We can’t seem to stop hearing about the Super Bowl. The game, the ending, the seemingly bonehead idea to pass instead of run, Deflate-gate, Marshawn Lynch, Left Shark, and tearjerker commercials.
But there’s one thing one which I must comment: the Pats’ place among football’s great dynasties.
The thing about dynasties is that there’s no real official definition of what exactly one is. Is it two Super Bowl wins in a row? Three in five years? Seven great years in a row but only one title? These are legitimate questions.
I’m not one to toss about the word dynasty casually. Most troubling to me about this particular case is the length of time: 14 years. Fourteen years of good football is great. But it was three Super Bowl wins in four years, then a decade before the next one. That’s nine years of someone else holding up that trophy and going to Disney World.
In the era of great player turnover, can we even call it the same team? Yes, I understand it’s Brady and Belichick. But other than Brady, can you name one player on both the 2004 Patriots and the 2014 team? There’s only one: Vince Wilfork, a rookie in 2004 and hardly a household name.
Were the Pats from 2001-2004 a dynasty? Three Super Bowls in four years is pretty damn good. Seems to me though a bit too short to be a dynasty. And adding a fourth a decade later, with different players and assistant coaches? Well, that might be too long to be dynastic. Hmm.
Were the Yankees of 1996-2000 a dynasty? Four World Series wins in five years? Pretty good if you ask me. How about when they tacked on a fifth nine years later with a new manager and (mostly) different players? I wouldn’t call the whole era dynastic, and the Yanks at least had a “core” (I use the term with purpose) of consistent players. If the Patriots are the New York Yankees of football (other teams and fans hate them for their money and success), can we give them the benefit of what we deny the Bronx Bombers? And let’s not forget, the Pats were half a yard from losing three Super Bowls in a row.
I guess that’s why we don’t put an official definition on “dynasty.”