TiVo Community
TiVo Community
TiVo Community
Go Back   TiVo Community > TiVo TV Talk > Now Playing - TV Show Talk
TiVo Community
View Poll Results: Best BB or Survivor (or other) reality player ever
Boston Rob (Survivor) 40 45.98%
Dan (BB) 16 18.39%
Dr. Will (BB) 11 12.64%
Russell (Survivor) 3 3.45%
Mike Boogie (BB) 0 0%
Richard Hatch (Survivor) 6 6.90%
Parvati (Survivor) 6 6.90%
Evil Dick (BB) 1 1.15%
Other 4 4.60%
Voters: 87. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
Forum Jump
 
Thread Tools
Old 08-27-2013, 10:31 AM   #31
Steveknj
Lost in New Joisey
 
Steveknj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 34,717
Quote:
Originally Posted by tivoboyjr View Post
Not a fan of the Sandra Diaz type of Survivor winners. They ride the coattails of stronger players and win by default. I think Danni Boatright is an underrated winner. She was down to a tribe of one, and she had to win every challenge - and she did.

I stopped watching BB several seasons ago. The best I saw was Dr Will, who I don't think would have had a chance on Survivor.
And I don't think Sandra would have much chance on BB. It's a lot harder to play a coattails game in BB than Survivor, simply because of the structure of how players get voted off. I think you can get to a certain level playing coattails in BB, but it's usually hard to win unless you made a move somewhere.
__________________
Annoying Blurb
Steveknj is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-2013, 11:37 AM   #32
bryhamm
randomize
 
bryhamm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: St Louis area
Posts: 2,189
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steveknj View Post
I have no argument with this. But the fact I've completely forgotten about her, despite her winning twice means that perhaps she won more because of circumstance than game play.

On the other hand, I've also felt that if you've never won either of these games, then you really can't be considered one of it's greatest players. People like Rupert or Russell on Survivor or Janelle and Kayser on BB to me aren't great players. Great personalities sure, but their game play never got them to victory.
I respectfully disagree with the bolded. Ask most poker pros who is the current greatest and I bet Phil Ivey is mentioned more than any other pro, yet he's never one the main event. The patriots 16-0 regular season team was arguably better than the giants, but they didn't win the SB. You don't really have to win the whole thing to be considered the greatest imo.

While I acknowledge those who say that Russell wasn't that good because he lacked the social part of the game, the blonde who won in Russell's first season was really not that good imo. She "won" because the jury was bitter at Russell ... which is fine, but clearly to me does not make her a good winner.
__________________
I just want bryhamm on top -- dthmj

Bry, normally I would say you can hammer me any time baby -- Zevida

I should have frickin' bryhammed your balls yesterday -- KMan
bryhamm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-2013, 11:38 AM   #33
bryhamm
randomize
 
bryhamm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: St Louis area
Posts: 2,189
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hcour View Post
Not sure about the "best" but I thought winner Yul Kwon played a fantastic game of Survivor in S13 and he did so with a minimum of backstabbing and deceit.
Agreed. As did Brian H (the used car salesman).
__________________
I just want bryhamm on top -- dthmj

Bry, normally I would say you can hammer me any time baby -- Zevida

I should have frickin' bryhammed your balls yesterday -- KMan
bryhamm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-2013, 11:40 AM   #34
MonsterJoe
$('.electric').slide
 
MonsterJoe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Central MA
Posts: 13,532
Quote:
Originally Posted by bryhamm View Post
The patriots 16-0 regular season team was arguably better than the giants, but they didn't win the SB.
Nothing arguable about that. A catches a ball with his head one time...ONE TIME!


TYREEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
MonsterJoe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-2013, 12:02 PM   #35
Steveknj
Lost in New Joisey
 
Steveknj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 34,717
Quote:
Originally Posted by bryhamm View Post
I respectfully disagree with the bolded. Ask most poker pros who is the current greatest and I bet Phil Ivey is mentioned more than any other pro, yet he's never one the main event. The patriots 16-0 regular season team was arguably better than the giants, but they didn't win the SB. You don't really have to win the whole thing to be considered the greatest imo.

While I acknowledge those who say that Russell wasn't that good because he lacked the social part of the game, the blonde who won in Russell's first season was really not that good imo. She "won" because the jury was bitter at Russell ... which is fine, but clearly to me does not make her a good winner.
Well I respectfully disagree with your disagreement I have no idea about the poker thing, since I don't watch, but the idea of all these games is to win the money at the end. If you didn't win the money, your game was flawed. The Pats example, while you could argue that they were better than the Giants, in the end they didn't win. So in my book, they aren't better than quite a few past Super Bowl winners. Their game was flawed in that they couldn't stop the pass rush when it mattered. The Giants, at the time of the Super Bowl, were a better, more well rounded team. You could equate that in Survivor or BB terms to the player who plays in the background most of the game and makes their big moves toward the end. It's actually a good strategy, provided you just didn't luck into winning. In the end, Russell may be a great player, but we are talking about the BEST. How can you be the BEST if you didn't win? I don't know Poker, but would Phil Ivey, today's best player be the best EVER having not won a major? Would Tiger Woods be considered one of the greatest golfers had he not ever won a major? Could those 16-0 Patriots have beaten the '85 Bears? The early 90s Cowboys? The 1970s Steelers? Those teams are the greatest ever, because they were not only great in the regular season, but they won Championships.
__________________
Annoying Blurb
Steveknj is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-2013, 12:04 PM   #36
Steveknj
Lost in New Joisey
 
Steveknj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 34,717
Quote:
Originally Posted by bryhamm View Post
Agreed. As did Brian H (the used car salesman).
I actually picked Brian H to win that season very early on. You could see he was thinking a step ahead of everyone the whole game. He has to be considered here, but I put him behind the others because they played other seasons. Not sure why Brian never came back.
__________________
Annoying Blurb
Steveknj is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-2013, 02:10 PM   #37
Dnamertz
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 790
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steveknj View Post
Well I respectfully disagree with your disagreement I have no idea about the poker thing, since I don't watch, but the idea of all these games is to win the money at the end. If you didn't win the money, your game was flawed. The Pats example, while you could argue that they were better than the Giants, in the end they didn't win. So in my book, they aren't better than quite a few past Super Bowl winners. Their game was flawed in that they couldn't stop the pass rush when it mattered. The Giants, at the time of the Super Bowl, were a better, more well rounded team. You could equate that in Survivor or BB terms to the player who plays in the background most of the game and makes their big moves toward the end. It's actually a good strategy, provided you just didn't luck into winning. In the end, Russell may be a great player, but we are talking about the BEST. How can you be the BEST if you didn't win? I don't know Poker, but would Phil Ivey, today's best player be the best EVER having not won a major? Would Tiger Woods be considered one of the greatest golfers had he not ever won a major? Could those 16-0 Patriots have beaten the '85 Bears? The early 90s Cowboys? The 1970s Steelers? Those teams are the greatest ever, because they were not only great in the regular season, but they won Championships.
So if its winning that defines greatness, then the debate is over...Sandra is the best hands down because no one else won BB or Survivor twice.

However, I don't agree with this. Sandra won twice which is the end goal, but there was nothing impressive or great about her gameplay. To me, just going on these shows and being non-threatening or nice might get you the victory but its not impressive. Heck, I can do that.

Sandra's 2 victories are not as impressive as other contestants who have only won once. And some players who have never won are more impressive than some players who have won once. Sometimes jury voting is unpredictable. There have been BB players (Boogie and Evel Dick) who played worse social games than Dan did last year, but they won and Dan did not.
Dnamertz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-2013, 02:12 PM   #38
Dnamertz
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 790
I would love to see CBS take an all-star BB cast and have them play Survivor and take an all-star Survivor cast and have them play BB.
Dnamertz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-2013, 02:22 PM   #39
tivoboyjr
Unregistered User
 
tivoboyjr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 5,309
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dnamertz View Post
I would love to see CBS take an all-star BB cast and have them play Survivor and take an all-star Survivor cast and have them play BB.
I thought Janelle from Dr Will-era BB would have done well on Survivor. She was very good at the physical challenges. (Also looked great in a bikini.) But that was 10 years or so ago. I doubt she'd do as well now.
tivoboyjr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-2013, 02:30 PM   #40
Ment
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: People's Republic of Boulder
Posts: 8,091
Janelle/Frank/Aaryn would do well in Survivor. Aaryn would probably be a Survivor darling since all her racist crap wouldn't make it out of camp. Conversely, we'd see BR/Russell in their a-holeness 24/7
Ment is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-2013, 02:31 PM   #41
Steveknj
Lost in New Joisey
 
Steveknj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 34,717
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dnamertz View Post
So if its winning that defines greatness, then the debate is over...Sandra is the best hands down because no one else won BB or Survivor twice.

However, I don't agree with this. Sandra won twice which is the end goal, but there was nothing impressive or great about her gameplay. To me, just going on these shows and being non-threatening or nice might get you the victory but its not impressive. Heck, I can do that.

Sandra's 2 victories are not as impressive as other contestants who have only won once. And some players who have never won are more impressive than some players who have won once. Sometimes jury voting is unpredictable. There have been BB players (Boogie and Evel Dick) who played worse social games than Dan did last year, but they won and Dan did not.
No, you're not quite getting what I was saying. There are mediocre Super Bowl winning teams and great ones. But I would never say for instance that the Tampa Bay team that won the SB is the greatest ever, but I also wouldn't say that Denver Broncos team that lost 4 straight Super Bowls was the greatest team ever either. The greatest players in Survivor or BB combine winning everything WITH great game play. I can't justify Russell for example as a GREAT player when one aspect of his game was SO flawed he could never win the game. Conversely, Sandra, even though she won two times never really did anything that mind blowing either time to say she was a great player. The best of the players know how to WIN and how to play. Dan on BB, his first time around not only was sneaky and made great moves, but his social game was good enough to get the jury votes. Same with someone like Boston Rob, who put all the aspects together to win his 4th go around.
__________________
Annoying Blurb
Steveknj is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-2013, 02:35 PM   #42
Steveknj
Lost in New Joisey
 
Steveknj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 34,717
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ment View Post
Janelle/Frank/Aaryn would do well in Survivor. Aaryn would probably be a Survivor darling since all her racist crap wouldn't make it out of camp. Conversely, we'd see BR/Russell in their a-holeness 24/7
I think they should make this a three part competition for $2.5 million. You take the best players of both games and have them play BOTH games. Then you take the winner of both and send them off on The Amazing Race together. If they make it to the end, they get all the money
__________________
Annoying Blurb
Steveknj is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-2013, 03:21 PM   #43
sburnside1
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 1,078
I seriously think people are underestimating Sandra.

Yes, she was boring to watch on TV, because her game was all social and not really aired. How do we know she was so successful? Well on her first win, she never had anyone vote for her at all until she was voted the winner. On her Heroes vs. Villains win, she didn't receive a vote until the 13th week. 2 tribals before the final.

So basically, she is discounted because she has a boring persona on TV. I am sure she is ok with that though. She has recieved 2 Million dollars for being overlooked on TV, and will be overlooked again if she is invited back.
sburnside1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-2013, 03:35 PM   #44
gweempose
Registered User
 
gweempose's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Northbrook, IL
Posts: 1,892
Quote:
Originally Posted by sburnside1 View Post
I seriously think people are underestimating Sandra.

Yes, she was boring to watch on TV, because her game was all social and not really aired. How do we know she was so successful? Well on her first win, she never had anyone vote for her at all until she was voted the winner. On her Heroes vs. Villains win, she didn't receive a vote until the 13th week. 2 tribals before the final.

So basically, she is discounted because she has a boring persona on TV. I am sure she is ok with that though. She has recieved 2 Million dollars for being overlooked on TV, and will be overlooked again if she is invited back.
I agree. Sandra is one of the all-time Survivor greats. She may not be a strong physical player, but her mental game is way beyond most other players. She has this way of stirring the pot and getting other players to turn against each other. She's always listening, and always thinking about ways to use whatever knowledge she has to her advantage. It's undeniably an effective strategy, as the proof is in the pudding.
__________________
(1) Roamio Pro
(1) Premiere XL4
(1) Premiere XL
(3) Minis

gweempose is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-2013, 03:43 PM   #45
gweempose
Registered User
 
gweempose's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Northbrook, IL
Posts: 1,892
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dnamertz View Post

I would love to see CBS take an all-star BB cast and have them play Survivor and take an all-star Survivor cast and have them play BB.
I was thinking the exact same thing. It would even be cool if they mixed it up half and half. To my knowledge, this coming season of Survivor marks the first time that a player from one show is competing on the other show. Considering how long both shows have been running, it's kind of shocking that CBS hasn't done more of this.
__________________
(1) Roamio Pro
(1) Premiere XL4
(1) Premiere XL
(3) Minis

gweempose is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-2013, 03:46 PM   #46
TampaThunder
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 1,083
Boston Rob was great but Dr. Will was absolutely brilliant the season he won BB. He played a perfect game with nary a misstep.
TampaThunder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-2013, 04:03 PM   #47
gweempose
Registered User
 
gweempose's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Northbrook, IL
Posts: 1,892
Quote:
Originally Posted by TampaThunder View Post

Boston Rob was great but Dr. Will was absolutely brilliant the season he won BB. He played a perfect game with nary a misstep.
And I'd argue that Boston Rob played a perfect game as well on Redemption Island. Dr. Will, Dan and BR are all amazing players. I'd rate BR at the top, simply because I think Survivor is a harder game to win. That being said, it's very difficult to compare players from different games, as they require slightly different skill sets.
__________________
(1) Roamio Pro
(1) Premiere XL4
(1) Premiere XL
(3) Minis

gweempose is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2013, 12:39 AM   #48
Snappa77
RUDEBWOY
 
Snappa77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: BOSTON
Posts: 1,106
Boston Rob also kicked butt on Amazing Race.
__________________
«If U STAND 4 nothing U will FALL 4 everything! ~ I'd rather DIE on my feet than LIVE on my knees!»
1 DVR40- GONE
1 R15- GONE
2 R10's- GONE
2 COMCAST HD TiVo DVR's. SofaKing slow.
Snappa77 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2013, 09:59 AM   #49
sburnside1
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 1,078
I get that Robs a likable persona and fun to watch, that why Russell also gets mentioned by some fans even though he could/would never win.

He is a good player, but hes only good when he can spend so much time with the tribemates that they cannot get alone time with others.

Hes been voted out:
7th week
final tribal
8th week
and won.

Both his 7th and 8th week vote outs, were after a tribal shift. And arguably his win was with the most dopey group of "followers" that the game has ever seen. I don't think they went anywhere without Rob telling them it was okay.

Rob being fun tv does not make him the best survivor.
sburnside1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2013, 04:15 PM   #50
bryhamm
randomize
 
bryhamm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: St Louis area
Posts: 2,189
The thing with survivor is that you are not in 100% control of everything like BB (more on this later though). Meaning, the tribes are divided however they are divided at the beginning. Plus you have the tribal shuffle, which is random. You can be the absolute best strategist, but get completely screwed by being on a weak tribe that cannot win any challenges and you go into the merge down in number and you lose. This adds to my thought before that in survivor you don't have to win to be the best. Too much luck can play into this.


Now, with BB there is nothing like the tribes. You go in D1 and you can decide to try an align with everyone or no one. You are in complete control of what you want to do. However, with BB there is the manipulation that goes on behind the scenes by the producers that taints this that survivor does not have. But, for BB I would say that you need to have won BB or gotten to at LEAST the end to be considered the best.
__________________
I just want bryhamm on top -- dthmj

Bry, normally I would say you can hammer me any time baby -- Zevida

I should have frickin' bryhammed your balls yesterday -- KMan
bryhamm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-29-2013, 07:16 AM   #51
Steveknj
Lost in New Joisey
 
Steveknj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 34,717
Quote:
Originally Posted by bryhamm View Post
The thing with survivor is that you are not in 100% control of everything like BB (more on this later though). Meaning, the tribes are divided however they are divided at the beginning. Plus you have the tribal shuffle, which is random. You can be the absolute best strategist, but get completely screwed by being on a weak tribe that cannot win any challenges and you go into the merge down in number and you lose. This adds to my thought before that in survivor you don't have to win to be the best. Too much luck can play into this.


Now, with BB there is nothing like the tribes. You go in D1 and you can decide to try an align with everyone or no one. You are in complete control of what you want to do. However, with BB there is the manipulation that goes on behind the scenes by the producers that taints this that survivor does not have. But, for BB I would say that you need to have won BB or gotten to at LEAST the end to be considered the best.
I don't think you could be considered THE BEST without winning either game. That would be like calling the 16-0 Patriots the best team ever, even though they did not win the championship. Or saying that McCain was the best political campaigner ever even though he lost the election. I'm not saying players like Russell or Ozzie weren't great players, just not THE BEST. There's luck in everything, but sometimes luck is a residue of hard work, as the cliche goes. The tribes are shuffled, well deal with it. A great player should be able to change their game based on what he or she has been dealt. That's where Dan shines in my opinion. With every turn of the game he came up with something new. And it all worked, especially in his first go around. Game 2 he worked SO hard at it that in the end, he just played it TOO hard.

As for manipulation by the producers. If you believe that happens in BB, it can (and may) happen in Survivor as well. The aforementioned shuffles could be done to benefit certain players. We've all accused Survivor producers of bringing out certain competitions that seem to favor certain players at certain times. And here's a difference, as well, in BB, there's a 24/7 feed, so we can see a LOT of what goes on behind the scenes, in Survivor, we only get that one hour highlights show every week (and it's of course VERY edited, so we only know about what the producers WANT us to know about). How do we know how much influence the producers have off camera?

In BB I agree, you COULD be in more control of your game. But, the game is much longer secret strategies are usually much more easily fleshed out because of the close proximity of all the house guests. I've always felt that Survivor is a more physically demanding game, while BB is a more mentally challenging game.
__________________
Annoying Blurb
Steveknj is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-02-2013, 09:26 AM   #52
danielhart
Nerp Nerp
 
danielhart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,299
Quote:
Originally Posted by bryhamm View Post
Agreed. As did Brian H (the used car salesman).
lol he gets my vote. getting all those fools to trust him - even after telling them what he did for a living from the start.

i also give props to the guy who won when the season was down to just him and the 5-girl alliance and he played them all against each other
danielhart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-02-2013, 11:15 AM   #53
Fool Me Twice
<<<<>>>>>>>>>>
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 3,473
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steveknj View Post
I actually picked Brian H to win that season very early on. You could see he was thinking a step ahead of everyone the whole game. He has to be considered here, but I put him behind the others because they played other seasons. Not sure why Brian never came back.
After his season it was discovered that he had hidden his pornography past. Later, he shot a stray dog with a bow and arrow. That might be part of it. I'm not sure.

The little gay kid that won Survivor China is one I know they've tried to bring back, but haven't been able to make it work. So, schedule conflicts play a part in who comes back.
Fool Me Twice is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-02-2013, 11:24 AM   #54
Fool Me Twice
<<<<>>>>>>>>>>
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 3,473
Quote:
Originally Posted by MonsterJoe View Post
I watch both.

Dan. No discussion.
Correct.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bryhamm View Post
You don't really have to win the whole thing to be considered the greatest imo.
Also, correct. But, it's not an obvious concept.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steveknj View Post
I always felt that Survivor is a more physically demanding game, while BB is a more mentally challenging game.
Also correct.
Fool Me Twice is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2013, 07:49 AM   #55
Steveknj
Lost in New Joisey
 
Steveknj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 34,717
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fool Me Twice View Post
Correct.



Also, correct. But, it's not an obvious concept.



Also correct.
I do think you have to have won to be THE GREATEST. That doesn't mean a non-winner can't be a great players.

For example, in baseball the 2001 Seattle Mariners won an AL record 116 regular season games. But were ousted in the playoffs. Were they a great team? Of course. Were they the GREATEST team? No. Same with the 16-1 NE Patriots. They can never be considered with the 85 Bears or the great 49er teams of the 80s or Steeler teams of the 70s or Packer teams of the 60s. All won championships. NE didn't.
__________________
Annoying Blurb
Steveknj is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2013, 08:57 AM   #56
MonsterJoe
$('.electric').slide
 
MonsterJoe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Central MA
Posts: 13,532
Ok, you need to stop bringing that season up.

Please.
MonsterJoe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2013, 09:03 AM   #57
Steveknj
Lost in New Joisey
 
Steveknj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 34,717
Quote:
Originally Posted by MonsterJoe View Post
Ok, you need to stop bringing that season up.

Please.
Sorry Giants fan here

I just think the parallel fights great here. They were compared all season with the best of the best, and when they lost in the Super Bowl, the comparisons stopped. That's kind of how I feel about great players who never win in BB or Survivor. Russell's moves were so great, yet it never got him a win in the end.
__________________
Annoying Blurb
Steveknj is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2013, 09:07 AM   #58
heySkippy
oldweakandpathetic
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Sarasota, FL
Posts: 18,227
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steveknj View Post
Sorry Giants fan here

I just think the parallel fights great here. They were compared all season with the best of the best, and when they lost in the Super Bowl, the comparisons stopped. That's kind of how I feel about great players who never win in BB or Survivor. Russell's moves were so great, yet it never got him a win in the end.
You're right. The Pats lost, they weren't the best that year. Of course, that doesn't change the fact that they are the best team of the 21st Century owing to the 3 SBs they didn't lose.
__________________

meh
heySkippy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2013, 09:50 AM   #59
Steveknj
Lost in New Joisey
 
Steveknj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 34,717
Quote:
Originally Posted by heySkippy View Post
You're right. The Pats lost, they weren't the best that year. Of course, that doesn't change the fact that they are the best team of the 21st Century owing to the 3 SBs they didn't lose.
But are they the greatest ever? And if they hadn't won those 3 SBs would they even be in the discussion. Buffalo made 4 straight SBs in the 1990s, yet won zero. I don't hear anyone saying they are the greatest ever. And we rarely hear the teams that BEAT them in that discussion either.

So we go back to what I was saying, to be the greatest EVER, you have to have won.
__________________
Annoying Blurb
Steveknj is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply
Forum Jump




Thread Tools


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Advertisements

TiVo Community
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
vBulletin Skins by: Relivo Media

(C) 2013 Magenium Solutions - All Rights Reserved. No information may be posted elsewhere without written permission.
TiVo® is a registered trademark of TiVo Inc. This site is not owned or operated by TiVo Inc.
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:48 PM.
OUR NETWORK: MyOpenRouter | TechLore | SansaCommunity | RoboCommunity | MediaSmart Home | Explore3DTV | Dijit Community | DVR Playground |