Chicago Bulls: If D-Rose's Team Wins a Title, Will It Escape Jordan's Shadow?

When the 2007-2008 NBA season began, the Boston Celtics looked to be the dynasty of the future. The problem: there was a set time limit on that future.

One title, two Finals berths, and maybe a few years left in the tank, the Celtics of KG, Pierce, and Allen have definitely left their mark on history...but it will be far too brief.

Instead, a new force seems to be gathering steam in the East and it doesn't appear to have a 'Big 3' attached to them. While people thought the Bulls would be good this year, did anyone think they'd be THIS good?

An impressive 51-19 record, a clinched division title and playoff berth, and a 1/2 game lead on the Celtics for the No. 1 spot in the East have people BULL-eiving again.

I'm not a reactionary type, and I'd like to see this Bulls team in the playoffs before automatically giving them a place in the Finals (let alone winning a ring).

However, their amazing commitment to defense, elite teamwork, and an MVP-bound leader makes them, certainly, a favorite. The only thing that remains is the playoffs themselves: four series victories and 16 wins.

So, let's pretend the Bulls do, indeed, win the title this year. Championship banners define a franchise: either as an indicator of past glory or as an example of exemplary team accomplishment. But very few teams reach that elite status of winning in multiple eras and decades.

When you think of the NBA's storied franchises, the Celtics, Lakers, and Bulls are always the first to come to mind.

The odd thing, however, is that the Bulls really only had one (or 1.5) true era, whereas teams like the Celtics, Lakers, and even the Spurs, to a lesser extent, have managed to remain relevant and dominant for almost the entire NBA's existence.

The Celtics and Lakers are thus NBA royalty...their bad years most certainly washed away by the seemingly endless good years.

But the Bulls are always considered one of those epic franchises despite a short history of domination. And it is mostly deserved: they won six titles in eight years (and many argue it would have been 8 out of 8 if things were different) and had not only the greatest player ever but the greatest dynamic duo and, at one point, the greatest "Big Three," a phrase many are in love with to this day.

The Bulls were a global brand. Countries detached from the NBA culture still know who the Bulls are (or, at least, were). Not even the Celtics can necessarily say that. The Bulls are/were global.

But in terms of long-term history, success wise, the Bulls don't have the resume legacy teams like the Lakers and Celtics have.

I want to note, however, that this isn't a bad thing, not does it take away the Bulls accomplishments (so Bulls fans, don't jump down my throat) but it is incredible what one/two good runs with amazing players can do for a franchise's longevity.

For example, the Celtics have won 20 division titles in the '70s, '80s, '90s, '00s, and '10s. They've won 21 conference titles (all in the same time period save the '90s) and 17 championships (once again, all decades from the '50s to the '00s, save the '90s).

The Lakers are very similar, winning 22 division titles ('70s-'10s), 31 Conference titles ('40s-'00s), and 16 championships ('40s, '50s, '70s, '80s, '00s).

Both franchises went through their rough periods (Celtics= mid/late '90s all the way until 2008; Lakers mid/late 90s) but, for the most part, have been relevant in almost decade of NBA existence.

In contrast, the Bulls are known, before this season, as being a one-time legacy-franchise. The Bulls have an impressive eight division titles, but six of them were won in the Jordan era. They've won six conferences: once again, all in the Jordan era. And six titles: yup, Jordan.

Having the greatest player in the world has its benefits and the Bulls are, to this day, a legacy franchise despite not being relevant until No. 23 was on the court. They've won only one playoff series since 1998.

But things are different now, or so NBA and Bulls fans believe. And can you blame them? The Bulls are kickin' the tar out of elite opponents and have bought into a defensive philosophy that rivals that of some of the greats.

And though Derrick Rose, the Bulls' amazing leader, is the leader of the MVP ballot at this point, when you think of the Bulls, you think of a team, not just a player. The Bulls are a cohesive unit and a potential powerhouse.

So let's go back to my statement: let's pretend it's June and there is a victory parade down Michigan Avenue. What does that mean for the Chicago Bulls as a franchise?

In one eight- to 10-year period, the Bulls cemented themselves amongst the league's all-time elite, despite less success, banner-wise. What will adding a new banner (and a new MVP, etc.) mean to Chicago?

Part of why Michael Jordan is considered the greatest of all time (besides the fact that, well, he is just that) is because he took a franchise to glory and it, basically, fell apart without him. The Bulls, despite recent successes, are still in Jordan's shadow.

The current Bulls squad winning a title won't necessarily lessen people's opinions that Jordan was the GOAT (Greatest Of All Time), but it will allow a franchise that is DEFINED by his Airness, the chance to breath and create a true legacy.

Once again, I'm not ripping on the Bulls at all. But, whether for better or worse, the franchise is linked to Jordan.

So while the Bulls winning a title this year, if it happens, or in years to come, will show the true impact of a team mentality and bring 'good guys' back to the forefront, so to speak, it will also do a lot to shove aside history.

Jordan will always be Jordan but if Chicago wins another title, the city can have another page in the history books and, while feeding on its former success, can also begin to write a new history without being chained down to it.