When a team as successful as the Patriots make another championship run, the media finds the need to compare the current dynasty with those of the past.

This article is a week old, but another example of what I mean.  Jean-Jacques Taylor of the Dallas Morning News uses this piece to compare the 2001-2007 Patriots to the dynasties of the 1960′s (Green Bay), 1970′s (Pittsburgh), 1980′s (San Francisco), and 1990′s (Cowboys).

Taylor takes great pains to use statistics of the by-gone era to justify that at least two of those teams of the past (Pittsburgh and Dallas) would defeat the Patriots “every time…or almost every time.”  Sigh.

The old adage that you can take statistics to make any argument applies here.  There are those who can probably claim that the Oakland Raiders of the 1960′s through the mid-1980′s should also be in the discussion.

The bottom line is that these arguments are hollow because it is impossible to decide the issue in the most appropriate manner possible…on the field.  There’s a reason why these teams were deemed the dynasty of their decade…they dominated the league during that period of time.  We can now include the Patriots as the team of the 2000′s.

Comparing teams from different eras is great bar room talk, but ultimately useless.  Besides, I doubt the Patriots would have trouble today containing 73 year-old Bart Starr.