Where ESPN ranked the 2009 Saints among 57 Super Bowl-winning teams (1 Viewer)

[ItFan]

NO WAY it’s middle of the pack. Nuff said

 

[IceHot]

I thought they would be lower but check out the numbers what they based their decision on.

Where ESPN ranked the 2009 Saints among 57 Super Bowl-winning teams

Where do you rank the New Orleans Saints' Super Bowl XLIV-winning squad among the greatest teams of all time? Or at least, among the NFL's other 57 champions? That's a question that ESPN writer Aaron Schatz set out to answer. Using his advanced-stat DVOA ratings…

saintswire.usatoday.com

Seems kind of low to me. NFL Films rated us as #30 against all NFL teams historically just not SB teams but championship teams from the past as well... such as the undefeated Canton Bulldogs and the 10-1 Bears

 

[OutlawSaint]

2018 team would beat our 2009 team if they were categorized as a SB team and not robbed in the NFC Championship game. 2018 Saints had more talent and an overall better defense that wasn't live or die off of the turnovers.

 

[fanoftheyear7]

Is there a way someone can post the list 57-1 ?? I’d love to see the full list. Thanks!

 

[sfidc3]

Respectfully disagree.

IMO, our 2011 Saints would have had a decent shot of beating our 2009 team. We also had some close calls vs. sub-par teams in the regular season.

Look at the stats the Saints had in the NFCCG vs. the Vikings.Turnovers were the only "saving grace" for us in that on (look under “TEAM STATS”). https://www.pro-football-reference.com/boxscores/201001240nor.htm

Sometimes, it's better to have the chips fall your way at the right time. It did for us in that one!

Anyway, I'm proud of how the Saints played in '09. I would put them at about #20 all time.

Respectfully disagree on the 2011 Saints being better if that's what you are saying....decent chance? OF course, they would have a chance....

But the 2009 Saints D was better and its not close. They created an incredible amount of turnovers, that's not all luck.....

They were also well balanced, the 2011 offensive was more explosive but I'm going with the SB winning team every time, they won when it counted most......

 

[2009ring]

The Ambush onside kick alone should have rated it higher in my opinion
Most gutsy and risky call l can remember in a Superbowl

Between that and the Porter Pick 6 I agree with you. Two all-time plays.

 

[ndcc]

Respectfully disagree on the 2011 Saints being better if that's what you are saying....decent chance? OF course, they would have a chance....

But the 2009 Saints D was better and its not close. They created an incredible amount of turnovers, that's not all luck.....

They were also well balanced, the 2011 offensive was more explosive but I'm going with the SB winning team every time, they won when it counted most......

Very good points; logical.

It’s not bad to agree to disagree.
In this case, I choose to stand pat.

 

[NeverGiveUP2]

Respectfully disagree.

IMO, our 2011 Saints would have had a decent shot of beating our 2009 team. We also had some close calls vs. sub-par teams in the regular season.

Look at the stats the Saints had in the NFCCG vs. the Vikings.Turnovers were the only "saving grace" for us in that on (look under “TEAM STATS”). https://www.pro-football-reference.com/boxscores/201001240nor.htm

Sometimes, it's better to have the chips fall your way at the right time. It did for us in that one!

Anyway, I'm proud of how the Saints played in '09. I would put them at about #20 all time.

I don't know where I would rank them all time but 2009 would lose to 2011 by 10 points... 2011 would rank top 15 all time had we won it all that year... As we should have

 

[sfidc3]

I don't know where I would rank them all time but 2009 would lose to 2011 by 10 points... 2011 would rank top 15 all time had we won it all that year... As we should have

I think you are vastly underrating the 2009 defense here, they were clearly superior.....and the players that remained on it until 2011 were 2 years younger.....

In that 9er playoff game we turned it over 5 times, and only got 1 in return....

In the 2009 playoff run we turned it over only 1 time in 3 games, and the D got 8.....

I think you folks are looking at the bright shiny object (the 2011 Saints offense) and vastly underestimating everything besides....offense.....

 

[Saintman2884]

Did the 2011 Saints win the SB?

I said the 2009 Saints team would beat at least 50 SB winners. Whether the 2011 team could beat the 2009 team is irrelevant. The 2011 didn't win a SB.

And a quick note about the Vikings turnovers: balls were punched out and intercepted. You give no credit whatsoever to the defense for creating the TO?

You have to admit, System, our 2011 roster was probably far better, more talented, more explosive on offense (record-breaking actually), but it didn't have as many breaks go its way compared to its Super Bowl 43-winning celebrated, hacylon predecessor. Their were more then a few things that went our way during that season to put us in position to win maybe a couple games we wouldve lost in previous seasons.

2011 was where we finally faced or went up against this very high, tough, extremely solid figurative brick wall in the San Francisco 49ers. Probably the last great game ever played at Candlestick Park, we were that unstoppable force that slammed into a unbreakable wall and while the wall was severely damaged and nearly broke, it was still standing at the end of the game and another, less-talented team that gelled at the right time (Giants) came in and destroyed what was remaining of that wall the following week. After 2011, we were never truly the same unstoppable team again, at least not in the same form.

 

[Saintman2884]

I think you are vastly underrating the 2009 defense here, they were clearly superior.....and the players that remained on it until 2011 were 2 years younger.....

In that 9er playoff game we turned it over 5 times, and only got 1 in return....

In the 2009 playoff run we turned it over only 1 time in 3 games, and the D got 8.....

I think you folks are looking at the bright shiny object (the 2011 Saints offense) and vastly underestimating everything besides....offense.....

sf, they are right in the fact that we got a lot more of the extra breaks, less-damaging, self-inflicted wounds than our 2011 squad did in the post-season. The worst, most frustrating thing we did in that 2011 Divisional Playoff game was fall behind by almost 3 TDs and have to claw our way back into the contest and Niners wouldn't let us get ahead too far to feel comfortable.

I can say, as agonizing and painful as that January 2012 loss still feels over a decade ago, at least we didn't consciously and deliberately go out of our ways to choke it like Detroit did last week, being up 21-3 at halftime and having a dumbarse HC unnecessarily call over-aggressive, stupid plays in two situations where a FG wouldve worked better. Last week's NFCCG loss for Detroit has to be laid partly at the feet of Dan Campbell.

 

[ndcc]

To me, it depends on a few factors how a 2009 Saints vs. 2011 Saints game would go:

a.) how many turnovers the 2009 defense could generate against the 2011 offense?​

b.) how well could 2011 defense stop the run against the 2009 offense?​

c.) how much pass rush could the 2011 defense generate vs. the 2009 offensive line?​

While they bled some yards, the 2009 defense was 2nd in the league in creating 39 turnovers and an additional 8 in the 3 playoff games. And despite the 2011 offense putting up points like no other, that's exactly how you beat them and exactly how they lost at Candlestick and even to 4-12 Buccaneers team... an opportunistic defense. The 2011 offense turned it over 19 times in the regular season and an additional 7 times in 2 playoff games. While the 2009 offense wasn't very protective of the ball either (turning it over 29 times including the playoffs), the 2011 defense themselves only generated 16 turnovers and 3 additional in 2 playoff games. In 18 games, the 2011 defense generated multiple turnovers in only 4 games where as the 2009 defense in 19 games had multiple turnovers in 14 games. I feel the 2011 defense would likely get maybe one on the 2009 offense, but the 2009 defense would get at least 2 maybe 3 off the 2011 offense in return.

The 2009 offense was far more balanced than the 2011 offense was which led to the 2011 defense more often than not playing with a sizable lead (leading opponents to get pass heavy early). While the 2011 defense was middle of the road regarding rushing yards and rushing TD's surrendered, they were 29th in YPC so teams that could run the ball did so nearly at will, it was just a matter of if opposing defenses would be able to keep them in the game or if they'd get blown out and have to abandon the run (which is why the 2011 defense was 1st in rushing attempts).

While the greatness of the 2011 offensive line isn't in question, the 2011 defensive line is a massive question mark considering no one on the DL that year other than Will Smith had more than 5 sacks. 15.5 of the team's 33 sacks came via blitzing and Harper ended up leading the team with 7.5 that year. While the 2009 offensive line was every bit as good as the 2011 offensive line, the 2009 defensive line rotation proved to be far more potent getting more pressure consistently with only the front 4 and not having to rely as heavily on blitzing (another reason the 2011 defense faltered in San Francisco). The 2009 defense wouldn't have to commit to blitzing as much to get pressure or stopping the run which would free up the back 7 to focus on stopping the 2011 passing attack. The 2011 defense would have to still blitz heavily leaving large passing windows open or risk being picked apart by the 2009 passing attack.

The only thing I really don't know how the 2009 defense would fair with is with Jimmy Graham. We didn't have one of those Aquib Talib or Kam Chancellor enforcer types in 2009 that could just man him up and run with him, however with having He Who Shall Not Be Named in deep center field could free up Harper having to play 2-high and could just try and bracket him with Fujita or something. However the same could also be said about Shockey since the 2011 defense had largely the same personnel sans Fujita and that free safety. Don't see Dunbar, Casillas, Herring, or Humber being able to stay with Shockey and he'd still body Greer or any CB on him through sheer size.

In all likelihood, a hypothetical game between the 2009 Saints vs. the 2011 Saints would likely end up in a down-to-the-wire, drag out game like the 2009 NFC Championship was coming down to the last possession. The 2011 offense moving the ball well (and probably at ease sometimes) on the 2009 defense but turning it over quite a bit, and the 2009 offense keeping the 2011 defense on its heels running the ball taking calculated deep shots against the Jenkins/Harper tandem and picking apart everything underneath.

That, my friend… is the classic textbook way of making your case.

…quite impressive.

 

[Epic Brownie]

If the Colts win they'd be top 10.

 

[sfidc3]

The 2009 offense was far more balanced than the 2011 offense was which led to the 2011 defense more often than not playing with a sizable lead (leading opponents to get pass heavy early).

No, it wasn't. That's why I didn't mention offensive stats....The 2011 offense actually ran for 21 yards more than the 2009 offense on just 30 less attempts.....

2009 - 55% pass, 45% run
2011 - 59% pass, 41% run

Not exactly "far more balanced".....both offense were great and balanced.....The 2011 defense couldn't hold the 2009 defenses jock....that is the difference.....