So the 1972 Dolphins were schedule babbys, right?
Of coursh
they also didn't lose the game that counted the most
>>64238341
The teams they played had a combined winning percentage of .400 or lower; it was considered one of the softest schedules a team ever had to play in the NFL. That doesn't take away from what that team did, though... other teams before and after had soft schedules and only one team has come close to matching that performance.
>>64238341
i found this
https://www.reddit.com/r/nfl/comments/1voi8z/is_the_1972_miami_dolphins_perfect_season/
>only 4 teams since 1972 have had an easier schedule than the '72 Dolphins
Asinine argument.
They lost in the super bowl the year before, and repeated as super bowl champions the year after. It takes a quality team to go to 3 Super Bowls in a row, and win two of them.
Yet only one other team has had an undefeated regular season since then.
No one claims they are the GOAT team either.
Yea, but they absolutely dominated their opponents as well. They would have shutout the Redskins in the owl if Garo Yepremian didn't try to unleash the dragon.
From 1971-1973 the Dolphins went 44-6-1, that's almost 90% winning percentage.
The '48 Browns were better.
>>64245785
>>64245977
>>64246143
>>64246301
OP BTFO
P
B
T
F
O
>>64241401
>I know it's still not "undefeated", but to a fan like me the Patriots 2007 season is far more impressive than the 1972 Dolphins.
Christ.
>>64246301
from 1946-1950, the Browns went 57-6-3 and won five straight championships
>>64246461
The Pats in 07' fought nothing but tin cans. The only team that really threatened them were the trashy Gnats. Who then beat them in the Superb Owl.
>>64246512
>counting championships before the forward pass
>>64246562
Literally wrong, not even a patriots fan but I don't think you watched football during 2007, there were more than a few games that the patriots could have lost too.
>>64246624
>not knowing who Otto Graham was.
embarrassing
>>64246749
Jim Otto is the superior NFL Otto
>>64246786
Otto Graham has seven Rings.
>>64246562
I've no idea about any of that shit, it was just directed at the kek narrative of doing really well but ultimately failing being somehow commendable or something and "to a fan like me" insinuates what a fucking loser nerd the poster is, as if one couldn't tell from SOS analysis from 40 years back.
>>64246562
The 07 Packers would've beaten the Pats.
>>64246512
Counting anything when the rules were completely different, Superbowl era is football, before that is something else
Otto Graham led the league in passing yards 5 times, and was second 2 times;
he led the league in passing TDs 3 times, and was second 3 times.
led his team to the championship game 10 consecutive season, winning 7 times.
you babbies really don't know anything about pro football. it's a shame.
Graham played before QBs were protected like tree frogs in skirts.
>>64246624
>not knowing when the forward pass was implemented
Found the casual.
>>64247052
>Counting anything when the rules were completely different,
The rules weren't that different in the 50s.
>Superbowl era is football, before that is something else
This is some extremely lazy sperging. Football didn't magically transform in 1966 just because the AFL and NFL champ played each other for the first time. The way football was played in the 70s looked a lot more like the 60s than it did the 80s (which is about as far back as you can go to see football that resembles the present). At least if you were to set the dividing mark at the NFL-AFL merger there would be some bureaucratic logic to it.
>>64245785
I don't think anyone's arguing the Dolphins of the early to mid 1970s weren't stacked with incredible talent and one of the greatest coaches of all time.
Having said that - outside of the Vikings - that Dolphins team didn't play any world beaters in the regular season or the playoffs.
Dusk had fallen on the Browns, pretty much for good, on that season and they wouldn't appear in the playoffs again until the Kardiac Kids almost a decade later.
The Steelers were nearly ripe, but not quite yet. They gave the Dolphins a hell of a game, but they just weren't ready yet.
The Redskins were old and hobbled by injuries and a coach who was such an offense-hating, control freak that he refused to let Sonny Jurgensen sit with the team and help backup, turned starter, Billy Kilmer, get through one of the toughest games of his life - all because he basically hated Jurgensen's guts.
I don't know if the Redskins win Super Bowl VII with a relatively healthy (Jurgensen was heading toward the end of his career at that point) but their offense probably scores at least once during the course of the game.
Now, that '73 Dolphins team was fucking incredible and by all rights, they should have three-peated in '74. I have a feeling if they got past the Raiders, Shula gets them ready for the game, no matter the on-field conditions, and they blow out the Vikings again.
the problem with historical comparisons is that a subjective fan of one team will draw a line somewhere in time, and everything before that line is irrelevant.
A real fan of a sport will take everything into consideration when comparing athletes and teams of different eras.
Of course, most of the posters on this board are trolls and faggots.
What really struck me is that the 1972 Miami Dolphins had a -4.3 Strength of Schedule (according to Pro-Football Reference), almost twice as much as the next weakest schedule (the Jets at -2.6). No denying they were a great team (+11 Team SRS), and the best in the league that year, but yes, they were schedule babbies.
http://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/1972/
>>64247052
Wash out your headgear.
>>64246461
Everyone feels this way.
I'm a Bronco fan, and the 07 Pats were amazing. I'm just glad they lost that owl
>>64238341
17-0 whether anyone likes it or not. The 73 team was even better and went 15-2.
>>64247074
>Graham played before QBs were protected like tree frogs in skirts.
he also played before physiology was a thing and players would shrug off their hangovers before playing
>>64246461
I hate the Patriots with the fire of a thousand suns but that's true, '72 dolphins had to play significantly less games, during the 70s when players took their jobs way less seriously
>>64250231
He also played in an era where the physical damage taken and given was far more worse, even if the 70s/80s era still had heavy hitting.
>>64247074
>>64246856
>>64246512
>counting stats and championships in a era without black players
lol'd
>>64250373
>without black players
Put down the crack pipe.
>>64250393
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_players_in_American_professional_football
No black players were in the NFL before 1946 and many teams didnt integrate until the 60s. Most had only 1 or 2 black players in the 50s
>>64247074
>implying you are old enough to have seen that
>implying AAFC "championships" are legit
>implying the QB position was even important back then
They were schedule babbies in the sense that they only had to play 17 total games instead of 19.
A perfect season is a perfect season, but would they have won two more in 1972 if they would have had to play two more? Maybe, maybe not. It was a different era from the modern NFL.
>>64250508
>a total of nine black people suited up for NFL teams between 1920 and 1926, including future attorney, black activist, and internationally acclaimed artist Paul Robeson. Fritz Pollard and Bobby Marshall were the first black players in what is now the NFL in 1920. Pollard became the first black coach in 1921.
You're not good at reading, you must be a nigger.
some art
