Bearing in mind who the Jets Super Bowl opponents would have been if the Jets had won the AFC Title in those years, which Jets team do you think would have had the best chance to take home the Lombardi Trophy? As a quick cliffs-notes-esque reminder, the '82 Jets would have faced Joe Gibbs, Joe Theismann, John Riggins and the Hogs in the Super Bowl. Redskins record that year was 8-1. the '98 Jets would have faced the 14-2 Dirty Bird Atlanta Falcons led by Dan Reeves, Chris Chandler and Jamaal Anderson. the 2009 Jets would have faced Sean Payton, Drew Brees and the 13-3 New Orleans Saints. and the 2010 Jets would have faced Rodgers and the 10-6 Pack. So, considering the talent on those individual NY Jets teams, and the potential match-ups they would have faced had they won the AFC title in those respective seasons, which of those 4 Jets teams do you think would have stood the best chance of winning the Super Bowl?
I think it's the 2010 team. In the regular season the Jets held the Pack to 9 points and that was before the offence really started to roll. Its the only one of these matchups i can say for sure (and back up) that they had good chance of winning.
hmmm, good point TorontoJet. Whoops, just looked up the score. Now I see what you are saying. The Jets held the Pack to 9 points, but lost 9-0, but that was before the Jets offense got on track that season. Got it.
Jets lost 9-0. The game was on halloween. The D showed they could handle the Packers. Had the offense shown up that day, as i am assuming they would in the Super Bowl, there is no reason to believe they wouldnt have won.
1998 They played the dirty bird falcons in the reg season albeit w steve deberg behind center & absolutely dominated them in every facet.It was a bad match up for Hotlanta
Easily the 98 team. Easily. Three main reasons: 1) That Falcons team was one of the softest teams to ever make a Superbowl. We absolutely destroyed them in the regular season (admittedly, without Chris Chandler) and we would have destroyed them in a rematch. As soon as they somehow upset Minny, I was giddy, because I knew that the winner of the Broncos-Jets game was winning the whole thing. 2) 98 Vinny was the best QB we have had since Namath. He was legit magic that year. 3) Parcells/BB with two weeks to prepare for Chris Chandler and Jamal Anderson.
Yeah, but we would have been very unlikely to hold them to only 9 points again. We would have had a good shot at them, but they would have been slight favorites.
I didn't know that, KurtTheJetsFan. Denver didn't turn out to be a good match-up for Hotlanta either that season, lol. I still can't believe the Falcons beat that 15-1 Vikings team which was firing on all cylinders offensively that season. Cunningham as unbelievable and Moss was flat-out dominant. I still remember the show he put on against the Cowboys on Thanksgiving day that year. A lot of football fans were bummed when they didn't get the dream match-up of the 15-1 Vikings against the Defending Champion Broncos that year.
^^that is a good point SlimJasi. TorontoJets brings up a valid point, but we have to remember that the 2010 Packers team (much like the 2011 Giants) were a classic example of a talented team that struggles a lot during the regular season, appears to be mediocre and then gets hot at the tail end of the year, sneaks into the playoffs and goes on a Super Bowl run. Don't forget they needed to beat Chicago in the final game of the season to even make the NFC playoffs and at one point that year, when they were really struggling, they were only 8-6...but then they got hot and went on a run. So the Packers team you would have faced in the Super Bowl was not the same one you faced in late October. I understand the Jets improved since that game, but so did Green Bay, lol.
I think all in all, in spite of their impressive record, the '98 Falcons were the weakest potential opponent for any of those Jets teams. I don't see Richard Todd and the 82 Jets beating Joe Gibbs, Riggins and the Hogs, nor do I see the 09 Jets defeating Drew Brees and a loaded Saints team. The 2010 Packers had a pedestrian 10-6 record, but they still had Rodgers at QB along with a hell of a defense (#2 in points allowed that year). Out of the 4, I think that the Falcons led by Chandler and Anderson and Reeves were the least intimidating squad, especially considering they seemed to be the classic example of a team primed for a huge letdown after pulling off a huge upset in their conference title game.
1998 is the only one I am absolutely certain the Jets would’ve won, still hurts. Think they could’ve won in 10 too but that game could’ve went either way and the Pack would’ve probably have been favored. 1998 was our year, for some lucky breaks a long the way and by the time we kicked off in Denver the Jets were the best team left.
Makes you wonder how we’d look at things now if we’d won our most recent SB......20 years ago in stead of 50?
I still think the 1986 team was the best we have had since Namath. With that said the Giants would have been a very tough opponent.
The 1998 team was the championship that got away. The Jets would have been favored and would have beaten Atlanta. The 2010 team would have made things interesting but probably would have fallen short . I can’t see the 1982 team beating the Skins that year. Especially considering the logistics due to the strike . It would have been back out to the west coast to play the very next week and the Jets seventh consecutive road game - a fact a lot of people don’t recall.. The Saints were a better rounded team than the Jets in 2009.....
The Saints game was indoors on a fast surface. Great D but that scenario is an edge to the O. It was also a home game. Very tough to win that one. The 2010 Packers that we played tough early didn't play great early in the season. They started rolling late and blew teams out in the playoffs. Rodgers really got it going in the playoffs that year. 98 was the year. Denver was better at home. We matched up on Atlanta and on a neutral field murder them.
^^^Good post, Biggs. Thanks for contributing to my thread. Just FYI though, from a few of your comments regarding the Saints match-up, you seem to be implying that the Saints-Colts Super bowl from the 2009 season (played in Feb 2010 obviously) was in the Superdome? It was actually played outdoors, down in Miami in "Hard Rock Stadium." Regardless, I agree with your point, that the Saints were a very good, explosive team that year and would have been tough to defeat. Thanks also, for echoing my point regarding how the 2010 Packers struggled often during the regular season, but really turned it on and got rolling toward the end and in the playoffs. There were 2 completely different teams that year.
Falcons easily. I think that Super Bowl would have been a blow out. The 82 Jets probably lose to the Redskins The 2009 Jets lose to the Saints and the 2010 Jets definitely would have had a chance against the Packers, but I still give the Packers the edge. You have to factor in the Jets defense flopped against Ben the week before. So Rodgers likely would have done similar.
1998 The Jets were better than the Broncos and should have beaten them. The Vikings were better than the Falcons and should have beaten them. In a '98 Jets vs. '98 Vikings match up, I honestly don't know who wins. Vikings if it's a shootout, Jets if it's a defensive battle--and it really could go either way. The Vikings could run with anybody in all three phases of the game, and so could the Jets. Vikings OC Brian Billick vs. Jets DC Belichick. Who do you pick in that matchup? Probably the most dangerous Offense I've ever watched: Randy Moss, Chris Carter, Robert Smith, and Randall Cunningham-- the Falcons contained them, though, and I'd argue that the Jets' D was superior to the Falcons'. Of course, if the Jets were going to commit 6 turnovers like they did in the AFCCG, they were going to lose, no matter what.
