Just What Would a Three-peat Mean to the Chiefs/NFL?

[Gravedigger]

It would give you a flex that no other team has ever had, not Tom Brady, not Joe Montana, not Don Shula, not Bill Belichick, so it would verify Reid and Mahomes as two of the best of all time and KC would be the ONLY true Dynasty of all time in the NFL. An opportunity that only shows itself once every 20 years or so, next year will be fun either way.

[big nasty kcnut]

It mean people will have to shut the **** up about the pats. It mean chiefs will be hated forever and I am all for it. Sometime being the villain is a good thing.

[KobesPilot]

A dynasty is in the making, don't know of any other teams who have had roster mishaps like we have but remain unbeatable in the playoffs against teams with an overall better roster, but they just don't play like a team should, they're all in it for themselves. It's a Brotherhood in KC.

[SHOWTIME]

I'm thinking 20-0 myself next year...

[FlaChief58]

Win 3 in a row, and you have to be considered the greatest dynasty of all time.

[RedinTexas]

The 70s Steelers really stand out to me as the greatest of all the dynasties. They went back-to-back twice in the span of 6 years. With a couple of breaks they could have won 6 in a row, but they didn't. Three in a row was beyond the capability of the mighty Steelers and they were competing before the salary cap and free agency.

Winning three in a row would elevate the Chiefs dynasty to the level of those Steelers because we are doing it at a time when it is far more difficult to sustain success. In my mind, three in a row would make the Chiefs the greatest of all the dynasties.

[DJay23]

Originally Posted by RedinTexas

The 70s Steelers really stand out to me as the greatest of all the dynasties. They went back-to-back twice in the span of 6 years. With a couple of breaks they could have won 6 in a row, but they didn't. Three in a row was beyond the capability of the mighty Steelers and they were competing before the salary cap and free agency.

Winning three in a row would elevate the Chiefs dynasty to the level of those Steelers because we are doing it at a time when it is far more difficult to sustain success. In my mind, three in a row would make the Chiefs the greatest of all the dynasties.

I agree with everything you said and I think there are more tiers to this.

If we win 3 in a row it puts us just ahead of the Steelers as you said. We would both have 4 in 6. The Steelers winning 2 back to back in that time frame, which has only been done by them (Damn Eric Fisher and his Achilles!) Then we would have 3 in a row (which is harder) having only been done by us.

But also like you said, winning back to back used to be easier. 8 of the first 14 (57%) Super Bowls were won by teams going back to back. Then it was 10 of 23 (43%), 12 of 28 (43%), 14 of 33 (42%) and 16 of 39 (41%). Now it stands at 18 of 58 ....(31%). If we win 3 in a row then 3 of the 59 Super Bowls have been won by a team going 3 straight (5%).

The Chiefs are only the 3rd team to accomplish back to back Super Bowls in the Salary Cap Era (Denver XXXII, XXXIII; Patriots XXXVIII, XXXIX) The Cowboys 2nd in XXVIII was the last year before the salary cap started in the 94 season. By the way, in looking that up, the first salary cap was $34.6 million)

I would still put the Super Bowl dynasties (which I consider 3 wins in 5 years, but extending beyond that if the QB/Coaches keep winning) in this order IF we win a 3rd straight...

Belichick/Brady
Reid/Mahomes
Noll/Bradshaw
Walsh/Siefert/Montana
Johnson/Switzer/Aikman

Belichick and Brady are an interesting study to me. By my own definition, they really had 2 dynasties 10 years apart. However, in those 10 years they lost 2 Super Bowls and went to a lot of AFCCG. Had Brady and Belichick not stayed together through those 10 years, or had a few years where they didn't win the division or make the playoffs, it might be 2 separate dynasties, but since they didn't I would consider it 1 long dynasty.

So we would have a long way to go to match the dynasty of Belichick and Brady. Probably not possible with Reid/Mahomes given Reid's age. But 3 in a row would give us, in my opinion the best TEAM ever, if not the longest tenured DYNASTY.

[RedinTexas]

Originally Posted by DJay23

I agree with everything you said and I think there are more tiers to this.

If we win 3 in a row it puts us just ahead of the Steelers as you said. We would both have 4 in 6. The Steelers winning 2 back to back in that time frame, which has only been done by them (Damn Eric Fisher and his Achilles!) Then we would have 3 in a row (which is harder) having only been done by us.

But also like you said, winning back to back used to be easier. 8 of the first 14 (57%) Super Bowls were won by teams going back to back. Then it was 10 of 23 (43%), 12 of 28 (43%), 14 of 33 (42%) and 16 of 39 (41%). Now it stands at 18 of 58 ....(31%). If we win 3 in a row then 3 of the 59 Super Bowls have been won by a team going 3 straight (5%).

The Chiefs are only the 3rd team to accomplish back to back Super Bowls in the Salary Cap Era (Denver XXXII, XXXIII; Patriots XXXVIII, XXXIX) The Cowboys 2nd in XXVIII was the last year before the salary cap started in the 94 season. By the way, in looking that up, the first salary cap was $34.6 million)

I would still put the Super Bowl dynasties (which I consider 3 wins in 5 years, but extending beyond that if the QB/Coaches keep winning) in this order IF we win a 3rd straight...

Belichick/Brady
Reid/Mahomes
Noll/Bradshaw
Walsh/Siefert/Montana
Johnson/Switzer/Aikman

Belichick and Brady are an interesting study to me. By my own definition, they really had 2 dynasties 10 years apart. However, in those 10 years they lost 2 Super Bowls and went to a lot of AFCCG. Had Brady and Belichick not stayed together through those 10 years, or had a few years where they didn't win the division or make the playoffs, it might be 2 separate dynasties, but since they didn't I would consider it 1 long dynasty.

So we would have a long way to go to match the dynasty of Belichick and Brady. Probably not possible with Reid/Mahomes given Reid's age. But 3 in a row would give us, in my opinion the best TEAM ever, if not the longest tenured DYNASTY.

It raises some of the questions I posed in another thread about dynasties. When does a dynasty begin? When does it end? The Patriots missed the playoffs entirely in the 2008 season. They went 3 seasons without winning a playoff game from 2008-2010. They went 10 seasons without winning the Super Bowl with only 2 Super Bowl appearances in the middle of their run.

If we're supposed to think of the Patriots as having a single dynasty rather than 2 separate dynasties, then that would give credence to claims like Buffalo having a dynasty in the early 90s even though they never won the Super Bowl, or Minnesota in the late 60s and 70s.

The term "dynasty" is too loosely defined for these purposes.

[DJay23]

Originally Posted by RedinTexas

It raises some of the questions I posed in another thread about dynasties. When does a dynasty begin? When does it end? The Patriots missed the playoffs entirely in the 2008 season. They went 3 seasons without winning a playoff game from 2008-2010. They went 10 seasons without winning the Super Bowl with only 2 Super Bowl appearances in the middle of their run.

If we're supposed to think of the Patriots as having a single dynasty rather than 2 separate dynasties, then that would give credence to claims like Buffalo having a dynasty in the early 90s even though they never won the Super Bowl, or Minnesota in the late 60s and 70s.

The term "dynasty" is too loosely defined for these purposes.

Right about the dynasty definition. Since there is not an agreed upon metric for that, everyone has their own definition. But if you aggregate all of the conversations about dynasties over the years, you usually hear the 60s Packers (if you lump the NFL championships pre Super Bowl...which I think confuses things too much so I leave them out of Super Bowl dynasty talk), the 70s Steelers, the 80s Niners, the 90s Cowboys, the 00s Patriots (or if you prefer the 00s and 10s Patriots), and now the 20s Chiefs.

Early 70s Dolphins went to 3 straight, had an undefeated season and won back to back. They would be next on my list, just didn't run the success long enough.

I mostly lump the the Patriots 2 dynasties into one because it is the same coach and QB combo for that entire stretch. That's an unprecedented aspect to their run like winning 2 back to back for the Steelers, or 3 in a row would be for the Chiefs.

[stevieray]

That Lamar and his fanbase got their just desserts.

[Rainbarrel]

Belton Missouri will eclipse Roswell New Mexico as "the" alien crash site

[Red Dawg]

3 straight gives you best team ever status. Gives Mahomes a big jump to Brady in the media.

[Brooklyn]

Agree we're going for 4 like the 1980s Islanders.

[InChiefsHeaven]

Originally Posted by Brooklyn

Agree we're going for 4 like the 1980s Islanders.

Going for 4 so we can illustrate just how OPPOSITE the Bills we really are...