Re: RE: Re: RE: 2000 Saints/ 2006 Saints
 

I agree with this part. I started a thread a while back saying the opportunity was there RIGHT NOW, and it needed to be capitalized on.

Let's revisit NFL history among the Super Bowl matchups over the last 10 years...

1996--Green Bay / New England...........Green Bay is one of the examples of those teams that build themselves up to the point of a Super Bowl, after falling short previous seasons. They had been to the playoffs, and finally overcame the likes of San Francisco and Dallas to reach the top of the NFC. New England, also, had been built up by Parcells. Would there be a "next season" for New England though?

1997--Green Bay / Denver.............Green Bay had built themselves up the prior year and won the Super Bowl.......Denver had been building and building, but underacheiving in the playoffs. This was finally the year they won it all.

1998--Denver/Atlanta.........Denver had been established, and won once again. Atlanta had turned their fortunes around under Dan Reeves. Would their be a "next season" for Atlanta though, after falling short in this Super Bowl?

1999--St. Louis/Tennessee............Both teams literally came out of nowhere. St. Louis wins it all. Would Tennessee build on coming up 1-yard-short and return to the Super Bowl?

2000--Baltimore/New York.........Both teams came from nothing......Baltimore wins. Would New York get back to the Super Bowl after this setback?

2001--St. Louis/New England.........St. Louis had been established a few years prior........New England came out of nowhere with Brady as QB to win it.

2002--Raiders/Bucs.........Bucs are one of those rare examples again of a team chipping, chipping, chipping and finally overcoming an obstacle and winning it all. How have the Raiders done since this Super Bowl?

2003--New England/Carolina........New England has basically established their nucleus 2 years prior. The out-of-nowhere Carolina Panthers make it a damn close Super Bowl, but fall short. Have they gotten back yet?

2004--New England/Philadelphia........New England is established, Philadelphia had been chipping, chipping, chipping but fell short.

2005--Pittsburgh/Seattle.........Pittsburgh had a monster season in 2004, and took it a step further in 2005 with a Super Bowl win (despite actually having fewer wins). Jury is still out on whether Seattle's current nucleus will take it a step further and win it all or not, but it doesn't look like it'll happen this year. I should also point out that Pittsburgh returned with basically the same team they had last year, and will be lucky to finish above .500 this year.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

So over 10 years, we can say Green Bay, Denver, Tampa Bay, and Pittsburgh have been the only teams to get a fire going, and finally bust the door down by winning a Super Bowl title. That's 4 out of 10. The rest of the teams pretty much came out of nowhere, and in rare cases such as New England, used that quick success to propel themselves to future championships. Also, look at the teams that fell short in those Super Bowls. In those 10 seasons, only New England has returned to a Super Bowl after losing (and that was 5 years later, under a completely different coaching staff, and a different QB).

This is why it is imperative for the Saints to not even worry about "next year" until next year. There is work to be done THIS year, and a golden opportunity laying ahead.

RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: 2000 Saints/ 2006 Saints
 

I think, myself, I would like to get the team in a situation, where we have consistent play off trips, year after year. Kind of like the Colts. They seem to be in the play offs every year, and have an amazing nucleus of talent on offense.

By the way, Carolina was in the NFC title game last year werent' they? I believe Atlanta was in the title game the year before. So they might not have went back to the SB, but they were in the thick of things in January.

RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: 2000 Saints/ 2006 Saints
 

Would you take a super bowl win and 3 years of missing the playoffs?
5 years?
10?

I would take 10 for one Sunday win in February

RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: 2000 Saints/ 2006 Saints
 

Frank, calm down buddy. Believe it or not, we are on the same side here. Ok, I left out, that I would also like to win the Superbowl this year. I am not saying I would rather go to the play offs, and NOT win any championships. I just mean in the future, my ideal situation, would be at least going to the play offs, and having a competitive team every season.

Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: 2000 Saints/ 2006 Saints
 

I'll give you that one on Carolina, but Atlanta was pretty much a different team in 2004 than the 1998 team that went to the Super Bowl. The 98 team had Reeves as coach, Chandler as QB, and Jamal Anderson at RB...whereas the 2004 team had Mora Jr as coach, Vick as QB, and Dunn at RB. Pretty much a different nucleus.

Anyway, I see what you are saying, and to elaborate on your statement, Tennessee was another team that actually had some legitimate playoff chances after their Super Bowl defeat. However, it still leads credence to what I'm saying, which is the fact that the window of opportunity only opens so far, and only stays open for so long...

Let's hope they get back on track starting Christmas Eve..

Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: 2000 Saints/ 2006 Saints
 

I will agree with you there. The Giants will be a tough test I believe. But a passable one.

Wouldn't you agree that out of all the Superbowl teams, that actually won, it seems as though Tampa Bay fell the farthest the fastest? Wow. They had a helluva defense, that just disbanded after the Superbowl. Which once again proves your guys' point, that you have to strike while the iron is hot.

Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: 2000 Saints/ 2006 Saints
 

Probably so. Denver has only had one losing season since Elway retired, and the Packers had several good seasons after they won the Super Bowl. New England has only missed the playoffs once since their first Super Bowl win, and even then they had a 9-7 record. Baltimore's had some chances. The Rams hung around after Martz took over. So up to this point, yeah Tampa is probably the ones who fell fastest. They had a good season last year (their only winning season since that Super Bowl), but fell by the wayside once again.

I agree it's hard not to compare the 2000 Saints to this team. But like others have said, there are many differences.
I seem to remember we played some pretty sorry teams in 2000. And in many of the wins, we just lucked out. I still say if Hakim hadn't dropped that punt the outcome of the wildcard game would have been different.
Iin the second game against St. Louis we where owned, and Denver spanked us good..... didn't Mike Anderson set a new rookie rushing record that game?
And Brooks was just phenomenal in the games he played..... problem is he never got any better.
Haslett was very emotional and that emotion carried over to the players. If one word described the 2000 Saints, I think "Over Achievers" does it.
Anyway, I have a summary of that 2000 season on my website HERE

This year, we still have a way to go, but we building on more than just emotion. Payton is instilling discipline in them. A trait the Haslett teams sorely lacked.
I just wouldn't get to down about the negatives of this season. I'm just waiting to see where we are next year at this time to tell how permanent the changes are.

Not to screw anything up but I wouldn't be disappointed with a playoff loss this season. I mean, after getting some key things like a LB, CB, and other needs we'd be even better for the next yr

who cares about next year?