IF the Patriots win the Super Bowl, then any conversation involving the Greatest Team Ever would have to include the Patriots....but it doesn't automatically make them the greatest ever.... ...I think it DOES exclude the 72 Dolphins from that conversation, however...and that's good enough for me!
I saw where one of the '72 Dawlpfinz came out and said that the 2007 would murder the 1972 team. I forget who it was, but I'm guessing he won't be getting any free steaks at Shula's any time soon. I was ambivalent about this for a good stretch. But then, that old, whiney, cheating, pointy-nose coach and his minions went on their campaign for the greatness of 1972, and continue to try laying claim to the title of Greatest Team Of All Time. If I see or hear from Mercury Morris one more time. . . . At least if the Patriots knock that bunch of old, mediocre, former players and their full-of-himself coach, I won't have to see or hear them ever again. Nor will I have to deal with a new batch of old, mediocre, former players, and THEIR full-of-himself coach for another 20 years or so. It's not a great trade-off, but it's the best of a bad lot.
1972 Dolphins points scored- 1st in league points allowed- 1st yards gained- 1st yards allowed- 1st takeway/giveaway differential- 2nd points differential- (obviously) 1st yardage differential- (obviously) 1st 1973 Dolphins, same categories- 5th, 1st, 9th, 3rd, 12th, 2nd, 4th
Yeah but that's just relying on substance and facts. The better way to judge how a team's legacy is how you feel when you think about them. Their swagger. Their confidence. Their aura. Aura is what wins football games, leading the league in those categories isn't. Since the '72 Dolphins have the reputatation of being overated because everyone of the team is disliked, that means they aren't that good and those stats are meaningless.
Hard to tell how serious you are being here. I am not the biggest fan of scrimmage yards gained/allowed, but I used the numbers above to show that the 1972 team was more dominant than the 1973 team.
No I was being sarcastic. While all of those stats are pretty overwhelming the easy schedule remains a factor. The other issue that I have with those stats is that football isn't the type of sport that is easily quantified like baseball. Some teams win big when they win and look like jugurnauts when they win and look like shit when they loose, some teams seem to always win by 7-10 points but never seem particularly impressive. Even though I just mentioned the early schedule as a possible reason why that team isn't necessarily a great team, the bottom line is the never lost and it's unfair to hypothetically assume that just b/c on one particular day they beat a mediocre team by 2 points that on another they wouldn't play a different style and hang with another very good team. To me, those stats only pad the legacy of the '72 Dolphins, this would be a very intresting debate though if all of those rankings were switched ('73 dolphins led the league in everything while the '72 dolphins were only good but never lost). Edit: In relation to the difficulty of schedule factor between the '73 dolphins and '72 dolphins there isn't a huge difference between the two. Coldhardfootballfacts lists the '72 team as 5-0 against quality oponents, while the '73 team went 8-1.
The 1972 Dolphins outscored their opponents by 214 points over the course of 14 regular season games. The scoreboard is what matters most and 1972 scoreboards indicated the Dolphins were pretty darn dominant. The schedule strength argument can only go so far. Three Miami opponents kept the deficit to single digits. Four teams did the same against the Patriots this year. In other words, 11 times in 14 games did the Dolphins defeat their opponents by 10 or more points. The Patriots did it 12 times in 16 games. Net points, Super Bowl champions 14-game regular season 1966 GB- 172 1967 GB- 123 1968 NYJ- 139 1969 KC- 182 1970 BAL- 87 1971 DAL- 184 1972 MIA- 214 1973 MIA- 193 1974 PIT- 116 1975 PIT- 211 1976 OAK-113 1977 DAL- 133 16-game regular season 1978 PIT- 161 1979 PIT- 154 1980 OAK- 58 1981 SF- 107 1982 WAS- 62 (9-game regular season) 1983 LARd- 104 1984 SF- 248 1985 CHI- 258 1986 NYG- 135 1987 WAS- 94 (15-game regular season) 1988 SF- 75 1989 SF- 189 1990 NYG- 124 1991 WAS- 261 1992 DAL- 166 1993 DAL- 147 1994 SF- 209 1995 DAL- 144 1996 GB- 246 1997 DEN- 185 1998 DEN- 192 1999 STL- 284 2000 BAL- 168 2001 NE- 99 2002 TB- 150 2003 NE- 110 2004 NE- 177 2005 PIT- 131 2006 IND- 67
Interesting point about those statistics - on the morning of Super Bowl VII the Redskins were favored by 3 points; a lot of late money on the Dolphins ultimately pushed the lines to pick 'em or the Dolphins as 1 point favorites. As I mentioned earlier, it is simply not the case that people thought that they were a super team at the time - their easy schedule and difficulties in the playoffs had led to plenty of doubters. Although the Dolphins won the game convincingly, that was because of their defense - their offense was pretty ineffective, and only outgained the Skins by 27 yards (and had fewer first downs). Certainly nothing happened in Super Bowl VII to justify them being called an elite team, other than the fact that it completed a perfect season.
They wrecked league MVP Larry Brown in Super Bowl 7 and were one freak play away from winning by a 17-0 score.
They won handily against the NFC's best team. It was the icing on the cake of a perfect season. We get it- you hate Don Shula and the Dolphins.
That's due to the fact the Dolphins ran 16 fewer plays than the Redskins. The Dolphins ran 50 plays. The Redskins ran 66 plays. The Dolphins averaged 5.1 yards per offensive play. The Redskins averaged 3.5 yards. Oh and the Dolphins outgained 'em by 25 yards- not 27. SUPER BOWL 7 airing on NFL Network right now.
You really are obsessed about this, aren't you? I have been quite open in my distaste for Don Shula and the 1972 Dolphins, but to imply that that is the sole reason (or even a primary reason) for my belief that they are not close to being the best team of all time is at best disingenuous, and at worst wilful misstatement. Since you insist on doing this, I guess I will once again (and for the last time) point out the reasons for my opinion. You don't have to agree that they are convincing, but they are backed up by indisputable facts. (1) Having an undefeated regular season is certainly an indicator of being a very good (even excellent) team, but no more so than having one loss (or even two). Any undefeated season got that way by some good luck versus some bad luck - that was true of this year's Patriots, and was certainly true of the 1972 Dolphins - and is thus not an indicator of quality at all compared to having a loss or two. Using an undefeated regular season as the key measure for being the best team ever is ridiculous. Larry Csonka once said "Perfection ends a lot of arguments." That is true, and is the reason why the 1972 Dolphins get into these discussions; unfortunately, all that represents is the inability of people to understand randomness. It does end the argument for a lot of people, but it shouldn't. This is particularly true when the regular season schedule happens to be easy, as it was for the Dolphins. (2) IMO a team that is potentially the "best team ever" should rise to the occasion in the most important games. They should dominate in playoff games, for instance. The Dolphins did not do this. They barely beat a mediocre Cleveland Browns team, and had trouble with a Steelers team that was lucky to be there (they had beaten the Raiders the previous week because of the "Immaculate Reception"). They certainly controlled the Super Bowl, and deserved to win, but while their defense was dominant in that game, their offense was pretty mediocre. (3) IMO a team that is potentially the "best team ever" should be viewed that way at the time. They certainly shouldn't be an underdog going into the Super Bowl! The pre-Super Bowl VII hype was all about whether the Dolphins would go undefeated, not whether they were the best team ever - that wasn't even remotely on the radar screen. I have never claimed that the 1972 Dolphins weren't worthy Super Bowl champions; only that they weren't close to being the best team ever, and that the only reason people even possibly consider them that is because they went undefeated. If you look at my list above, various teams immediately qualify, and to my mind are stronger candidates for best team ever - the Packers of the mid 1960s, the 1971, 1977, 1992, and 1993 Cowboys, the 1973 Dolphins, the 1984, 1989, and 1994 49ers, and the 1985 Bears. Personally, I would have a tough time choosing between the 1989 49ers and 1985 Bears.
Are ya aggravated yet? Sounds like it to me. The thread was bumped (as much as one can use the term "bumped" for a thread that was still on the first page in a particular forum) because I wanted to point out that Super Bowl 7 was going to be re-aired last night. That way people who did not see the game and/or weren't familiar with the team could judge for themselves. While doing the bumping, I had more comments to add on the 1972 team.
Hey, if I had known that it was just early campaigning for the 2008 "Most annoying" award, I would have left it alone. :wink:
Nah, it was in reference to the fact you really got on my nerves last Sunday and it appeared to me that the tide had turned this Sunday.
