There are 159 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

The accuracy of the Super Bowl in determining best team in NFL?

Well, both teams were considered the best at SOME point in the season.
I think its accurate at finding out the best team from December to February which is all you can expect in any format.

Sure there are teams that were better in September or October that didn't end up winning the SB. But I'm not interested who started out as the best team.
  • BobS
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 8,089
Originally posted by LifelongNiner:
I think what this thread may be referring to is how it doesn't seem like teams that dominate in the regular season (basically 1st or maybe 2nd seeds) win the Super Bowl anymore. I think the Saints are the only team in the last seven years to be a top seed that won it all. It would be the equivalent of the 49ers or Cowboys being knocked off by the Saints, Falcons, Eagles, or Lions. Or the 1991 49ers making the playoffs and winning it all after they got hot at the end of the season. I will say that the 13-3/14-2/15-1 teams don't seem to be as balanced as the 13-3/14-2/15-1 teams of old. I think one of the most glaring indicators is that when they made the documentary on the top 20 Super Bowl Teams of all time back in 2006, Only one team from the 2000s made the list, the 2004 Patriots. Whereas 7 teams made it from the 90s, 5 teams made it from the 80s, and another 6 from the 70s. Even if they remade the list and grouped every team from 2000 to 2012 together (I'm including this season), the Patriots of 2004 would still be the lone team from the 21st century on there. Teams just don't dominate like that anymore and the one that had a shot at being an all-time great team (the 2007 Patriots), blew it by losing the Super Bowl.
The hard salary cap that started in 1995 probably has something to do with that. With a 120 million cap now and top position players getting 10 million and up per year teams are going to have a lot of positions filled with average or under average players to stay under the cap.
There isn't a way in today's NFL to see what team is actually the best. Its all about what team is the hottest during playoff time.

Now before the free agency period we could see more clearly what team really is the best.
Honestly, at first thought, you'd probably say the NBA or MLB would have a better system, with teams playing best of 7 in each round of the playoffs. You'd say, it eliminates teams getting lucky because they play more games and there's a regression to the mean kind of thing.

For instance, the season the Patriots went undefeated, but lost in the Super Bowl. Clearly, when you look at a lot of numbers and factors, you'd say they were "the best team." If they played that Super Bowl against the Giants 7 times... who knows... maybe they win 5 times?

Teams statistically have a chance in the multiple game playoff system, and will have a more "undisputed" feel to it... but I personally like the one-game victory system. It gives more meaning to every play... every coaching decision... every moment of the game.

Sure, the Patriots in their undefeated season were great "winners," but when it came down to the most important game... they lost. Do I want to bestow the title of "best team in the league" on a team who can't win when it MATTERS? To me, that's the beauty of a one-win playoff system.
Honestly, at first thought, you'd probably say the NBA or MLB would have a better system, with teams playing best of 7 in each round of the playoffs. You'd say, it eliminates teams getting lucky because they play more games and there's a regression to the mean kind of thing.

For instance, the season the Patriots went undefeated, but lost in the Super Bowl. Clearly, when you look at a lot of numbers and factors, you'd say they were "the best team." If they played that Super Bowl against the Giants 7 times... who knows... maybe they win 5 times?

Teams statistically have a chance in the multiple game playoff system, and will have a more "undisputed" feel to it... but I personally like the one-game victory system. It gives more meaning to every play... every coaching decision... every moment of the game.

Sure, the Patriots in their undefeated season were great "winners," but when it came down to the most important game... they lost. Do I want to bestow the title of "best team in the league" on a team who can't win when it MATTERS? To me, that's the beauty of a one-win playoff system.
Honestly, at first thought, you'd probably say the NBA or MLB would have a better system, with teams playing best of 7 in each round of the playoffs. You'd say, it eliminates teams getting lucky because they play more games and there's a regression to the mean kind of thing.

For instance, the season the Patriots went undefeated, but lost in the Super Bowl. Clearly, when you look at a lot of numbers and factors, you'd say they were "the best team." If they played that Super Bowl against the Giants 7 times... who knows... maybe they win 5 times?

Teams statistically have a chance in the multiple game playoff system, and will have a more "undisputed" feel to it... but I personally like the one-game victory system. It gives more meaning to every play... every coaching decision... every moment of the game.

Sure, the Patriots in their undefeated season were great "winners," but when it came down to the most important game... they lost. Do I want to bestow the title of "best team in the league" on a team who can't win when it MATTERS? To me, that's the beauty of a one-win playoff system.
I believe the 49ers and Ravens are the two best teams in the NFL this year. Something to keep in mind with the NFL is matchups. For some reason this 49er team reminds me of the 92 Cowboys. A team starting a run on Championships.
I think the best team usually wins the super-bowl.

Just because a team has a ton of success during the regular season doesn't mean they are the best team. They could have had a soft schedule. The 2011 49ers are a good example. I do not think we were the best team last year, we had a very good team and a soft regular season schedule. The 2011 Packers are another good example.

You could also say that some great teams fall off later in the season due to injuries to key players. I also don't think that holds up. Because truly great teams have great depth as well as great starters. 2012 49ers are a great example of this, we lost Alex Smith, Kyle Williams, Mario Manningham, Kendall Hunter, etc. and we still dominate.

What team was really better than the 49ers this year? All of the AFC benefited from soft regular season schedules. Outside of the Pats, Broncos, and Baltimore, there were no good teams in the AFC. In the NFC, the Falcons and Packers each have a great team within a team (passing offense), but they are not good in all aspects of the game. The Seahawkes have a good well rounded team, but away from their home field they struggle. The Giants are wildly inconsistent. The Vikings lack a passing game and the Redskins lack experience, depth, and an offensive weapon other than RG3.

The 49ers are the best team in the NFL and will prove it on Sunday!
Originally posted by vaden:
What I love most about the NBA is that the best team always wins the championship. Even though it makes most of the playoffs irrelevant, it's just nice seeing the best team win. With the NFL, I think the best team rarely wins the championship, but it does make the playoffs much more exciting.

That's not true. Plenty of times, it comes down to matchups and team gettin' hot at the right time. Mavs weren't the best team in the NBA in 2011. They got hot at the right time, hitting ridiculous number of 3-pointers and Dirk was unbelievable during the playoff run.

The more accurate statement will be - the best teams in NBA have a better chance of winning the championship.
Originally posted by RishikeshA:
I believe the 49ers and Ravens are the two best teams in the NFL this year. Something to keep in mind with the NFL is matchups. For some reason this 49er team reminds me of the 92 Cowboys. A team starting a run on Championships.

I don't know if they are the two best teams - considering Ravens were extremely lucky to have beaten Denver. I do agree that it's about the match-ups but it's also about peaking at the right time.