Which crap team will win a SB in the next decade?

Mutant June 17th 2011, 11:11 am

"Crap" is a little harsh but there's a damn text limit for thread titles so I had to shorten it a little.

Basically, I'm asking who is the most likely out of the uh...less successful teams to win a Super Bowl before the end of the decade (the Year 2020 or Super Bowl 53 if my math is right...)

Reason I ask this is because I have little joke with my Lions fan friend that the Lions will win the Super Bowl in 2016. It started awhile ago and the more that Matt Millen's era is cleansed from the annals of Lions lore, the more I think it's likely. They have a good young team who are getting better every year.

I only really included teams who haven't had much success for years (Lions, Browns) or ones who have recently become shit after brief flashes of greatness (Panthers, Cardinals, Rams).

FUCK, posted too early.

Besides the Lions, I really think my Cards can do it.

I know that's a bit of a homer choice but we did it once before although that was with a guy called Kurt Warner who had previous success of taking a team to the SB (and winning). We're in the NFC West and even with Bradders it's still a pretty piss-poor although by 2016 it could resemble the new NFC West lots of young talent at these teams who'd be hitting their primes in a few years. All we need is a half decent QB.

The Rams are also legit contenders because they've finally got a franchise QB. They just need some molding and development

Chiefs seem to be going ion the right direction too.

SteelersJMB June 17th 2011, 11:23 am

Hmm this is kinda tough just because its about a 9 year window that they have to win the Super Bowl, some of those teams are just a year or two from being a playoff team, a few others are gonna take the greater part of the decade to become a playoff team.

But out of the choices I would choose Vikings or Raiders

Mutant June 17th 2011, 11:37 am

Maybe it was a bit OTT....

My thinking is that if teams are being run well NOW with good young talent coming in, there's no reason why they can't contend in a few years.

I'm not expecting you to time travel and steal a Gray's Sports Almac to see who wins the next 9 SB's.

Just thought it might be an interesting debate.

HurpDurpHurray June 17th 2011, 11:47 am

Clearly the Bengals. AJ Green, All-star until he retires! Doesn't even matter if that ginger plays QB for us, AJ's gonna lead this team to multiple Super Bowl victories!

SteelersJMB June 17th 2011, 12:23 pm

Mutant wrote:Maybe it was a bit OTT....

My thinking is that if teams are being run well NOW with good young talent coming in, there's no reason why they can't contend in a few years.

I'm not expecting you to time travel and steal a Gray's Sports Almac to see who wins the next 9 SB's.

Just thought it might be an interesting debate.

Yeah I know, I'll stick with Vikes and Oak.

Pintsizedjark June 17th 2011, 12:31 pm

The Vikings....all they need is a decent QB..we all saw what happened with Favre at the helm in 2009.

SteelersJMB June 17th 2011, 12:51 pm

Need a lil help on defense, especially the D-line and secondary.

KWicK78 June 17th 2011, 1:10 pm

Yeah the Vikings true form got exposed last year. Cedric Griffin can't cover, Winfield and Pat Williams are only getting older. They have no QB, and may only have one legitimate threat at WR in Harvin.

Not impressive.

I'm going with Chiefs. They need to get a little tougher on both sides, but they showed potential with a division title.

Soarindude02 June 17th 2011, 1:46 pm

Great Topic I must say, one of the most interesting ones I have seen in a while! (Why did you not put the Bucs on here? They're pretty much on the same page as the Lions.)

I voted for Detroit and Seattle. Detriot is the common pick because of how much potential is there. Everybody knows that this team is two-three years tops from exploding into the SuperBowl. 2013, 2014, etc

Seattle has a great coach (<3), a good running game, a Young and amazing Offensive Line (O-Line is the most important postion on the offense) and has some good Defensive guys that should contribute. I can see them in the SB in years 2015, 2016, etc.

MaddMatter June 17th 2011, 1:51 pm

Lions Bucs Rams

Those 3 "crap" teams are going to be contending each year in the playoffs I think. All 3 have young coaches/ QB's and are slowly building the talent level all around.

usmfan45 June 17th 2011, 2:05 pm

That's a good topic, and a hard one to pick. I think the Lions and the Bengals would be my second choice, but I have to go with Kansas City. They've drafted very well in recent years, if Matt Cassel can find success and their offense can start clicking the way it very well could. Then I think they could have a shot to make a playoff run THIS year. (If the lockout ends) Their defense is mediocre, but if they can hold teams to 20 ppg, I could see them pulling off a winning record and maybe even winning a playoff game. They need another good draft or two before I start screaming superbowl though.

MaddMatter June 17th 2011, 2:14 pm

@USM: KC worries me because of one name, Charlie Wiess. He's gone. I think he was a MAJOR part in that offense last year.

usmfan45 June 17th 2011, 2:16 pm

MaddMatt wrote:@USM: KC worries me because of one name, Charlie Wiess. He's gone. I think he was a MAJOR part in that offense last year.

Good point. Although, for Kansas City's sake I hope his assistants took notes.

SteelersJMB June 17th 2011, 2:52 pm

Soarindude02 wrote:Great Topic I must say, one of the most interesting ones I have seen in a while! (Why did you not put the Bucs on here? They're pretty much on the same page as the Lions.)

I voted for Detroit and Seattle. Detriot is the common pick because of how much potential is there. Everybody knows that this team is two-three years tops from exploding into the SuperBowl. 2013, 2014, etc

Seattle has a great coach (<3), a good running game, a Young and amazing Offensive Line (O-Line is the most important postion on the offense) and has some good Defensive guys that should contribute. I can see them in the SB in years 2015, 2016, etc.

Better established team is one reason I wouldn't put the Bucs on that team, not too long ago were they in the playoffs and although its a different coach and QB there are still some pretty good pieces there, they do drop a lot since Talib probably isn't going to be there.
I seriously don't buy into the Lions hype, playoffs? Not likely, not really because of them(other then their glass QB) but also because of the talent and how deep the rest of the NFC is. Super Bowl? Get outta hear, they couldn't match up to any of the "top dogs" in the AFC imo or even some NFC powerhouses GOING INTO next year, GB and Falcons are teams that come to mind.

Seattle will be improving but maybe they can make playoffs again, depending on how SF does because they are the true team that I believe will come back to the playoffs before Seattle and even the Lions.

usmfan45 June 17th 2011, 2:54 pm

SteelersJMB wrote:
Soarindude02 wrote:Great Topic I must say, one of the most interesting ones I have seen in a while! (Why did you not put the Bucs on here? They're pretty much on the same page as the Lions.)

I voted for Detroit and Seattle. Detriot is the common pick because of how much potential is there. Everybody knows that this team is two-three years tops from exploding into the SuperBowl. 2013, 2014, etc

Seattle has a great coach (<3), a good running game, a Young and amazing Offensive Line (O-Line is the most important postion on the offense) and has some good Defensive guys that should contribute. I can see them in the SB in years 2015, 2016, etc.

If we're going to argue the Bucs because they were in the playoffs a few years ago... Why is the Vikings on there?

Better established team is one reason I wouldn't put the Bucs on that team, not too long ago were they in the playoffs and although its a different coach and QB there are still some pretty good pieces there, they do drop a lot since Talib probably isn't going to be there.
I seriously don't buy into the Lions hype, playoffs? Not likely, not really because of them(other then their glass QB) but also because of the talent and how deep the rest of the NFC is. Super Bowl? Get outta hear, they couldn't match up to any of the "top dogs" in the AFC imo or even some NFC powerhouses GOING INTO next year, GB and Falcons are teams that come to mind.

Seattle will be improving but maybe they can make playoffs again, depending on how SF does because they are the true team that I believe will come back to the playoffs before Seattle and even the Lions.

SteelersJMB June 17th 2011, 3:08 pm

Lol Quote Fail^

I saw what you posted though so I'll reply to it here.

Well The Bucs are a more established team then the Vikings as well, really only because of Freeman if Ponder turns out to be a legitamate(sp?) QB in the NFL then they won't be a "crap" team that much longer, not too long ago were we talking about Vikes getting Mcnabb and they'd be a contender once again, I believe Ponder will be "the" guy for that team

usmfan45 June 17th 2011, 3:16 pm

SteelersJMB wrote:Lol Quote Fail^

I saw what you posted though so I'll reply to it here.

Well The Bucs are a more established team then the Vikings as well, really only because of Freeman if Ponder turns out to be a legitamate(sp?) QB in the NFL then they won't be a "crap" team that much longer, not too long ago were we talking about Vikes getting Mcnabb and they'd be a contender once again, I believe Ponder will be "the" guy for that team

That's up for discussion... Yes, Tampa Bay has Freeman, but when you look all the way across the board the Vikings have to be more established. They were in the NFC Championship two years ago. The biggest thing they don't have now that they had then is Brett Farve and Chester Taylor. They still have one of the league's best defenses, and if they can find a quarterback who will put up mediocre numbers they could still have a shot at winning their division. They'll give Adrian Peterson more of a role this year too, whereas when Farve was quarterback they tended to throw it more. Tampa is a good football team, but they don't have the pieces yet to go in a division race with New Orleans and Atlanta. Tampa isn't far away, but to say they're closer than Minnesota is kind of a stretch.

SteelersJMB June 17th 2011, 3:42 pm

usmfan45 wrote:
SteelersJMB wrote:Lol Quote Fail^

I saw what you posted though so I'll reply to it here.

Well The Bucs are a more established team then the Vikings as well, really only because of Freeman if Ponder turns out to be a legitamate(sp?) QB in the NFL then they won't be a "crap" team that much longer, not too long ago were we talking about Vikes getting Mcnabb and they'd be a contender once again, I believe Ponder will be "the" guy for that team

That's up for discussion... Yes, Tampa Bay has Freeman, but when you look all the way across the board the Vikings have to be more established. They were in the NFC Championship two years ago. The biggest thing they don't have now that they had then is Brett Farve and Chester Taylor. They still have one of the league's best defenses, and if they can find a quarterback who will put up mediocre numbers they could still have a shot at winning their division. They'll give Adrian Peterson more of a role this year too, whereas when Farve was quarterback they tended to throw it more. Tampa is a good football team, but they don't have the pieces yet to go in a division race with New Orleans and Atlanta. Tampa isn't far away, but to say they're closer than Minnesota is kind of a stretch.

That is true but mostly was due to Favre being there and being healthy, look at last season when he just looked pathetic at times.
Not only are you going back a step because you don't have a franchise QB right now, I want Ponder to be "the" guy but he has to prove it first.
A QB will not be able to help them beat the Packers twice a year, because that's what they're going to have to do, GB has too many weapons as opposed to Minny who doesn't have the secondary to contain all of them, maybe if they can generate a pass rush to disrupt Rodgers, but then he can beat you with his feet.

What do you mean "more of a role" He's their top recieving back, their best offensive weapon, franchise RB, what else can he possible do for them.
Maybe he'll get more touches but you still need to have another back to help take the load off, and I really don't think Gerhart(sp?) is that guy.
Tampa Bay may have a harder and touger division but Vikes do as well, going against Chi and GB. and I guess the Lions as well.

usmfan45 June 17th 2011, 4:07 pm

SteelersJMB wrote:
usmfan45 wrote:
SteelersJMB wrote:Lol Quote Fail^

I saw what you posted though so I'll reply to it here.

Well The Bucs are a more established team then the Vikings as well, really only because of Freeman if Ponder turns out to be a legitamate(sp?) QB in the NFL then they won't be a "crap" team that much longer, not too long ago were we talking about Vikes getting Mcnabb and they'd be a contender once again, I believe Ponder will be "the" guy for that team

That's up for discussion... Yes, Tampa Bay has Freeman, but when you look all the way across the board the Vikings have to be more established. They were in the NFC Championship two years ago. The biggest thing they don't have now that they had then is Brett Farve and Chester Taylor. They still have one of the league's best defenses, and if they can find a quarterback who will put up mediocre numbers they could still have a shot at winning their division. They'll give Adrian Peterson more of a role this year too, whereas when Farve was quarterback they tended to throw it more. Tampa is a good football team, but they don't have the pieces yet to go in a division race with New Orleans and Atlanta. Tampa isn't far away, but to say they're closer than Minnesota is kind of a stretch.

That is true but mostly was due to Favre being there and being healthy, look at last season when he just looked pathetic at times.
Not only are you going back a step because you don't have a franchise QB right now, I want Ponder to be "the" guy but he has to prove it first.
A QB will not be able to help them beat the Packers twice a year, because that's what they're going to have to do, GB has too many weapons as opposed to Minny who doesn't have the secondary to contain all of them, maybe if they can generate a pass rush to disrupt Rodgers, but then he can beat you with his feet.

What do you mean "more of a role" He's their top recieving back, their best offensive weapon, franchise RB, what else can he possible do for them.
Maybe he'll get more touches but you still need to have another back to help take the load off, and I really don't think Gerhart(sp?) is that guy.
Tampa Bay may have a harder and touger division but Vikes do as well, going against Chi and GB. and I guess the Lions as well.

I don't really think Green Bay is that much better than the Vikings honestly. The Packers can be great one year and horrible the next, and I just don't see the Packers having a spectacular year.
I mean he'll have more touches, and Gerhart can be that guy at times. Adrian peterson has the skills to be able to take the increased load, he just has to hold onto the football.

SteelersJMB June 17th 2011, 4:15 pm

Green Bay doesn't have to have a spectacular year in order to beat the Vikings, they just need to stop AP, easier said then done but is a lot easier if they don't have a good QB by the time they play and then just go after the QB.

When you have a 3rd down back or a rotating back, he can't be "that guy AT TIMES" he has to do it every time he's called upon, otherwise he won't be on the team anymore, or just stuck to playing special teams.

Peterson can no doubt take more carries but if they were to make it to the playoffs without a first round bye, then what happens? he's supposed to get the ball 20 or more times for 19 straight weeks? That'll wear a guy out in a heart beat.

usmfan45 June 17th 2011, 4:25 pm

SteelersJMB wrote:Green Bay doesn't have to have a spectacular year in order to beat the Vikings, they just need to stop AP, easier said then done but is a lot easier if they don't have a good QB by the time they play and then just go after the QB.

When you have a 3rd down back or a rotating back, he can't be "that guy AT TIMES" he has to do it every time he's called upon, otherwise he won't be on the team anymore, or just stuck to playing special teams.

Peterson can no doubt take more carries but if they were to make it to the playoffs without a first round bye, then what happens? he's supposed to get the ball 20 or more times for 19 straight weeks? That'll wear a guy out in a heart beat.

You do make good points, and some of which I can't argue with. I'm saying that as it stands today, the Vikings are a better team than the Bucs. When you put the two head to head. I don't think either one is a "crap" team, but Minneasota doesn't deserve that title YET. You understand what I'm trying to say?

tubbs51 June 17th 2011, 8:45 pm

Seahawks... cause.... well... we were the last ones there out of these teams Very Happy

Like Sorin Said, we have a great Head Coach, a possibly great young offensive line, a solid Defense led by our great Linebacking Corps with Tatupu, Hawthorne, and Curry, a young great FS in Earl Thomas, a potentially great SS in Kam Chancellor, a potentially great CB in Walter Thurmond. Our Defensive line is solid, Chris Clemons had 11.5 sacks last year and Red Bryant was a run stopping machine. Brandon Mebane is one of the most underrated DTs in the game.

Pete Carroll is an amazing motivational coach that can draw extraordinary things from ordinary players. Plus the Seahawks have one of the best owners in the league, a quiet but involved and RICH Paul Allen Very Happy

Soarindude02 June 17th 2011, 9:05 pm

tubbs51 wrote:

Pete Carroll is an amazing motivational coach that can draw extraordinary things from ordinary players.

<3

JermikesHere June 17th 2011, 9:36 pm

I picked the Rams because they have the best quarterback imo.

tubbs51 June 17th 2011, 10:04 pm

JermikesHere wrote:I picked the Rams because they have the best quarterback imo.

Well by this time next year you'll say that about Seattle cause we'll have Andrew Luck Razz

Sponsored content

Which crap team will win a SB in the next decade?

Which of these teams are more likely to win a Super Bowl before the end of the decade [multi-choice]

Which crap team will win a SB in the next decade?

Re: Which crap team will win a SB in the next decade?

Re: Which crap team will win a SB in the next decade?

Re: Which crap team will win a SB in the next decade?

Re: Which crap team will win a SB in the next decade?

Re: Which crap team will win a SB in the next decade?

Re: Which crap team will win a SB in the next decade?

Re: Which crap team will win a SB in the next decade?

Re: Which crap team will win a SB in the next decade?

Re: Which crap team will win a SB in the next decade?

Re: Which crap team will win a SB in the next decade?

Re: Which crap team will win a SB in the next decade?

Re: Which crap team will win a SB in the next decade?

Re: Which crap team will win a SB in the next decade?

Re: Which crap team will win a SB in the next decade?

Re: Which crap team will win a SB in the next decade?

Re: Which crap team will win a SB in the next decade?

Re: Which crap team will win a SB in the next decade?

Re: Which crap team will win a SB in the next decade?

Re: Which crap team will win a SB in the next decade?

Re: Which crap team will win a SB in the next decade?

Re: Which crap team will win a SB in the next decade?

Re: Which crap team will win a SB in the next decade?

Re: Which crap team will win a SB in the next decade?

Re: Which crap team will win a SB in the next decade?

Re: Which crap team will win a SB in the next decade?