Super Bowl Appearances

[Mr. Scot]

So a post by one of our resident knuckleheads got me thinking (ironic, huh) where does this just over twenty-year-old franchise stand in league history when it comes to Super Bowl appearances?

Looked it up and here's what I found:

First off, the hard luck cases.  There are four teams who have never made the big game at all: That'd be the Browns (new version, though neither did the old version till they moved and changed their name), Jaguars, Texans and Lions.  Of that bunch, the Lions are the only "old" franchise here unless you consider the current Browns to be a continuation of the original Browns rather than the Ravens taking that role.  And FYI, league records back you up on that if you do.

Seven teams have a single championship appearance to their credit:  Those teams are the Buccaneers, Jets, Saints (winners) Cardinals, Chargers, Falcons and Titans (losers).  Of the winners, the Jets have the longest streak of not getting back, followed by the Bucs and of course the Saints.  Which big game loser has the longest drought?  The Chargers, with Atlanta and the Titans / Oilers not far behind.

As far as appearances go, we're now up to the Panthers who have two in twenty years, and that's a number which equals the success rate of some much older franchises.

The Bears, Bengals, Chiefs, Eagles and Ravens are the five teams that have a pair of appearances.  Only the Ravens won both games.  The Bears and Chiefs split and the Bengals and Eagles lost both. 

Time wise, the Panthers tie the Ravens for the third quickest return, coming in at twelve years.  The Chiefs and Bengals were faster, while the Eagles and Bears both took more than two decades to get back.

That's fairly respectable for a young franchise, and it's worth noting that even with the new expansion rules to benefit them, no team created since the Panthers has come anywhere close to their level of playoff success.

Overall useless information I know, but fun food for thought in the offseason doldrums.

Seems like even with the dark times the team has had in the past, overall we're not doing too bad.

[Cam's New Arm]

Pie this man

[caatfan]

Making it to the NFC Championship game in season #2 ain't bad either.

[Servant of Cthululelei]

Great post.  Though now I'm terrified because our company of teams that have been to two superbowls but won neither are the Bengals and the Eagles.  Both franchises that I (and many others) laugh at for their choking ways.  Franchises that I would not be at all surprised to never see win a superbowl in my lifetime.

I'm not superstitious, but I'm a little stitious.

[Hoenheim]

I don't even care about appearances I just want  a SB win man

The Bills appeared in 4 Super Bowls in a row all the good that did them

[Handsome Steve]

Yeah, i'll take not going back to a bowl for a while just for a win. Hell, it was almost 13 years since the last one and this one hurt more than the last time.

[Khyber53]

Third time is the charm. We'll have a loooong talk about it on Feb. 6, 2017.

[Mr. Scot]

44 minutes ago, Handsome Steve said:

Yeah, i'll take not going back to a bowl for a while just for a win. Hell, it was almost 13 years since the last one and this one hurt more than the last time.

See, what you have to realize is that's not a trade off that you have to make.

It's possible to build a team that's in contention on an annual basis.  More than one franchise has done it, and our GM is making the right kind of moves to put us in that category as well.

Said it in the other thread: If one Super Bowl win is enough to keep you happy through numerous long crappy seasons of watching your team lose and your rivals win, that's some pretty low standards.

We're building something far superior to that: A winning tradition, and we're well on the way.

[KillerKat]

35 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

See, what you have to realize is that's not a trade off that you have to make.

It's possible to build a team that's in contention on an annual basis.  More than one franchise has done it, and our GM is making the right kind of moves to put us in that category as well.

Said it in the other thread: If one Super Bowl win is enough to keep you happy through numerous long crappy seasons of watching your team lose and your rivals win, that's some pretty low standards.

We're building something far superior to that: A winning tradition, and we're well on the way.

I'd rather choose the first option of winning 1 then sucking just so that I can say the Panthers have won one in my lifetime. And then go ahead with the future stuff for the rest of time. If you keep building and keep missing the win, other people are going to talk poo about you. If you win 1 and then keep losing, others will talk poo about you. They're gonna talk either way so I'd rather have the win.

[KillerKat]

...Only if I had to choose between the 2 though

[Handsome Steve]

16 hours ago, Mr. Scot said:

See, what you have to realize is that's not a trade off that you have to make.

It's possible to build a team that's in contention on an annual basis.  More than one franchise has done it, and our GM is making the right kind of moves to put us in that category as well.

Said it in the other thread: If one Super Bowl win is enough to keep you happy through numerous long crappy seasons of watching your team lose and your rivals win, that's some pretty low standards.

We're building something far superior to that: A winning tradition, and we're well on the way.

To be fair, other than a handful of seasons, we HAVE been through numerous long crappy seasons of losing and our rivals winning.  Just so happens that in the last three years we've had two winning seasons. So yeah, at this point, my standards ARE pretty low. I got so used to being let down by this team that yeah, I WOULD take a bowl win just to say we've won one. 

It's kinda pointless if you are ALMOST winning one year in and out, and never doing it. I do trust GMan but i still get gun shy about this team and not putting everything together. But I try not to get my panties in a wad about it since I literally can't do anything about it but watch and hope.

[Mr. Scot]

Just now, Handsome Steve said:

To be fair, other than a handful of seasons, we HAVE been through numerous long crappy seasons of losing and our rivals winning.  Just so happens that in the last three years we've had two winning seasons. So yeah, at this point, my standards ARE pretty low. I got so used to being let down by this team that yeah, I WOULD take a bowl win just to say we've won one. 

It's kinda pointless if you are ALMOST winning one year in and out, and never doing it. I do trust GMan but i still get gun shy about this team and not putting everything together. But I try not to get my panties in a wad about it since I literally can't do anything about it but watch and hope.

And what's different about the last three seasons?

[Handsome Steve]

16 hours ago, KillerKat said:

I'd rather choose the first option of winning 1 then sucking just so that I can say the Panthers have won one in my lifetime. And then go ahead with the future stuff for the rest of time. If you keep building and keep missing the win, other people are going to talk poo about you. If you win 1 and then keep losing, others will talk poo about you. They're gonna talk either way so I'd rather have the win.

Yeah, this is basically my view on it. I don't care if we are constantly good if we never win the whole thing.

[Mr. Scot]

16 hours ago, KillerKat said:

I'd rather choose the first option of winning 1 then sucking just so that I can say the Panthers have won one in my lifetime. And then go ahead with the future stuff for the rest of time. If you keep building and keep missing the win, other people are going to talk poo about you. If you win 1 and then keep losing, others will talk poo about you. They're gonna talk either way so I'd rather have the win.

The problem with that approach is that the only thing guaranteed is years of cap hell afterwards. It doesn't guarantee a Super Bowl win. Teams like the Dolphins, Colts and Saints found out the hard way.