Soul_Survivor88
Experienced Starter w/First Big Contract
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2015
- Messages
- 7,131
- Reaction score
- 12,056
I still think that team was better than the 72 dolphins
Different rules, different personnel. Even the philosophies don't match. Don Shula said his Dolphins were a grind-it-out group that thrived on controlling the clock. Whereas the 2007 Patriots relied on a powerful offense that could score at will. In reality, you cannot really compare the 1972 Dolphins and 2007 Patriots on a point by point basis. But you can compare their respective accomplishments. The 2007 Pats played more games against tougher opponents and won by larger margins. Even if they did lose the Super Bowl, I'd argue that the Patriots were the more impressive team.
The '72 Dolphins have always been rather vocal about their lofty place in NFL history. They praise themselves and are lionized for going undefeated on the way to the Lombardi Trophy. Perhaps the epitome of their own self-congratulation are their annual celebrations and unapologetic glee whenever a competitor falls short late in the season. I think it's plain silly that a group of aged athletes can take pleasure when another team loses their chance to achieve something historic. If the 1972 Dolphins had lost just once during the regular season, they would still rightly be remembered as a very good team that won the game’s ultimate prize. But the NFL has grown so much since then and has evolved.
For instance, the amount of medical knowledge and how we view fitness, conditioning, and strength training has all evolved dramatically. "There is no way to compare," said Manny Fernandez a defensive tackle for Miami in 1972. "The rules are all so different, it's changed the entire complexion and physical makeup of the game. Obviously, we couldn't stand up physically to guys who weigh 340 pounds for 60 minutes, week in and week out. Giving away 80 to 90 pounds a man, it would be tough.” The size and speed of players, the quality of training, and overall level of skill has become much more competitive, not to mention that players start playing football at a younger age. And unlike in the 1970s -- when teams like Pittsburgh, Dallas and Miami had a stable roster of 1-st rate players -- there's a greater turnover and balance of talent throughout the League, thanks to the salary cap and free agency. That just makes it harder for one team to dominate - yet still, the Pats went 18-0 until the Super Bowl. That's pretty amazing when you think about!
The regular season is also 12.5% longer now than it was when the Dolphins won all their games. There were only a 14 game regular season however, so they won 17 games in a row total. Pats won 18 in a row in the same season, and had to compete in an additional high-stakes game in order to win the Super Bowl Championship. Having won so many games against top-tier teams, it is quite likely that the Patriots had already peaked and were physically and emotionally drained during the Super Bowl.
In 1972, the Dolphins also happened to draw what many consider one of the least competitive schedules in NFL history. The Simple Rating System used by Pro-Football-Reference (which rates teams based on the outcome of their regular season games and the strength of the opponents they faced) rates Miami's 1972 strength of schedule as -4.3, with 0 being average. In the last 40 years, only four teams had an easier SoS: the 1975 Vikings (-5.2) the 1991 Bills (-5.2), the 1999 Rams (-5.9) and 2007 Seahawks (-4.6). The 1972 Miami Dolphins were helped along by the poor performance of their regular season opponents, whose overall win percentage fell below .400.
KC: 8-6
HOU: 1-13
MIN: 7-7
NYJ: 7-7
SD: 4-9-1
BUF: 4-9-1
BAL: 5-9
BUF: 4-9-1
NE: 3-11
NYJ: 7-7
STL: 4-9-1
NE: 3-11
NYG: 8-6
BAL: 5-9
That’s a combined record of 70-122-4 (0.367 winning percentage). They played only two teams above .500 all season, and both of them only 8-6. And none of the teams in their schedule made the playoffs. So the 72' Dolphins, for the most part, flew under the radar and generally went unnoticed until the playoffs, where they faced much stiffer opposition against top-tier teams like the Steelers.
Now let's compare that to the 2007 Patriots schedule:
NYJ: 4-12
SD: 11-5
BUF: 7-9
CIN: 7-9
CLE: 10-6
DAL: 13-3
MIA: 1-15
WAS: 9-7
IND: 13-3
BUF: 7-9
PHI: 8-8
BAL: 5-11
PIT: 10-6
NYJ: 4-12
MIA: 1-15
NYG: 10-6
Thanks to the Dolphins 1-15 weighted record, the combined record of all teams is still under .500 (0.469 winning percentage), but it's obvious that New England played much better opponents. 7 of their 16 opponents had winning records, and 6 of those 7 made the playoffs (Cleveland had the same 10-6 record as Pittsburgh, but lost the tiebreaker). In the regular season New England played the AFC #2, #3, and #4 seeds, and the NFC #1, #5, and #6 seeds. In other words, the Patriots had to contend with several top-tier division leaders, and defeated some of the best teams in League.
On top of that, the Patriots faced a lot more media scrutiny and adversity. The toughest part of pursuing a perfect season? The hype it creates. Chasing a record means finding yourself under a bigger spotlight. Win 10 or so consecutive games and suddenly a media circus develops. There were no cameras following the Dolphins' every move, no scrutiny from ESPN, 24-hour sport radio or the Internet. The Patriots were in a fishbowl all season unlike any other: a teammate dying in training camp, SpyGate, and the first serious team to challenge 16-0 in the media hype era. No team has gone through the pressure cooker that this team did for 10+ games and almost come out unscathed and perfect (given the magnitude of the SB 46 loss, it's easy to lose sight of the fact that this team rose to the occasion almost every single time it faced adversity.)
Last edited: