LeesburgSkinFan Posted January 24, 2006 Share Posted January 24, 2006 Any guesses? 2000 New York Giants? 1994 San Diego Chargers? 1989 Denver Broncos? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drex Posted January 24, 2006 Share Posted January 24, 2006 The 1979 Rams were 9-7 when they lost to Pittsburgh in the Superbowl. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeesburgSkinFan Posted January 24, 2006 Author Share Posted January 24, 2006 That was the first Super Bowl I can remember, and if I recall correctly, the Rams were winning most of that game and lost the lead in the 4th Quarter. But yeah, 9-7 is pretty bad for a Super Bowl team, especially when a 10-6 Redskins team isn't even in the playoffs... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henry Posted January 24, 2006 Share Posted January 24, 2006 Tough to argue against the Rams. At least they knocked the Cowboys out of the playoffs. And at least they showed up in the SB. Recently I'd have to say the 2000 Giants. The NFC really didn't deserve to send a team that year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ntotoro Posted January 24, 2006 Share Posted January 24, 2006 The '98-'99 Falcons and that stupid "Dirty Bird" dance, which looked more like a dry heave set to music (all apologies to George Costanza). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TD_washingtonredskins Posted January 24, 2006 Share Posted January 24, 2006 I think that New England team from 1986 was pretty bad. Granted, you couldn't really tell because the Bears beat everyone that year by 30+ points, but they were pretty bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drex Posted January 24, 2006 Share Posted January 24, 2006 I think that New England team from 1986 was pretty bad. Granted, you couldn't really tell because the Bears beat everyone that year by 30+ points, but they were pretty bad. I still wonder what might have been if Miami had defeated New England in the AFC Title game to earn a rematch against a vaunted Bears team they defeated during the regular season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peckerwood Posted January 24, 2006 Share Posted January 24, 2006 the '98 falcons beating the vikes that year was a big upset because of how minny played that year, with that offense, to a 15-1 record.. but you have to remember... atlanta was 14-2 that year as well - they weren't just some wild card scrub team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grampi Posted January 25, 2006 Share Posted January 25, 2006 2000 Migets Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hercules Posted January 25, 2006 Share Posted January 25, 2006 Any guesses? 2000 New York Giants? 1994 San Diego Chargers? 1989 Denver Broncos? Those are all very good choices. 85 Patriots as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom [Giants fan] Posted January 25, 2006 Share Posted January 25, 2006 The Ravens were winning that Super Bowl no matter who they faced. And the Giants had to at least be a good team to win the NFC Championship Game 41-0. :nana: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fuji869 Posted January 25, 2006 Share Posted January 25, 2006 The 1979 Los Angeles Rams 9-7 and the gave the Steelers a run for there money too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phixius Posted January 25, 2006 Share Posted January 25, 2006 The thread is worst team to ever make the Super Bowl not worst team in SuperBowl(based on peformance in SB). Giants did win the NFC Championship 41-0. In SuperBowl they didnt play well. The Redskins was good in 1983. Were they was the worst team because they didnt play well against the Raiders in the SuperBowl . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedskinsNation Posted January 25, 2006 Share Posted January 25, 2006 2004 Eagles for sure... I keed, I keed...simmer down. Honestly I'd go with the 1994 Chargers. Besides Seau I cant be sure of any player on that team.....wasnt stanley humphries their QB? Marion Butts their RB? They had a KickOff return TD and a defensive TD in that game???? and still lost 49-26? to SF. Young, Rice, Watter and company steamrolled the bolts....SD had no business playing. LOL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigRay Posted January 25, 2006 Share Posted January 25, 2006 2004 Eagles for sure...I keed, I keed...simmer down. Honestly I'd go with the 1994 Chargers. Besides Seau I cant be sure of any player on that team.....wasnt stanley humphries their QB? Marion Butts their RB? They had a KickOff return TD and a defensive TD in that game???? and still lost 49-26? to SF. Young, Rice, Watter and company steamrolled the bolts....SD had no business playing. LOL. I have to agree with you partner on the 94 Chargers hey but I go a step even further I'll probably get hammered for this but it just my opinion the 2000 Baltimore Ravens.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedskinsNation Posted January 25, 2006 Share Posted January 25, 2006 I have to agree with you partner on the 94 Chargers hey but I go a step even further I'll probably get hammered for this but it just my opinion the 2000 Baltimore Ravens.. that super bowl year for the Ratbirds cemented my hatred for that team. Seeing all that gawd-awful purple color from their bandwagon fans was sickening. I hate purple because of that team. I do respect their D and JLew had a solid year. But i see your point for sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
China Posted January 25, 2006 Share Posted January 25, 2006 I'll go with the '85-86 Patriots. I have to agree with you partner on the 94 Chargers hey but I go a step even further I'll probably get hammered for this but it just my opinion the 2000 Baltimore Ravens.. By definition wouldn't the team that lost to the Ravens in 2001 (the Giants) be worse? Now I might agree that the 2000 Ravens are the worst team to win a Superbowl. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsdude Posted January 25, 2006 Share Posted January 25, 2006 I have to agree with you partner on the 94 Chargers hey but I go a step even further I'll probably get hammered for this but it just my opinion the 2000 Baltimore Ravens.. I'm with you BigRay. Five straight games without an offensive touchdown? WTF. Even we beat them that year and we were struggling. They may not be the worst team to get in the super bowl but they are the worst team to win it. The Lombardi is tainted forever. The fact that Brian Billick has a ring makes me sick to my stomach. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedskinsNation Posted January 25, 2006 Share Posted January 25, 2006 I'll go with the '85-86 Patriots.By definition wouldn't the team that lost to the Ravens in 2001 (the Giants) be worse? Now I might agree that the 2000 Ravens are the worst team to win a Superbowl. Well his point is valid I suppose because the title doesnt specify if the team had to win or just lose...just says make it....regardless though Ravens may have been worse team ever. Whats great or is it sad? is that we beat them that year....10-3. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
China Posted January 25, 2006 Share Posted January 25, 2006 Well his point is valid I suppose because the title doesnt specify if the team had to win or just lose...just says make it....regardless though Ravens may have been worse team ever. Whats great or is it sad? is that we beat them that year....10-3. How can they be worse than the team that they beat? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H-O-G Posted January 25, 2006 Share Posted January 25, 2006 2000 ravens? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsdude Posted January 25, 2006 Share Posted January 25, 2006 How can they be worse than the team that they beat? You have to look at the team over an entire season, not just one game. Obviously they played better than the Giants on Super Bowl Sunday but not over the course of the entire year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Destino Posted January 25, 2006 Share Posted January 25, 2006 I'm with you BigRay. Five straight games without an offensive touchdown? WTF. Even we beat them that year and we were struggling. They may not be the worst team to get in the super bowl but they are the worst team to win it. The Lombardi is tainted forever. The fact that Brian Billick has a ring makes me sick to my stomach. I guess having one of the best defenses of all time doesn't count. They set a record in points allowed and running yards allowed that year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inxsive Posted January 25, 2006 Share Posted January 25, 2006 I think you have to judge the teams not based on their record but based on who they played to get to that spot. In the NCAA, do we consider an undefeated division 2 team better than a division one that lost 2 games or even one than lost 6? If every team played the same strength of schedule then number on wins are much more important. In college we judge a team by their record and who they played because of the fact they rarely played the same teams. In terms of ranking a team’s quality, why should we judge the pro's any different? I like the playoff format we have in the NFL but when it comes to judging one years Superbowl teams to another years Superbowl teams you need to take their path into consideration. That being said, look no further than this years Seattle Seahawks. They had the easiest schedule of any team (32 out of 32). Didn't beat a team with a winning record on the road all year (0-2), in fact haven’t won on the road against a winning team since 2002. They were the only team in their division not to lose at least 10 games. They didn't even have to play a team above a 5 seed and won't in the playoffs. They deserve 100% to be in the Superbowl, but they are easily one of if not the weakest team to make it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsdude Posted January 25, 2006 Share Posted January 25, 2006 I guess having one of the best defenses of all time doesn't count. They set a record in points allowed and running yards allowed that year. No it really doesn't, especially when you have an offense that goes FIVE straight games without scoring a touchdown (that seems almost impossible; and then to win the Super Bowl). A couple of years ago ESPN.com did a poll of their readers and sports writers and asked a similar question. The question was "What are the 10 worst world championship teams of all time" (in all of the different sports)? Obviously I don't remember all of the teams but number 1 was the Patriots first championship team and number 2 was the 2000 Ravens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.