Did the Patriots have a Dynasty?
The concept of the sports dynasty is nebulous. Various people define it in various ways, and they are entitled to since there isn’t a definitive criterion for a sports dynasty. In the NFL, some people consider the Patriots of the past decade to have been a dynasty. While it is hard to argue against them being the best franchise of the 2000s, whether or not they had a dynasty is a bit more debatable.
From the 2001 season to the 2007 season, you could say the Patriots had a dynasty. After the 2001 season, they won their first Super Bowl. They then proceeded to win Super Bowls after the 2003 and 2004 seasons. Heading into the Super Bowl after the 2007 season, they were undefeated, but lost the title game to the New York Giants. So why count that within their dynasty? Well, because they made the title game and, did you read the part where they were undefeated at that point? Going that long in a season without losing is an incredible accomplishment.
You could also say the Patriots didn’t have a dynasty. You could say it was a shorter dynasty, or you could say it was a longer dynasty. After all, they didn’t fall apart after the 2007 season. In fact, Sportsbook has them at +1200 to win the Super Bowl this season. However, what cannot be debated is that the Patriots won three Super Bowls, and played in another, in a short span of time. If you want to say they were an NFL dynasty, there are plenty of facts to support that case.