How the Browns are not the worst team of the 2010’s is beyond me. No winning seasons, a three year stretch of only winning 3 games total, 6 different head coaches, 10 starting QB’s, and a 2017 season that saw no wins from the Browns. Say what you will about the Jags during the 2010’s but at least their fluke 2017 season should give the Browns the honor of being the worst 2010’s nfl team.
Somehow the Panthers don't have a "worst team of the decade" yet. but they have to be in the running for 2020s, then the entire division will have one!
The Browns record from 2010-19 was 42-117-1 for a .266 win percentage. THAT'S the worst record in NFL during the 2010s. Seven head coaches, six GM's two owners, and plethora of failed starting quarterbacks.
We celebrated Hue Jackson day on January 31st 2018 (1/31) because that was the teams record with him at head coach. The city of Cleveland even had a parade to celebrate their perfect season. It was so bad then, we could do nothing but laugh. Hue Jackson said after the 2016 season, if the Browns had a worse record in 2017 than they had in 2016, he'd jump into lake Erie. Long story short, he held up his end of the deal and jumped into a frigid lake Erie after the 2017 season. Hate what he did for the team but respect the hell out of him for doing what he said he'd do.
They finally learned geography! St Louis/Phoenix/Arizona Cardinals were in Nfc east.. Atlanta were in nfc west They wanted to put Ravens in afc east an put Miami in south (Buffalo Phins rivalry is huge so didnt happen) pats dont rule the east if Ravens were in division
You know what's kind of funny about the Lions record in the 2000s? It's almost the same record the Detroit Tigers had in 2003. The Tigers went 43-119 that season.
Although the Jags had a solid 10-6 campaign in 2017 and almost made the superbowl, they were really garbage with not a single season winning over 6 games. The browns had two 7 win seasons (2014 and 2018).
As a lifelong Saints fan from New Orleans, I got a sad chuckle watching this vid and remembering how awful those 70s teams were because I was taken back to the watch parties that became adult drinking parties mostly by halftime! The only other time in the lifetime of the franchise that reminded me most of those days was the Mike Shitka coaching debacle of the late 90s! His teams would've fit in nicely amongst the 70s teams!
@@arizonawrestlinginterviews1040 They should've fired him on the spot...Ricky was a good RB, but he wasn't worth all those picks!! It amazes me to this day that Haslett was able to win the division the year after Ditka got canned!
4:00-Another dubious "accomplishment" by the Saints was becoming the first team EVER to lose to the Buccaneers who had lost the first twenty-six games of their existence. That was truly paper bag time for the "Ain'ts".
I'm sorry but I have to say Cleveland Is the Worst Team in the 2010's because they were more consistently bad. Look at there record between 2015 and 2017 where they went 3-44 and had 2 17 game losing streaks
Yeah, him and all the mistresses he was spending money on instead of trying to actually build a team. I still frequently watch the 0-26 episode of The Timeline.
Dishonorable mention, my Green Bay Packers in both the 70's and 80's. 2 10 win seasons during those 2 decades including 1972 and 1989 (year I was born) 2 playoff appearances, 1972 and the strike shortened 1982 season 1 division title, 1972 Outside 72, 82, and 89 only 1 other winning season, 1978, barely, they finished with an 8-7-1 record and did not make the playoffs. They also somehow missed the playoffs in 1989 despite a 10-6 record. 5 QB's started a full season between Starr/Favre, they were: Scott Hunter in 1972, David Whitehurst in 1978 (Charlie's dad), Lynn Dickey (1980, 1982 *half*, and 1983), Randy Wright (1986), and Don Majkowski (1989). Only twice did the team finish with more TD passes than INT's (AS A TEAM NOT INDIVIDUALLY!), 1983 and 1989. Every year they either finished with an equal amount or more INT's than TD passes. Outside of that, the best they could finish was 8-8 most of the time, and the worst part, no 1st overall picks, they never tanked at all, cuz the teams last 1st overall pick was 1959.
I had friends that were twin brothers in Jr high, late 80's, huge Packers fans. Always used to give them shit about it. Why they rooted for such a shitty team. Turned out they were born in Wisconsin, moved west as infants, but their dad was always loyal to the Packers. He'd play old videos of the Vince Lomardi and Bart Starr days and make them watch. Packers fans are loyal.
My Raiders probably would've beat out the Lions in the 2000s if not for 3 straight playoff seasons which included a Super Bowl appearance and 2 AFC Championship games (1-1) to start the decade. From 2003 on, fuckin' brutal 😳
As a Raiders fan, I thought so too. But I remembered that there were so many seasons where we went into the last game of season where if we win we get a playoff spot. But always just muck it up. There was some truly I think the NFL commissioner just doesn’t like Raiders. From throwing Gruden under a bus for calling him a fa6 or stopping the move to LA. Too even last year when Jones was onside to block the kick for the team to have a winning record.
@@jawjaw27 i ran some numbers based off of what he runs. it’s pretty close. it depends on how much he weighs strength of schedule. the browns were worse in average expected wins (5.43 to 5.7) and point differential (-96.1 to -87.9), but had a significantly tougher SOS (0.687 to -0.64)
Terrible decade for NYC metro area football fans. Neither the Giants or Jets made the playoffs in the 70's, not even once. They, along with the Saints were the only teams who existed for every year of the decade that didn't reach the postseason at least once.
@@coryfeldman-hz2yj Aside from a couple brief stretches, this is the unfortunate truth. They weren't even that good for a big part of Namath's career after 1969. Joe couldn't stay healthy and the team deteriorated around him too. One of the most mind-blowing stats to me is that Mark Sanchez has the most playoff wins in franchise history.
Finally something that deals with ineptitude and the Browns are not the obvious answer. Yaay. And lol cause I was typing that with about a minute left and you just said the same thing about the 2010's Browns.
Idk what this C-score thing is about but the Browns were way worse than the Jags in the 2010s. Worse overall record, zero winning records, no playoff appearances, more staff changes, and the second 0-16 team in history of the NFL. The Jags had an AFC championship run and almost won in 2018, that alone makes them a better team
The Sabres are on track to be even worse Pegula got lucky with Beane and Allen and initially McDermott before he regressed...otherwise he would be widely recognized as the worst owner in Sports
These two Lions teams are actually very, very close in quality overall. But the 2009 Lions slightly edge out the 2008 Lions as being the lesser team. Let's consider the 2009 Lions' two regular season wins. The 2009 Lions beat the Redskins 19-14 in week 3, and the Browns 38-37 in week 11. The 2009 Redskins finished the regular season 4-12, and the team was a borderline bottom 10 percent all-time NFL team. In the game, the Lions held scoreboard advantage throughout most of it, after going up 7-0 late in the 1st quarter. But that was a 5 point win for the Lions over an awful team, not decisive, or a blow out. The 2009 Browns finished the regular season 5-11, and the team was a bottom 10 percent all-time NFL team. The Lions beat them by a single point. For that Browns win, the Lions trailed 24-3 late in the first quarter, trailed 27-24 at half-time, and won on a 4th quarter game-ending TD pass and PAT kick to finish the game up by 1 point over the Browns. So the 2009 Lions got their only 2 wins of the regular season, narrowly, and about as narrowly as it gets, over two historically awful teams. Outside of those 2 wins, the 2009 Lions were outscored 205-443 during the regular season, which is a 17 ppg average over 14 losses. One of those losses was a 17-10 week 8 loss to the Rams. That was the only game the 2009 Rams won all regular season, and I rank the 2009 Rams (1-15) as the 5th worst team all-time in NFL history. Let's look at the 2008 Lions. They were nearly as awful as the 2009 Lions. However, the 2008 Lions were very competitive in 2 games against the Vikings (a decent 10-6 playoff team). There was a 12-10 week 6 loss to the Vikings on a late 4th quarter field goal. There was a week 14 loss to the Vikings in a 3-lead-change game, in which the Lions only trailed 17-16 late in the 4th quarter, but ultimately lost 20-16. The 2008 Lions also played not too poorly against the Panthers (a decent 12-4 playoff team) in week 11, in a 31-22 loss. The game was close throughout, and the Lions only trailed 24-22 late in the 4th quarter. The 2008 Lions were outscored 268-517 during the regular season, which is about a 15.6 ppg average over 16 losses. For any two NFL teams, same franchise or different franchises, whether it's the same season, or different seasons, the opponents differ, and quality of wins, losses, and ties differ. To judge the relative quality of these teams, I have to consider these factors, beyond just the overall respective W-L-T records.
@@rtchidc oh of course breaking it down deeper makes it make more sense. It's just at face value, a team that was literally unable to win a single game is somehow better than a 2 win team is absurd. I remember both seasons, watched them both back then. The 08 team gets a lot of flack for being horrible, rightfully so, but a lot of people underestimate how terrible that 09 team was too. Stafford threw over 20 picks, then when he was hurt Culpepper and Drew Stanton couldn't accomplish anything either. If it wasn't for Stafford and Calvin Johnson both being generational talents that team would've absolutely gone 0-16 as well. It's kind of wild how close some of the games in 08 were... Still would've been a disappointing season regardless, but they really had a chance to win about 6 games if a few things had gone differently.
@@glaciersmash4118 When it comes to team distinctions like being winless or undefeated, the way I approach it is, these teams only played fewer than half of the other teams in the league that regular season. Currently, that fraction is 14 of 31 other teams (about 45%). From 2002-2020, it was 13 of 31 other teams (about 42%). It is rare that any team finishes a regular season undefeated and untied, or winless and without ties. The best team almost always loses at least one regular season game (and sometimes a playoff game). The worst team almost always wins at least one regular season game. Opponent schedules have a lot to do with it. If I could be convinced that an undefeated team was truly unbeatable, or a winless team was actually incapable of winning a game, as an intrinsic property of those teams, then that would be one thing. But for a team like the 2008 Lions, I wonder what difference it may have made in the Lions' going 0-4 against AFC teams, that the interconference division matchup rotation had the NFC North teams playing the teams of the AFC South (2nd best AFC division that season) instead of the AFC West (worst AFC division that season). The Titans and Colts were both top 6 teams that season, while the Texans and Jaguars were in the top 20-24 range. In the AFC West, the Chargers won the division at 8-8 (1-1 in the playoffs), but I have them as 7th best in the league that season. The Raiders, Broncos, and Chiefs are sitting at 28th, 29th, and 30th best that season. Maybe the 2008 Lions pick up a win (or two) against the bottom three AFC West teams if they had played each other. Then, what if the intraconference division matchup rotation had the NFC North teams playing the teams of the NFC West instead of the teams of the NFC South. The NFC South was arguably the best NFC division in 2008, but I have them at #2. Top to bottom, I have those teams (Panthers, Buccaneers, Falcons, and Saints), ranked 10th-13th best in the league that season. In the NFC West, the Cardinals won the division at 9-7, and lost to the Steelers in the Super Bowl, 27-23. That was a decent Cardinals team, which overachieved for its quality (I have them at 9th best that season, 3rd best in the NFC). The rest of the NFC West was the 49ers, Seahawks, and Rams, which were all bottom 7 teams that season, with the Rams (2-14) ranking as my worst in the league, one below the Lions, despite the Lions going 0-16. Maybe the 2008 Lions get a win (or two) against against the Seahawks and/or Rams if they had played each other. The Lions played the 49ers in week 3 that season, as one of the two "strength of schedule" NFC opponents, and the Lions lost 31-13. One area where I don't think "what if" really helps the 2008 Lions is in reimagining which two "strength of schedule" NFC opponents would have been more advantageous to the Lions if they had swapped playing all four NFC South teams with all four NFC West teams. The Lions would have had to play one of those NFC South teams, and the Lions went 0-4 against them. And the Lions would have had to play an NFC East team, just the same as they did. I think the Lions played the worst NFC East team, the Redskins, and the Lions lost 25-17 in week 8. Maybe with a more advantageous schedule, the 2008 Lions finish 1-15, 2-14, or 3-13. Whatever their record, they'd still be as bad as they were, but just with a better record than 0-16.
I think the Jets can turn things around this season, but beyond that they'll need to solve their chronic quarterback issues in the long run. The Texans should be competitive as long as CJ Stroud stays healthy. The Broncos, Panthers, and Falcons could also make a run at infamy. The Rams nearly competed for the 1990's dishonor until the Greatest Show on Turf arrived in the nick of time. My best educated guess for the worst team from the entire 1960's NFL decade would be the Steelers, followed by the Broncos.
@@sijdnsd6460 I have the Carolina Panthers ranked #4 worst for the 2020s. The Panthers 2020s record has been 19-48 (.284), and 0-0 in playoffs (no appearances). The 2020s Panthers' have a worse regular season W-L-T record than each of the Jets, Texans, and Jaguars, but not by much. In 2020 and 2021, while the Panthers only finished 5-11 and 5-12, respectively, those teams were of much better quality than each of the Texans (5-11 and 4-13), Jets (2-14 and 4-13), and Jaguars (1-15 and 3-14) in those same seasons. In 2022, the Jets (7-10) and Jaguars (9-8, 1-1 in playoffs) were both better than the Panthers (7-10), but not by a lot in either case. The Panthers remained much better than the Texans (3-13-1). In 2023, the Texans (10-7, 1-1 in playoffs), Jaguars (9-8), and Jets (7-10) were much better than the Panthers (2-15), although the Jets were significantly less so than the Texans and Jaguars.
Really thought the Browns would take the crown for the 10's, but I guess two 7-win seasons in a tough division was just enough to keep them in 31st place.
The 6-10 record in 2019 somewhat helps too but tbh the division that year was horrible with only the Browns and Ravens battling. Keep in mind that 6-10 browns team DESTROYED a 14-2 Ravens team.
I'm glad you're enjoying it. Workin' hard to get it out. I was, but I played around with what I could include and what I couldn't till I found that right combo.
It's unclear to me if the Strength of Schedule metric being used for C Score is the one the NFL uses based upon the previous years standings, or if it's based upon the Standings at the end of the particular season itself in question looking backwards.
The browns are the worst in the 2010s, without question. Cleveland had a losing season every year from 2008-2019. In 2017, they went 0-16, after going 1-15 in 2016, which is impossible. For comparison, Jacksonville at least finished 8-8 in 2010 and made the afc championship in 2017. The browns, meanwhile, were 42-117-1 during the decade
Mine: 1920s - Columbus Panhandles/Columbus Tigers (1920-1926) (13-45-3, .224) 1930s - Pittsburgh Pirates (1933-1939)* (22-55-3, .286, 0-0 in playoffs) 1940s - Pittsburgh Steelers/Phil-Pitt**/Card-Pitt***/Pittsburgh Steelers (40-64-6, .385, 0-1 in playoffs) 1950s - Green Bay Packers (39-79-2, .331, 0-0 in playoffs) 1960s (entire decade) - Denver Broncos - AFL (39-97-4, .287, 0-0 in playoffs) 1960s, worst NFL franchise (entire decade) - Washington Redskins (46-82-10, .359, 0-0 in playoffs) 1960s (pre-Super Bowl, 1960-1965) - Denver Broncos - AFL (22-59-3, .272, 0-0 in playoffs) 1960s, worst NFL franchise (pre-Super Bowl, 1960-1965) - Washington Redskins (22-55-5, .286, 0-0 in playoffs) *the Pittsburgh Pirates became the Pittsburgh Steelers in 1940 **the Steelers merged with the Philadelphia Eagles for 1943, due to a World War II NFL player shortage ***no longer merged with the Eagles, the Steelers merged with the Chicago Cardinals for 1944, due to the World War II NFL player shortage
Rams closed out with a SB though. Bengals were just dreary that whole decade. Usually in sports you expect a team to feel good before a season until reality crushes all those hopes. Cincy during that span just always felt like a battered wife dreading the inevitable end of the day when her hubby got home.
@@75aces97 VERY FEW saw that Super Bowl coming. NO one, not even Mike Martz saw the rise of Kurt Warner on the horizon. The year before that run they were 3-13 and Dick Vermiel was on the bubble. Marshall Faulk and Torry Holt were HUGE to that team. There is a reason NO ONE will ever wear the number 28 for the Rams, that's how big of a deal Faulk was to the Rams.
My gawd - I didn't think there was a chance a team could rank lower in the '10s than my Browns. The Mangini, Shurmer, Chudzinski, Pettine (2nd) and Jackson seasons were absolutely unwatchable.
OMG! This was spot on as I was trying to see if I was going to disagree, it felt like the Browns and Jags could've had the 2010s, but the math don't lie. 2020s remains to be seen, I don't think the Jets will be bad for very long if Aaron Rodgers can help them. I can see the Panthers becoming that team.
I was gonna add this. They didn’t shoot themselves in the foot, they got screwed by the refs and a league who was worried about a Blake Bortles-Nick Foles Super Bowl matchup 😂
He definitely wasn't down. But I do believe JAX still coulda/shoulda won the game. Doug Marrone put the offense into a complete shell and played right into Bill Belichick's hand, otherwise known as Schottenheimering. I've got no head coaching metric, but this has to be one of the most lopsided coaching matchups in playoff history.
@@cccproductions2019 Marrone was horrible for sure. They were tearing the Pats up and then they seemed like the plan changed to just trying to hold on rather than playing to win. Doug Pederson was talking about it back then and he was right. I am happy he is our coach now.
No, the 1960s were 1960-1969, the 1970s were 1970-1979, and so on. It's a defining characteristic of years from the "X0s" that the second-to-last digit is an X.
Another interesting video would be examining the 5 or 10 worst 10-year stretches of all time, i e. stretches not confined to one specific decade. I imagine the Lions from 2001-2010 would still make the list (39 wins, 121 losses).
I knew the Saints had earned the distinction of being the worst team during the 1970s. Yet, they wouldn't hit franchise rock bottom until 1980. The stigma of the paper bags has never truly gone away. The team managed to win only 26 per cent of their games with Archie Manning as their starting QB. For every touchdown pass he threw, he was sacked what, at least four or five times?
As a raiders fan it feels like we should be in consideration for the 2000s. I suppose the first 3 seasons of the decade keep them out of it but the remaining years were awful
The 1990s Bears' regular season/playoff W-L-T record was 73-87 (.456)/ 2-3 (.400) over 10 seasons. There were 12 NFL teams which had a worse regular season W-L-T record than the Bears during the 1990s (the Bengals had the worst). I rank the 1990s Bears as 21st among NFL franchises for the 1990s. There are no franchises with better decade regular season records that I rank below the Bears, but there are two with worse regular season records that I rank above the Bears - the 1996-1999 Ravens (24-39-1, .383) at 18th, and the Seahawks (70-90, .438, 0-1 in playoffs) at 19th. The Ravens may have been worse per average season than the Bears in the 1990s, but I'm weighing the cumulation of longevity above average quality. I also differ slightly with the video pick for worst of the 1990s - I pick the Cardinals first, with the Bengals second.
Why the back handed statement at the end? They'll probably be good for the next two or 3 seasons. Even if they are horrible afterwards which I doubt, they probably wont be last off of 2 or 3 potentially good years.
You gotta remember the old browns became the ravens and the new browns are a totally different expansion team. If you do the math on their individual record no team has a worse win pct than the new browns since 99 (.343) and no team has a better overall record than the combined old browns/ravens (.590).
What about a Best Team Of Every Decade (Super Bowl Era)? 1970's would be interesting since Dallas won the most games that decade but Steelers won more Super Bowls.
This would be such a hard list to make Because not all of them like reset in the beginning of the decade So you can have like carry over from the previous decade You know so like the run over what not Like taken into account. Which teams average the quickest resets do ya think?
@cmorris9494 I was just thinking about the Super Bowl Era. Although the worst years were the second half of the 60s and first of the 70s before they hired Vermeil.
Jets will actually prob win the division this year. Go back and watch the preseason game with Rodgers in it from last year. It was scary. Buffalo is a wildcard this year that’ll make the playoffs due to Allen, but not too much else. The Dolphins will suck this year. Tua is regressing just like Jalen Hurts. However, Tua isn’t as far as Hurts is in that process. They might go 9-8 but miss the playoffs.
The 2000s Saints were 83-77 (.519) over 10 regular seasons, and 5-2 (.714) in the playoffs. I have them #17 for that decade. For the 2010s, the Saints were 100-60 (.625) over 10 regular seasons, and 4-6 (.400) in the playoffs. I have them #5 for that decade.
No doubt it's going to be number one on this list. The poor fans in this city has waited for a championship is priceless. That city is Cleveland. And the team is Browns.
The Browns had the worst overall regular season W-L-T record of any NFL franchise for the decade of the 2010s. But the Jaguars come in second, with an average of only 0.85 more wins per regular season than the Browns over the course of the decade. Picking the Jaguars over the Browns for worst of the 2010s is likely a matter of taking into account the differing opponents and quality of wins, losses, and ties for each team, and attempting to weigh those fairly and reasonably. The Jaguars had a very good season in 2017. They were 10-6, and 2-1 in the playoffs, losing to the Patriots 24-20 in the AFC Championship game. That was one of ten relevant Jaguars seasons. The 2012, 2013, 2014, and 2019 Jaguars teams of the 2010s were among bottom 10 percent in league history, and the remaining Jaguars teams of the decade were, for the most part, not that far behind. Outside of the 2017 and 2018 Jaguars (bottom 40 percent), there isn't a Jaguars team of that decade that I wouldn't rank among the bottom 10 or 20 percent of all-time NFL teams (2010, 2011, 2015, and 2016 included). By comparison, the Browns had no good teams during the decade, no winning seasons, and no season playoff appearances. The 2016 and 2017 Browns were bottom 10 percent all-time teams. The 2011, 2012, 2013, and 2015 Browns teams were not that far behind. But the 2010, 2014, 2018, and 2019 Browns, while below-average, weren't terribly bad. Of those last four, only the 2014 Browns crack my bottom 40 percent of all-time NFL teams. Don't get me wrong. I don't think the 2010s Browns should rank higher than second worst NFL franchise of the 2010s. I just agree that on balance, the Jaguars were worse over the decade.
@@rtchidc I just found it amazing that the Jaguars managed to somehow be worse than my Browns. Being a Browns fan is a painful thing, finding little silver linings like this is nice.
@@TheBeggies95 I take a minority view regarding the 1970s and 1990s. The Steelers and Cowboys won the most Super Bowls in those decades, respectively. But I think that over the entirety of 1970-1979, the Cowboys were better. And I think that over the entirety of 1990-1999, the 49ers were better. The Steelers didn't get good or great in the 1970s until 1972, by which point the Cowboys were already 1-1 (.500) in Super Bowls for the 1970s. For the 1990s, the Cowboys' prime years above mediocrity are really 1991-1996. The 49ers only had one not very good or great season in the 1990s, which was 1999.
Mine: 1920s 1.Decatur Staleys/Chicago Staleys/Chicago Bears (84-31-19, .730) - 1921 NFL title 2.Frankford Yellow Jackets (1924-1929) (65-26-13, .714) - 1926 NFL title 3.Green Bay Packers (1921-1929) (61-25-13, .709) - 1929 NFL title 1930s 1.Green Bay Packers (86-35-4, .711, 2-1 in playoffs) - 1930 and 1931 NFL titles; 1936*, 1938 and 1939* NFL title game appearances 2.Chicago Bears (85-28-11, .752, 1-2 in playoffs) - 1932 NFL title; 1933*, 1934 and 1937 NFL title game appearances 3.New York Giants (80-39-8, .672, 2-3 in playoffs) - 1933, 1934*, 1935, 1938* and 1939 NFL title game appearances *win 1940s 1.Chicago Bears (81-26-3, .757, 5-1 in playoffs) - 1940*, 1941*, 1942, 1943*, and 1946* NFL title game appearances 2.Cleveland Browns - AAFC (1946-1949) (47-4-3, .922, 5-0 in playoffs) - 1946*, 1947*, 1948* and 1949* AAFC title game appearances 3.San Francisco 49ers - AAFC (1946-1949) (38-14-2, .731, 1-1 in playoffs) - 1949 AAFC title game appearance *win 1950s 1.Cleveland Browns (88-30-2, .746, 4-5 in playoffs) - 1950*, 1951, 1952, 1953, 1954*, 1955* and 1957 NFL title game appearances 2.Detroit Lions (68-48-4, .586, 5-1 in playoffs) - 1952*, 1953*, 1954 and 1957* NFL title game appearances 3.New York Giants (76-41-3, .650, 2-3 in playoffs) - 1956*, 1958 and 1959 NFL title game appearances *win 1960s (1960-1969) 1.Green Bay Packers (96-37-5, .722, 9-1 in playoffs) - 1960, 1961*, 1962*, 1965*, 1966 and 1967 NFL title game appearances 2.Dallas Texans/Kansas City Chiefs - AFL (87-48-5, .644, 5-2 in playoffs) - 1962*, 1966 and 1969 AFL title game appearances 3.Baltimore Colts (92-42-4, .687, 2-3 in playoffs) - 1964 and 1968 NFL title game appearances *pre-Super Bowl era win - The Packers' 1966 and 1967 NFL title game appearances were wins, followed by Super Bowl wins. - The Chiefs' 1966 and 1969 AFL title game appearances were wins, followed by a Super Bowl loss and win, respectively. - The Colts' 1968 NFL title game appearance was a win, followed by a Super Bowl loss. 1960s (Super Bowl era, 1966-1969) 1.Kansas City Chiefs - AFL (43-12-1, .782, 4-2 in playoffs) - 1966 and 1969 AFL title game appearances 2.Oakland Raiders - AFL (45-9-2, .833, 3-3 in playoffs) - 1967, 1968 and 1969 AFL title game appearances 3.Green Bay Packers (35-19-2, .648, 5-0 in playoffs) - 1966 and 1967 NFL title game appearances - The Raiders' 1967 AFL title game appearance was a win, followed by a Super Bowl loss. 1970s 1.Dallas Cowboys (105-39, .729, 14-7 in playoffs) - 1970, 1971*, 1975, 1977* and 1978 season Super Bowl appearances 2.Pittsburgh Steelers (99-44-1, .691, 14-4 in playoffs) - 1974*, 1975*, 1978* and 1979* season Super Bowl appearances 3.Oakland Raiders (100-38-6, .715, 8-6 in playoffs) - 1976* season Super Bowl appearance *win 1980s 1.San Francisco 49ers (104-47-1, .688, 13-4 in playoffs) - 1981*, 1984*, 1988* and 1989* season Super Bowl appearances 2.Washington Redskins (97-55, .638, 11-3 in playoffs) - 1982*, 1983 and 1987* season Super Bowl appearances 3.Chicago Bears (92-60, .605, 5-4 in playoffs) - 1985* season Super Bowl appearance *win 1990s 1.San Francisco 49ers (113-47, .706, 9-7 in playoffs) - 1994* season Super Bowl appearance 2.Dallas Cowboys (101-59, .631, 12-5 in playoffs) - 1992*, 1993* and 1995* season Super Bowl appearances 3.Buffalo Bills (103-57, .644, 10-8 in playoffs) - 1990, 1991, 1992 and 1993 season Super Bowl appearances *win 2000s 1.New England Patriots (112-48, .700, 14-4 in playoffs) - 2001*, 2003*, 2004* and 2007 season Super Bowl appearances 2.Indianapolis Colts (115-45, .719, 9-8 in playoffs) - 2006* season Super Bowl appearance 3.Philadelphia Eagles (103-56-1, .647, 10-8 in playoffs) - 2004 season Super Bowl appearance *win 2010s 1.New England Patriots (125-35, .781, 16-7 in playoffs) - 2011, 2014*, 2016*, 2017 and 2018* season Super Bowl appearances 2.Seattle Seahawks (100-59-1, .628, 10-7 in playoffs) - 2013* and 2014 season Super Bowl appearances 3.Baltimore Ravens (98-62, .613, 7-5 in playoffs) - 2012* season Super Bowl appearance *win 2020s (2020-2023) 1.Kansas City Chiefs (51-16, .761, 11-2 in playoffs) - 2020, 2022* and 2023* season Super Bowl appearances 2.Buffalo Bills (48-18, .727, 5-4 in playoffs) 3.Baltimore Ravens (42-25, .627, 2-3 in playoffs) *win
![Megan Thee Stallion - Mamushi (Remix) [feat. TWICE] [Official Audio]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/5c0_u9PsrsQ/mqdefault.jpg)
How the Browns are not the worst team of the 2010’s is beyond me. No winning seasons, a three year stretch of only winning 3 games total, 6 different head coaches, 10 starting QB’s, and a 2017 season that saw no wins from the Browns. Say what you will about the Jags during the 2010’s but at least their fluke 2017 season should give the Browns the honor of being the worst 2010’s nfl team.
to me, its a toss up, pick either one and they will be the worst.
Yeah - and I mean the Jaguars damn near won the Super Bowl in 2017.
Definitely gonna have to disagree with that one.
@@DrJager1went to* the super bowl
@@martialartist3953 I am confident their defense would have completely shut down Philadelphia had they gotten past New England.
@@DrJager1 refs hate the jags man they woulda wiped the rams on their asses too in 99 but the titans stole they playbook
New fans of NFC South teams: Why is the NFC South so bad?
Fans since the 1960s: Always has been son.
To be fair. 6 Super Bowl appearances from the south in 22 years. All four teams have made at least one appearance.
Somehow the Panthers don't have a "worst team of the decade" yet. but they have to be in the running for 2020s, then the entire division will have one!
The Browns record from 2010-19 was 42-117-1 for a .266 win percentage. THAT'S the worst record in NFL during the 2010s. Seven head coaches, six GM's two owners, and plethora of failed starting quarterbacks.
The team had a stretch of 4-44-1 from late 2014 to early 2018
We celebrated Hue Jackson day on January 31st 2018 (1/31) because that was the teams record with him at head coach. The city of Cleveland even had a parade to celebrate their perfect season. It was so bad then, we could do nothing but laugh. Hue Jackson said after the 2016 season, if the Browns had a worse record in 2017 than they had in 2016, he'd jump into lake Erie. Long story short, he held up his end of the deal and jumped into a frigid lake Erie after the 2017 season. Hate what he did for the team but respect the hell out of him for doing what he said he'd do.
Including a two year span where the Browns only won 1 game on Christmas Eve after the season was already over
Let's just caulk it up to only the Browns could find a way to not win even being the worst title.
@@LavitosExodius. LMAO😂
NFL in 2002 when they made the NFC South: “Put the all time worst teams together and add the new Panthers to the mix”
It’s the NFL punching bag division with a spicy playoff run here and there (thanks Tom Brady)
They finally learned geography!
St Louis/Phoenix/Arizona Cardinals were in Nfc east..
Atlanta were in nfc west
They wanted to put Ravens in afc east an put Miami in south (Buffalo Phins rivalry is huge so didnt happen) pats dont rule the east if Ravens were in division
in 2002 the Falcons and Bucs had been to a Super Bowl........ but sure lol.
@@aceassn716no they wanted to keep Indianapolis in the east. But the other 3 teams wanted Miami to stay because of old rivalries.
The panthers went to the NFC championship in 1996
You know what's kind of funny about the Lions record in the 2000s?
It's almost the same record the Detroit Tigers had in 2003. The Tigers went 43-119 that season.
It’s funny how most of the Cat Teams are on this list. Just add the Panthers for the worst team of the 2020s & we’re complete.
Browns fan here, how did we not take the 2010s?! We were garbage!
Browns can't even win the worst team award. Total BS
Classic Browns. They couldn't even win 1st place for worst team.
@@markgalanter1171lmao
@@markgalanter1171😂😂
Although the Jags had a solid 10-6 campaign in 2017 and almost made the superbowl, they were really garbage with not a single season winning over 6 games. The browns had two 7 win seasons (2014 and 2018).
As a lifelong Saints fan from New Orleans, I got a sad chuckle watching this vid and remembering how awful those 70s teams were because I was taken back to the watch parties that became adult drinking parties mostly by halftime! The only other time in the lifetime of the franchise that reminded me most of those days was the Mike Shitka coaching debacle of the late 90s! His teams would've fit in nicely amongst the 70s teams!
Still can't believe mans traded the ENTIRE 1999 DRAFT CLASS for Ricky Williams
@@arizonawrestlinginterviews1040 They should've fired him on the spot...Ricky was a good RB, but he wasn't worth all those picks!! It amazes me to this day that Haslett was able to win the division the year after Ditka got canned!
The AIN'TS...😅
@@luisreyes1963 That's original...how did you ever come up with such a clever name?🤦♂️🤦♂️
4:00-Another dubious "accomplishment" by the Saints was becoming the first team EVER to lose to the Buccaneers who had lost the first twenty-six games of their existence. That was truly paper bag time for the "Ain'ts".
We Bengals fans call the worst era in their history The Lost Decade, and it goes through the 2002 season.
In Marvin Lewis we trust
@@Scape_The_Goat Until January 9, 2016.
I'm sorry but I have to say Cleveland Is the Worst Team in the 2010's because they were more consistently bad. Look at there record between 2015 and 2017 where they went 3-44 and had 2 17 game losing streaks
And ended that 3 yr stretch with a winless season.
Yep. If your formula to pick the worst team of the decade picks a team that had a legitimate Superbowl run, your formula is broken.
You can thank Culverhouse for that futility in Tampa
Yeah, him and all the mistresses he was spending money on instead of trying to actually build a team. I still frequently watch the 0-26 episode of The Timeline.
@@THEREDHOTWRECK and the unwillingness to pay Doug Williams among others.
Dishonorable mention, my Green Bay Packers in both the 70's and 80's.
2 10 win seasons during those 2 decades including 1972 and 1989 (year I was born)
2 playoff appearances, 1972 and the strike shortened 1982 season
1 division title, 1972
Outside 72, 82, and 89 only 1 other winning season, 1978, barely, they finished with an 8-7-1 record and did not make the playoffs. They also somehow missed the playoffs in 1989 despite a 10-6 record.
5 QB's started a full season between Starr/Favre, they were: Scott Hunter in 1972, David Whitehurst in 1978 (Charlie's dad), Lynn Dickey (1980, 1982 *half*, and 1983), Randy Wright (1986), and Don Majkowski (1989).
Only twice did the team finish with more TD passes than INT's (AS A TEAM NOT INDIVIDUALLY!), 1983 and 1989. Every year they either finished with an equal amount or more INT's than TD passes.
Outside of that, the best they could finish was 8-8 most of the time, and the worst part, no 1st overall picks, they never tanked at all, cuz the teams last 1st overall pick was 1959.
I had friends that were twin brothers in Jr high, late 80's, huge Packers fans. Always used to give them shit about it. Why they rooted for such a shitty team. Turned out they were born in Wisconsin, moved west as infants, but their dad was always loyal to the Packers. He'd play old videos of the Vince Lomardi and Bart Starr days and make them watch. Packers fans are loyal.
They were probably in a worse spot overall. They were rarely trash enough to get top draft picks.
@@donaldjgumpofficial5754 And when they did, they'd take, like, Rich Campbell 6th overall, or Tony Mandarich 1st.
Or Brent Fullwood 4th. 🙃
Of the Saints’ 42 wins in the 1970s, keep in mind 15 of those W’s came in 1978 AND 1979
They won only 27 games in the first 8 years of that decade!
and they were as putrid to watch as those 27 wins suggest!! It was miserable being a Saints fan...and to think this was all before the bags came out!!
Didn't the 0-26 Bucs get their first win against the Saints?
@@Elthenar why you bringing up old sh*t??🤣😭
@@Starchild011067 I have to talk about the old days to mention when the Saints were better than the Bucs
My Raiders probably would've beat out the Lions in the 2000s if not for 3 straight playoff seasons which included a Super Bowl appearance and 2 AFC Championship games (1-1) to start the decade. From 2003 on, fuckin' brutal 😳
As a raiders fan I agree. I swear I thought my boys were gonna be on this list lol
Yeah but the more I think about it, there were so many seasons where we were terrible, but not bad enough to get the top talents in the draft
As a Raiders fan, I thought so too. But I remembered that there were so many seasons where we went into the last game of season where if we win we get a playoff spot. But always just muck it up. There was some truly I think the NFL commissioner just doesn’t like Raiders. From throwing Gruden under a bus for calling him a fa6 or stopping the move to LA. Too even last year when Jones was onside to block the kick for the team to have a winning record.
I’m shocked the jaguars beat the browns out for the 2010s
It was surprising. I would have thought that the Browns would have been worst.
0-16 and no playoff appearances… jags put a hell of an effort to beat that out
The jaggies made the playoffs in 2017/18 going to the afc championship game that year while the browns were 1-31 between 2016/17-2017/18.
Blame this goofy “C-score” metric. The Browns were clearly worse.
@@jawjaw27 i ran some numbers based off of what he runs. it’s pretty close. it depends on how much he weighs strength of schedule. the browns were worse in average expected wins (5.43 to 5.7) and point differential (-96.1 to -87.9), but had a significantly tougher SOS (0.687 to -0.64)
every decade: yeah, it's the cardinals
Terrible decade for NYC metro area football fans. Neither the Giants or Jets made the playoffs in the 70's, not even once. They, along with the Saints were the only teams who existed for every year of the decade that didn't reach the postseason at least once.
and as a Mets fan in Baseball
The jets have been garbage since namath left lol
@@coryfeldman-hz2yj Aside from a couple brief stretches, this is the unfortunate truth. They weren't even that good for a big part of Namath's career after 1969. Joe couldn't stay healthy and the team deteriorated around him too. One of the most mind-blowing stats to me is that Mark Sanchez has the most playoff wins in franchise history.
@@aaroncalhoun337 - Mets actually were in a World Series in the 1970's, so you are wrong there.
@@StevenWoolf-eb5xy I should have said late 70's
Overall is the Cardinals
Except for the air Coryell 1.0 years, I think you're right for long term ineptitude.
2010s can’t be right: at least the Jags won games every year and made the playoffs once
It is not right. It’s the jete
@@ashkechum101 jets had 2 good seasons in 2010 and 2015 and 1 playoff appearance; it’s the Browns
Finally something that deals with ineptitude and the Browns are not the obvious answer. Yaay. And lol cause I was typing that with about a minute left and you just said the same thing about the 2010's Browns.
Idk what this C-score thing is about but the Browns were way worse than the Jags in the 2010s. Worse overall record, zero winning records, no playoff appearances, more staff changes, and the second 0-16 team in history of the NFL. The Jags had an AFC championship run and almost won in 2018, that alone makes them a better team
Surprised the St Louis Rams didn't make the cut for the 2000s. Guess the GSOT years balanced it out, but they were atrocious in the late 2010s.
Yes, 2001 and 2003 was enough to keep em out. From 04-13 they had a -186 score, so calendar technicalities played in their favor.
The jaggies got to the afc championship in 2017-18. With the 2020s, I would replace the jets with either the broncos or panthers.
Fun video, I tried guessing which team was next with decent success.
Worst owner of the modern era is undoubtedly Bil Bidwill. Stan Kroenke is grateful.
Even worse than Culverhouse. Wow.
This video should have been 2 minutes long and just alternated the Lions and Browns.
Ironically they both were basically the Chiefs & Patriots of the 1950s.
Why? The Browns were solid in the 60’s-80’s.
Dishonorable mention should go to the Buffalo Bills. 26 QB’s in the 20 years between Jim Kelly and Josh Allen with a 17 year playoff drought.
The Sabres are on track to be even worse Pegula got lucky with Beane and Allen and initially McDermott before he regressed...otherwise he would be widely recognized as the worst owner in Sports
It's insane to me that the 2009 Lions (2-14) scored worse than 2008 (0-16)
These two Lions teams are actually very, very close in quality overall. But the 2009 Lions slightly edge out the 2008 Lions as being the lesser team. Let's consider the 2009 Lions' two regular season wins. The 2009 Lions beat the Redskins 19-14 in week 3, and the Browns 38-37 in week 11. The 2009 Redskins finished the regular season 4-12, and the team was a borderline bottom 10 percent all-time NFL team. In the game, the Lions held scoreboard advantage throughout most of it, after going up 7-0 late in the 1st quarter. But that was a 5 point win for the Lions over an awful team, not decisive, or a blow out. The 2009 Browns finished the regular season 5-11, and the team was a bottom 10 percent all-time NFL team. The Lions beat them by a single point. For that Browns win, the Lions trailed 24-3 late in the first quarter, trailed 27-24 at half-time, and won on a 4th quarter game-ending TD pass and PAT kick to finish the game up by 1 point over the Browns. So the 2009 Lions got their only 2 wins of the regular season, narrowly, and about as narrowly as it gets, over two historically awful teams. Outside of those 2 wins, the 2009 Lions were outscored 205-443 during the regular season, which is a 17 ppg average over 14 losses. One of those losses was a 17-10 week 8 loss to the Rams. That was the only game the 2009 Rams won all regular season, and I rank the 2009 Rams (1-15) as the 5th worst team all-time in NFL history. Let's look at the 2008 Lions. They were nearly as awful as the 2009 Lions. However, the 2008 Lions were very competitive in 2 games against the Vikings (a decent 10-6 playoff team). There was a 12-10 week 6 loss to the Vikings on a late 4th quarter field goal. There was a week 14 loss to the Vikings in a 3-lead-change game, in which the Lions only trailed 17-16 late in the 4th quarter, but ultimately lost 20-16. The 2008 Lions also played not too poorly against the Panthers (a decent 12-4 playoff team) in week 11, in a 31-22 loss. The game was close throughout, and the Lions only trailed 24-22 late in the 4th quarter. The 2008 Lions were outscored 268-517 during the regular season, which is about a 15.6 ppg average over 16 losses. For any two NFL teams, same franchise or different franchises, whether it's the same season, or different seasons, the opponents differ, and quality of wins, losses, and ties differ. To judge the relative quality of these teams, I have to consider these factors, beyond just the overall respective W-L-T records.
@@rtchidc oh of course breaking it down deeper makes it make more sense. It's just at face value, a team that was literally unable to win a single game is somehow better than a 2 win team is absurd. I remember both seasons, watched them both back then. The 08 team gets a lot of flack for being horrible, rightfully so, but a lot of people underestimate how terrible that 09 team was too. Stafford threw over 20 picks, then when he was hurt Culpepper and Drew Stanton couldn't accomplish anything either. If it wasn't for Stafford and Calvin Johnson both being generational talents that team would've absolutely gone 0-16 as well. It's kind of wild how close some of the games in 08 were... Still would've been a disappointing season regardless, but they really had a chance to win about 6 games if a few things had gone differently.
@@glaciersmash4118 When it comes to team distinctions like being winless or undefeated, the way I approach it is, these teams only played fewer than half of the other teams in the league that regular season. Currently, that fraction is 14 of 31 other teams (about 45%). From 2002-2020, it was 13 of 31 other teams (about 42%). It is rare that any team finishes a regular season undefeated and untied, or winless and without ties. The best team almost always loses at least one regular season game (and sometimes a playoff game). The worst team almost always wins at least one regular season game. Opponent schedules have a lot to do with it. If I could be convinced that an undefeated team was truly unbeatable, or a winless team was actually incapable of winning a game, as an intrinsic property of those teams, then that would be one thing. But for a team like the 2008 Lions, I wonder what difference it may have made in the Lions' going 0-4 against AFC teams, that the interconference division matchup rotation had the NFC North teams playing the teams of the AFC South (2nd best AFC division that season) instead of the AFC West (worst AFC division that season). The Titans and Colts were both top 6 teams that season, while the Texans and Jaguars were in the top 20-24 range. In the AFC West, the Chargers won the division at 8-8 (1-1 in the playoffs), but I have them as 7th best in the league that season. The Raiders, Broncos, and Chiefs are sitting at 28th, 29th, and 30th best that season. Maybe the 2008 Lions pick up a win (or two) against the bottom three AFC West teams if they had played each other. Then, what if the intraconference division matchup rotation had the NFC North teams playing the teams of the NFC West instead of the teams of the NFC South. The NFC South was arguably the best NFC division in 2008, but I have them at #2. Top to bottom, I have those teams (Panthers, Buccaneers, Falcons, and Saints), ranked 10th-13th best in the league that season. In the NFC West, the Cardinals won the division at 9-7, and lost to the Steelers in the Super Bowl, 27-23. That was a decent Cardinals team, which overachieved for its quality (I have them at 9th best that season, 3rd best in the NFC). The rest of the NFC West was the 49ers, Seahawks, and Rams, which were all bottom 7 teams that season, with the Rams (2-14) ranking as my worst in the league, one below the Lions, despite the Lions going 0-16. Maybe the 2008 Lions get a win (or two) against against the Seahawks and/or Rams if they had played each other. The Lions played the 49ers in week 3 that season, as one of the two "strength of schedule" NFC opponents, and the Lions lost 31-13. One area where I don't think "what if" really helps the 2008 Lions is in reimagining which two "strength of schedule" NFC opponents would have been more advantageous to the Lions if they had swapped playing all four NFC South teams with all four NFC West teams. The Lions would have had to play one of those NFC South teams, and the Lions went 0-4 against them. And the Lions would have had to play an NFC East team, just the same as they did. I think the Lions played the worst NFC East team, the Redskins, and the Lions lost 25-17 in week 8. Maybe with a more advantageous schedule, the 2008 Lions finish 1-15, 2-14, or 3-13. Whatever their record, they'd still be as bad as they were, but just with a better record than 0-16.
I think the Jets can turn things around this season, but beyond that they'll need to solve their chronic quarterback issues in the long run. The Texans should be competitive as long as CJ Stroud stays healthy. The Broncos, Panthers, and Falcons could also make a run at infamy. The Rams nearly competed for the 1990's dishonor until the Greatest Show on Turf arrived in the nick of time. My best educated guess for the worst team from the entire 1960's NFL decade would be the Steelers, followed by the Broncos.
Toss the giants in that infamy list this year. Danny Dimes is dead. Out of all the teams to suck this year, they may be the worst.
My 3 worst for each decade (Super Bowl era):
1960s (1966-1969)
1.Miami Dolphins - AFL (15-39-2, .278, 0-0 in playoffs)
2.Atlanta Falcons (12-43-1, .218, 0-0 in playoffs)
3.Pittsburgh Steelers (12-41-3, .226, 0-0 in playoffs)
1970s
1.New Orleans Saints (42-98-4, .306, 0-0 in playoffs)
2.Buffalo Bills (51-91-2, .361, 0-1 in playoffs)
3.Atlanta Falcons (60-81-3, .427, 1-1 in playoffs)
1980s
1.Tampa Bay Buccaneers (45-106-1, .299, 0-2 in playoffs)
2.Houston Oilers (62-90, .408, 2-4 in playoffs)
3.Baltimore Colts/Indianapolis Colts (54-97-1, .359, 0-1 in playoffs)
1990s
1.Phoenix Cardinals/Arizona Cardinals (58-102, .363, 1-1 in playoffs)
2.Cincinnati Bengals (52-108, .325, 1-1 in playoffs)
3.Indianapolis Colts (66-94, .413, 2-3 in playoffs)
2000s
1.Detroit Lions (42-118, .263, 0-0 in playoffs)
2.Arizona Cardinals (62-98, .388, 4-2 in playoffs)
3.San Francisco 49ers (68-92, .425, 1-2 in playoffs)
2010s
1.Jacksonville Jaguars (51-109, .319, 2-1 in playoffs)
2.Cleveland Browns (42-117-1, .266, 0-0 in playoffs)
3.Oakland Raiders (63-97, .394, 0-1 in playoffs)
2020s (2020-2023)
1.New York Jets (20-47, .299, 0-0 in playoffs)
2.Houston Texans (21-45-1, .321, 1-1 in playoffs)
3.Jacksonville Jaguars (22-45, .328, 1-1 in playoffs)
Why not the panthers in the 2020s? Otherwise great list.
@@sijdnsd6460 I have the Carolina Panthers ranked #4 worst for the 2020s. The Panthers 2020s record has been 19-48 (.284), and 0-0 in playoffs (no appearances). The 2020s Panthers' have a worse regular season W-L-T record than each of the Jets, Texans, and Jaguars, but not by much. In 2020 and 2021, while the Panthers only finished 5-11 and 5-12, respectively, those teams were of much better quality than each of the Texans (5-11 and 4-13), Jets (2-14 and 4-13), and Jaguars (1-15 and 3-14) in those same seasons. In 2022, the Jets (7-10) and Jaguars (9-8, 1-1 in playoffs) were both better than the Panthers (7-10), but not by a lot in either case. The Panthers remained much better than the Texans (3-13-1). In 2023, the Texans (10-7, 1-1 in playoffs), Jaguars (9-8), and Jets (7-10) were much better than the Panthers (2-15), although the Jets were significantly less so than the Texans and Jaguars.
@@rtchidc Oh, ok. Makes sense. Thx!
Really thought the Browns would take the crown for the 10's, but I guess two 7-win seasons in a tough division was just enough to keep them in 31st place.
The 6-10 record in 2019 somewhat helps too but tbh the division that year was horrible with only the Browns and Ravens battling. Keep in mind that 6-10 browns team DESTROYED a 14-2 Ravens team.
Been enjoying the content lately
I wanna know if you’re getting copyrighted for the NFL music tho
I'm glad you're enjoying it. Workin' hard to get it out.
I was, but I played around with what I could include and what I couldn't till I found that right combo.
It's unclear to me if the Strength of Schedule metric being used for C Score is the one the NFL uses based upon the previous years standings, or if it's based upon the Standings at the end of the particular season itself in question looking backwards.
I remember watching the Lions and my Packers back in the day,and saying “Well…at least we’ll win TWO games this year!” 🦁 👀
I'm also shocked that Browns didn't take the crown for worst team of the 2010s. Damn, they weren't even good at losing!
Cool video. Thank you.
When im in a: "Try to be the worst Division" and my opponent is the Nfc South
The browns are the worst in the 2010s, without question. Cleveland had a losing season every year from 2008-2019. In 2017, they went 0-16, after going 1-15 in 2016, which is impossible. For comparison, Jacksonville at least finished 8-8 in 2010 and made the afc championship in 2017. The browns, meanwhile, were 42-117-1 during the decade
You should do pre super bowl era as well.
Mine:
1920s - Columbus Panhandles/Columbus Tigers (1920-1926) (13-45-3, .224)
1930s - Pittsburgh Pirates (1933-1939)* (22-55-3, .286, 0-0 in playoffs)
1940s - Pittsburgh Steelers/Phil-Pitt**/Card-Pitt***/Pittsburgh Steelers (40-64-6, .385, 0-1 in playoffs)
1950s - Green Bay Packers (39-79-2, .331, 0-0 in playoffs)
1960s (entire decade) - Denver Broncos - AFL (39-97-4, .287, 0-0 in playoffs)
1960s, worst NFL franchise (entire decade) - Washington Redskins (46-82-10, .359, 0-0 in playoffs)
1960s (pre-Super Bowl, 1960-1965) - Denver Broncos - AFL (22-59-3, .272, 0-0 in playoffs)
1960s, worst NFL franchise (pre-Super Bowl, 1960-1965) - Washington Redskins (22-55-5, .286, 0-0 in playoffs)
*the Pittsburgh Pirates became the Pittsburgh Steelers in 1940
**the Steelers merged with the Philadelphia Eagles for 1943, due to a World War II NFL player shortage
***no longer merged with the Eagles, the Steelers merged with the Chicago Cardinals for 1944, due to the World War II NFL player shortage
In the 90's, the Rams were close to the Bengals. I know, I'm a long time Rams fan and that era was pretty brutal.
Tied with the Cardinals for second worst winning percentage of the entire decade.
At least you guys ended the 90s with your first SB championship in the modern era.
Rams closed out with a SB though. Bengals were just dreary that whole decade. Usually in sports you expect a team to feel good before a season until reality crushes all those hopes. Cincy during that span just always felt like a battered wife dreading the inevitable end of the day when her hubby got home.
@@75aces97
VERY FEW saw that Super Bowl coming. NO one, not even Mike Martz saw the rise of Kurt Warner on the horizon. The year before that run they were 3-13 and Dick Vermiel was on the bubble. Marshall Faulk and Torry Holt were HUGE to that team. There is a reason NO ONE will ever wear the number 28 for the Rams, that's how big of a deal Faulk was to the Rams.
Well, we Bengals fans do not call the 90s The Lost Decade for nothing.
My gawd - I didn't think there was a chance a team could rank lower in the '10s than my Browns. The Mangini, Shurmer, Chudzinski, Pettine (2nd) and Jackson seasons were absolutely unwatchable.
The Jaguars being worse in the 2010’s is actually surprising
It really wasn't though
As a browns fan, yes
Browns suck so hard at winning that they can’t even win being the worst team of the 2010’s😂
Don't sleep on the Panthers, they have some baaaad seasons ahead of them. They will keep up the cat trend
OMG! This was spot on as I was trying to see if I was going to disagree, it felt like the Browns and Jags could've had the 2010s, but the math don't lie. 2020s remains to be seen, I don't think the Jets will be bad for very long if Aaron Rodgers can help them. I can see the Panthers becoming that team.
Myles Jack wasn't down.
Thank you!! Im not a Jags fan but will die saying that
I was gonna add this. They didn’t shoot themselves in the foot, they got screwed by the refs and a league who was worried about a Blake Bortles-Nick Foles Super Bowl matchup 😂
He definitely wasn't down. But I do believe JAX still coulda/shoulda won the game. Doug Marrone put the offense into a complete shell and played right into Bill Belichick's hand, otherwise known as Schottenheimering. I've got no head coaching metric, but this has to be one of the most lopsided coaching matchups in playoff history.
@NotMeNaNaNa hey, it could've been Blake Bortles - Case Keenum!
@@cccproductions2019 Marrone was horrible for sure. They were tearing the Pats up and then they seemed like the plan changed to just trying to hold on rather than playing to win. Doug Pederson was talking about it back then and he was right. I am happy he is our coach now.
The 60s were 1961-1970, the 80s were 71-80, and so on.
No, the 1960s were 1960-1969, the 1970s were 1970-1979, and so on. It's a defining characteristic of years from the "X0s" that the second-to-last digit is an X.
You probably got it mixed up with centuries not starting until xx01, since there was no year 0
How are the Jets or Texans anywhere close to the Panthers and Broncos for the 2020s?
The Packers had 2 bad patches in the 70's & 80's?
As a disgruntled Bears fan, i long for those days. 😁
I’m sure Lions & Vikings fans wish for those days as well.
It wasn't until the 1980s that Rozelle's plan for parity started to work.
It's just a constant rotation of Cleveland, Detroit and pre Dungy Bucs
Another interesting video would be examining the 5 or 10 worst 10-year stretches of all time, i e. stretches not confined to one specific decade. I imagine the Lions from 2001-2010 would still make the list (39 wins, 121 losses).
I knew the Saints had earned the distinction of being the worst team during the 1970s. Yet, they wouldn't hit franchise rock bottom until 1980. The stigma of the paper bags has never truly gone away.
The team managed to win only 26 per cent of their games with Archie Manning as their starting QB. For every touchdown pass he threw, he was sacked what, at least four or five times?
2017 Jags didnt shoot themselves in the foot? What r u referring too? If anything I'm sure most people would blame or fault the reffs on that fumble.
im surprised the panthers aren’t the worst team in the 2020s, and the browns aren’t the worst in the 2010s
As a raiders fan it feels like we should be in consideration for the 2000s. I suppose the first 3 seasons of the decade keep them out of it but the remaining years were awful
as a browns fan i’m shocked we weren’t the worst in the 2010s
How low was the Bears score in the 90’s? I always thought they were tied with the Bengals for worst W-L record in the 90’s.
The 1990s Bears' regular season/playoff W-L-T record was 73-87 (.456)/ 2-3 (.400) over 10 seasons. There were 12 NFL teams which had a worse regular season W-L-T record than the Bears during the 1990s (the Bengals had the worst). I rank the 1990s Bears as 21st among NFL franchises for the 1990s. There are no franchises with better decade regular season records that I rank below the Bears, but there are two with worse regular season records that I rank above the Bears - the 1996-1999 Ravens (24-39-1, .383) at 18th, and the Seahawks (70-90, .438, 0-1 in playoffs) at 19th. The Ravens may have been worse per average season than the Bears in the 1990s, but I'm weighing the cumulation of longevity above average quality. I also differ slightly with the video pick for worst of the 1990s - I pick the Cardinals first, with the Bengals second.
The 2010s had to be the Browns. Every Cleveland fan would have committed a felony to have a 2017 outlier season like Jacksonville did.
Why the back handed statement at the end? They'll probably be good for the next two or 3 seasons. Even if they are horrible afterwards which I doubt, they probably wont be last off of 2 or 3 potentially good years.
You gotta remember the old browns became the ravens and the new browns are a totally different expansion team. If you do the math on their individual record no team has a worse win pct than the new browns since 99 (.343) and no team has a better overall record than the combined old browns/ravens (.590).
How do you calculate the c score?
Worst in the 1920s was the Dayton Triangles/Indianapolis Colts franchise.
The Jags almost had a Super Bowl appearance in the 2010s no way they’re worse than Cleveland
Without watching the video: bro Jets is one syllable, how do you take 13+ minutes saying it?
What about a Best Team Of Every Decade (Super Bowl Era)? 1970's would be interesting since Dallas won the most games that decade but Steelers won more Super Bowls.
Never thought I'd see Edward Snowden in a football video 😅
I can be sneaky like that ;-)
Now we need to see a ranking of the best and worst franchises, based on avg season C score during their existance.
That's on its way... soonish lol
Look forward to it. I was just about to make the same request!
I'm genuinely disappointed my redskins aren't on this list
Shocking that DAN SNYDER did better than Henry Ford's grandbrat, and Bill Bidwell.
This would be such a hard list to make Because not all of them like reset in the beginning of the decade So you can have like carry over from the previous decade You know so like the run over what not Like taken into account. Which teams average the quickest resets do ya think?
No way you put Arizona as the 2000s runner up over the Texans and this is coming from a Texans fan
People here: Doing this:
Make the music a bit louder I can almost hear your voice
I paused at 18 seconds to share my anxiety about how many times the Lions will make the list. Alright…let’s get this over with…
Phew!…I knew the 90s were safe, but I was sh*tting bricks for the 70s and 80s.
JETS i know only 2 division titles put the texans in the east from 2002 probably zero for you
Brady played that title game against the Jags with an injured hand
The refs carried him through it.
At least two very questionable calls that if they go the jags way they go to the super bowl.
2020’s I would’ve thought the Carolina Panthers so far
Would be fitting because the other cat teams have been on this list.
Commenting in the beginning of the video. As an Eagles fan, the Eagles have to be high in the running in the 60s and 70s.
The eagles won the championship in 1960. They also made the playoffs in 78 and 79. So they didn't stink up the joint that bad.
@cmorris9494 I was just thinking about the Super Bowl Era. Although the worst years were the second half of the 60s and first of the 70s before they hired Vermeil.
Im shocked the Panthers arent even in the top 2 for the 2020s
I would say the Jets are playoff contenders but the Bills and Dolphins exist
Jets will actually prob win the division this year. Go back and watch the preseason game with Rodgers in it from last year. It was scary.
Buffalo is a wildcard this year that’ll make the playoffs due to Allen, but not too much else.
The Dolphins will suck this year. Tua is regressing just like Jalen Hurts. However, Tua isn’t as far as Hurts is in that process. They might go 9-8 but miss the playoffs.
Jaguars almost clinched the super bowl in 2017
No real shockers here.
I am honestly surprised the Saints weren't the worst of every decade.
But, I'm thrilled the Falcons were the worst overall.
The Dome Patrol, Drew Breea and Tracy Porter said otherwise.
The 2000s Saints were 83-77 (.519) over 10 regular seasons, and 5-2 (.714) in the playoffs. I have them #17 for that decade. For the 2010s, the Saints were 100-60 (.625) over 10 regular seasons, and 4-6 (.400) in the playoffs. I have them #5 for that decade.
No doubt it's going to be number one on this list. The poor fans in this city has waited for a championship is priceless. That city is Cleveland. And the team is Browns.
Me being a Browns fan and knowing damn well the 00s and 10s will likely have them there
Edit: holy shit
I have to admit I'm surprised anyone could beat the Browns for worst team in the 2010s.
The Browns had the worst overall regular season W-L-T record of any NFL franchise for the decade of the 2010s. But the Jaguars come in second, with an average of only 0.85 more wins per regular season than the Browns over the course of the decade. Picking the Jaguars over the Browns for worst of the 2010s is likely a matter of taking into account the differing opponents and quality of wins, losses, and ties for each team, and attempting to weigh those fairly and reasonably. The Jaguars had a very good season in 2017. They were 10-6, and 2-1 in the playoffs, losing to the Patriots 24-20 in the AFC Championship game. That was one of ten relevant Jaguars seasons. The 2012, 2013, 2014, and 2019 Jaguars teams of the 2010s were among bottom 10 percent in league history, and the remaining Jaguars teams of the decade were, for the most part, not that far behind. Outside of the 2017 and 2018 Jaguars (bottom 40 percent), there isn't a Jaguars team of that decade that I wouldn't rank among the bottom 10 or 20 percent of all-time NFL teams (2010, 2011, 2015, and 2016 included). By comparison, the Browns had no good teams during the decade, no winning seasons, and no season playoff appearances. The 2016 and 2017 Browns were bottom 10 percent all-time teams. The 2011, 2012, 2013, and 2015 Browns teams were not that far behind. But the 2010, 2014, 2018, and 2019 Browns, while below-average, weren't terribly bad. Of those last four, only the 2014 Browns crack my bottom 40 percent of all-time NFL teams. Don't get me wrong. I don't think the 2010s Browns should rank higher than second worst NFL franchise of the 2010s. I just agree that on balance, the Jaguars were worse over the decade.
@@rtchidc I just found it amazing that the Jaguars managed to somehow be worse than my Browns. Being a Browns fan is a painful thing, finding little silver linings like this is nice.
Looking to see the best in every decade
Easy,
70s Steelers
80s 49ers
90s Cowboys
00s Patriots
10s Patriots
20s will probably be the Chiefs
@@TheBeggies95 no 60s Packers?
@@THEREDHOTWRECKEven though this was in the old era but 50s Browns & Lions.
@@TheBeggies95 I take a minority view regarding the 1970s and 1990s. The Steelers and Cowboys won the most Super Bowls in those decades, respectively. But I think that over the entirety of 1970-1979, the Cowboys were better. And I think that over the entirety of 1990-1999, the 49ers were better. The Steelers didn't get good or great in the 1970s until 1972, by which point the Cowboys were already 1-1 (.500) in Super Bowls for the 1970s. For the 1990s, the Cowboys' prime years above mediocrity are really 1991-1996. The 49ers only had one not very good or great season in the 1990s, which was 1999.
Mine:
1920s
1.Decatur Staleys/Chicago Staleys/Chicago Bears (84-31-19, .730) - 1921 NFL title
2.Frankford Yellow Jackets (1924-1929) (65-26-13, .714) - 1926 NFL title
3.Green Bay Packers (1921-1929) (61-25-13, .709) - 1929 NFL title
1930s
1.Green Bay Packers (86-35-4, .711, 2-1 in playoffs) - 1930 and 1931 NFL titles; 1936*, 1938 and 1939* NFL title game appearances
2.Chicago Bears (85-28-11, .752, 1-2 in playoffs) - 1932 NFL title; 1933*, 1934 and 1937 NFL title game appearances
3.New York Giants (80-39-8, .672, 2-3 in playoffs) - 1933, 1934*, 1935, 1938* and 1939 NFL title game appearances
*win
1940s
1.Chicago Bears (81-26-3, .757, 5-1 in playoffs) - 1940*, 1941*, 1942, 1943*, and 1946* NFL title game appearances
2.Cleveland Browns - AAFC (1946-1949) (47-4-3, .922, 5-0 in playoffs) - 1946*, 1947*, 1948* and 1949* AAFC title game appearances
3.San Francisco 49ers - AAFC (1946-1949) (38-14-2, .731, 1-1 in playoffs) - 1949 AAFC title game appearance
*win
1950s
1.Cleveland Browns (88-30-2, .746, 4-5 in playoffs) - 1950*, 1951, 1952, 1953, 1954*, 1955* and 1957 NFL title game appearances
2.Detroit Lions (68-48-4, .586, 5-1 in playoffs) - 1952*, 1953*, 1954 and 1957* NFL title game appearances
3.New York Giants (76-41-3, .650, 2-3 in playoffs) - 1956*, 1958 and 1959 NFL title game appearances
*win
1960s (1960-1969)
1.Green Bay Packers (96-37-5, .722, 9-1 in playoffs) - 1960, 1961*, 1962*, 1965*, 1966 and 1967 NFL title game appearances
2.Dallas Texans/Kansas City Chiefs - AFL (87-48-5, .644, 5-2 in playoffs) - 1962*, 1966 and 1969 AFL title game appearances
3.Baltimore Colts (92-42-4, .687, 2-3 in playoffs) - 1964 and 1968 NFL title game appearances
*pre-Super Bowl era win
- The Packers' 1966 and 1967 NFL title game appearances were wins, followed by Super Bowl wins.
- The Chiefs' 1966 and 1969 AFL title game appearances were wins, followed by a Super Bowl loss and win, respectively.
- The Colts' 1968 NFL title game appearance was a win, followed by a Super Bowl loss.
1960s (Super Bowl era, 1966-1969)
1.Kansas City Chiefs - AFL (43-12-1, .782, 4-2 in playoffs) - 1966 and 1969 AFL title game appearances
2.Oakland Raiders - AFL (45-9-2, .833, 3-3 in playoffs) - 1967, 1968 and 1969 AFL title game appearances
3.Green Bay Packers (35-19-2, .648, 5-0 in playoffs) - 1966 and 1967 NFL title game appearances
- The Raiders' 1967 AFL title game appearance was a win, followed by a Super Bowl loss.
1970s
1.Dallas Cowboys (105-39, .729, 14-7 in playoffs) - 1970, 1971*, 1975, 1977* and 1978 season Super Bowl appearances
2.Pittsburgh Steelers (99-44-1, .691, 14-4 in playoffs) - 1974*, 1975*, 1978* and 1979* season Super Bowl appearances
3.Oakland Raiders (100-38-6, .715, 8-6 in playoffs) - 1976* season Super Bowl appearance
*win
1980s
1.San Francisco 49ers (104-47-1, .688, 13-4 in playoffs) - 1981*, 1984*, 1988* and 1989* season Super Bowl appearances
2.Washington Redskins (97-55, .638, 11-3 in playoffs) - 1982*, 1983 and 1987* season Super Bowl appearances
3.Chicago Bears (92-60, .605, 5-4 in playoffs) - 1985* season Super Bowl appearance
*win
1990s
1.San Francisco 49ers (113-47, .706, 9-7 in playoffs) - 1994* season Super Bowl appearance
2.Dallas Cowboys (101-59, .631, 12-5 in playoffs) - 1992*, 1993* and 1995* season Super Bowl appearances
3.Buffalo Bills (103-57, .644, 10-8 in playoffs) - 1990, 1991, 1992 and 1993 season Super Bowl appearances
*win
2000s
1.New England Patriots (112-48, .700, 14-4 in playoffs) - 2001*, 2003*, 2004* and 2007 season Super Bowl appearances
2.Indianapolis Colts (115-45, .719, 9-8 in playoffs) - 2006* season Super Bowl appearance
3.Philadelphia Eagles (103-56-1, .647, 10-8 in playoffs) - 2004 season Super Bowl appearance
*win
2010s
1.New England Patriots (125-35, .781, 16-7 in playoffs) - 2011, 2014*, 2016*, 2017 and 2018* season Super Bowl appearances
2.Seattle Seahawks (100-59-1, .628, 10-7 in playoffs) - 2013* and 2014 season Super Bowl appearances
3.Baltimore Ravens (98-62, .613, 7-5 in playoffs) - 2012* season Super Bowl appearance
*win
2020s (2020-2023)
1.Kansas City Chiefs (51-16, .761, 11-2 in playoffs) - 2020, 2022* and 2023* season Super Bowl appearances
2.Buffalo Bills (48-18, .727, 5-4 in playoffs)
3.Baltimore Ravens (42-25, .627, 2-3 in playoffs)
*win
I’m surprised Washington is not on here.
Which decade would they be in?
Browns were definitely worse than the Jaguars in the 2010s
Carolina panthers have a worse win loss percentage than the Jets and they are on head coach #3 if interims don’t count.
My Raiders bad enough to miss playoffs to good to be in this list
There's always somebody worse than the Washington Commanders. Those are words I live by....
Honestly eye test and Tepper like the Panthers should complete the division and be the worst of the 2020s, Jets are fine if Rodgers plays.
until last year 1960-2024 the worst team was ALWAYS the Lions.
So the Colts were the 2nd worst team of the 1980's. At least by the mid 1990's they became competitive.
Jets are going to the playoffs the next two years with rodgers so no way will they be on this list
Browns didn't make the 1st place? Even they suck for sucking
Papyrus?
Nah how were the browns not worst for the 2010s
Pretty sure the 2000s and 2010s are the Browns. They're the factory of sadness.
Browns 2.0 didn't have a winless season in the 2000's though.