
The “World Wide Leader” has been working their All Decade NFL series over the last week (forgetting, apparently, that there’s still another year left in this decade).
It’s hard to disagree with their selection for team of the decade.
ESPN selected your New England Patriots as the team of the decade for the 2000s. Being the objective observer that I am, I tried to look for reasons to disagree with ESPN’s informed assessment. But the Patriots, at least to this point, are clearly the team of the decade.
They have the most regular season wins, the most postseason wins, the most Conference Championship game appearances, the most Conference Championships, and the most Super Bowl victories.
Game, set, match.
The number two team, however, isn’t nearly as clear-cut.
Pittsburgh Steelers fans not only believe their team should be ranked second, but most of them actually believe they have a significant claim to team of the decade status.
The Steelers are the only other team to win multiple Super Bowls. They’re tied for second with the Giants in Super Bowl appearances. They’ve also gone to four AFC championship games, second only to the Patriots.
Yet I’m not comfortable calling them the second best team of the decade.
If the first and second best teams in a decade both live in the same conference, shouldn’t they have developed some sort of rivalry? Do the Patriots and Steelers have a rivalry? Sure, maybe in the same way the hammer and the nail have a rivalry, but certainly not the type of rivalry you’d expect between the two best teams of the decade.
The Steelers have met the Patriots in AFC championship games twice this decade. Both games were played in Pittsburgh. Both times, the Patriots represented the AFC in the Super Bowl.
The Patriots have won every meaningful game the two teams have played against each other this decade. How is that a rivalry?
In 2003 and 2004, when the Patriots won their last two Super Bowls, the Steelers were not the second best team in the AFC. The Indianapolis Colts were.
As a matter of fact, the Steelers were only better than the Colts in 2001, 2005, and 2008. 2002 can be considered a push, as both teams won 10 games and neither won a championship.
The Colts, however, were clearly better in 2000, 2003, 2004, 2006, and 2007.
That’s five seasons to three. Even if you take 2004 away from the Colts (the Steelers' record was 15-1, but anyone who watched the NFL that season knows that the Patriots and Colts were the two best teams), they still lose four to three.
The Steelers have been to the playoffs six times this decade. The Colts have been to the playoffs eight times. The Colts have made the playoffs every year since 2002.
The Colts won seven more regular season games than the Steelers, but their best teams this decade had the misfortune of running into the New England Patriots. Meanwhile, the Steelers were able to take advantage of the only two “down” seasons the Patriots have had since 2001 (one of which was without their hall of fame quarterback).
The Steelers certainly have an argument for being the runner-up to the Patriots (they have absolutely no claim to team of the decade…anyone who thinks they do is just being silly), but the Colts have had a consistently better team.
Twenty years from now, when we think about the 2000s, we’ll remember the battles between Peyton Manning’s Colts and Tom Brady’s Patriots. The Steelers’ two Super Bowls will be an afterthought.
Which is why the Colts, not the Steelers, are the second best team of the decade.
Follow the Patriots on Twitter: http://twitter.com/realpatriots
Follow the Patriots Examiner on Twitter: http://twitter.com/PatsExamimer
Questions? Comments? Insults? You can email them to Sean Crowe at scrowe@gmail.com.
Other articles you might like: