Author Topic: If the Chiefs win the SB are they a dynasty?  (Read 5680 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: If the Chiefs win the SB are they a dynasty?
« Reply #15 on: February 10, 2023, 08:55:24 AM »

Online Donoghus

  • Global Moderator
  • Bill Russell
  • ******************************
  • Posts: 30937
  • Tommy Points: 1607
  • What a Pub Should Be
Certainly not yet but they're on the right track to being that way if they win on Sunday.  The consistency of winning is already in place. They just need to add more trophies.

I mean, if the Eagles win on Sunday, would people be asking the same question?  Two Super Bowl titles in 6 seasons?   This would be two super bowls in 4 seasons for the Chiefs.  Super Bowl history is littered with two time Super Bowl winners in similar spans but you don't really see them being referred to as dynasties.  Denver won back to back in the late 90s but I don't think you see anyone really referring to them as a dynasty.   It's when teams win that third one,  that's then the dynasty stuff really picks up steam.


2010 CB Historical Draft - Best Overall Team

Re: If the Chiefs win the SB are they a dynasty?
« Reply #16 on: February 10, 2023, 09:33:30 AM »

Offline Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 58549
  • Tommy Points: -25636
  • Bo Knows: Joe Don't Know Diddley
Come on now.  No, they weren't.

To me, a dynasty involves at least four SB wins.  I consider a "mini-dynasty" to include three titles in a short period of time, like six years.

Two titles?  Nope, unless we're ready to talk about the Eli Manning Giants dynasty.
the NFL is not the same as the other sports.  No "team" has won 4 Super Bowl since the Steelers won 4 in 6 years in the 70's.  I mean the Patriots had 10 years between the 3rd and 4th title, that can't count as a continuation and thereby the Patriots weren't even a dynasty by that definition (which is obviously a strange argument to make).

And the Giants may have won 2 SB's in 5 seasons, but they missed the playoffs twice and lost in the divisional round the 3 years in between.  Not anywhere near the same thing as the Chiefs.

The Pats are interesting.  I'd say they were two mini-dynasties separated by a decade.  If somebody wants to argue that two mini-dynasties equals one full dynasty, I'd let them have it

And, the 49ers won 4 out of 9 titles in the 1980s.  So, they're right there with the Steelers, albeit it took them three more seasons.

But the Chiefs?  Now?  They're the Big Ben Steelers if they win. 


I'M THE SILVERBACK GORILLA IN THIS MOTHER——— AND DON'T NONE OF YA'LL EVER FORGET IT!@ 34 minutes

Re: If the Chiefs win the SB are they a dynasty?
« Reply #17 on: February 10, 2023, 09:45:29 AM »

Offline MarcusSmartFanClub

  • NCE
  • Bill Walton
  • *
  • Posts: 1096
  • Tommy Points: 59
The Chiefs are better than those Pitt teams. They need 2 more Ron’s to qualify as a dynasty.

It would be hard for anyone to claim that the Pats were not a dynasty.

Re: If the Chiefs win the SB are they a dynasty?
« Reply #18 on: February 10, 2023, 09:57:38 AM »

Online Donoghus

  • Global Moderator
  • Bill Russell
  • ******************************
  • Posts: 30937
  • Tommy Points: 1607
  • What a Pub Should Be
Some history.

Dolphins (1970s) - 2 SB wins in 3 seasons (other season was a lose in SB)

Cowboys (1970s) - 2 SB wins in 8 seasons with 2 SB losses also

Raiders (1970s-1980s)  - 3 SB wins in 8 seasons. 

Giants (1980s-1990s)  - 2 SB wins in 5 seasons.

Redskins (1980s-1990s) - 3 SB wins in 10 seasons.

Broncos (1990s) - 2 SB wins in 2 seasons.

Giants (2000s-2010) - 2 SB wins in 5 seasons

Steelers (2000s-2010s) - 2 SB wins in 6 seasons with 1 SB loss also.

Would you consider any of these dynasties?



2010 CB Historical Draft - Best Overall Team

Re: If the Chiefs win the SB are they a dynasty?
« Reply #19 on: February 10, 2023, 10:06:18 AM »

Offline MarcusSmartFanClub

  • NCE
  • Bill Walton
  • *
  • Posts: 1096
  • Tommy Points: 59
Some history.

Dolphins (1970s) - 2 SB wins in 3 seasons (other season was a lose in SB)

Cowboys (1970s) - 2 SB wins in 8 seasons with 2 SB losses also

Raiders (1970s-1980s)  - 3 SB wins in 8 seasons. 

Giants (1980s-1990s)  - 2 SB wins in 5 seasons.

Redskins (1980s-1990s) - 3 SB wins in 10 seasons.

Broncos (1990s) - 2 SB wins in 2 seasons.

Giants (2000s-2010) - 2 SB wins in 5 seasons

Steelers (2000s-2010s) - 2 SB wins in 6 seasons with 1 SB loss also.

Would you consider any of these dynasties?

I wouldn’t.

For me, it’s the 80s 49ers, early 90’s Cowboys, and early 00’s Patriots.

Re: If the Chiefs win the SB are they a dynasty?
« Reply #20 on: February 10, 2023, 10:19:20 AM »

Offline Neurotic Guy

  • Dave Cowens
  • ***********************
  • Posts: 23319
  • Tommy Points: 2509
I think the Pats had one dynasty.  It lasted 18 years and produced 6 SB wins, 9 appearances. 18 winning seasons, however many AFC title games and division titles.

I think a definition of dynasty might help the discussion.   

I'll give it a shot for NFL...
A lengthy and distinct period of success in which a team is unquestionably the overall best or most dominant.      Open to better definitions.
   


I would suggest that for football that "lengthy period" could be as short as 3 seasons.   

Yes, I think the Chiefs are a dynasty if they win on Sunday.

Re: If the Chiefs win the SB are they a dynasty?
« Reply #21 on: February 10, 2023, 10:42:45 AM »

Offline Moranis

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 33461
  • Tommy Points: 1533
Come on now.  No, they weren't.

To me, a dynasty involves at least four SB wins.  I consider a "mini-dynasty" to include three titles in a short period of time, like six years.

Two titles?  Nope, unless we're ready to talk about the Eli Manning Giants dynasty.
the NFL is not the same as the other sports.  No "team" has won 4 Super Bowl since the Steelers won 4 in 6 years in the 70's.  I mean the Patriots had 10 years between the 3rd and 4th title, that can't count as a continuation and thereby the Patriots weren't even a dynasty by that definition (which is obviously a strange argument to make).

And the Giants may have won 2 SB's in 5 seasons, but they missed the playoffs twice and lost in the divisional round the 3 years in between.  Not anywhere near the same thing as the Chiefs.

The Pats are interesting.  I'd say they were two mini-dynasties separated by a decade.  If somebody wants to argue that two mini-dynasties equals one full dynasty, I'd let them have it

And, the 49ers won 4 out of 9 titles in the 1980s.  So, they're right there with the Steelers, albeit it took them three more seasons.

But the Chiefs?  Now?  They're the Big Ben Steelers if they win.
The Big Ben Steelers missed the playoffs 2 years in between the SB appearances and lost in the WC round another year (they also switched coaches).  There is a significant difference between that and the Chiefs.  The Chiefs have been the best team in the conference for 5 years in a row (they've hosted all 5 AFC CC in that span) and either made the SB or lost in overtime in the CC.

That is just a different level of success than the other "teams" to win 2 SB's in a 5 year period.   
2023 Historical Draft - Brooklyn Nets - 9th pick

Bigs - Pau, Amar'e, Issel, McGinnis, Roundfield
Wings - Dantley, Bowen, J. Jackson
Guards - Cheeks, Petrovic, Buse, Rip

Re: If the Chiefs win the SB are they a dynasty?
« Reply #22 on: February 10, 2023, 10:47:13 AM »

Offline Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 58549
  • Tommy Points: -25636
  • Bo Knows: Joe Don't Know Diddley
Come on now.  No, they weren't.

To me, a dynasty involves at least four SB wins.  I consider a "mini-dynasty" to include three titles in a short period of time, like six years.

Two titles?  Nope, unless we're ready to talk about the Eli Manning Giants dynasty.
the NFL is not the same as the other sports.  No "team" has won 4 Super Bowl since the Steelers won 4 in 6 years in the 70's.  I mean the Patriots had 10 years between the 3rd and 4th title, that can't count as a continuation and thereby the Patriots weren't even a dynasty by that definition (which is obviously a strange argument to make).

And the Giants may have won 2 SB's in 5 seasons, but they missed the playoffs twice and lost in the divisional round the 3 years in between.  Not anywhere near the same thing as the Chiefs.

The Pats are interesting.  I'd say they were two mini-dynasties separated by a decade.  If somebody wants to argue that two mini-dynasties equals one full dynasty, I'd let them have it

And, the 49ers won 4 out of 9 titles in the 1980s.  So, they're right there with the Steelers, albeit it took them three more seasons.

But the Chiefs?  Now?  They're the Big Ben Steelers if they win.
The Big Ben Steelers missed the playoffs 2 years in between the SB appearances and lost in the WC round another year (they also switched coaches).  There is a significant difference between that and the Chiefs.  The Chiefs have been the best team in the conference for 5 years in a row (they've hosted all 5 AFC CC in that span) and either made the SB or lost in overtime in the CC.

That is just a different level of success than the other "teams" to win 2 SB's in a 5 year period.   

Do we judge dynasties based upon what round they lost in the playoffs now?  Can we talk about the Buffalo Bills dynasty, then?


I'M THE SILVERBACK GORILLA IN THIS MOTHER——— AND DON'T NONE OF YA'LL EVER FORGET IT!@ 34 minutes

Re: If the Chiefs win the SB are they a dynasty?
« Reply #23 on: February 10, 2023, 10:52:13 AM »

Offline Moranis

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 33461
  • Tommy Points: 1533
Come on now.  No, they weren't.

To me, a dynasty involves at least four SB wins.  I consider a "mini-dynasty" to include three titles in a short period of time, like six years.

Two titles?  Nope, unless we're ready to talk about the Eli Manning Giants dynasty.
the NFL is not the same as the other sports.  No "team" has won 4 Super Bowl since the Steelers won 4 in 6 years in the 70's.  I mean the Patriots had 10 years between the 3rd and 4th title, that can't count as a continuation and thereby the Patriots weren't even a dynasty by that definition (which is obviously a strange argument to make).

And the Giants may have won 2 SB's in 5 seasons, but they missed the playoffs twice and lost in the divisional round the 3 years in between.  Not anywhere near the same thing as the Chiefs.

The Pats are interesting.  I'd say they were two mini-dynasties separated by a decade.  If somebody wants to argue that two mini-dynasties equals one full dynasty, I'd let them have it

And, the 49ers won 4 out of 9 titles in the 1980s.  So, they're right there with the Steelers, albeit it took them three more seasons.

But the Chiefs?  Now?  They're the Big Ben Steelers if they win.
The Big Ben Steelers missed the playoffs 2 years in between the SB appearances and lost in the WC round another year (they also switched coaches).  There is a significant difference between that and the Chiefs.  The Chiefs have been the best team in the conference for 5 years in a row (they've hosted all 5 AFC CC in that span) and either made the SB or lost in overtime in the CC.

That is just a different level of success than the other "teams" to win 2 SB's in a 5 year period.   

Do we judge dynasties based upon what round they lost in the playoffs now?  Can we talk about the Buffalo Bills dynasty, then?
There has to be winning though.  Had the Bills won 2 SB's, lost in 2 others then it would be a discussion point just like it will be for the Chiefs, if they win on Sunday.  if the Chiefs lose on Sunday it is a moot question.
2023 Historical Draft - Brooklyn Nets - 9th pick

Bigs - Pau, Amar'e, Issel, McGinnis, Roundfield
Wings - Dantley, Bowen, J. Jackson
Guards - Cheeks, Petrovic, Buse, Rip

Re: If the Chiefs win the SB are they a dynasty?
« Reply #24 on: February 10, 2023, 10:59:33 AM »

Online Celtics2021

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7144
  • Tommy Points: 979
Come on now.  No, they weren't.

To me, a dynasty involves at least four SB wins.  I consider a "mini-dynasty" to include three titles in a short period of time, like six years.

Two titles?  Nope, unless we're ready to talk about the Eli Manning Giants dynasty.
the NFL is not the same as the other sports.  No "team" has won 4 Super Bowl since the Steelers won 4 in 6 years in the 70's.  I mean the Patriots had 10 years between the 3rd and 4th title, that can't count as a continuation and thereby the Patriots weren't even a dynasty by that definition (which is obviously a strange argument to make).

And the Giants may have won 2 SB's in 5 seasons, but they missed the playoffs twice and lost in the divisional round the 3 years in between.  Not anywhere near the same thing as the Chiefs.

The Pats are interesting.  I'd say they were two mini-dynasties separated by a decade.  If somebody wants to argue that two mini-dynasties equals one full dynasty, I'd let them have it

And, the 49ers won 4 out of 9 titles in the 1980s.  So, they're right there with the Steelers, albeit it took them three more seasons.

But the Chiefs?  Now?  They're the Big Ben Steelers if they win.
The Big Ben Steelers missed the playoffs 2 years in between the SB appearances and lost in the WC round another year (they also switched coaches).  There is a significant difference between that and the Chiefs.  The Chiefs have been the best team in the conference for 5 years in a row (they've hosted all 5 AFC CC in that span) and either made the SB or lost in overtime in the CC.

That is just a different level of success than the other "teams" to win 2 SB's in a 5 year period.   

Do we judge dynasties based upon what round they lost in the playoffs now?  Can we talk about the Buffalo Bills dynasty, then?

Honestly I’d take the Bills dynasty over a couple of others listed here.  I don’t think we’ll see another team make four straight Super Bowls.

Re: If the Chiefs win the SB are they a dynasty?
« Reply #25 on: February 10, 2023, 11:02:35 AM »

Online Donoghus

  • Global Moderator
  • Bill Russell
  • ******************************
  • Posts: 30937
  • Tommy Points: 1607
  • What a Pub Should Be
Come on now.  No, they weren't.

To me, a dynasty involves at least four SB wins.  I consider a "mini-dynasty" to include three titles in a short period of time, like six years.

Two titles?  Nope, unless we're ready to talk about the Eli Manning Giants dynasty.
the NFL is not the same as the other sports.  No "team" has won 4 Super Bowl since the Steelers won 4 in 6 years in the 70's.  I mean the Patriots had 10 years between the 3rd and 4th title, that can't count as a continuation and thereby the Patriots weren't even a dynasty by that definition (which is obviously a strange argument to make).

And the Giants may have won 2 SB's in 5 seasons, but they missed the playoffs twice and lost in the divisional round the 3 years in between.  Not anywhere near the same thing as the Chiefs.

The Pats are interesting.  I'd say they were two mini-dynasties separated by a decade.  If somebody wants to argue that two mini-dynasties equals one full dynasty, I'd let them have it

And, the 49ers won 4 out of 9 titles in the 1980s.  So, they're right there with the Steelers, albeit it took them three more seasons.

But the Chiefs?  Now?  They're the Big Ben Steelers if they win.
The Big Ben Steelers missed the playoffs 2 years in between the SB appearances and lost in the WC round another year (they also switched coaches).  There is a significant difference between that and the Chiefs.  The Chiefs have been the best team in the conference for 5 years in a row (they've hosted all 5 AFC CC in that span) and either made the SB or lost in overtime in the CC.

That is just a different level of success than the other "teams" to win 2 SB's in a 5 year period.   

Do we judge dynasties based upon what round they lost in the playoffs now?  Can we talk about the Buffalo Bills dynasty, then?

Total aside but Marv Levy lives near me.  See him out & about sometimes.  Still kicking in his 90s. Grew up and went to high school here. Coached the USFL Chicago Blitz before going to Buffalo.  There's a "Marv Levy Way" about 4 blocks from me in Lincoln Park.   Believe he's the oldest living HOFer now.


2010 CB Historical Draft - Best Overall Team

Re: If the Chiefs win the SB are they a dynasty?
« Reply #26 on: February 10, 2023, 01:11:53 PM »

Online rocknrollforyoursoul

  • Satch Sanders
  • *********
  • Posts: 9669
  • Tommy Points: 325
I think the baseline factor in determining a dynasty has to be titles, because, in my mind at least, "dynasty" connotes being No. 1.

The Bills made it to four straight Super Bowls but lost all four, so they were a very good team during that stretch, but not once did they prove themselves the best, so that can't be a dynasty period.

And even in the age of free agency, where things change a lot and often, I still think there has to be at least three titles in order to be a dynasty—that could be three straight titles, or three titles in, say, four or five years.

So even with a Chiefs win this week, they won't be a dynasty, IMO. I'd call them a mini-dynasty, with the potential to achieve "dynasty" status in the next couple years.
"There are two kinds of people: those who say to God, 'Thy will be done,' and those to whom God says, 'All right, then, have it your way.'"

"You don't have a soul. You are a Soul. You have a body."

— C.S. Lewis

Re: If the Chiefs win the SB are they a dynasty?
« Reply #27 on: February 12, 2023, 09:14:09 PM »

Offline GreenlyGreeny

  • NCE
  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2116
  • Tommy Points: 94
Some history.

Dolphins (1970s) - 2 SB wins in 3 seasons (other season was a lose in SB)

Cowboys (1970s) - 2 SB wins in 8 seasons with 2 SB losses also

Raiders (1970s-1980s)  - 3 SB wins in 8 seasons. 

Giants (1980s-1990s)  - 2 SB wins in 5 seasons.

Redskins (1980s-1990s) - 3 SB wins in 10 seasons.

Broncos (1990s) - 2 SB wins in 2 seasons.

Giants (2000s-2010) - 2 SB wins in 5 seasons

Steelers (2000s-2010s) - 2 SB wins in 6 seasons with 1 SB loss also.

Would you consider any of these dynasties?

No. I’d say the 49ers with Montana was the last major dynasty team, but even that is kind of bifurcated by Montana and Ronnie Lott being the only major common elements in all four wins. Steelers of the ‘70s is an indisputable dynasty. No dynasties in the 1990s, but the Cowboys came close and probably would have been one had Jimmy Johnson not been fired stupidly by Jerry Jones. Pats had the two separate sort of mini-dynasties of the 2000s and 2010s by virtue of volume of Super Bowl appearances and three wins each go. Or one can make the argument it was the Brady/Belichick dynasty of the 2000s/2010s. To be a dynasty, the Chiefs need to win this one and one or two more before the end of the decade.

Unlike basketball and hockey, achieving a dynasty is really tough in football and baseball. Probably due to the quantity of players on teams.
« Last Edit: February 12, 2023, 09:33:34 PM by GreenlyGreeny »

Re: If the Chiefs win the SB are they a dynasty?
« Reply #28 on: February 12, 2023, 09:34:17 PM »

Offline GreenlyGreeny

  • NCE
  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2116
  • Tommy Points: 94
Come on now.  No, they weren't.

To me, a dynasty involves at least four SB wins.  I consider a "mini-dynasty" to include three titles in a short period of time, like six years.

Two titles?  Nope, unless we're ready to talk about the Eli Manning Giants dynasty.
the NFL is not the same as the other sports.  No "team" has won 4 Super Bowl since the Steelers won 4 in 6 years in the 70's.  I mean the Patriots had 10 years between the 3rd and 4th title, that can't count as a continuation and thereby the Patriots weren't even a dynasty by that definition (which is obviously a strange argument to make).

And the Giants may have won 2 SB's in 5 seasons, but they missed the playoffs twice and lost in the divisional round the 3 years in between.  Not anywhere near the same thing as the Chiefs.

The Pats are interesting.  I'd say they were two mini-dynasties separated by a decade.  If somebody wants to argue that two mini-dynasties equals one full dynasty, I'd let them have it

And, the 49ers won 4 out of 9 titles in the 1980s.  So, they're right there with the Steelers, albeit it took them three more seasons.

But the Chiefs?  Now?  They're the Big Ben Steelers if they win.
The Big Ben Steelers missed the playoffs 2 years in between the SB appearances and lost in the WC round another year (they also switched coaches).  There is a significant difference between that and the Chiefs.  The Chiefs have been the best team in the conference for 5 years in a row (they've hosted all 5 AFC CC in that span) and either made the SB or lost in overtime in the CC.

That is just a different level of success than the other "teams" to win 2 SB's in a 5 year period.   

Do we judge dynasties based upon what round they lost in the playoffs now?  Can we talk about the Buffalo Bills dynasty, then?

Total aside but Marv Levy lives near me.  See him out & about sometimes.  Still kicking in his 90s. Grew up and went to high school here. Coached the USFL Chicago Blitz before going to Buffalo.  There's a "Marv Levy Way" about 4 blocks from me in Lincoln Park.   Believe he's the oldest living HOFer now.

Wow. That’s super cool.

Re: If the Chiefs win the SB are they a dynasty?
« Reply #29 on: February 12, 2023, 10:18:00 PM »

Offline PAOBoston

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8098
  • Tommy Points: 533
I think the Pats had one dynasty.  It lasted 18 years and produced 6 SB wins, 9 appearances. 18 winning seasons, however many AFC title games and division titles.

I think a definition of dynasty might help the discussion.   

I'll give it a shot for NFL...
A lengthy and distinct period of success in which a team is unquestionably the overall best or most dominant.      Open to better definitions.
   


I would suggest that for football that "lengthy period" could be as short as 3 seasons.   

Yes, I think the Chiefs are a dynasty if they win on Sunday.
This is how I feel. The Chiefs have been the cream of the crop in the nfl for the last 5 years.