NFL Throwback YouTube channel ranks every Super Bowl winner, and loser in two seperate videos.

[Ness]

Winners:

https://youtu.be/XVer3IyR_mQ?si=KQfGEwrFIH7vGxsW

Losers:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uU5tO_ykPrs

For winners I'm surprised the '76 Raiders made it as high as 5th. Over teams like the '91 Redskins, and '89 49ers.
They actually had the '94 49ers above '89, which I can't get behind, but it's just an opinion.

[SeahawkFever]

Saw those videos. Interesting ranking.

On the list related to the winners, I would say the 86 Giants should have been a few spots higher (more like 15th).
I was glad to see the 69 Vikings pretty high on the Super Bowl losers list. That is one of the few teams to finish number one on both sides of the ball.

Just to say a couple thoughts on it.

[Ness]

Saw those videos. Interesting ranking.

On the list related to the winners, I would say the 86 Giants should have been a few spots higher (more like 15th).
I was glad to see the 69 Vikings pretty high on the Super Bowl losers list. That is one of the few teams to finish number one on both sides of the ball.

Just to say a couple thoughts on it.

It was nice to see that pretty much all of the Vikings teams were highly ranked. Still hard to believe they went 0-4 in those contests. I could see it with the Bills, but those Vikings teams' should have had at least won ring. Especially the '69, and '75 squads. Oh well.

[Brian wolf]

Vikings best year was 1973 but the Dolphins took their soul, they never recovered during the 70s ...

[SeahawkFever]

Vikings best year was 1973 but the Dolphins took their soul, they never recovered during the 70s ...

Vikings were really good in 73. Though, the 74 team arguably played a closer Super Bowl against Pittsburgh than the 73 team did against Miami.

Those two years they played well for themselves either way.

[SeahawkFever]

Vikings best year was 1973 but the Dolphins took their soul, they never recovered during the 70s ...

Vikings were really good in 73. Though, the 74 team arguably played a closer Super Bowl against Pittsburgh than the 73 team did against Miami.
Those two years they played well for themselves either way.

Also, no knock on Joe Kapp (who had a solid 1969 season in my opinion), but if Fran Tarkenton was hypothetically on the Vikings of 1969, 70, and 71, then that probably could've been an even better team than any of their teams were in reality. The defense was still excellent from 73-76, but it was otherworldly from 1969-71 which perfectly coincides with Tarkenton's last three years in New York.

At least that's something I would argue.

[Bryan]

Vikings were really good in 73. Though, the 74 team arguably played a closer Super Bowl against Pittsburgh than the 73 team did against Miami.

I'm not disagreeing with you, as the Vikes theoretically had "a chance" to win SB IX with the score 9-6 in the 4th (as opposed to theoretically having "no chance" to beat the Dolphins with the score 24-0 in the 4th). But....

I think it shows how much Bobby Walden/Roy Gerela messed up the Steelers in SB IX and X. They basically cost Pittsburgh 12 points in SB IX....no small feat considering the teams combined for 22 points. Gerela missed an easy FG, Walden dropped a snap on another close FG attempt, and Walden's blocked punt allowed Minnesota to score their only TD. The Steelers should have won more like 22-0 than 16-6. One thing I find interesting is that the Steelers basically outgained the Vikings 3-to-1 in Super Bowl IX, whereas the Dolphins and Vikings had about the same amount of total yards in SB VIII. I don't think the Vikings were any better in SB IX than SB VIII, they were just luckier.

[74_75_78_79_]

Vikings were really good in 73. Though, the 74 team arguably played a closer Super Bowl against Pittsburgh than the 73 team did against Miami.

I'm not disagreeing with you, as the Vikes theoretically had "a chance" to win SB IX with the score 9-6 in the 4th (as opposed to theoretically having "no chance" to beat the Dolphins with the score 24-0 in the 4th). But....

I think it shows how much Bobby Walden/Roy Gerela messed up the Steelers in SB IX and X. They basically cost Pittsburgh 12 points in SB IX....no small feat considering the teams combined for 22 points. Gerela missed an easy FG, Walden dropped a snap on another close FG attempt, and Walden's blocked punt allowed Minnesota to score their only TD. The Steelers should have won more like 22-0 than 16-6. One thing I find interesting is that the Steelers basically outgained the Vikings 3-to-1 in Super Bowl IX, whereas the Dolphins and Vikings had about the same amount of total yards in SB VIII. I don't think the Vikings were any better in SB IX than SB VIII, they were just luckier.

Exactly!


I watched both countdowns. Here they are for all to see...

Super Bowl winners:

58) 2011 Giants. 9-7
57) 2007 Giants, 10-6
56) 2012 Ravens, 10-6
55) 1980 Raiders, 11-5
54) 1970 Colts, 11-2-1
53) 2015 Broncos, 12-4
52) 2021 Rams, 12-5
51) 2001 Patriots, 11-5
50) 2005 Steelers, 11-5

49) 1988 Forty Niners, 10-6
48) 2023 Chiefs, 11-6
47) 1982 Redskins, 8-1
46) 2020 Buccaneers, 11-5
45) 2006 Colts, 12-4
44) 1987 Redskins, 11-4 (8-4 non-scabs)
43) 1974 Steelers, 10-3-1
42) 2018 Patriots, 11-5
41) 2010 Packers, 10-6
40) 2008 Steelers, 12-4

39) 1967 Packers, 9-4-1
38) 2014 Patriots, 12-4
37) 1990 Giants, 13-3
36) 2002 Buccaneers, 12-4
35) 1983 Raiders. 12-4
34) 2000 Ravens, 12-4
33) 1981 Forty Niners, 13-3
32) 2019 Chiefs, 12-4
31) 1995 Cowboys, 12-4
30) 2022 Chiefs, 14-3

29) 1997 Broncos, 12-4
28) 2017 Eagles, 13-3
27) 2009 Saints, 13-3
26) 1979 Steelers, 12-4
25) 2003 Patriots, 14-2
24) 1968 Jets, 11-3
23) 1993 Cowboys, 12-4
22) 1969 Chiefs, 11-3
21) 1986 Giants, 14-2
20) 1971 Cowboys, 11-3

19) 2016 Patriots, 14-2
18) 1973 Dolphins, 12-2
17) 2004 Patriots, 14-2
16) 2013 Seahawks, 13-3
15) 1992 Cowboys, 13-3
14) 1977 Cowboys, 12-2
13) 1998 Broncos, 14-2
12) 1996 Packers, 13-3
11) 1999 Rams, 13-3

10) 1989 Forty Niners, 14-2
9) 1966 Packers, 12-2
8) 1975 Steelers, 12-2
7) 1994 Forty Niners, 13-3
6) 1991 Redskins, 14-2
5) 1976 Raiders, 13-1
4) 1978 Steelers, 14-2
3) 1984 Forty Niners, 15-1
2) 1985 Bears, 15-1
1) 1972 Dolphins, 14-0

The '07 Giants automatically being ranked as 2nd-worst? I feel there's enough gap between they and that obvious worst 2011 installment. Maybe '07 should be in that position. But if so, not at all by much, Several others can arguably be placed there as well.

The '15 Broncos, '88 Forty Niners, and '74 Steelers are the first three "too low"s which I see. Not saying they should each be moved way too much higher. Denver, with that classic defense, did lack things on the other side of the ball with Peyton, suddenly, no longer in All Pro nor even Pro Bowl form (their divisional-round opponent not being full-strength did help them). And as for '88 SF & '74 Pit? The jury was still out late into each of their respective campaigns before reaching championship-form right on time.

Now the '67 Packers...FAR too low! As we all know, they were actually 9-2-1 going into those final two games with everything already wrapped up!

The team at #10 (whom I've declared for the longest time as the best team since 1980)...yeah.

And though I may see they and at least a couple other SB-winning teams as being better, I'm not going to waste breath nor energy complaining about the 1984 Forty Niners being placed where they're at - if only because I feel that they do indeed get historically overlooked (they went 18-1 first, and just a year prior mind you, and they slammed Marino in their game vs them)!

My Steelers? Just comparing their six installments on this list among each other? As I've opined before - 2005 is better than 2008, 1975 is better than 1978.

Other, non-Steeler, "too low"s and "too high"s on this list worth mention, but I'll close the can of worms for now.

'85 Bears and then the 17-0 Dolphins seems to be the general consensus and I'm fine with that by now whether I agree or not (not). If God told me that they are, indeed, the Top Two Ever, I would fully accept. Both achievements are too monumental to fully invest any real passionate argument over.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Okay, and here are the Runner-Ups...

58) 1979 Rams, 9-7
57) 1995 Chargers, 11-5
56) 1985 Patriots, 11-5
55) 1986 Broncos, 11-5
54) 2000 Giants, 12-4
53) 2003 Panthers, 11-5
52) 2008 Cardinals, 9-7
51) 1987 Broncos, 10-4-1 (8-3-1 non-scab)
50) 2021 Bengals, 10-7

49) 1995 Steelers, 11-5
48) 1996 Patriots, 11-5
47) 1992 Bills, 11-5
46) 1989 Broncos, 11-5
45) 1999 Titans, 13-3
44) 1982 Dolphins, 7-2
43) 2016 Falcons, 11-5
42) 1977 Broncos, 12-2
41) 1993 Bills, 12-4
40) 1981 Bengals, 12-4

39) 2020 Chiefs, 14-2
38) 2018 Rams, 13-3
37) 2002 Raiders, 11-5
36) 1971 Dolphins, 10-3-1
35) 1975 Cowboys, 10-4
34) 1980 Eagles, 12-4
33) 1988 Bengals, 12-4
32) 1972 Redskins, 11-3
31) 1974 Vikings, 10-4
30) 2019 Forty Niners, 13-3

29) 1970 Cowboys, 10-4
28) 1976 Vikings, 11-2-1
27) 2010 Steelers, 12-4
26) 2012 Forty Niners, 11-4-1
25) 2009 Colts, 14-2
24) 2011 Patriots, 13-3
23) 1991 Bills, 13-3
22) 2017 Patriots, 13-3
21) 2023 Forty Niners, 12-5
20) 2006 Bears, 13-3

19) 1966 Chiefs, 11-2-1
18) 2004 Eagles, 13-3
17) 2022 Eagles, 14-3
16) 2013 Broncos, 13-3
15) 2005 Seahawks, 13-3
14) 1998 Falcons, 14-2
13) 1973 Vikings, 12-2
12) 2014 Seahawks, 12-4
11) 1997 Packers, 13-3

10) 2015 Panthers, 15-1
9) 1978 Cowboys, 12-4
8) 1984 Dolphins, 14-2
7) 1967 Raiders, 13-1
6) 1990 Bills, 13-3
5) 1969 Vikings, 12-2
4) 2001 Rams, 14-2
3) 1983 Redskins, 14-2
2) 1968 Colts, 13-1
1) 2007 Patriots, 16-0

Top-two, here, is definitely less an argument than the list of SB-winners. Though '69 Vikings should be '2b' or maybe, maybe, tied with the Colts! And if wind blows just right...tie the unbeaten Pats with the two as well!

The 1979 Los Angeles Rams are NOT the 'worst' SB runner-up of all-time! Once they came around the bend, they were really no less than those other contending teams they were all decade-long (not to mention another solid showing in '80)!

Without opening a big can of worms with this list either, there are quite a few more "too low"s. But I'll mention a few "too high"s for the road...

'98 Dirty Birds at 14th an attention-grabbing notable with me. No, I do respect them! Yes, remember, they were 14-2 (just like Denver)! They being seen as a "one-year-wonder", Anderson missing that FG, John Randle out in OT, losing that convincer two weeks later, etc, makes them a bit overlooked. A very good team they were at the very least, but still I opine that's too high.

And, yes, the '84 Dolphins - after all - weren't "just" Dan (#7 ranked D), but there was some truth to it; just some, relatively-speaking. Not too far down should they be placed on this list IMO, but their given spot is a bit too high with me. Same applies to that '83 team at #3! Each of these two being higher than '78 Cowboys, '97 Packers, '14 Seahawks (and '83 Wash better than '01 Rams)? I disagree with that.

And 2011 Pats? Got to lower them too! 31st in defense and they failed to do what they always did and that's beat Pittsburgh. When the G-men pulled off those upsets at GB and SF ("here we go again"), I seriously picked them to beat the Pats going into that SB. If they wouldn't have, I would have seen THAT as an upset!


But otherwise, with plenty else to say about both, good intriguing conversation-starting lists!

[SeahawkFever]

Vikings were really good in 73. Though, the 74 team arguably played a closer Super Bowl against Pittsburgh than the 73 team did against Miami.

I'm not disagreeing with you, as the Vikes theoretically had "a chance" to win SB IX with the score 9-6 in the 4th (as opposed to theoretically having "no chance" to beat the Dolphins with the score 24-0 in the 4th). But....

I think it shows how much Bobby Walden/Roy Gerela messed up the Steelers in SB IX and X. They basically cost Pittsburgh 12 points in SB IX....no small feat considering the teams combined for 22 points. Gerela missed an easy FG, Walden dropped a snap on another close FG attempt, and Walden's blocked punt allowed Minnesota to score their only TD. The Steelers should have won more like 22-0 than 16-6. One thing I find interesting is that the Steelers basically outgained the Vikings 3-to-1 in Super Bowl IX, whereas the Dolphins and Vikings had about the same amount of total yards in SB VIII. I don't think the Vikings were any better in SB IX than SB VIII, they were just luckier.

That's fair if you want to argue that the 73 squad was a bit better given that.

[SeahawkFever]

Vikings were really good in 73. Though, the 74 team arguably played a closer Super Bowl against Pittsburgh than the 73 team did against Miami.

I'm not disagreeing with you, as the Vikes theoretically had "a chance" to win SB IX with the score 9-6 in the 4th (as opposed to theoretically having "no chance" to beat the Dolphins with the score 24-0 in the 4th). But....

I think it shows how much Bobby Walden/Roy Gerela messed up the Steelers in SB IX and X. They basically cost Pittsburgh 12 points in SB IX....no small feat considering the teams combined for 22 points. Gerela missed an easy FG, Walden dropped a snap on another close FG attempt, and Walden's blocked punt allowed Minnesota to score their only TD. The Steelers should have won more like 22-0 than 16-6. One thing I find interesting is that the Steelers basically outgained the Vikings 3-to-1 in Super Bowl IX, whereas the Dolphins and Vikings had about the same amount of total yards in SB VIII. I don't think the Vikings were any better in SB IX than SB VIII, they were just luckier.

Exactly!


I watched both countdowns. Here they are for all to see...

Super Bowl winners:

58) 2011 Giants. 9-7
57) 2007 Giants, 10-6
56) 2012 Ravens, 10-6
55) 1980 Raiders, 11-5
54) 1970 Colts, 11-2-1
53) 2015 Broncos, 12-4
52) 2021 Rams, 12-5
51) 2001 Patriots, 11-5
50) 2005 Steelers, 11-5

49) 1988 Forty Niners, 10-6
48) 2023 Chiefs, 11-6
47) 1982 Redskins, 8-1
46) 2020 Buccaneers, 11-5
45) 2006 Colts, 12-4
44) 1987 Redskins, 11-4 (8-4 non-scabs)
43) 1974 Steelers, 10-3-1
42) 2018 Patriots, 11-5
41) 2010 Packers, 10-6
40) 2008 Steelers, 12-4

39) 1967 Packers, 9-4-1
38) 2014 Patriots, 12-4
37) 1990 Giants, 13-3
36) 2002 Buccaneers, 12-4
35) 1983 Raiders. 12-4
34) 2000 Ravens, 12-4
33) 1981 Forty Niners, 13-3
32) 2019 Chiefs, 12-4
31) 1995 Cowboys, 12-4
30) 2022 Chiefs, 14-3

29) 1997 Broncos, 12-4
28) 2017 Eagles, 13-3
27) 2009 Saints, 13-3
26) 1979 Steelers, 12-4
25) 2003 Patriots, 14-2
24) 1968 Jets, 11-3
23) 1993 Cowboys, 12-4
22) 1969 Chiefs, 11-3
21) 1986 Giants, 14-2
20) 1971 Cowboys, 11-3

19) 2016 Patriots, 14-2
18) 1973 Dolphins, 12-2
17) 2004 Patriots, 14-2
16) 2013 Seahawks, 13-3
15) 1992 Cowboys, 13-3
14) 1977 Cowboys, 12-2
13) 1998 Broncos, 14-2
12) 1996 Packers, 13-3
11) 1999 Rams, 13-3

10) 1989 Forty Niners, 14-2
9) 1966 Packers, 12-2
8) 1975 Steelers, 12-2
7) 1994 Forty Niners, 13-3
6) 1991 Redskins, 14-2
5) 1976 Raiders, 13-1
4) 1978 Steelers, 14-2
3) 1984 Forty Niners, 15-1
2) 1985 Bears, 15-1
1) 1972 Dolphins, 14-0

The '07 Giants automatically being ranked as 2nd-worst? I feel there's enough gap between they and that obvious worst 2011 installment. Maybe '07 should be in that position. But if so, not at all by much, Several others can arguably be placed there as well.

The '15 Broncos, '88 Forty Niners, and '74 Steelers are the first three "too low"s which I see. Not saying they should each be moved way too much higher. Denver, with that classic defense, did lack things on the other side of the ball with Peyton, suddenly, no longer in All Pro nor even Pro Bowl form (their divisional-round opponent not being full-strength did help them). And as for '88 SF & '74 Pit? The jury was still out late into each of their respective campaigns before reaching championship-form right on time.

Now the '67 Packers...FAR too low! As we all know, they were actually 9-2-1 going into those final two games with everything already wrapped up!

The team at #10 (whom I've declared for the longest time as the best team since 1980)...yeah.

And though I may see they and at least a couple other SB-winning teams as being better, I'm not going to waste breath nor energy complaining about the 1984 Forty Niners being placed where they're at - if only because I feel that they do indeed get historically overlooked (they went 18-1 first, and just a year prior mind you, and they slammed Marino in their game vs them)!

My Steelers? Just comparing their six installments on this list among each other? As I've opined before - 2005 is better than 2008, 1975 is better than 1978.

Other, non-Steeler, "too low"s and "too high"s on this list worth mention, but I'll close the can of worms for now.

'85 Bears and then the 17-0 Dolphins seems to be the general consensus and I'm fine with that by now whether I agree or not (not). If God told me that they are, indeed, the Top Two Ever, I would fully accept. Both achievements are too monumental to fully invest any real passionate argument over.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Okay, and here are the Runner-Ups...

58) 1979 Rams, 9-7
57) 1995 Chargers, 11-5
56) 1985 Patriots, 11-5
55) 1986 Broncos, 11-5
54) 2000 Giants, 12-4
53) 2003 Panthers, 11-5
52) 2008 Cardinals, 9-7
51) 1987 Broncos, 10-4-1 (8-3-1 non-scab)
50) 2021 Bengals, 10-7

49) 1995 Steelers, 11-5
48) 1996 Patriots, 11-5
47) 1992 Bills, 11-5
46) 1989 Broncos, 11-5
45) 1999 Titans, 13-3
44) 1982 Dolphins, 7-2
43) 2016 Falcons, 11-5
42) 1977 Broncos, 12-2
41) 1993 Bills, 12-4
40) 1981 Bengals, 12-4

39) 2020 Chiefs, 14-2
38) 2018 Rams, 13-3
37) 2002 Raiders, 11-5
36) 1971 Dolphins, 10-3-1
35) 1975 Cowboys, 10-4
34) 1980 Eagles, 12-4
33) 1988 Bengals, 12-4
32) 1972 Redskins, 11-3
31) 1974 Vikings, 10-4
30) 2019 Forty Niners, 13-3

29) 1970 Cowboys, 10-4
28) 1976 Vikings, 11-2-1
27) 2010 Steelers, 12-4
26) 2012 Forty Niners, 11-4-1
25) 2009 Colts, 14-2
24) 2011 Patriots, 13-3
23) 1991 Bills, 13-3
22) 2017 Patriots, 13-3
21) 2023 Forty Niners, 12-5
20) 2006 Bears, 13-3

19) 1966 Chiefs, 11-2-1
18) 2004 Eagles, 13-3
17) 2022 Eagles, 14-3
16) 2013 Broncos, 13-3
15) 2005 Seahawks, 13-3
14) 1998 Falcons, 14-2
13) 1973 Vikings, 12-2
12) 2014 Seahawks, 12-4
11) 1997 Packers, 13-3

10) 2015 Panthers, 15-1
9) 1978 Cowboys, 12-4
8) 1984 Dolphins, 14-2
7) 1967 Raiders, 13-1
6) 1990 Bills, 13-3
5) 1969 Vikings, 12-2
4) 2001 Rams, 14-2
3) 1983 Redskins, 14-2
2) 1968 Colts, 13-1
1) 2007 Patriots, 16-0

Top-two, here, is definitely less an argument than the list of SB-winners. Though '69 Vikings should be '2b' or maybe, maybe, tied with the Colts! And if wind blows just right...tie the unbeaten Pats with the two as well!

The 1979 Los Angeles Rams are NOT the 'worst' SB runner-up of all-time! Once they came around the bend, they were really no less than those other contending teams they were all decade-long (not to mention another solid showing in '80)!

Without opening a big can of worms with this list either, there are quite a few more "too low"s. But I'll mention a few "too high"s for the road...

'98 Dirty Birds at 14th an attention-grabbing notable with me. No, I do respect them! Yes, remember, they were 14-2 (just like Denver)! They being seen as a "one-year-wonder", Anderson missing that FG, John Randle out in OT, losing that convincer two weeks later, etc, makes them a bit overlooked. A very good team they were at the very least, but still I opine that's too high.

And, yes, the '84 Dolphins - after all - weren't "just" Dan (#7 ranked D), but there was some truth to it; just some, relatively-speaking. Not too far down should they be placed on this list IMO, but their given spot is a bit too high with me. Same applies to that '83 team at #3! Each of these two being higher than '78 Cowboys, '97 Packers, '14 Seahawks (and '83 Wash better than '01 Rams)? I disagree with that.

And 2011 Pats? Got to lower them too! 31st in defense and they failed to do what they always did and that's beat Pittsburgh. When the G-men pulled off those upsets at GB and SF ("here we go again"), I seriously picked them to beat the Pats going into that SB. If they wouldn't have, I would have seen THAT as an upset!


But otherwise, with plenty else to say about both, good intriguing conversation-starting lists!

First off, thank you for taking the time to type all of that down for reference, very helpful.

As for the teams we've mentioned:
I'd agree that the 07 Giants are higher than the second worst. If anything, I think you could argue that the 1970 Colts were worse than both of those Giants teams in spite of their record. They had a very good record, but were average statistically, and I don't see anyone arguing that the playoff wins they put up were particularly impressive.

As for the 15 Broncos, I could see a good argument for higher than 53rd, and same with the 74 Steelers for higher than 43rd. As for the 88 Niners, I would say they should be ranked right next to the Chiefs of this past season. I can't vouch for the Niners during the 1988 season, but I don't recall anyone saying the Chiefs were the best team in the league at any point in the regular season, and both happened to follow it up with a playoff appearance that led to a title.

Also, in the case of the 1988 Niners, if Steve Young is tackled on his run against the Vikings (and assuming they lose), they aren't in the playoffs at all (if that happened then I favor Minnesota to go to the Super Bowl, but that's besides the point).

As for the 1967 Packers, I could see them being on the same level as say the 2017 Eagles. They definitely appear to have coasted at the end of their regular season. Also, while on the Packers, I'd switch the 1966 and 1996 teams in ranking, but that's just me. In the case of the 60's Packers, the best team they ever had was in 1962 in my opinion, and that one isn't going to be on a list like this.

The 1989 49ers should be no worse than sixth in my opinion, and I'd take that team over 84 and 94 personally. 84 should be more like tenth or so, and 94 I'd have in the mid teens. 94 was a great team don't get me wrong (and one that could've repeated in 95 if Steve Young doesn't get injured and miss six games), but I think of that one as about as good as my Seahawks championship in 2013, and the 86 Giants (who are a few spots too low in my opinion).

As for your Steelers, I would say 1975 is certainly the best team they've ever had. I think it says something that the 1975 team scored more points than 1978 in two fewer games and without the Mel Blount rule, and that it allowed fewer points in the regular season (both total and per game), and against a tougher schedule in the regular season too. In 78, the Steelers had a better first two playoff games (and thus better postseason stats overall), but I'm taking 75 over 78, and I'd argue top five for that one.

From a Seahawks fan, the 75 Steelers are one of the most overlooked teams ever because the 76 team gets a lot of retrospective praise for overcoming a bad start (and if they won it all after the season they had, we'd probably call it the best one by consensus, but as is they made the conference championship game and lost there), and because 78 is often labeled the best Steeler team by NFL Films (really good season, but I don't agree personally).

75 isn't much worse statistically than 76, and I'd argue that the fact that that team won it all and 76 lost in the conference championship game cancels out whatever statistical advantages 76 has going for it, and I'd argue the gap between 75 and 78's regular season's is bigger than whatever advantage in the postseason that 78 has going for it (both won it all after all).

And 05 being considered better than 08 is fine with me.

As for those who made and lost the Super Bowl:


Got some thoughts on the 79 Rams to share:
The 79 Rams being listed as one of the worst I could see, but I don't know about the very bottom.

They did play at a better level in the playoffs, and without injuries their regular season may have resulted in more than a 9-7 record, and sub par team stats (not awful but worse than both the 2011 Giants and 1970 Colts in that regard). However, I would argue that the teams that Chuck Knox coached were a certain amount better than the 79 team was and simply lost to even better teams. Those Rams played seasons that were better by record and stats, and lost to the Cowboys and Vikings in six consecutive seasons; arguably better Cowboy and Viking teams than any team in the 1979 NFC.

The NFC was 16-36 vs its corresponding AFC, a win percentage of 30.77%, the worst ever since the merger for one conference vs the other.

The Cowboys team that the 79 squad beat still had a fifth ranked offense with Roger Staubach still playing great (though he was 37 and in his last year) as well as Tony Dorsett. However they had a defense that wasn't even in the top ten, and the 79 Cowboys were the top seed with an 11-5 record and a worse point differential than the 79 Patriots who missed the playoffs on the AFC side (not that they were a worse team than the Pats that year, but I do think that is worth noting).

The Rams beat the Cowboys, and they proceeded to beat the Bucs in the NFC Championship Game (a team with an excellent first ranked defense, but a rather mediocre to bad offense that ranked 21st). I think it says something about the NFC of 79 that the Rams played a better regular season in 1980, ran into the Cowboys with Danny White starting, and lost to the Cowboys in 1980.

79 Rams were a solid team, and I don't know about the last spot for them, but I do think the conference they got out of is worth acknowledging. I would also argue that some of Chuck Knox's teams could've made the Super Bowl out of that 79 conference if you inserted them, but that's just me.

As for the 1998 Falcons, they should not be 14th. I would agree that that is a bit too high. My hunch would be somewhere in the 20's (maybe 22nd or 23rd).

While we are on the Falcons, the 2016 team should arguably be higher than 43rd as well. That one had an amazing offensive team, and if you want to talk about units stepping up in the playoffs, their defense played pretty well in the games against Seattle and Green Bay as well. However, simultaneously, that team in aggregate had a worse defense than people seem to remember (it ranked 27th by points, and 25th by yards), and given that the 1998 team won one more game, and was fourth on both sides of the ball by points (and still top ten by yards on both sides), I would rank 98 ahead of 2016.

What would have been interesting would be if the 2012 Falcons (who had a top five defense and top ten offense by points) had beaten the 49ers and made the Super Bowl and played the Ravens (who I'd say were worse than New England in 2016). That was the most well rounded team Atlanta had with Matt Ryan in my opinion, and they also had better receivers around Julio Jones and a better defense than 2016 had I'd say.

Miami in 84 and Washington in 83 I could see both being at around 9 or 10 or so and behind the teams you mentioned (especially the 78 Cowboys who were the best team that season statistically), and I might be inclined to throw the 2013 Broncos within the next five spots behind. All three teams not only had the number one offense, but scored the most points in history up to their respective times, and unfortunately lost the Super Bowl. I would rank it as Dolphins, Skins, and Broncos in that order because Miami had the highest ranked defense of the three (though Washington did set the turnover differential record, and that included getting 61 of those).

And I'd agree that the 2011 Patriots are too high (probably by at least five to seven spots).

Also, one other note: The 2006 Bears are arguably a few spots too high. At minimum I'd take the Niners team we just saw over them.

At least that's what I think. What do you think?