Remember when you watched those dynastys as a kid?

For me it was Pittsburgh in the seventies. They had some epic games vs Oakland. There was a short Miami dynasty in there right before it. And Dallas was always good. But Pittsburgh was the TEAM.

Then it was the 49ers. They were fun to watch.

Then the Cowboys had a bit of a dynasty, interrupted by a fantastic Redskins team.

Even Buffalo had it's dynasty. They just didn't get a Lombardi to show for it. Sorta like the Vikings.

And now it's OUR turn. Instead of watching Pittsburgh, SF or Dallas, we get to watch our Hawks. Those other guys didn't win every year, but they were in it every year for a good 4-6 years. We're in our third year and who thinks we won't be a playoff team next year too?

It's the best of times and we should appreciate it because it's rare. Whether we repeat or not, this is a great time to be a Hawk fan.

Nice recap.
The Raiders sorta-kinda-almost had some dynasty years in there too.
And New England, of course, but are you trying to say you're not a kid anymore, so that doesn't count?

olyfan63":1dhkzdcu said:

Nice recap.
The Raiders sorta-kinda-almost had some dynasty years in there too.
And New England, of course, but are you trying to say you're not a kid anymore, so that doesn't count?

Click to expand...

New England won back to back, then haven't had much success since despite dominating a very weak division. Coincidentally - not! - coinciding with them being busted for cheating. So I tend to not count them. And Oakland you're right about, they sorta-almost-kinda had some dynasty for years.

SalishHawkFan":oau5ivei said:

olyfan63":oau5ivei said:

Nice recap.
The Raiders sorta-kinda-almost had some dynasty years in there too.
And New England, of course, but are you trying to say you're not a kid anymore, so that doesn't count?

Click to expand...

New England won back to back, then haven't had much success since despite dominating a very weak division. Coincidentally - not! - coinciding with them being busted for cheating. So I tend to not count them. And Oakland you're right about, they sorta-almost-kinda had some dynasty for years.

Click to expand...

You know, since they were busted for the Spygate thing, the Patriots have been to the SB twice. If that's not having much success, I hope that we manage to have that lack of success on a regular basis.

New England hasn't failed to win it all because of Spygate. They've failed because their SB teams were teams that featured a strong passing offense, but a weak run offense, and paired that with middling defenses, at best. When they ran into a team with a pass rush effective enough to make Brady uncomfortable, they fell apart (also true during their playoff runs that didn't end in the SB).

SalishHawkFan":uyvvflnj said:

olyfan63":uyvvflnj said:

Nice recap.
The Raiders sorta-kinda-almost had some dynasty years in there too.
And New England, of course, but are you trying to say you're not a kid anymore, so that doesn't count?

Click to expand...

New England won back to back, then haven't had much success since despite dominating a very weak division. Coincidentally - not! - coinciding with them being busted for cheating. So I tend to not count them. And Oakland you're right about, they sorta-almost-kinda had some dynasty for years.

Click to expand...

The Pats won 3 of 4 which is the same thing the Cowboys did in the 90s. I see you are penalizing them for Spy Gate, so I don't know if this makes a difference.

This is obviously WAY premature and fairly presumptuous, but I honestly feel that we are just ascending the foothills of the next great dynasty -- that of our beloved Seattle Seahawks. This team is young, hungry, talented, and battle tested. All 53 guys on this roster truly LOVE to play football. They are all about winning championships and know what it takes to win. It wouldn't shock me whatsoever to see this team rip off 3 or 4 Super Bowl titles over the next few years. 20 years from now, will this time be looked back upon as the era of the Seahawk? I'd say there is a good strong chance that it will be.

I'm so old I saw the greatest dynasty in the history of the NFL, the 1960s Packers. Won the championship in '61, '62, '65, '66 and '67. That's 5 titles in 7 years and still the only team to ever win 3 NFL championships in a row. They also won the first 2 ever Super Bowls. I started watching football in 1964 so saw those 3 straight titles and first 2 Super Bowls.

They won in a very similar fashion to our Hawks. They ran the ball very well, had a QB that didn't throw a ton of passes and threw very few picks and had a very good defense including 2 HOFers in their defensive backfield (Willie Wood and Herb Adderly). Sound familiar?

Here's my :twocents: if ask the leaders on the Seahawks they will tell you that their goal is to be in that conversation with those great teams,

Since day one I've related this Seahawks team to the 90's Cowboys. Like those Cowboys teams, this team came up and was created together. Both of those teams we're built from the ground up, via a hard reboot. Both we're young when they got their 1st Lombardi. Wilson is a fairly good match to Aikman, personality and drive wise. Carroll and Jimmy each brought a program feel to their squads.

Only thing missing is a power play by Pete, pissing off Allen, and Urban Meyer coming in to procure an easy title (Urban Meyer equals Switzer).

I sometimes wonder if any of the dynasty teams of yesteryear were hit anywhere as hard in terms of injuries as the 2014 Seattle Seahawks. It's amazing that with 17 on IR, we're still a force to be reckoned with.

hawksfansinceday1":ywutobf5 said:

I'm so old I saw the greatest dynasty in the history of the NFL, the 1960s Packers. Won the championship in '61, '62, '65, '66 and '67. That's 5 titles in 7 years and still the only team to ever win 3 NFL championships in a row. They also won the first 2 ever Super Bowls. I started watching football in 1964 so saw those 3 straight titles and first 2 Super Bowls.

They won in a very similar fashion to our Hawks. They ran the ball very well, had a QB that didn't throw a ton of passes and threw very few picks and had a very good defense including 2 HOFers in their defensive backfield (Willie Wood and Herb Adderly). Sound familiar?

Click to expand...

Having been born in the Chicago area in 1949 and raised there through HS, I'm right there with you.

As a Bears fan at the time, I finally got to boast of my team having won a championship team in 1963... but it was just one year.

Those Packers teams of that era just were on a different level. They played so well together. Even if you knew what play they were going to run, your team couldn't stop them.

I don't think one can use the word "Dynasty" until at least 2 Super Bowls have been won in a relatively short span with great success in several other years, and even that may not be enough.

Do we consider Pittsburgh from a few years ago a dynasty ? Nobody I know does. Super Bowl champs in the 2005 and 2008 seasons and made it to the Super Bowl in 2010. Additional playoff appearances in 2001, 2002, 2004, 2007 and 2011 as well.

Yes we have the potential to become a Dynasty, but we're a long ways from there yet. A Super Bowl victory this season will definitley go a long way towards that though

Hawkscanner":2l0fsy8k said:

This is obviously WAY premature and fairly presumptuous, but I honestly feel that we are just ascending the foothills of the next great dynasty -- that of our beloved Seattle Seahawks. This team is young, hungry, talented, and battle tested. All 53 guys on this roster truly LOVE to play football. They are all about winning championships and know what it takes to win. It wouldn't shock me whatsoever to see this team rip off 3 or 4 Super Bowl titles over the next few years. 20 years from now, will this time be looked back upon as the era of the Seahawk? I'd say there is a good strong chance that it will be.

Click to expand...

I don't think it's premature OR presumptuous. We've steadily gotten better. If it weren't for a underachieving first half in Atlanta, we would be on schedule for our third NFC championship in a row. Seattle as a team is young and for the most part under contract. We are one of the best and most consistent teams in the NFL.

SalishHawkFan":2ynu33w0 said:

olyfan63":2ynu33w0 said:

Nice recap.
The Raiders sorta-kinda-almost had some dynasty years in there too.
And New England, of course, but are you trying to say you're not a kid anymore, so that doesn't count?

Click to expand...

New England won back to back, then haven't had much success since despite dominating a very weak division. Coincidentally - not! - coinciding with them being busted for cheating. So I tend to not count them. And Oakland you're right about, they sorta-almost-kinda had some dynasty for years.

Click to expand...

The Pats didn't just win back-to-back titles. They won 3 in 4 years. They're a dynasty. Hell, the way they've owned the East, been to 5 Super Bowls, and played in even more conference championships, you could say they're STILL a dynasty. One of the longest ever.

pehawk":v7wifk6h said:

Since day one I've related this Seahawks team to the 90's Cowboys. Like those Cowboys teams, this team came up and was created together. Both of those teams we're built from the ground up, via a hard reboot. Both we're young when they got their 1st Lombardi. Wilson is a fairly good match to Aikman, personality and drive wise. Carroll and Jimmy each brought a program feel to their squads.

Only thing missing is a power play by Pete, pissing off Allen, and Urban Meyer coming in to procure an easy title (Urban Meyer equals Switzer).

Click to expand...

Over at SeahawkBlue there is a regular poster that thinks the same and went into a pretty detailed analysis of both the players and the organization's progression to elite and it is so earily similar as to be scary. The one thing that seems to be different is that like now Dallas's success was predicated on their OL and it's when certain things happened to it is when Dallas fell off in combination with Jerry's power play vs. Jimmy Johnson.

Like that team the Seahawks are poised to win multiple Superbowls in the next 5-7 years unless ego, injury or other things that can't be eliminated happen.

MizzouHawkGal":mwprvld5 said:

pehawk":mwprvld5 said:

Since day one I've related this Seahawks team to the 90's Cowboys. Like those Cowboys teams, this team came up and was created together. Both of those teams we're built from the ground up, via a hard reboot. Both we're young when they got their 1st Lombardi. Wilson is a fairly good match to Aikman, personality and drive wise. Carroll and Jimmy each brought a program feel to their squads.

Only thing missing is a power play by Pete, pissing off Allen, and Urban Meyer coming in to procure an easy title (Urban Meyer equals Switzer).

Click to expand...

Over at SeahawkBlue there is a regular poster that thinks the same and went into a pretty detailed analysis of both the players and the organization's progression to elite and it is so earily similar as to be scary. The one thing that seems to be different is that like now Dallas's success was predicated on their OL and it's when certain things happened to it is when Dallas fell off in combination with Jerry's power play vs. Jimmy Johnson.

Like that team the Seahawks are poised to win multiple Superbowls in the next 5-7 years unless ego, injury or other things that can't be eliminated happen.

Click to expand...

How many boards do you belong too, crymany? You moderate two Chiefs boards, and are active at seahawks.net AND Seahawksblow?

But yeah, similarities are scary.

pehawk":2vwchiip said:

MizzouHawkGal":2vwchiip said:

pehawk":2vwchiip said:

Since day one I've related this Seahawks team to the 90's Cowboys. Like those Cowboys teams, this team came up and was created together. Both of those teams we're built from the ground up, via a hard reboot. Both we're young when they got their 1st Lombardi. Wilson is a fairly good match to Aikman, personality and drive wise. Carroll and Jimmy each brought a program feel to their squads.

Only thing missing is a power play by Pete, pissing off Allen, and Urban Meyer coming in to procure an easy title (Urban Meyer equals Switzer).

Click to expand...

Over at SeahawkBlue there is a regular poster that thinks the same and went into a pretty detailed analysis of both the players and the organization's progression to elite and it is so earily similar as to be scary. The one thing that seems to be different is that like now Dallas's success was predicated on their OL and it's when certain things happened to it is when Dallas fell off in combination with Jerry's power play vs. Jimmy Johnson.

Like that team the Seahawks are poised to win multiple Superbowls in the next 5-7 years unless ego, injury or other things that can't be eliminated happen.

Click to expand...

How many boards do you belong too, crymany? You moderate two Chiefs boards, and are active at seahawks.net AND Seahawksblow?

But yeah, similarities are scary.

Click to expand...

So now it's TWO Chiefs boards!?! You crazy honey.

I remember my mom watching Dynasty, Dallas, and occasionally Remington Steele.

For me, the benchmark is the seventies Steelers. As a Raider fan from the "sea of hands" play when I was 8 to the day crazy Al traded Stabler (fellow crafty lefty) those Steeler teams made me suffer. They imposed their will on everyone and were undefeated in 4 Superbowls. I Hated them. (Raiders did beat them the year of their touted "best" team in '76 for the trip to and victory in SB XI)

Until a team wins four Superbowls without losing one within its dynasty run, I will maintain the " Steel Curtain " and Bradshaw's boys were the best dynasty.

I BELIEVE the " Legion of Boom " and Wilson's warriors are of the caliber to pull this off.

Thank you football gods

:179417:

pehawk":3behj6jf said:

Since day one I've related this Seahawks team to the 90's Cowboys. Like those Cowboys teams, this team came up and was created together. Both of those teams we're built from the ground up, via a hard reboot. Both we're young when they got their 1st Lombardi. Wilson is a fairly good match to Aikman, personality and drive wise. Carroll and Jimmy each brought a program feel to their squads.

Only thing missing is a power play by Pete, pissing off Allen, and Urban Meyer coming in to procure an easy title (Urban Meyer equals Switzer).

Click to expand...

I have been thinking that same thing since the beginning of 2013. The similarities are amazing with the exception of a feature receiver. The defense is team orientated and running game huge with efficient passing and young people everywhere.