PDA

View Full Version : What is the best giants team ever?



GentleGiant
01-11-2013, 05:11 PM
Is it the 1986 team or the 2007 team? Is it one of the pre merger teams? Or someone else?

Like the answers but I'm surprised that the pre merger teams aren't coming up. YA tittle or the Sam Huff teams?

Greg_129
01-11-2013, 05:15 PM
I lean toward the '90 team.

Giantsfan241
01-11-2013, 05:17 PM
2011.

nhpgiantsfan
01-11-2013, 05:54 PM
The Parcells teams were much better than this ere's teams. They dominated through the whole season. TC's teams squeaked into the playoffs and got red hot.

The only edge I would give to the TC era Giants is at QB and WR. The big difference is the defenses. TC's defense is not even in the same league as BP's defense.

BK07071
01-11-2013, 06:34 PM
Is it the 1986 team or the 2007 team? Is it one of the pre merger teams? Or someone else?


'86 team by far the best ! Present team cannot compare to that one. We had the best linebacking corp in the NFL. All our LB's were pro bowlers, even some of the replacements.

fletch842
01-11-2013, 06:44 PM
'86 was simply dominant, awesome team.

G14ntzF4π
01-11-2013, 06:51 PM
86's defence was a beast

Toadofsteel
01-11-2013, 07:57 PM
2008 would have been if Plaxico didn't shoot himself... but we got Nicks out of all that (no way in hell he would have fallen to 32 in the 2009 draft) so it all worked out.

M00KIE
01-11-2013, 08:24 PM
It's '86 for me. I would say '90 second and '07 and '11 are kind of even in my mind. Maybe I'd give an edge to '07 just because of Strahan.

Roosevelt
01-11-2013, 08:26 PM
1986 by far was the best team we've ever had. 17-2.

brad
01-11-2013, 08:41 PM
If Simms hadn't gotten hurt in 90, I would probably go with the 90 team, they were dominant and prior to Simms getting hurt I believe they were 10-0. That being said I would go with the 86 team. The defense was about as good as any in the history of the game. You actually looked forward to that defense being on the field because they were as likely to make a big play as the offense was. Teams feared that defense, who could blame them? I would not want to be a QB looking at those guys knowing that eventually I had to take the snap.

On the offensive side, they just dictated to the defense, everyone knew they were going to run the ball, but no one could do anything about it. They essentially went out there and did what they wanted to do and few did it better... ever. They weren't a great passing team, not because of talent but because they didn't need to pass the ball. Simms was a very good QB and proved that in the SB.

fourth&forever
01-11-2013, 09:53 PM
86

Parademon
01-11-2013, 10:10 PM
This a trick question? 86' team without a doubt!

sheli no more
01-11-2013, 10:14 PM
86 by far.....Maybe Bill Belicheat needs a break from head coach and will come back as our defensive coordinator. Then we just need a young Carson, Banks and Taylor and we're good to go. The hell with OL, DBs or anything else, with LB's like that we'd rock.

tonyt830
01-11-2013, 10:32 PM
In my generation, the 1986 Giants were the best of the 4 Superbowl winning teams, in my opinion. But the NFL has changed so much in the passed 20 to 25 years. The athletes are bigger, stronger and faster, and the rules now benefit offenses moreso than back in the day.

And I'm sure, there may be some fans from the older generations that may disagree---the Giants had some very good teams in the 50's and early 60's as well. That 1958 team was pretty darn good too.

Pksoze
01-11-2013, 11:34 PM
The 86 team was the best.

DandyDon
01-12-2013, 12:00 AM
'86 team by far the best ! Present team cannot compare to that one. We had the best linebacking corp in the NFL. All our LB's were pro bowlers, even some of the replacements.

+1

JJC7301
01-12-2013, 12:19 AM
The Parcells teams were much better than this ere's teams. They dominated through the whole season. TC's teams squeaked into the playoffs and got red hot.

The only edge I would give to the TC era Giants is at QB and WR. The big difference is the defenses. TC's defense is not even in the same league as BP's defense.
+1. The 1986 team was the best they had in the modern era because the D was just so dominant. And they were young and on the rise. I'd have to go withe the '90 team as # 2.

The Parcells teams had a toughness, throughout entire seasons, that the Coughlin teams don't have. And while I believe that the TC coaches are good, the Parcells coaches were fantastic, which included Belichek and Coughlin and a few others.

L.T.56
01-12-2013, 12:26 AM
the 86 team was definetly the best. they could have went undefeated if they didn't lose two real close games at dallas and at seattle.

fansince69
01-12-2013, 12:52 AM
the 86 team was definetly the best. they could have went undefeated if they didn't lose two real close games at dallas and at seattle. since I have been watching in 69...the 86 team..There was really no doubt after the 85 season that we were the best team in football...we could beat you so many ways...that defense forced it's will on teams

moosedrool
01-12-2013, 02:03 AM
1986 by a landslide. It's not even close. No miracle catches off a helmet or sideline heroics. Simply dominated.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1986_New_York_Giants_season

Divisional playoffs 49-3 over Montana's 49ers
Conference playoffs shutout the Redskins 17-0
Super Bowl 39-20 over Denver

Roster included 5 stud LB's





Linebackers

Carl Banks (http://boards.giants.com/wiki/Carl_Banks)
Harry Carson (http://boards.giants.com/wiki/Harry_Carson)
Pepper Johnson (http://boards.giants.com/wiki/Pepper_Johnson)
Gary Reasons (http://boards.giants.com/wiki/Gary_Reasons)
Lawrence Taylor (http://boards.giants.com/wiki/Lawrence_Taylor)

SweetZombieJesus
01-12-2013, 06:39 AM
Some would say the '56 team... That or the '86 team.

In terms of historical context I'd have to say the 56 team. Vince Lombardi and Tom Landry on the staff, all those great players like Charlie Connerly, Sam Huff, Frank Gifford, the Rosies, etc.

I think it doesn't get respect because it's been 50+ years... Before our times. But the Giants in that era were special (6 championship games in 8 years, so many innovations going on). The bad news is they lost 5 of those 6 championships and that's why history groans on them. But a staff that had Lombardi and Landry on it at the same time, just imagine!

http://a4.ec-images.myspacecdn.com/images02/124/fa94a925c1c74dfc818dca688adbcc18/l.jpg

Rich4114
01-12-2013, 10:12 AM
2008 would have been if Plaxico didn't shoot himself... but we got Nicks out of all that (no way in hell he would have fallen to 32 in the 2009 draft) so it all worked out.

That's what I was going to say. Other than the Browns game that year this team dominated until the Plax shooting.

bigblue58
01-12-2013, 10:26 AM
Is it the 1986 team or the 2007 team? Is it one of the pre merger teams? Or someone else?

Like the answers but I'm surprised that the pre merger teams aren't coming up. YA tittle or the Sam Huff teams?

The 2011 team by a country mile!
As great as the '86 and 90 teams were, they weren't the best team in the NFL the next year like the 2011 team was!
The 2011 team came the closest to repeating
The 2011 team was the only team in the modern Giants era to win the division and even make the playoffs the season after a SB championship.

I don't count the Sam Huff era because as great as those guys were in their time, the game was so different then, and those players don't compare to the athletes of today.

Redeyejedi
01-12-2013, 10:32 AM
1986 team was the best the 2008 Giant team was very good until Plax shot himself and the DLIne wore down.Im not sure if u guys remember but Fred Robbins was unstoppable at the beginning of that season. He was as good as I have ever seen a Giant DT until he got hurt that year,

B&RWarrior
01-12-2013, 10:47 AM
The '86 team would be the best. If you are comparing it to any team after '86 then you clearly don't remember the '86 team. IMO we beat a better Buffalo Bills team in '90. The Eli era hasn't been about dominance. Under TC we get hot and get on a roll. The most dominant TC team was 2008 and we shot ourselves in the foot that year . Hehehe, did you see what I did there, did you see what I did there?

bigblue58
01-12-2013, 10:54 AM
1986 team was the best the 2008 Giant team was very good until Plax shot himself and the DLIne wore down.Im not sure if u guys remember but Fred Robbins was unstoppable at the beginning of that season. He was as good as I have ever seen a Giant DT until he got hurt that year,

The 86 team was great, but how can you say that they were better than the 2011 team when the 86 team didn't make the playoffs the next year?
The 2011 team not only made the playoffs but won the division, and were the best team in the NFL.
And could we please stop with the "til Plax shot himself" nonsense? It's a myth. Talk about what people remember....do you remember how mediocre a season Burress had been having in 2008, leading up to his shooting? Do you remember how everyone was ragging on Burress for dogging it after signing his new lucrative contract the offseason?
Burress was having very little impact on that season in any meaningful or positive way......we weren't one and done because of his absence. He was already done for the season when the Giants won the Division.

B&RWarrior
01-12-2013, 11:21 AM
The 86 team was great, but how can you say that they were better than the 2011 team when the 86 team didn't make the playoffs the next year?
The 2011 team not only made the playoffs but won the division, and were the best team in the NFL.
And could we please stop with the "til Plax shot himself" nonsense? It's a myth. Talk about what people remember....do you remember how mediocre a season Burress had been having in 2008, leading up to his shooting? Do you remember how everyone was ragging on Burress for dogging it after signing his new lucrative contract the offseason?
Burress was having very little impact on that season in any meaningful or positive way......we weren't one and done because of his absence. He was already done for the season when the Giants won the Division.

The only reason they missed the playoffs was because of the players strike in '87. That '87 team was better than 2011 team and the 2007 team. Best means most dominant that year. Next years results don't play into how dominant they were that year because next year represents a different team. I'll repeat 1986 was the most dominant year the Giants ever had. This isn't even a good argument for anybody who actually watched our 1986 team. In fact I'd take the '85-'87 Giants over any Giants team EVER!!!

FYI our offense went into the dumps when Plax got shot in 2008. If you're saying losing Plax didn't change anything then your rewriting history. Check the stats, check the game tape, check everything, it all shows a drop off without Plax.

nhpgiantsfan
01-12-2013, 12:01 PM
The 2011 team by a country mile!
As great as the '86 and 90 teams were, they weren't the best team in the NFL the next year like the 2011 team was!
The 2011 team came the closest to repeating
The 2011 team was the only team in the modern Giants era to win the division and even make the playoffs the season after a SB championship.

I don't count the Sam Huff era because as great as those guys were in their time, the game was so different then, and those players don't compare to the athletes of today.

What in the world are you talking about?? Do you mean the 2008 team? And if so, I don't care how many regular season games they won. They went one and done in the post season. Can't be the best team. Who cares about winning a division after SB win. It has nothing to do with what year was the greatest team.

1987 players strike, 1991 Ray Handley. Can punish the 86 & 90 teams for what happened the year after.

moosedrool
01-12-2013, 01:55 PM
The 86 team was great, but how can you say that they were better than the 2011 team when the 86 team didn't make the playoffs the next year?.

Because each year is different due to injuries, and 1987 they had many injuries, the players strike, and three games with replacement players!

17-2 in 1986, and look at the dominating scores in the playoffs and Super Bowl. 2011 was a miracle run with small margin victories. It's not even close.

Toadofsteel
01-12-2013, 02:06 PM
1986 by a landslide. It's not even close. No miracle catches off a helmet or sideline heroics. Simply dominated.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1986_New_York_Giants_season

Divisional playoffs 49-3 over Montana's 49ers
Conference playoffs shutout the Redskins 17-0
Super Bowl 39-20 over Denver

Roster included 5 stud LB's




Linebackers

Carl Banks (http://boards.giants.com/wiki/Carl_Banks)
Harry Carson (http://boards.giants.com/wiki/Harry_Carson)
Pepper Johnson (http://boards.giants.com/wiki/Pepper_Johnson)
Gary Reasons (http://boards.giants.com/wiki/Gary_Reasons)
Lawrence Taylor (http://boards.giants.com/wiki/Lawrence_Taylor)





You realize there's more to a defense than Linebackers, right?

Daytona Giant
01-12-2013, 02:09 PM
I went to my first Giant game in 56 they were great more in the trenches and down and dirty no astoturf half the time is was mud.It was a different game then different rules I think for pure football skills the 86 Giants were the best I have everseen.

bearbryant
01-12-2013, 02:30 PM
The first game i ever watched the Jints play was at the Polo Grounds in 1953. I've seen some of the best and some of the worst Giant years including the teams of the 70's when fans huddled together in the parking lots and burned their tickets to make a statement about the Giants horrible play. The best Giant team I've ever had the pleasure of seeing play was the 1986 Super Bowl Champion New York Giants. They went 17-2 had arguably the best LB corp to ever play the game, Simms threw for 22-25 in the Super Bowl ( still a record today) and in a game that is usually a close contest between 2 excellently paired teams, the Giants throttled the Denver Broncos 39-20. Now that was a game and a fabulous year for Giant football

Giantslb66
01-12-2013, 02:42 PM
No doubt about it, the 86 Giants by far! That defense would beat teams up and still want more. I wish we still had players like that now....

moosedrool
01-12-2013, 03:13 PM
You realize there's more to a defense than Linebackers, right?

That is a ridiculous comment toadofsteel. You obviously missed the point that we had 5 stud LB's on the roster.

FIFTY6G-MAN
01-12-2013, 03:16 PM
No doubt about it, the 86 Giants by far! That defense would beat teams up and still want more. I wish we still had players like that now....https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQHn_4HAWMxNvWvteM9e5n51-AEgLyOCErgvZdea5cncj-LdT7f

Giantsfan241
01-12-2013, 04:36 PM
2011 cause the best team is the team with the best qb and eli is the best qb in giants history by far.

Roosevelt
01-12-2013, 04:42 PM
2011 cause the best team is the team with the best qb and eli is the best qb in giants history by far.

*sigh*

Roosevelt
01-12-2013, 04:56 PM
The 86 team was great, but how can you say that they were better than the 2011 team when the 86 team didn't make the playoffs the next year?
The 2011 team not only made the playoffs but won the division, and were the best team in the NFL.
And could we please stop with the "til Plax shot himself" nonsense? It's a myth. Talk about what people remember....do you remember how mediocre a season Burress had been having in 2008, leading up to his shooting? Do you remember how everyone was ragging on Burress for dogging it after signing his new lucrative contract the offseason?
Burress was having very little impact on that season in any meaningful or positive way......we weren't one and done because of his absence. He was already done for the season when the Giants won the Division.

You got your years mixed up. So which team are you talking about 2007 or 2011? Not that it matters because 86 was better than both of them.

We were 14-2 in the reg. season and then stormed through the playoffs to the championship.

The 86 Giants dominated the league year. 2007 and 2011 we came together and got hot and lucky at the right time.

Giantsfan241
01-12-2013, 04:56 PM
sigh you roosevelt Eli is the best simms doesn't have anything on eli, simms was v good but eli is elite.

nhpgiantsfan
01-12-2013, 04:58 PM
2011 cause the best team is the team with the best qb and eli is the best qb in giants history by far.

Say what??

gmen46
01-12-2013, 05:00 PM
Fun topic, although a very subjective one. Not the "86 team, not even close" conclusion that some would have us believe.

Some here confuse "best Giants team" with best Giants season, in my view. Understandable, since it can be argued that each season produces a unique team, but that's just one way to look at the question.

When the subject of the Niners of the 80s, for example, or the Steelers, Cowboys, Dolphins, Raiders of the 70s, is raised, it inevitably is discussed in terms of a team's general dominance during a sequence of several seasons, not just 1 season. I mean, do we really hear arguments about "the 81 Niners were their best team, not the 89 Niners"? No. Nearly every discussion concerning the Niners dominant years involve useage of "the Walsh Niners" or the Montana Niners". It is a legitimate way to approach this thread's title question, as well.

In that context, there is a compelling argument to be made for the Giants teams of the late 50s, early 60s as the "best Giants team".

During an 8 year stretch of 1956-63, Giants played in 6 Championship games. They won only 1 of those, true, but how many teams in the history of the league can boast that consistency over that many years? It is an elite club, to be sure.

With at least 5 HOF players on some of, if not all 6 of, the Giants teams in that stretch (Gifford, Huff, Rosey Brown, YA, Robustelli), plus the likes of Alex Webster, Charlie Conerly, Grier, Rote, Morrison, and with Landry-Lombardi doing the actual coaching of the first 2-3 championship teams, I submit there's a strong case to be made for that time frame as the "best Giants team, all time"

If you want to restrict the debate to only the Super Bowl era, then sure, we are restricted to a much narrower time frame of a single season here and there.

And even in that context there are different qualifiers in each of our Super Bowl-winning seasons that make this a very subjective argument---

86 team was arguably the most dominant team that year. However, even in the comparison of 86 to 90, it could be argued the 90 team was a better team overall, since 2 crucial players (Jumbo Elliott and Carl Banks) missed 8 and 7 games, respectively, due to injuries, and Simms missed the last 2 and a half games of the reg season and all the post season. We won the last 2 reg season games, 2 post season games and the Super Bowl with a professional back up QB, who was an average QB at best.

That could not have been accomplished unless the team was very, very good.

So, while there is no question the 86 Giants finished the second half of the regular season by steam-rolling through the competition with 10-11 consecutive wins, and they crushed their opponents throughout the post season culminating in a dominant second half of their Super Bowl victory, I'd say what the players and coaches achieved on the 90 team (they were absolutely dominant the first 10 games of that season, remember) after Simms went down for the season in Game 14, was even more impressive--defeating a very dominant Niners team intent on being the first (only) team to win 3 consecutive SBs, in the NFC Championship game, and defeating the most explosive team in NFL history up to that point, in the Super Bowl.

(Anyone who claims they actually believed the Giants hopes for a second SB trophy were not completely crushed when Simms broke his leg in that Dec '90 Buffalo game...is not being honest)

Giantsfan241
01-12-2013, 05:03 PM
Say what??
Do you not understand the simple logic of best qb=best team..

i think you do

nhpgiantsfan
01-12-2013, 05:16 PM
Do you not understand the simple logic of best qb=best team..

i think you do

That is the dumbest logic I have ever heard. Although I agree that Eli is better than Simms, the idea that it makes the 2011 team better than any other team is craziness. Actually I feel that of the 4 SB teams, the 2011 team was the worst.

'86, '90, '07, '11 in that order.

If I had to guess I would say that you are to young to have witnessed the Parcells era. If you saw that defense you would never make the argument that the QB is the deciding factor of which team is the best.

Giantsin04
01-12-2013, 05:25 PM
The 86 team might of been the best, but I'll tell you what, the last team they would of wanted to see in the superbowl would be one of these recent Giants teams.

nhpgiantsfan
01-12-2013, 05:34 PM
The 86 team might of been the best, but I'll tell you what, the last team they would of wanted to see in the superbowl would be one of these recent Giants teams.

2011 Patriots had a bad defense. '86 team would've killed the 2011 offensive line.

Giantsfan241
01-12-2013, 05:40 PM
No sir the team with the best qb is the best team in history of the team if you won the sb.. i'd say the pats best years were with brady.. our best years with eli.. packers best years with rodgers.. colts best years with peyton.. broncos best years with elway (or maybe peyton now if they win sb) and ravens best years with flacco if they win the big one.. i can go on n on.

Redeyejedi
01-12-2013, 05:45 PM
The 86 team was great, but how can you say that they were better than the 2011 team when the 86 team didn't make the playoffs the next year?
The 2011 team not only made the playoffs but won the division, and were the best team in the NFL.
And could we please stop with the "til Plax shot himself" nonsense? It's a myth. Talk about what people remember....do you remember how mediocre a season Burress had been having in 2008, leading up to his shooting? Do you remember how everyone was ragging on Burress for dogging it after signing his new lucrative contract the offseason?
Burress was having very little impact on that season in any meaningful or positive way......we weren't one and done because of his absence. He was already done for the season when the Giants won the Division. What are u talking about. The Giants didnt make the playoffs this season how can that be the basis of your argument

Rudyy
01-12-2013, 05:48 PM
No sir the team with the best qb is the best team in history of the team if you won the sb.. i'd say the pats best years were with brady.. our best years with eli.. packers best years with rodgers.. colts best years with peyton.. broncos best years with elway (or maybe peyton now if they win sb) and ravens best years with flacco if they win the big one.. i can go on n on.The quarterback is not the team.

nhpgiantsfan
01-12-2013, 05:49 PM
So a team that dominates all of football going 14-2 and winning the SB like 1986, is not as good as the team that went 9-7 and won the SB like 2011, solely because Eli is better than Simms?? Is that what you are saying??

Wow just wow!

Rudyy
01-12-2013, 05:49 PM
So a team that dominates all of football going 14-2 and winning the SB like 1986, is not as good as the team that went 9-7 and won the SB like 2011, solely because Eli is better than Simms?? Is that what you are saying??

Wow just wow!Doesn't make any sense lol.

nhpgiantsfan
01-12-2013, 05:50 PM
No sir the team with the best qb is the best team in history of the team if you won the sb.. i'd say the pats best years were with brady.. our best years with eli.. packers best years with rodgers.. colts best years with peyton.. broncos best years with elway (or maybe peyton now if they win sb) and ravens best years with flacco if they win the big one.. i can go on n on.
So a team that dominates all of football going 14-2 and winning the SB like 1986, is not as good as the team that went 9-7 and won the SB like 2011, solely because Eli is better than Simms?? Is that what you are saying??

Wow just wow!

Giantsfan241
01-12-2013, 05:54 PM
Without a doubt.

Giantsfan241
01-12-2013, 05:55 PM
The quarterback is not the team.
The QB makes the team.

Roosevelt
01-12-2013, 06:01 PM
sigh you roosevelt Eli is the best simms doesn't have anything on eli, simms was v good but eli is elite.

Of course Phil has things on Eli, but that's for another thread.

Giantsfan241
01-12-2013, 06:02 PM
Some things but eli > simms.

Rudyy
01-12-2013, 06:04 PM
The QB makes the team.He's an important piece, but he is not the team.

Giantsfan241
01-12-2013, 06:07 PM
Lol okay... lol

Roosevelt
01-12-2013, 06:07 PM
Some things but eli > simms.

That's cool that you feel that way. It's just not relevant to this thread.

Giantsfan241
01-12-2013, 06:21 PM
You're the one making it about it, ur right let's not discuss this here some people will get v angry.

moosedrool
01-12-2013, 06:27 PM
Anyone who thinks the 2011 team was better than the 1986 team is probably age 37 years or younger. I can't see any Giant fan over the age of 10 in 1986 possibly saying 2011 was better than 1986. It's not even close.

17-2 record

49-3 division playoffs over SF
17-0 conference playoffs over WAS
39-20 super bowl over DEN

All three games the Giants dominated from the opening whistle to the end. They never had a chance.

Roosevelt
01-12-2013, 06:40 PM
Anyone who thinks the 2011 team was better than the 1986 team is probably age 37 years or younger. I can't see any Giant fan over the age of 10 in 1986 possibly saying 2011 was better than 1986. It's not even close.

17-2 record

49-3 division playoffs over SF
17-0 conference playoffs over WAS
39-20 super bowl over DEN

All three games the Giants dominated from the opening whistle to the end. They never had a chance.

You're right. The '86 Giants we're a dominant team.

With our 2011 team, we knew they could beat any team on any given day, but we were anything but dominant.

YATittle1962
01-12-2013, 07:09 PM
I have no idea why '07 and '11 are even mentioned in this conversation

they might be in the top 10 best Giant teams ever .....maybe

some of the best Giant teams ever unfortunately didn't win championships

nhpgiantsfan
01-12-2013, 07:21 PM
I have no idea why '07 and '11 are even mentioned in this conversation

they might be in the top 10 best Giant teams ever .....maybe

some of the best Giant teams ever unfortunately didn't win championships

The ones who are mentioning 07 & 11, clearly are much younger fans

SweetZombieJesus
01-12-2013, 07:29 PM
The 2011 team by a country mile!
As great as the '86 and 90 teams were, they weren't the best team in the NFL the next year like the 2011 team was!
The 2011 team came the closest to repeating
The 2011 team was the only team in the modern Giants era to win the division and even make the playoffs the season after a SB championship.

I don't count the Sam Huff era because as great as those guys were in their time, the game was so different then, and those players don't compare to the athletes of today.

You're wrong in about 37 different ways. Just about everything you said is wrong.

The 1986 team had no good followup because 1987 was a strike year and there were replacement players playing for a good part of the season.

I assume you mean the 2012 team not the 2011 team... The 2011 team could not have repeated because they didn't make the playoffs in 2010 and they didn't make the playoffs in 2012. Since they didn't make the playoffs or win the division, what in blue blazes are you even talking about? Are you talking about the 2007 & 2008 teams?

The 2012 team was no where near as good as the 2008 team was.

SweetZombieJesus
01-12-2013, 07:30 PM
The 86 team was great, but how can you say that they were better than the 2011 team when the 86 team didn't make the playoffs the next year?

The 2011 team didn't make the playoffs the next year either. Or are you watching imaginary Giants playoff games and not sharing what you are smoking?

SweetZombieJesus
01-12-2013, 07:34 PM
The QB makes the team.

So the '84 Dolphins are the best team evar!!!!1!!

Giantsfan241
01-12-2013, 07:37 PM
So the '84 Dolphins are the best team evar!!!!1!!
I said with sb's

Broadway Blue
01-12-2013, 07:57 PM
Big Blue Wrecking Crew is all I got to say

nhpgiantsfan
01-12-2013, 08:14 PM
I said with sb's

So are the 2000 Ravens the best Raven team ever because of Trent Dilfer?

Shockeystays08
01-12-2013, 08:16 PM
86 Team.

Giantsfan241
01-12-2013, 08:19 PM
So are the 2000 Ravens the best Raven team ever because of Trent Dilfer?


I said if Flacco wins a sb with the ravens now they're team would be better than the 2000 ravens team.

nhpgiantsfan
01-12-2013, 08:24 PM
I said if Flacco wins a sb with the ravens now they're team would be better than the 2000 ravens team.

Regardless of how good the 2000 Ravens defense was??

Giantsfan241
01-12-2013, 08:39 PM
Yes, in my opinion, yes.

moosedrool
01-12-2013, 10:11 PM
I said if Flacco wins a sb with the ravens now they're team would be better than the 2000 ravens team.

This has got to be a joke. The 2000 Ravens were a dominating defense. They only gave up 165 points in 16 games.

TroyArcher
01-12-2013, 10:11 PM
86, not even a close second.

Giantsfan241
01-12-2013, 10:14 PM
Just my opinion.

Rudyy
01-12-2013, 10:15 PM
​2009..whoever disagrees with me is an idiot!

gmenfan0488
01-13-2013, 12:02 AM
That's what I was going to say. Other than the Browns game that year this team dominated until the Plax shooting.

Agreed. I have no doubt we would've repeated had Plax not shot himself.

gmenfan0488
01-13-2013, 12:03 AM
I said if Flacco wins a sb with the ravens now they're team would be better than the 2000 ravens team.

This is wrong. it's really that simple.

AllHailEli
01-13-2013, 12:15 AM
The 2007 and 2011 teams were great in the post-season and played out of their minds to win the Super Bowls but I can't say either of them was the best team, 2011 esp was not. They just made the most of the opportunity and that's really was the most amazing thing. In terms of satisfaction level, these last two were off the charts. The 2008 Super Bowl is the best Super Bowl of all time. You can't be more underdog than that going against a team on their way to perfection, and the way it all ended with an escape and a helmet catch, the script couldn't be more perfect.

Rat_bastich
01-13-2013, 01:32 AM
The Parcell's era Giants were probably some of the best. They were gritty and tough. There was no finesse to them and the defense was something to be feared. The offense was made up of blue collar guys as well. You didn't have receivers like you have now, but you had Bavaro and guys that could get you a few yards after the bruising running game softened up opposing defenses. The 86' and 90' Giants were just hard nosed and the better teams that I have ever seen.

ebick
01-13-2013, 09:55 AM
1986. Lost the season opener, and only lost one more time all year. Rolled in the play-offs.....only one competitive half in the play-offs. Best quote....In the divisional play-off game against SF, won by the Giants 49-3, Jerry Rice dropped a pass very early in the game that probably would have gone for a TD. When LT was asked if that would have made a difference in the game, he responded, "Yes, it would have been 49-10".

NASCARBLITZ
01-13-2013, 10:50 AM
i started watching the giants when i was around 6 now at that time i didnt know nearly enough about football like i do now...but even at 8 years old...watching them in 86 i could tell you they were dominate and the best team the giants ever had...followed by the 90 team..infact heres my order of best giants teams from my era 84 to present..sbs or not
1.86
2.90
3.08
4.89
5.07
6.11

NASCARBLITZ
01-13-2013, 10:53 AM
the 08 team..should have won it all...i have no doubt we wouldve beat the steelers like a drum in the sb cause we manhandled them and the cardinals in both games we played in that season..the schedule was brutal that year also, just like this years was and we flat out crushed teams with ease, other than the damn browns lol what a joke that game was..lol anyways nobody could stop the rushing attack of the giants..nobody..rmbr 300yds against a good carolina team..it was crazy..we also blew out the ravens and made them look old with that running game

NASCARBLITZ
01-13-2013, 10:54 AM
89 is another one of those teams that should have won..damn flipper anderson!

B&RWarrior
01-13-2013, 10:56 AM
So are the 2000 Ravens the best Raven team ever because of Trent Dilfer?

Nice one!

B&RWarrior
01-13-2013, 11:32 AM
Fun topic, although a very subjective one. Not the "86 team, not even close" conclusion that some would have us believe.

Some here confuse "best Giants team" with best Giants season, in my view. Understandable, since it can be argued that each season produces a unique team, but that's just one way to look at the question.

When the subject of the Niners of the 80s, for example, or the Steelers, Cowboys, Dolphins, Raiders of the 70s, is raised, it inevitably is discussed in terms of a team's general dominance during a sequence of several seasons, not just 1 season. I mean, do we really hear arguments about "the 81 Niners were their best team, not the 89 Niners"? No. Nearly every discussion concerning the Niners dominant years involve useage of "the Walsh Niners" or the Montana Niners". It is a legitimate way to approach this thread's title question, as well.

In that context, there is a compelling argument to be made for the Giants teams of the late 50s, early 60s as the "best Giants team".

During an 8 year stretch of 1956-63, Giants played in 6 Championship games. They won only 1 of those, true, but how many teams in the history of the league can boast that consistency over that many years? It is an elite club, to be sure.

With at least 5 HOF players on some of, if not all 6 of, the Giants teams in that stretch (Gifford, Huff, Rosey Brown, YA, Robustelli), plus the likes of Alex Webster, Charlie Conerly, Grier, Rote, Morrison, and with Landry-Lombardi doing the actual coaching of the first 2-3 championship teams, I submit there's a strong case to be made for that time frame as the "best Giants team, all time"

If you want to restrict the debate to only the Super Bowl era, then sure, we are restricted to a much narrower time frame of a single season here and there.

And even in that context there are different qualifiers in each of our Super Bowl-winning seasons that make this a very subjective argument---

86 team was arguably the most dominant team that year. However, even in the comparison of 86 to 90, it could be argued the 90 team was a better team overall, since 2 crucial players (Jumbo Elliott and Carl Banks) missed 8 and 7 games, respectively, due to injuries, and Simms missed the last 2 and a half games of the reg season and all the post season. We won the last 2 reg season games, 2 post season games and the Super Bowl with a professional back up QB, who was an average QB at best.

That could not have been accomplished unless the team was very, very good.

So, while there is no question the 86 Giants finished the second half of the regular season by steam-rolling through the competition with 10-11 consecutive wins, and they crushed their opponents throughout the post season culminating in a dominant second half of their Super Bowl victory, I'd say what the players and coaches achieved on the 90 team (they were absolutely dominant the first 10 games of that season, remember) after Simms went down for the season in Game 14, was even more impressive--defeating a very dominant Niners team intent on being the first (only) team to win 3 consecutive SBs, in the NFC Championship game, and defeating the most explosive team in NFL history up to that point, in the Super Bowl.

(Anyone who claims they actually believed the Giants hopes for a second SB trophy were not completely crushed when Simms broke his leg in that Dec '90 Buffalo game...is not being honest)

Great try, but no. Best SB era Giants team are the '86 Giants. Take a look at the two rosters. The Bills were a better team than us in '90. If San Fran doesn't fumble we don't even get in the SB in '90. We then went on to win a very close SB. In '86 we whipped ***** the entire way.