The league was weak during those years.
2006-07-18 05:32:03 · 10 answers · asked by hagar 1 in Sports ➔ Football (American)
I think the Patriots actually deserve more credit for their dynasty than do many teams of the past.
The Patriots had to build and maintain a team during an era with a pretty strict salary cap, something that the Packers, Steelers, Cowboys, and other past dynasties did not need to contend with. It's one thing to build a great team, and quite another to keep your main guys while changing out the parts that go with them. Belichick not only had to build smartly through the draft, but he also had to be smart about who he signed to replace those who left via free agency.
I'm not sure that I understand the argument that the league was weak during those seasons. Maybe there wasn't a team or teams that were continually dominant, but there was plenty of great talent.
I believe that the Pats are as valid a dynasty as any other. Would I rate them ahead of some of those others? Probably not - I think, for example, that the 49ers or Steelers were more dominant during their eras.
However, I think New England deserves the most credit for winning in an NFL whose structure dissuades dynasties with its salary cap and constant player movement. Watch how some teams go from contender one year to out of the playoffs the next season, and you gain a greater appreciation for what New England has done.
2006-07-18 05:48:28 · answer #1 · answered by Craig S 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋
No. You don't win 3 Super Bowls unless you are an outstanding organization. The league was not weak during those years or has it ever been weak. Watch out for the Pats this year.
2006-07-18 07:59:23 · answer #2 · answered by toughguy2 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Overrated? Well a little yeah. Not the team was weak, rather that it was a team that got good fast, and they try to give too much credit to Bellichick.
2006-07-18 11:22:47 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
No way. the pats won 3 super bowls in 4 years. and they did that in this day and age, where you have to deal with the salary cap and free angency and other stuff too. did the steelers of the 70s have to deal with that. i think not.
2006-07-18 08:30:43 · answer #4 · answered by packerswes4 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes. If the referree in the snow game against The Raiders wasn't such an idiot, the whole thing would have never happened.
2006-07-18 05:36:28 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
not really. they won 3 out of 4 super bowls, that speaks for itself. i'm a diehard miami fan and i'm man enough to give them their props. but i think it's downhill for them from here. the dolphins will unseat them in the AFC east this year
2006-07-18 12:34:32 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
no way...give credit where it is due...
the weak league argument IS weak...they were the best..i am not a fan..just a realist..
2006-07-18 14:53:23 · answer #7 · answered by KT 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Please give me a break.....if you call winning 3 championships in the past 5 years "overrated".....that's really a joke. The NFL was weak???? Ok.....that's real laughable.....sounds like sour grapes to me.
2006-07-18 05:48:11 · answer #8 · answered by B-Money 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
hell no
2006-07-18 16:09:35 · answer #9 · answered by RAIDER NATION 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
NO!!
2006-07-18 06:32:23 · answer #10 · answered by -- 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋