of them being better than the 2013 Seahawks, 2014 Pats or 2016 Pats.

The 2017 Pats still came very close to beating them and are much inferior to the 2016 and 2014 versions of them. I'm inclined to believe that those defenses could've actually made a stop or two throughout that game and that the offenses would've enjoyed similar success.

The 2013 Seahawks defense would've been far better than any defense the Eagles saw this season.

And to restate Lancerman's point - the League in 2013 and 2014 was FAR more deep and stronger than it is now. I don't think the Eagles or Patriots of this year make the SB in either of those seasons if they were to take the place of their counterparts from back then.