Who Will Be The Next Dynasty In Sports?

[STAX]

Dynastys are hard to come by these days. Seattle made it back to back superbowls which is hard thing to do. Maybe a 3rd would qualify them? San Antonio is on the decline, Patriots time has passed, MLB is wide open, Blackhawks in hockey? Where will we find the next dynasty? Any guesses?

no.

[Killer_Demo]

San Francisco Giants win 4th world-series in 6 years

[newguy]

Multiple people saying buckeyes - can you have a dynasty in college sports though? Buckeyes currently play about 2-3 games a year (including their two playoff/championship games) against teams with equal talent. Pro sports at least you can make an argument that they are playing with equal talent but you can't tell me that when OSU takes on Northwestern they are playing against a team with equal talent (or the ability to get equal talent).

I can't get behind any college dynasty being called a dynasty. Differences in talent - total changeover of rosters - unequal playing fields - no way.

[Vegas39]

Multiple people saying buckeyes - can you have a dynasty in college sports though? Buckeyes currently play about 2-3 games a year (including their two playoff/championship games) against teams with equal talent. Pro sports at least you can make an argument that they are playing with equal talent but you can't tell me that when OSU takes on Northwestern they are playing against a team with equal talent (or the ability to get equal talent).

I can't get behind any college dynasty being called a dynasty. Differences in talent - total changeover of rosters - unequal playing fields - no way.

agree with that

[STAX]

Multiple people saying buckeyes - can you have a dynasty in college sports though? Buckeyes currently play about 2-3 games a year (including their two playoff/championship games) against teams with equal talent. Pro sports at least you can make an argument that they are playing with equal talent but you can't tell me that when OSU takes on Northwestern they are playing against a team with equal talent (or the ability to get equal talent).

I can't get behind any college dynasty being called a dynasty. Differences in talent - total changeover of rosters - unequal playing fields - no way.

then why dont we see more teams winning 2 and 3 championships in a row? Or 4 in a decade, shit like that? In alot of ways college sports is a fairer playing field than professional sports when you consider payroll and ownership. Theres really only a handful of teams in each pro sport with a realistic chance of winning a title every year. Is that really more of an equal playing field?

there is some truth in what you are sayng but same can be said for professional sports as well.

[daneblazer]

Ask Phyllis from Finebaum about dynasties

[newguy]

then why dont we see more teams winning 2 and 3 championships in a row? Or 4 in a decade, shit like that? In alot of ways college sports is a fairer playing field than professional sports when you consider payroll and ownership. Theres really only a handful of teams in each pro sport with a realistic chance of winning a title every year. Is that really more of an equal playing field?

there is some truth in what you are sayng but same can be said for professional sports as well.

I think its actually much of the same reason that now with free agency it makes it harder for dynasty's in pro sports: when you win a nat championship your stock for the draft is about as high as it can be so a lot of underclassmen make the jump. Very rare to see teams that win keep their core of draft-eligible players for multiple years. Gators hoops did it when they went b2b but its very rare and if I remember right at least a few of those core players were from more affluent backgrounds (know Noah was, Horford maybe too?) so they could take their chances but most jump as soon as that 7 figure check becomes a reality for them.

In pro sports over a period of 15 years lets say, you will see teams rise and fall - its rare for teams to NEVER be good in pro sports because they get draft picks and have some ability to influence their talent levels. In college the opposite is true - the rich get richer - the better you are, the more top recruiting classes you have, giving you more ability to win.

There are over 100 schools in division 1, yet since 1936 (so like 80 years) only 30 schools have won at least a share of the national championships. So I would say you do see much less parity in college football. Only 4 NFL teams have never been to the super bowl and 2 of those 4 (Jaguars and Texans) are newer to the league. So that just goes back to my point that its easier to win in college

[KingHutch]

Please explain how the Patriots 'time has passed' LOL

[STAX]

I think its actually much of the same reason that now with free agency it makes it harder for dynasty's in pro sports: when you win a nat championship your stock for the draft is about as high as it can be so a lot of underclassmen make the jump. Very rare to see teams that win keep their core of draft-eligible players for multiple years. Gators hoops did it when they went b2b but its very rare and if I remember right at least a few of those core players were from more affluent backgrounds (know Noah was, Horford maybe too?) so they could take their chances but most jump as soon as that 7 figure check becomes a reality for them.

In pro sports over a period of 15 years lets say, you will see teams rise and fall - its rare for teams to NEVER be good in pro sports because they get draft picks and have some ability to influence their talent levels. In college the opposite is true - the rich get richer - the better you are, the more top recruiting classes you have, giving you more ability to win.

There are over 100 schools in division 1, yet since 1936 (so like 80 years) only 30 schools have won at least a share of the national championships. So I would say you do see much less parity in college football. Only 4 NFL teams have never won the super bowl and 2 of those 4 (Jaguars and Texans) are newer to the league. So that just goes back to my point that its easier to win in college

I disagree with a lot of this. About half the franchises in pro sports have been terrible 80% of the years they've existed. There has been 98 teams make a Super Bowl. 62 of these are by 10 teams: PIT/SF/DEN/NE/GB/WAS/NYG/DAL/OAK/MIA. So less than 1/3 of the league accounts for almost 2/3 of the super bowl appearances. These same 10 teams have won 38 of the 49 Super Bowls!!

Where do you get only 4 teams have never won a Super bowl? Browns, Jags, Lions, Vikings, Texans, Bengals, Cardinals, Bills, Chargers, Titans, Eagles, Falcons, and Panthers... Thats 13 out of 32 teams without a title. 16 out of 32 NFL teams either have never won a Super Bowl or have been to only 1 Super Bowl.

[newguy]

I disagree with a lot of this. About half the franchises in pro sports have been terrible 80% of the years they've existed. There has been 98 teams make a Super Bowl. 62 of these are by 10 teams: PIT/SF/DEN/NE/GB/WAS/NYG/DAL/OAK/MIA. So less than 1/3 of the league accounts for almost 2/3 of the super bowl appearances. These same 10 teams have won 38 of the 49 Super Bowls!!

Where do you get only 4 teams have never won a Super bowl? Browns, Jags, Lions, Vikings, Texans, Bengals, Cardinals, Bills, Chargers, Titans, Eagles, Falcons, and Panthers... Thats 13 out of 32 teams without a title. 16 out of 32 NFL teams either have never won a Super Bowl or have been to only 1 Super Bowl.

I did mis-state - I meant appeared in one, not won. Only 4 teams have never appeared in 1. That is what I get for not proof-reading it. The rest of it though your kind of making my point and we are only talking football here. You said that in the NFL, 19 of 32 teams have won a title. That is almost 60% of the league with a title. In college 25% of the league has a title. They are easier to win in college than in the NFL.

My point was simply that in pro sports, it really is true that on any given day any team can beat any other team. That is much much less likely in college. In the NFL you will rarely have a game where a team is so confident they can win that they look past the opponent but in college that happens all the time. Heck now you schedule it so one of your cupcake games is before a real challenging opponent. That is all I was saying - to be a dynasty in pro sports which is what this topic was loosely based on - you really do have to win challenging games through a much much larger percentage of your schedule than college.

[jjgold]

Newguy excellent points… They'll never be a Dominant Golfers or tennis players moving forward

If the Cavaliers ended up winning the title this year they are the only shot with a couple new additions to be dominant for three years

[Vegas39]

Newguy excellent points… They'll never be a Dominant Golfers or tennis players moving forward

If the Cavaliers ended up winning the title this year they are the only shot with a couple new additions to be dominant for three years

disagree ye olde baldy