'88 Forty Niners VS '10 Packers
Posted: Tue Jan 10, 2023 7:53 pm
The two KINGS of anti-paper-tiger-hood!
Two 10-6 teams that ended up winning a Lombardi.
Now, upon first glance, you'd think SF is the obvious answer! And maybe it is. We're talking the beef of the '80s Forty Niners Dynasty! And you can't help but to immediately think of Next Year's installment! "Next year's" version for GB was that 15-1 "video game" paper-tiger! The year before? A 'good' 11-5 team who got swept by the Vikings as well as going one-and-done vs Zona. For SF, 'last year' was a best-record 13-2 though, yeah, going one-and-done as well like '11 Pack (but at least showed more championship-caliber balance through it all). Montana, Rice, Craig, that insanely historically underrated Lott/Haley-led D of theirs (DC'd by the most-underrated DC himself in Seifert - better than Buddy and Wade, IMO)! Bill Walsh vs...Mike McCarthy??? I've forever opined that the '89 Forty Niners truly began when the actual calendar-year of 1989 began ('88 playoffs began)!
But in addition to just finding out (didn't even know it at the time despite being a tad pessimistic anyway for the 'Burgh going into the event) the Pack being a 3-pt favorite going into SBXLV, I just was reminded that the '10 Packers were NEVER trailing by more than 7 points at ANY point during that season!! Carth HAS to get some big credit for that whatever you may say about him as a coach, good or bad. How did Mike possibly perform that?? Possibly (possibly) currently staring down the barrel of a one-and-done to an 8-9 team (albeit an arguable G.O.A.T. QB being at helm for that very opposition), what caused him to not be that great of a HC in all the years since?
Simply judging each team within the very confines of '88 and '10 repectively...who do you think is best? Yes, I likely will still pick the former without even knowing that I'm likely, subconsciously, breaking the rules. I mean we're talking a spoke in a Legendary Dynasty! But do try thinking of the '88 Forty Niners as a 'one-Lombardi-wonder' as well in this exercise, if possible.
Two 10-6 teams that ended up winning a Lombardi.
Now, upon first glance, you'd think SF is the obvious answer! And maybe it is. We're talking the beef of the '80s Forty Niners Dynasty! And you can't help but to immediately think of Next Year's installment! "Next year's" version for GB was that 15-1 "video game" paper-tiger! The year before? A 'good' 11-5 team who got swept by the Vikings as well as going one-and-done vs Zona. For SF, 'last year' was a best-record 13-2 though, yeah, going one-and-done as well like '11 Pack (but at least showed more championship-caliber balance through it all). Montana, Rice, Craig, that insanely historically underrated Lott/Haley-led D of theirs (DC'd by the most-underrated DC himself in Seifert - better than Buddy and Wade, IMO)! Bill Walsh vs...Mike McCarthy??? I've forever opined that the '89 Forty Niners truly began when the actual calendar-year of 1989 began ('88 playoffs began)!
But in addition to just finding out (didn't even know it at the time despite being a tad pessimistic anyway for the 'Burgh going into the event) the Pack being a 3-pt favorite going into SBXLV, I just was reminded that the '10 Packers were NEVER trailing by more than 7 points at ANY point during that season!! Carth HAS to get some big credit for that whatever you may say about him as a coach, good or bad. How did Mike possibly perform that?? Possibly (possibly) currently staring down the barrel of a one-and-done to an 8-9 team (albeit an arguable G.O.A.T. QB being at helm for that very opposition), what caused him to not be that great of a HC in all the years since?
Simply judging each team within the very confines of '88 and '10 repectively...who do you think is best? Yes, I likely will still pick the former without even knowing that I'm likely, subconsciously, breaking the rules. I mean we're talking a spoke in a Legendary Dynasty! But do try thinking of the '88 Forty Niners as a 'one-Lombardi-wonder' as well in this exercise, if possible.