Throwdowns > Forfeited

Views
6
Comments
18
  • June 09, 2008 10:13 PM ET

Tournament Throwdowns "Get Of Your Rear" Tournament-- Worst Super Bowl Champion Last 10 years (overall)

Bucmaster: Rocktober (37-63-10) vs Porkins: Catches bullets (138-13-1)
1
Votes
4
Votes
1
Votes
4
Votes


As much as this hurts me to say, I am going to have to with the Tampa Bay Buccaneers.

They have only had two above .500 seasons after they won the Super Bowl, which of their best was 11-5. The Bucs are a mediocre team that only got to the Super Bowl because of Keyshawn Johnson and Brad Johnson, which they both don't play for them anymore.

The New England Patriots are absolutely dominant this decade so they are definitley not the worst. The Steelers are a mediocre teams with their last couple of seasons being above .500. The Indianopilis Colts are excellent, having a bunch of above .500 seasons this decade.

The only questionable pick is the New York Giants. They haven't had the best decade either, but we have no idea how they are going to be.

The Bucs have been, by far, the worst. They couldn't even get past the wild-card in this past season. I think that no Super Bowl champion has been worse in the past ten seasons then the Bucs. The Bucs weren't even very good in 2002. They were going against a mediocre Oakland Raiders team


Good luck Porky!


Nice start, but there's no way that Tampa was the worst.

The year they beat the Raiders their defense was DOMINANT. They were ranked FIRST in the league in:

Points Allowed
Total Yards
Passing Yards
First downs allowed

The Bucs defense was monstrously good that year. Yes, the offense was somewhat more average, but featured a solid passing attack that led them to a 12-4 record, and their special teams were among the best in the NFL.

Tampa won its division and STEAMROLLED the Raiders 48-21...and Oakland was the NUMBER ONE offense in the NFL that year.

No, that Tampa team was very solid.


Sadly, my choice is one of my preferred teams, but a team that nonetheless was much weaker than the 2002 Bucs.


The 2007 Giants, who went 10-6 and won as a wild card.

Sorry, but even Giants fans know that this team rode an incredible wave of momentum to the title. I take nothing away from what they did but look at the numbers:

16th in total offense
7th in total defense
17th in scoring D

They exposed a tired Pats squad, and I give them credit. But relatively speaking, they were a weaker champ.

I'll contrast the two teams in #2.


I'll contrast them right now.

Yes, the Bucs were pretty impressive, but the Giants were more inpressive. They won eleven games in a row on the road, (including playoffs.) They beat a mediocre Tampa Bay Bucs team in the Wild Card, totally came against the odds against the Cowboys to beat them.

Then the cornerbacks really stood out in the game against the Packers. The last throw of Brett Farve's career was him getting sacked. And then they suprised the whole world by beating the Patriots in Arizona, 17-14. They were very consistent on the road and the play-offs, which helped them win Super Bowl XLII. I know 10-6 is a mediocre record, but it matches up to what they did through out the season.


Yes, the Giants road record was impressive. Any team that wins the title must have done a lot right. But we're talking about who is weaker overall.

During the past 10 years, here are the teams' respective performances:

TB: 86-74 with 6 playoff appearances
NY: 83-77 with 5 playoff appearances

Tampa has had a STRONGER decade than NY. 4 division titles to the Giants 2. MORE wins, MORE playoff appearances.


As I said, the year they beat Oakland they had the BEST D in the NFL and scorched the team with the best offense by more than 3 TDs. I don't see how they can be considered weak.

NY was mediocre for most of the year (especially offensively) and had 5 home losses. They were 26th OF 32 TEAMS in turnover margin (the Bucs were BEST in the NFL in '02) and squeaked out a 3-point win over the hyped-up Pats.

Let me summarize. Tampa had:

1. A BETTER record for the decade
2. A BETTER record the year they won
3. MORE playoff appearances
4. MORE division titles
5. The #1 defense the year they won
6. The #1 turnover margin the year they won
7. A 27 POINT SB ROMP over the NFL's best offense

There's simply no way that they were a weaker champ than the NYG.

Comments (18) Add A Comment

June 9, 2008  10:17 PM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE

This year's New York Giants.

June 9, 2008  10:24 PM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE

That was an idea, but I changed my mind..

June 9, 2008  10:43 PM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE

This year's New York Giants.
LIFER is Buckwheat! | 06/09/08, 10:17 PM


they could quite possibly be the worst SB champs of all time, with the exception of the NY Jets in SB III

June 10, 2008  07:39 AM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE

Geez. Good thing I didn't read the comments before making my argument. You guys totally copied me.

June 10, 2008  07:46 AM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE

What about the Steelers? The year they "beat" the Seahawks. At least the Giants had a great D.

June 10, 2008  07:54 AM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE

Did they really have a great D? Go check the numbers.

The year Pitt beat Seattle, they had a Top 10 offense and a Top 5 defense. Plus they've bene much stronger over the past decade in general...

June 10, 2008  07:56 AM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE

I agree with Porkins. You can't judge the Giants by one game against the New England Patriots. They were just above average in the regular season though.

June 10, 2008  08:16 AM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE

I was about to say, one game?

June 10, 2008  08:39 AM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE

I don't thin you can use how a team has done over the course of the decade as a factor in determining the worst individual Super Bowl winner. With free agency, teams change drastically from year to year.

Even if you want to look long term, the Bucs defense had been a dominating one for several years. In fact, Dungy got fired for not getting them over the hump - a Super Bowl was expected of them, and they finally delivered.

Vote to Porkins.

June 10, 2008  08:45 AM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE

T-fo, I think this topic was actually meant to include performance for the decade as PART of the consideration, which is why Buc mentioned it and I rebutted. It's who was the weakest champ in the past 10 years "overall", so I think it was meant to include more than just the year they won...I think.

June 10, 2008  08:50 AM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE

But either way, you're right- by any measure (decade or single season) the Giants are the weaker champ

June 10, 2008  09:13 AM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE

the bucs? they had the top D and the best QB of the past decade????

June 10, 2008  09:37 AM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE

Porkins, good call with the Giants. Havent the Bucs been one of the top D's for most of the 10yrs? 3-5 possible HoF players in that span. In 02 they had Sapp, Brooks, Barber, Rice, and John Lynch quite a few possible HoF names there.

June 10, 2008  09:38 AM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE

Let me emphasize POSSIBLE

June 10, 2008  09:41 AM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE

Porkins, I'm really mad at your pick. And I knew you were going to pick it. So I was prepared.

June 10, 2008  10:44 AM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE

Sorry Moon. I had to do it. Two of my best friends are lifelong fans of the G-Men as well. Luckily they don't use FN, or I'd get admonished.

June 10, 2008  12:31 PM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE

Admonished? 20pts to Porkins for that usage. Lol!

 
June 10, 2008  04:12 PM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE

Giants had a good team.They are still very underrated. Just because they dont have names like brady and Moss, they were the better team in the game that counts the most. Momentum isn't everything, skill is 90% of the game. Momentum is maybe 5%. And i'm not just saying this all because i am a giant fan. The power rankings cam out recently, and it is a disgrace that there not in the top 5. Still very underrated.

Comment

Remember to keep your posts clean. Profanity will get filtered, and offensive comments will be removed.


Leaderboard

  Fan W L T Win %
1 DetroitFan* BS: Start Stanton! 132 9 7 91.6%
2 Porkins: Catches bullets 138 13 1 91.1%
3 Baun-ded=PUCKHEAD 52 5 1 90.5%
4 The Ram 138 17 4 88.1%
5 Foosball 68 9 2 87.3%
6 Philly-- www.sportsnoise.com 74 11 4 85.4%
7 Hyped78 113 19 5 84.3%
8 Dookie: Here We Go Steelers 117 19 8 84.0%
9 [The] Coach 97 18 5 82.9%
10 BSchwartz07 129 27 6 81.5%

Truth & Rumors

MOST POPULAR

  1. 1
    Plaxico shows no remorse
    Views
    4054
    Comments
    887
  2. 2
    Teixeira good fit for Yankees?
    Views
    11510
    Comments
    639
  3. 3
    Burnett won't be on market long
    Views
    7745
    Comments
    151
  4. 4
    Warner hasn't ruled out retirement
    Views
    4042
    Comments
    58
  5. 5
    Bengals coach on hot seat?
    Views
    4907
    Comments
    48

Weekly Most Active Users

Comments + Blog Posts + Throwdowns

  1. 1
  2. 2
  3. 3
  4. 4
  5. 5

Message Boards

  1. MMA > Fight Club

    Who will be the new 'face of…
    Views
    1093
    Replies
    10

  2. NFL > General NFL

    Ed Hochuli needs to be FIRED!!
    Views
    416
    Replies
    24

  3. NFL > General NFL

    Taking bids for a new team!!!
    Views
    25
    Replies
    2

Blogs

SI.com

Swimsuit

Melissa HaroMelissa Haro
Jessica GomesJessica Gomes

SI Photos

Rookies to Watch in the NHLRookies to Watch in the NHL
Dominant Pitching SeasonsDominant Pitching Seasons

SI Vault