Jump to content

  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Most Consecutive Seasons .500 or Under in the Super Bowl Era(1967-Present)

kungfoodude

By kungfoodude,
in Carolina Panthers

 Share

Recommended Posts

kungfoodude Grand Master

kungfoodude

Posted
Posted


Minnesota - 3
Baltimore - 4
Dallas - 5
Pittsburgh - 5
Green Bay - 6
Kansas City - 6
Carolina - 7
Denver - 7
Houston - 7
Miami - 7
Tennessee - 7
Washington - 7
LA Chargers - 8
NY Giants - 8
San Francisco - 8
Seattle - 8
Buffalo - 9
Chicago - 9
Indianapolis - 9
Jacksonville - 9
New England - 9
Atlanta - 10
Detroit - 10
NY Jets - 11
Philadelphia - 11
Cleveland - 12
Arizona - 13
Las Vegas - 13
LA Rams - 13
Cincinnati - 14
Tampa Bay - 14
New Orleans - 20

 

Looked into this today and was pretty shocked to see how well we have done historically in comparison to the league as a whole. So, while this is definitively the worst stretch in franchise history, it could be a lot worse. The negative is, it could also get a lot worse. 

Either way, it was interesting to see some of these INSANE stretches of futility. 

  • Pie 1
  • Beer 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
kungfoodude Grand Master

kungfoodude

Posted
  • Author
Posted
3 minutes ago, HaricotVert said:

So we are not as historically bad as it may feel?

We are at our franchise low but in comparison to the rest of the NFL's franchise lows......I mean....it is wild how low it can get. Eleven teams have had at least a decade long .500 or less stretch. That's over a third of the league.

  • Pie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
PleaseCutStewart Grand Master

PleaseCutStewart

Posted
Posted
12 minutes ago, kungfoodude said:


Minnesota - 3
Baltimore - 4
Dallas - 5
Pittsburgh - 5
Green Bay - 6
Kansas City - 6
Carolina - 7
Denver - 7
Houston - 7
Miami - 7
Tennessee - 7
Washington - 7
LA Chargers - 8
NY Giants - 8
San Francisco - 8
Seattle - 8
Buffalo - 9
Chicago - 9
Indianapolis - 9
Jacksonville - 9
New England - 9
Atlanta - 10
Detroit - 10
NY Jets - 11
Philadelphia - 11
Cleveland - 12
Arizona - 13
Las Vegas - 13
LA Rams - 13
Cincinnati - 14
Tampa Bay - 14
New Orleans - 20

 

Looked into this today and was pretty shocked to see how well we have done historically in comparison to the league as a whole. So, while this is definitively the worst stretch in franchise history, it could be a lot worse. The negative is, it could also get a lot worse. 

Either way, it was interesting to see some of these INSANE stretches of futility. 

Helps that we have only been around since 1995. At the rate we are going, we are well on our way to catching up to NO....

The most surprising thing is that Minni somehow has been the best at being .500 or better

  • Pie 1
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
kungfoodude Grand Master

kungfoodude

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)
22 minutes ago, PleaseCutStewart said:

Helps that we have only been around since 1995. At the rate we are going, we are well on our way to catching up to NO....

The most surprising thing is that Minni somehow has been the best at being .500 or better

Well, Jacksonville already has had a 9 year stretch. Houston has had a 7 and existed even less.

Minnesota was completely shocking.

Edited by kungfoodude
Link to comment
Share on other sites
kungfoodude Grand Master

kungfoodude

Posted
  • Author
Posted
5 minutes ago, TD alt said:

Yeah, but that 24 percent winning season reality still stings. We can look at all the loser stats we like.

No doubt. I honestly started this thinking we would be in the bottom half of the NFL in this but was very surprised to see how high up this list we actually were.

I think the thing is that our stretches of futility have been relatively short until now. But, we also rarely have ever had any appreciable stretches of winning. 

Still have never had back to back winning seasons(no one in the NFL can say that).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
kungfoodude Grand Master

kungfoodude

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Just now, t96 said:

It's kind of a flawed comparison though as we are such a relatively young franchise and many of those streaks were pre-cap era where smaller markets had even less of a chance of contending than they do now. 

Quite a few of those 10+ year stretches were post 1995.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Joe Bear
      2026 World Cup Thread

      By Joe Bear · Posted

      Hello, soccer fans [crickets, tumbleweed flies by]. The World Cup kicks off in less than 2 weeks and, well, 🇺🇸USA USA USA🇺🇸 and all. We beat Senegal 3-2 yesterday in a tune-up friendly at BoA, with Christian Pulisic finally entering the scoring column.  How will we do in the World Cup once our tournament kicks off on the 12th? Well, there are 48 teams (assuming Iran is there) and it feels like one of two thing happens: we get grouped for the first time since '98, or we make it to the Round of 16 for the third time in the last four World Cups. I tried out the lottery for an Atlanta game and struck out, so yesterday was as World Cup as I'll get for in-person ($285/ticket for like Norway vs $39/ticket for USMNT right beforehand was a layup).  The U.S. has a travel-heavy schedule in group play, playing in LA, Seattle and LA. Real road warrior mentality being built. Glad the east coast gets worse kickoff times for a NA World Cup than a Qatar World Cup.
    • TD alt
      LWOS on the FO's error--my word--on X...traits, timelines, Brazzell, & indications of improvement.

      By TD alt · Posted

      Well, that's the thing. Drafting players only for their physical measurables as you are suggesting only really happened during 2024, and X unfortunately has become the poster child for that. To be clear, it's not necessarily about drafting RAS over skill, but RAS over NFL-readiness and/or a solid body of work. Lots of players show skill in college, but those skills don't necessarily translate to the NFL for a multitude of reasons. But, getting back to the main point, to be clear, I believe that our FO is still enamored with physical gifts (who wouldn't be?), but now they're letting Dr. Eric Eager's proprietary system--his "secret sauce" prioritize the players that the Panthers draft, and it seems like it weighs not only a solid body of work, relative to a college career of course, but consistent gradual improvement as evidenced by production pretty highly. 
    • rebelrouser
      LWOS on the FO's error--my word--on X...traits, timelines, Brazzell, & indications of improvement.

      By rebelrouser · Posted

      Its a good article about how pathetically bad our past drafts ('23 and '24) have been. Building the team in '23 since we weren't ready yet and taking your qb in '24 made so much more sense in hindsight. Ladd McConkey over XL is pretty much a given but not sure it does as much to change Bryce's trajectory as the author suggests.  As bad as '23 and '24 drafts were, the '25 and '26 really give me hope.  
×
×
  • Create New...