Originally Posted by macg0120
Yeah. But if the Warriors beat the 72-10 by the end of the season then Bulls 72-10 is not the most historic season. And I think the "most historic season" is only referring to the regular season of the 96 Bulls.
If the Bulls didn't win the title in 1996, then no one would be calling their season the most historic. It would be labeled as the most disappointing. Look at the 2007 Patriots, they went undefeated up until the Super Bowl, and lost. People don't talk about how the Patriots went unbeaten, they talk about how they lost.
Jordan winning the MVP for the regular season, and all-star MVP, along with Kukoc winning 6th man of the year, Phil's coach of the year, all solidified how historic the season was by sweeping the major regular season awards, AND winning the championship.
Sure, the Warriors are on a pace to have more than 72 wins in a season, but if you don't win the championship, the season was a bust, and that's how history would remember them as.
Ask any player, they would rather have the ring than any other record.
Second place is 1st loser.
Edited by Fransravo - 11/25/15 at 2:03am