Which was the best, the 2000 or the 2012 SB run?

**goldenelite28** · 02-07-2013, 09:16 PM

2012 IMO.

Facing two of the best QB to ever play the game on the road.
Facing the very real possibility of being the new Eagles.
Having so much drama during the season.
Being a dropped pass away from the superbowl the previous year.
Ray's last ride.
Constant media scrutiny of Flacco.
Possibly Reed's last year here.
Flacco having the second best postseason in NFL history.
70 miracle.
Revenge against New England.

**Uli2001** · 02-07-2013, 09:24 PM

Originally Posted by goldenelite28

2012 IMO.

Facing two of the best QB to ever play the game on the road.
Facing the very real possibility of being the new Eagles.
Having so much drama during the season.
Being a dropped pass away from the superbowl the previous year.
Ray's last ride.
Constant media scrutiny of Flacco.
Possibly Reed's last year here.
Flacco having the second best postseason in NFL history.
70 miracle.
Revenge against New England.

Don't forget that this is also the season of the 4th-and-29 play. That was a sign of things to come, if only people would see it.

Gota, this was not originally a debate of which team would win if facing each other, but I will bite. Do you mean playing under 2000 or 2012 rules? Do you realize that the 2000 D would be less dominant playing under current rules? That's one of the reasons such a dominant defense will never be seen again, by the way. I think this would be a very interesting match-up. Both teams played with the same determination, same team of destiny strength. This game would have been decided in the final minutes, or in OT, as each team refused to lose.

**goldenelite28** · 02-07-2013, 09:31 PM

Originally Posted by Uli2001

Don't forget that this is also the season of the 4th-and-29 play. That was a sign of things to come, if only people would see it.

I remember a lot of people saying that we were a team of destiny after that.
Of course that talk died down in the following weeks.

**Paintballguy** · 02-07-2013, 09:36 PM

Originally Posted by goldenelite28

I remember a lot of people saying that we were a team of destiny after that.
Of course that talk died down in the following weeks.

When that play happened I knew things were bouncing our way. Every Super Bowl team has plays like that where it really went in their favor.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

**GOTA** · 02-07-2013, 09:46 PM

Originally Posted by Uli2001

Don't forget that this is also the season of the 4th-and-29 play. That was a sign of things to come, if only people would see it.

Gota, this was not originally a debate of which team would win if facing each other, but I will bite. Do you mean playing under 2000 or 2012 rules? Do you realize that the 2000 D would be less dominant playing under current rules? That's one of the reasons such a dominant defense will never be seen again, by the way. I think this would be a very interesting match-up. Both teams played with the same determination, same team of destiny strength. This game would have been decided in the final minutes, or in OT, as each team refused to lose.

It's the other way around. The rules that weaken defenses are a recent change to the NFL. The 2000 defense was dominant playing under similar rules that had been in place for 50+ years. All these comebacks we see in the NFL, including the Ravens last second one against the Broncos and the 49ers in the Super Bowl are products of recent rule changes. We all knew the Giants had no shot of winning that Super Bowl game. The outcome of this game was in doubt until the very end.

There was a confidence that 2000 team had that no team is going to have today because the rules don't allow it. Once the 2000 team got ahead no one was catching it. The NFL doesn't allow that anymore. That confidence and dominance made that a more satisfying run in my opinion. There is a reason why Super Bowls and playoff games were more lopsided before these rule changes and are almost always close now days. Better teams had a chance to dominate back then and rarely are able because the NFL has made it that way.

**Ravenswintitle** · 02-07-2013, 09:54 PM

the first one was incredible; overcoming the odds in all but the first playoff game.
This ...one was incredible; overcoming the odds in all but the first playoff game.

**pslholder96** · 02-07-2013, 09:57 PM

They say the first time is always the sweetest but I've got to give the 2012 postseason the edge because of all the adversity (on and off the field) that we had to endure during the regular season and in the playoffs. It's just so gratifying to see all the hard work and heart these guys put in finally paying off, especially coming after season in which we were one dropped pass away from going to the SB.
Furthermore the 12 years it took to witness this championship is much more satisfying and makes me realize how fortunate we are to have a first class organization like the Ravens. This run was fuel by so much emotion and heart and Ray's last ride had a lot to do with that.

**micadrz400** · 02-07-2013, 10:12 PM

2000 because it was such an improbable run. 2012 was the Ravens 5th straight year in the playoffs, no big surprise they went to the big dance.

**Uli2001** · 02-07-2013, 11:18 PM

Originally Posted by micadrz400

2000 because it was such an improbable run. 2012 was the Ravens 5th straight year in the playoffs, no big surprise they went to the big dance.

That was also my wife's point. In 2000 they came out of really nowhere to win it. In 2012 they were already NFL Champions, already had that pedigree. But other than that, this year's run was really as improbable or more than in 2000, given how the opponents stacked up in the playoffs.

Gota, I think you ended up agreeing with me, not disagreeing. The 2000 D could not be as dominating now, because of the rules. So under today's rules, a 2012 Ravens - 2000 Ravens matchup could well be won by the 2012 Ravens (with a vastly superior offense, and an inferior, but not vastly inferior, defense, and about equivalent special teams).

**FadeToBlack** · 02-08-2013, 12:03 AM

Originally Posted by Raveninwoodlawn

I heard some people talking about it on the radio and they basically described my feeling.

This one was a LOT better IMHO.

I love that 2000 team as I don't think we'll ever see the level of swag and one side of the ball dominating like that again...watching that defense shut offenses down and then hearing the opposing offense try and claim that we weren't that good after getting their ass kicked was incredibly satisfying.

But that team was full of "hired guns", guys that came from other cities/teams and spent just a few years here...Goose, Sam Adams, Rod, Sharpe, Dilfer, a lot of our best players were here for just a blink of an eye. That team never had any playoff experience so they didn't really have to go through much adversity on the field prior to 2000.

This one seems a lot more personal, almost all of our best players have spent their careers here...Joe, Ray Rice, Yanda, Torrey, Pitta, Suggs, Reed, Ray Lewis, Ellerbe, Webb, Ngata...they all know nothing but the Baltimore Ravens and we only know them as homegrown Ravens. The only top player who wasn't from here is Boldin, and I don't think there was ever a player more meant to be a Raven than him.

So we have all this homegrown talent, all these pro bowl level guys who have suffered multiple...failures to be frank...in the playoffs for each of the last 4 years, and every loss except one was excruciating, and heartbreaking losses where when we needed someone to make a play, none of our players could. They all went through the frustrations and disappointments...the questions on if we'd ever make it to and win the big show with our guys. We worried about wasting the prime of 2 first ballot HOF's in Ray and Reed...wondered if Ray would ever get that second one he was holding on for and if Ed would ever get one that frankly, I and I believe most of us felt he deserved.

The 2000 team never went through any of that. It was a perfect storm...a category 5 hurricane that kind of came out of nowhere, destroyed everything in it's path, and then was torn apart shortly after it's damage was done.

Also, don't forget that while we had a very good, passionate fanbase in 2000, it in noway compares to what we have now...that outpouring of love and appreciation on Tuesday confirmed that.

This post is "elite."

**FadeToBlack** · 02-08-2013, 12:15 AM

I enjoyed the 2012 run much more as I was not nearly as interested in the Ravens in 2000. But I did watch both seasons.

The 2000 Ravens are characterized by 2 things, IMO: 1) the greatest defense ever, while the 2012 Ravens have no "greatest ever" quality anywhere, 2) being the first Ravens team to win it.

Ultimately, if the Ravens franchise had to be without ONE of these Super Bowl trophies, I believe your only argument for excluding the 2000 team and keeping the 2012 team is to pick the 2012 team for being much more recent and relevant. Otherwise, the Ravens franchise benefits much more for having the greatest defense of all time. You could argue this 2012 team is really no different in the lens of hindsight than ANY single Super Bowl winning team. The 2000 team has an historic component to them. Only we the Ravens fans understand the journey, the adversity the players RavenInWoodlawn mentioned is not something the annals of NFL history will remember as vividly.

**Beerracuda** · 02-08-2013, 12:25 AM

Ok, I'd have to say 2012, based entirely on the way I felt throughout the season.

In 2000, I still had confidence in the team, despite going 5 straight games without a TD. Our defense was THAT dominant. And, after beating Tennessee during the regular season, I no longer feared them in the playoffs.

This year, by the time we lost to Washington, I had lost all confidence in this team. Firing Cam Cameron the very next day made me much more hopeful, but moreso towards future seasons. I didn't think they could shake off Cam enough to make a big enough difference to win the SB. Kicking the Giants' asses in Week 16 added to my confidence, but only enough to believe we'd beat Indianapolis in Round 1. I thought we'd lose to Denver by at least 10-15 points. That win alone made me think we had a decent chance to beat the Pats in the AFCCG. After beating Denver and New England in their houses, against the top QBs in the league, I was thoroughly convinced we'd beat SF in the SB. That is, until the 3rd quarter.

The Super Bowl is kind of a microcosm of the season to me. I was loaded with confidence in the beginning of the season and the game, lost some of that confidence along the way, and feared disaster towards the end, only to be saved by a miracle at the very end. When Ray Rice fumbled that ball, allowing SF to pull within 5 points, I really thought the game was lost, especially the way SF was moving the ball. When SF had 1st and goal with 3 minutes to play, I thought it was a foregone conclusion they would score a TD there. I was just hoping for another Flacco miracle to win the game. Surprise: a goal-line stand by the D!! Totally unexpected, and totally miraculous!

I also think that so many of the disappointments of the post-season in recent years had soured me to thinking this season would also end in disappointment. In 2000, we had no previous playoff experience, so I fully expected us to win each time we took the field.

Finally, it also helps that this was the year for revenge. Beating NE in the season, Pitt again, knocking off the Colts in the playoffs, and then knocking out the guy who used to kill us with the Colts, followed by getting our revenge on Brady. What a year! It will be REALLY hard to top this one!