[bostonsports1]

I'm not trying to offend you but under this logic (since they haven't won the SB since they were caught cheating) would you say the Bills teams in the 90's, that went to the SB 4 times in a row and never won one, were a dominating team?

Yes- I would agree with uwash, that team was dominate for sure. I think the issue is you must first define what "dominate" means. I think thats where most of us are not seeing eye to eye. A dominate team does not need to win the sb each year, they just need to be constantly good, make the playoffs, have a winning record, be know by others as a difficult opponent etc etc

[Marinocollector]

Wow... there is some REALLY blind statements in this thread. How can 16 losses in 5 years NOT be dominant? THATS 64 WINS!!!!! The closest team to the Patriots are the Packers with 25 loses. Or 55 wins. Even if you take away the perfect season in 2007, the Patriots are 48-16, the Packers are 42-22. HUGE difference in 1.5 more wins a year!

Brady has had the BEST winning percentage ALL TIME. How can his team NOT be dominant? 9-7 was the only non-10 win year he had (when healthy) and THAT WAS 2002!!!! Do you guys realize how difficult a dynasty like this is to obtain? Especially in the free agent era?

The record of the Patriots since their last Super Bowl, 7 seasons ago.... 86 - 26
The record of the Cowboys, the last 3 Super Bowl team, 7 years after the last win... 49 - 63

Remember, the playoffs are 1 and done. The Giants were NOT the best team in the NFC last year, let alone the league. The difference was the BEST team was rusty against the Giants and beat themselves. The Packers should have EASILY won against all the holes in that secondary, Rodgers and his WRs were just a half second off all game. The Super Bowl winner is nothing more than the BEST TEAM AT THE PLAYOFFS. Take it or leave it.

Oh, and it took a frickin MIRACLE at the end of the first Giants lost for the Patriots to lose, and even then they could have won if they played smarter at the end of the game.

[nolan5000]

Seriously doubt they are still "spying" on people as you say. And you are completely wrong about 2007, the story broke on week 1 of that season, so there is no chance they were still doing it then. Please look up the facts on the whole situation and you will see what really happened. In a nutshell prior to 2006-2007 ALL teams(confirmed by many coaches) would constantly film the other teams sideline during games. Then at some point prior to that Goodell sent a memo to the league saying to stop. Patriots did not and in the first week in 2007 the story broke and fines/punishment came down later. All they were ever caught doing was filming the other teams sidelines after being told not to, something many teams around the league did prior to the memo, all the garbage about filming walkthroughs is media trash and has no proof at all. Look at the facts before making stuff up, their record after the first week of 2007 proves they are still one of the best teams in the league.

---

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/10612...on-spygate

Great read on spygate, I am sure most of you guys won't read it as you love to hate on the Pats, but for those who care to base stuff on facts not media trash, there you go.

I don't read the bleacher report b/c it causes harm to computers. Their website has spyware attached to it.

[giantfan270]

Wow... there is some REALLY blind statements in this thread. How can 16 losses in 5 years NOT be dominant? THATS 64 WINS!!!!! The closest team to the Patriots are the Packers with 25 loses. Or 55 wins. Even if you take away the perfect season in 2007, the Patriots are 48-16, the Packers are 42-22. HUGE difference in 1.5 more wins a year!

Brady has had the BEST winning percentage ALL TIME. How can his team NOT be dominant? 9-7 was the only non-10 win year he had (when healthy) and THAT WAS 2002!!!! Do you guys realize how difficult a dynasty like this is to obtain? Especially in the free agent era?

The record of the Patriots since their last Super Bowl, 7 seasons ago.... 86 - 26
The record of the Cowboys, the last 3 Super Bowl team, 7 years after the last win... 49 - 63

Remember, the playoffs are 1 and done. The Giants were NOT the best team in the NFC last year, let alone the league. The difference was the BEST team was rusty against the Giants and beat themselves. The Packers should have EASILY won against all the holes in that secondary, Rodgers and his WRs were just a half second off all game. The Super Bowl winner is nothing more than the BEST TEAM AT THE PLAYOFFS. Take it or leave it.

Oh, and it took a frickin MIRACLE at the end of the first Giants lost for the Patriots to lose, and even then they could have won if they played smarter at the end of the game.

Your so confused.....The best team won the Super Bowl. It always does. That's why we call them Champions. The ONLY team that had what it took to beat the Giants in the playoff this year was New Orleans at home, but thanks to the 49ers, that never happened. Don't over think it. The best team won, as usual. Simple as that.

[bselje]

Wow... there is some REALLY blind statements in this thread. How can 16 losses in 5 years NOT be dominant? THATS 64 WINS!!!!! The closest team to the Patriots are the Packers with 25 loses. Or 55 wins. Even if you take away the perfect season in 2007, the Patriots are 48-16, the Packers are 42-22. HUGE difference in 1.5 more wins a year!

Brady has had the BEST winning percentage ALL TIME. How can his team NOT be dominant? 9-7 was the only non-10 win year he had (when healthy) and THAT WAS 2002!!!! Do you guys realize how difficult a dynasty like this is to obtain? Especially in the free agent era?

The record of the Patriots since their last Super Bowl, 7 seasons ago.... 86 - 26
The record of the Cowboys, the last 3 Super Bowl team, 7 years after the last win... 49 - 63

Remember, the playoffs are 1 and done. The Giants were NOT the best team in the NFC last year, let alone the league. The difference was the BEST team was rusty against the Giants and beat themselves. The Packers should have EASILY won against all the holes in that secondary, Rodgers and his WRs were just a half second off all game. The Super Bowl winner is nothing more than the BEST TEAM AT THE PLAYOFFS. Take it or leave it.

Oh, and it took a frickin MIRACLE at the end of the first Giants lost for the Patriots to lose, and even then they could have won if they played smarter at the end of the game.

Do you work for the BCS?