My initial thought is...

Quote
L.A.Rams
I think the 2017 Rams could be better than the 2001 Rams. Better balance among offense, defense, and special teams. Better coaching.

No way.

The 2001 offense was much more unstoppable. The Patriots' only recourse in the Super Bowl was literally to manhandle every receiver and pray the officials "just let 'em play," which is, of course, exactly what happened. If the refs had called a clean game, the Rams would have blown them to smithereens just like they did every other team that year.

The 2001 defense was 3rd in yards-per-game at 279 and only gave up 17 points per game. So far the 2017 Rams are giving up 327 yards per game and 19 points per game (though, admittedly, some of that is probably skewed by the 49ers game). This one is closer, but still, edge to 2001 Rams.

Special teams... I'm too lazy to look up stats on this one, but Jeff Wilkins was every bit as good as Zuerlein. Zuerlein probably has the edge on distance, though. Hekker is better than John Baker, but then, Baker didn't have to work as much. My sense is that I trusted the 2001 return team more than I do Pharoh Cooper.

Coaching... obviously this is controversial. I'm an unabashed Martz fan. Until McVay, everything we had was worse than Martz, even with his idiosyncracies and foibles. McVay does run a more balanced offense, but I don't worship at the altar of how you "ought" to play the game. Let's just say, jury's out on this one. When McVay takes us to a Super Bowl, I'll be happy to give him the edge.