+ Reply to Thread
Page 11 of 22 FirstFirst ... 91011121321 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 110 of 219

Thread: Who are the worst fans in the NFL?

  1. #101
    Quote Originally Posted by Colorado49er View Post
    seems like youre a little mad that the cough cant come up with something as inspiring. Oh well, I guess all cant be as clever.
    It's not clever at all -- especially when you aren't the last team standing. It's something a 5 year old would say.


  2. #102
    Quote Originally Posted by GentleGiant View Post
    They're (Pittsburgh) the most consistently successful franchise in NFL history.
    NOT. EVEN. CLOSE.

    Not disrespecting the Steelers but they didn't even make the playoffs one single time for their first 40 years. They were consistent cellar-dwellers for decades.

    That title has to go to the Packers (13 championships, multiple dynasties, last team to win 3 in a row)... Bears and Giants belong in the conversation. All of those 3 have been competitive in almost every era. Pittsburgh belongs in the SB era conversation but even their success is contained in 2 of 5 SB decades.
    Last edited by SweetZombieJesus; 04-16-2013 at 08:15 AM.

  3. #103
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Philipsburg, PA
    Posts
    656
    Quote Originally Posted by SweetZombieJesus View Post
    NOT. EVEN. CLOSE.Not disrespecting the Steelers but they didn't even make the playoffs one single time for their first 40 years. They were consistent cellar-dwellers for decades.That title has to go to the Packers (13 championships, multiple dynasties, last team to win 3 in a row)... Bears and Giants belong in the conversation. All of those 3 have been competitive in almost every era. Pittsburgh belongs in the SB era conversation but even their success is contained in 2 of 5 SB decades.
    Oh don't give me that crap. Where were the bears in the 60s, 70s, and 90s? Where was the pack in the 70s and 80s? Where were the giants in the 60s, 70s, and 90s? I'm getting sick of people acting like the pre SB wins actually count. The pack doesn't have 13 championships. They have NFC/AFC championships and 4 REAL championships. The fact that the AFL had its own championship obviously shows that the NFL championships don't count.

    MULTIPLE DYNASTIES? HA! The only way the pack ever had a dynasty is if the bills going to 4 SBs is a dynasty cause that's all they did. Win NFC/ AFC championships. The 2 teams that went to the championship weren't even the actual best teams in the league. It was basically CFB. A bunch of people debating who should go. No playoff system. Why do the NFL championships count but the AFL doesn't? Face it. SBs are the only things that count. The fact that the NFL merged at all means the old ones have no merit. Congratulations pack. You WENT to the SB 9 times.

    I'm a giants fan but even I know the old ones are not the same stature as SBs. There wouldn't have been a merge if they did matter.

    And no this isnt the same as baseball. There wasn't 2 MLB leagues that merged like the NFL did.

    Next you'll tell me is that the lions and browns are better than the steelers, cowboys, and niners. Oh the browns being bad after the merge counts but the packs doesn't?

    The steelers actually played the game to get their rings. The pack got lucky cause the boarding room felt bad for them. SBs are harder. The system actually works to make sure the 2 teams left are actually the best. A SB should be worth 10 old ones.

    Not taking anything from the players and coaches. That's different.
    Last edited by GentleGiant; 04-16-2013 at 08:13 PM.

  4. #104
    Quote Originally Posted by SamHuff70 View Post
    Dude I couldn't disagree with you more. I've had more Steelers fans come up to me shaking my hand - some buying me a beer - because I'm a Giants fan. Why? Because we beat the Patsies twice in the SB.
    I am with you.


    I don't live in the NY area and for a long time I spent my Sundays in sports bars among fellow football fans. I never liked going to sports bars where just 1 group of fans would hang. The Steeler fans always represented well, and were among the best guys to have a beer and a laugh with. They have a lot in common with the Giants you know:

    -Kate Mara, and little sis Rooney
    -They hate the Cowboys for the 1996 Superbowl, among other numberous obnoxiouses.
    - They dislike the Eagles as cross state rivals, and for making outsiders thing all of the state of Penn is like what you see at an Eagles game.
    - The 2 teams owners have been friends for a long time.
    - and lastly, Kate Mara. Because it is my post and I get to put her 2x.

  5. #105
    Quote Originally Posted by GentleGiant View Post
    Oh don't give me that crap. Where were the bears in the 60s, 70s, and 90s? Where was the pack in the 70s and 80s? Where were the giants in the 60s, 70s, and 90s? I'm getting sick of people acting like the pre SB wins actually count. The pack doesn't have 13 championships. They have NFC/AFC championships and 4 REAL championships. The fact that the AFL had its own championship obviously shows that the NFL championships don't count.
    Oh, so you're one of "those." The NFL has been around since 1920. The 8 team AFL merged with it in 1970. The first AFL-NFL Championship (Super Bowl) was in 1966.

    Where were the Steelers in the 30s, 40s, 50s, and 60s? Certainly not in the playoffs. But guess what, they were in the league and they were playing. The Steelers were one of the league's worst franchises for their first 40 years.

    Since the ABA merged with the NBA, please tell me which NBA titles no longer count. I guess all those Celtics championships get thrown out by your logic.

    As for the Bears -- playoff appearences in 60s/70s/90s: 1963, 1977,1979, 1990,1991, 1994
    As for the Packers -- playoff appearences in 70s/80s: 1972, 1982
    As for the Giants -- playoff appearences in 60/s/70s/90s: Three straight championship games (1961, 1962, 1963), 1990 (Super Bowl win), 1993, 1997 (and Super Bowl loss in 2000)

    The Pack does have 13 championships even if you stomp your feet and deny it.


    Even the NFL itself acknowledges it on its site -- I'll dig up a link.

    Quote Originally Posted by GentleGiant View Post
    MULTIPLE DYNASTIES? HA! The only way the pack ever had a dynasty is if the bills going to 4 SBs is a dynasty cause that's all they did.
    I'll just leave it by saying you are ignorant, as in the dictionary definition, meaning uneducated. Did you ever stop to think why the trophy is named after Vince Lombardi? His Packers won 5 championships in 7 seasons, including the first two Super Bowls. 61-62-65-66-67. That's the very definition of a dynasty, and no other since has reached those heights. Not the Steelers, not the Cowboys, not the 49ers, not the Patriots. They're also the only team to 3-peat as champions, and they've done it twice. 29-30-31 and 65-66-67.

    Quote Originally Posted by GentleGiant View Post
    Win NFC/ AFC championships. The 2 teams that went to the championship weren't even the actual best teams in the league. It was basically CFB. A bunch of people debating who should go. No playoff system.
    More ignorance. From 1920-1932 the team with the best standing won the championship. The Giants won in 1927 this way. From 1933-1965 there were two divisions and the two teams that won the divisions played in the championship game, which is a playoff system. No ambiguity, no CFB ranking system.

    Further, there was no AFL until 1960. So how is the NFL supposed to compete with a league that doesn't exist? How can the Giants' 1956 Championship be discounted as an "NFC Championship" when the other league wouldn't even exist for 4 more years? And in fact, the other league would be created because of the 1958 Championship between the Giants and Colts. Do you need a history lesson on that too? (Crib notes version: That game put pro football on the map and people wanted new NFL teams to spread across the country. When the NFL said "no", they started their own league -- the AFL).

    By the way, baseball operated the same way until 1969 -- the team with the best standing of each league played the other league's champion in the World Series. So do those old World Series no longer count either?

    Quote Originally Posted by GentleGiant View Post
    Why do the NFL championships count but the AFL doesn't?
    Several reasons. The AFL merged into the NFL. The AFL only awarded 6 stand-alone AFL championship titles (1960-1965). The NFL had awarded 46 (1920-1965).

    Quote Originally Posted by GentleGiant View Post
    Face it. SBs are the only things that count. The fact that the NFL merged at all means the old ones have no merit. Congratulations pack. You WENT to the SB 9 times.
    I disagree. The teams played. They tried to make the postseason and win championships. If the team won a championship in its system of the day, how can it be invalid? I'm not for erasing/ignoring 45 years of NFL history. We don't do that in any other sport.

    Quote Originally Posted by GentleGiant View Post
    I'm a giants fan but even I know the old ones are not the same stature as SBs. There wouldn't have been a merge if they did matter.
    The Giants don't agree with you.



    Quote Originally Posted by GentleGiant View Post
    And no this isnt the same as baseball. There wasn't 2 MLB leagues that merged like the NFL did.
    More ignorance... The AL and NL were two rival leagues operating under the MLB umbrella, but until very recently they kept their business operations quite separate (including league offices and umpiring crews).

    Quote Originally Posted by GentleGiant View Post
    SBs are harder. The system actually works to make sure the 2 teams left are actually the best. A SB should be worth 10 old ones.
    Really? Because the exact opposite could be argued. Up until 1965 the two best teams played in the championship game. In 1965, that meant a 2-in-14 chance of making the playoffs (14%). Today it's a 12-in-32 chance (38%). How does having 1/3 of the league making the playoffs, and having a 3x greater chance of making the playoffs, ensure that the two teams left are actually the best?
    Last edited by SweetZombieJesus; 04-17-2013 at 01:27 PM.

  6. #106
    Quote Originally Posted by SweetZombieJesus View Post
    Oh, so you're one of "those." The NFL has been around since 1920. The 8 team AFL merged with it in 1970. The first AFL-NFL Championship (Super Bowl) was in 1966.

    Where were the Steelers in the 30s, 40s, 50s, and 60s? Certainly not in the playoffs. But guess what, they were in the league and they were playing. The Steelers were one of the league's worst franchises for their first 40 years.

    Since the ABA merged with the NBA, please tell me which NBA titles no longer count. I guess all those Celtics championships get thrown out by your logic.

    As for the Bears -- playoff appearences in 60s/70s/90s: 1963, 1977,1979, 1990,1991, 1994
    As for the Packers -- playoff appearences in 70s/80s: 1972, 1982
    As for the Giants -- playoff appearences in 60/s/70s/90s: Three straight championship games (1961, 1962, 1963), 1990 (Super Bowl win), 1993, 1997 (and Super Bowl loss in 2000)

    The Pack does have 13 championships even if you stomp your feet and deny it.


    Even the NFL itself acknowledges it on its site -- I'll dig up a link.



    I'll just leave it by saying you are ignorant, as in the dictionary definition, meaning uneducated. Did you ever stop to think why the trophy is named after Vince Lombardi? His Packers won 5 championships in 7 seasons, including the first two Super Bowls. 61-62-65-66-67. That's the very definition of a dynasty, and no other since has reached those heights. Not the Steelers, not the Cowboys, not the 49ers, not the Patriots. They're also the only team to 3-peat as champions, and they've done it twice. 29-30-31 and 65-66-67.



    More ignorance. From 1920-1932 the team with the best standing won the championship. The Giants won in 1927 this way. From 1933-1965 there were two divisions and the two teams that won the divisions played in the championship game, which is a playoff system. No ambiguity, no CFB ranking system.

    Further, there was no AFL until 1960. So how is the NFL supposed to compete with a league that doesn't exist? How can the Giants' 1956 Championship be discounted as an "NFC Championship" when the other league wouldn't even exist for 4 more years? And in fact, the other league would be created because of the 1958 Championship between the Giants and Colts. Do you need a history lesson on that too? (Crib notes version: That game put pro football on the map and people wanted new NFL teams to spread across the country. When the NFL said "no", they started their own league -- the AFL).

    By the way, baseball operated the same way until 1969 -- the team with the best standing of each league played the other league's champion in the World Series. So do those old World Series no longer count either?



    Several reasons. The AFL merged into the NFL. The AFL only awarded 6 stand-alone AFL championship titles (1960-1965). The NFL had awarded 46 (1920-1965).



    I disagree. The teams played. They tried to make the postseason and win championships. If the team won a championship in its system of the day, how can it be invalid? I'm not for erasing/ignoring 45 years of NFL history. We don't do that in any other sport.



    The Giants don't agree with you.





    More ignorance... The AL and NL were two rival leagues operating under the MLB umbrella, but until very recently they kept their business operations quite separate (including league offices and umpiring crews).



    Really? Because the exact opposite could be argued. Up until 1965 the two best teams played in the championship game. In 1965, that meant a 2-in-14 chance of making the playoffs (14%). Today it's a 12-in-32 chance (38%). How does having 1/3 of the league making the playoffs, and having a 3x greater chance of making the playoffs, ensure that the two teams left are actually the best?
    Wow, SZJ, what a thorough reply.
    You said much more completely than I would have, but my answer was essentially the same.
    I have to smile when youn g people think the world started when they were born, and history startes there. I remember well in the 50's and 60's, when I first started watching football, that the Steelers were the ultimate cellar dwellars, which made it all the more difficult to take when they absolutely killed YA Tittle in thet '63 (?) game. The classic one where you see him on his knees, his helmet off and blood coming down his face. That was about the worst beating I've ever seen a QB take in my life.

  7. #107
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Philipsburg, PA
    Posts
    656
    Quote Originally Posted by SweetZombieJesus View Post
    Oh, so you're one of "those." The NFL has been around since 1920. The 8 team AFL merged with it in 1970. The first AFL-NFL Championship (Super Bowl) was in 1966.Where were the Steelers in the 30s, 40s, 50s, and 60s? Certainly not in the playoffs. But guess what, they were in the league and they were playing. The Steelers were one of the league's worst franchises for their first 40 years.Since the ABA merged with the NBA, please tell me which NBA titles no longer count. I guess all those Celtics championships get thrown out by your logic.As for the Bears -- playoff appearences in 60s/70s/90s: 1963, 1977,1979, 1990,1991, 1994As for the Packers -- playoff appearences in 70s/80s: 1972, 1982As for the Giants -- playoff appearences in 60/s/70s/90s: Three straight championship games (1961, 1962, 1963), 1990 (Super Bowl win), 1993, 1997 (and Super Bowl loss in 2000)The Pack does have 13 championships even if you stomp your feet and deny it. Even the NFL itself acknowledges it on its site -- I'll dig up a link. I'll just leave it by saying you are ignorant, as in the dictionary definition, meaning uneducated. Did you ever stop to think why the trophy is named after Vince Lombardi? His Packers won 5 championships in 7 seasons, including the first two Super Bowls. 61-62-65-66-67. That's the very definition of a dynasty, and no other since has reached those heights. Not the Steelers, not the Cowboys, not the 49ers, not the Patriots. They're also the only team to 3-peat as champions, and they've done it twice. 29-30-31 and 65-66-67. More ignorance. From 1920-1932 the team with the best standing won the championship. The Giants won in 1927 this way. From 1933-1965 there were two divisions and the two teams that won the divisions played in the championship game, which is a playoff system. No ambiguity, no CFB ranking system.Further, there was no AFL until 1960. So how is the NFL supposed to compete with a league that doesn't exist? How can the Giants' 1956 Championship be discounted as an "NFC Championship" when the other league wouldn't even exist for 4 more years? And in fact, the other league would be created because of the 1958 Championship between the Giants and Colts. Do you need a history lesson on that too? (Crib notes version: That game put pro football on the map and people wanted new NFL teams to spread across the country. When the NFL said "no", they started their own league -- the AFL).By the way, baseball operated the same way until 1969 -- the team with the best standing of each league played the other league's champion in the World Series. So do those old World Series no longer count either?Several reasons. The AFL merged into the NFL. The AFL only awarded 6 stand-alone AFL championship titles (1960-1965). The NFL had awarded 46 (1920-1965).I disagree. The teams played. They tried to make the postseason and win championships. If the team won a championship in its system of the day, how can it be invalid? I'm not for erasing/ignoring 45 years of NFL history. We don't do that in any other sport.The Giants don't agree with you.More ignorance... The AL and NL were two rival leagues operating under the MLB umbrella, but until very recently they kept their business operations quite separate (including league offices and umpiring crews). Really? Because the exact opposite could be argued. Up until 1965 the two best teams played in the championship game. In 1965, that meant a 2-in-14 chance of making the playoffs (14%). Today it's a 12-in-32 chance (38%). How does having 1/3 of the league making the playoffs, and having a 3x greater chance of making the playoffs, ensure that the two teams left are actually the best?
    I never seen so much pointless banter in my life. It's cute how you call me ignorant despite the fact that I literally just said that everything the coaches and players did was different. Yet you just continued off in your idiotic banter. So any cheesehead rant about Lombardi is irrelevant.

    Under the MLB umbrella? Yeah sure old man. So umbrella was the NFL and AFL under? Cute how you somehow think only the AFL merged despite the fact that the Browns and colts were originally NFL before moving to the NFL. So I'm supposed to care that the giants have banners? The patriots have ones for going 16-0( as if that means anything). The packers won a championship by winning 7 games. SEVEN. Cause there was no overtime. They went 7-1-6. Yeah they CLEARLY deserved it. It was clearly harder. The highest records doesn't mean the best team. There's a reason why CFB is changing the system. Cause most regular reasons doesn't mean best team. Notre dame had the most wins. How is one championship game considered a playoff system? Take off the cheesehead old man. I never said that the championships be forgotten. I they aren't SBs. The pack has 4 SBs. Not 13.

    Yeah the pack did better than the 9ers, cowboys and steelers despite the fact that the pack played ONE playoff game. Obviously it's easy to win an old championship if theirs 16 teams. One championship game. That's not a playoff system old man. That's a bowl game. You literally just described a college system. I'm sorry if I offended your college system.

    Oh the old championships are suddenly harder than SBs. I guess the pack only has 9 championships.

    Tell me the browns and lions are better than the steelers, cowboys, and 9ers. I dare you.

    I bet you'll tell me Otto graham could beat Joe Montanna.
    Last edited by GentleGiant; 04-17-2013 at 10:29 PM.

  8. #108
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Philipsburg, PA
    Posts
    656
    Quote Originally Posted by zimonami View Post
    Wow, SZJ, what a thorough reply.
    You said much more completely than I would have, but my answer was essentially the same.
    I have to smile when youn g people think the world started when they were born, and history startes there. I remember well in the 50's and 60's, when I first started watching football, that the Steelers were the ultimate cellar dwellars, which made it all the more difficult to take when they absolutely killed YA Tittle in thet '63 (?) game. The classic one where you see him on his knees, his helmet off and blood coming down his face. That was about the worst beating I've ever seen a QB take in my life.
    You know who was cellar dwellers in the 80s and 70s? The pack. I never said that the players, coaches, and events have no merit. Hell the championships have some merit. But full blown SBs? No.
    Last edited by GentleGiant; 04-17-2013 at 10:43 PM.

  9. #109
    Quote Originally Posted by GentleGiant View Post
    You know who was cellar dwellers in the 80s and 70s. The pack. I never said that the players, coaches, and events have no merit. Hell the championships have some merit. But full blown SBs? No.
    Here's the most essential fact... before there were SB's the teams in the NFL represented the very best players in the country. Regardless if there was only one championship game doesn't matter. The NFL champion was the very best in football, and just because they weren't in the Superbowl era with 32 teams and the best 8 or 10 making the playoffs, only the 2 best played for the championship and those championships were just as relevent to the times as they are now.
    The AFL represented inferior quality and depth for many years... when the SB started they were finallt deserving, evn if they lost the first 2.. But by '67, with 6 years under their belt, Professional football saw a more even distribution of talent than in their early years. BUT, you must remember that now the depth on teams wasn't nearly as good as in the earlier years when there were fewer teams.

  10. #110
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Philipsburg, PA
    Posts
    656
    Quote Originally Posted by zimonami View Post
    Here's the most essential fact... before there were SB's the teams in the NFL represented the very best players in the country. Regardless if there was only one championship game doesn't matter. The NFL champion was the very best in football, and just because they weren't in the Superbowl era with 32 teams and the best 8 or 10 making the playoffs, only the 2 best played for the championship and those championships were just as relevent to the times as they are now.
    The AFL represented inferior quality and depth for many years... when the SB started they were finallt deserving, evn if they lost the first 2.. But by '67, with 6 years under their belt, Professional football saw a more even distribution of talent than in their early years. BUT, you must remember that now the depth on teams wasn't nearly as good as in the earlier years when there were fewer teams.
    That's arguable. That's like how the jets(AFL) beat the colts. The colts(NFL) were supposedly the best team in the world too. Not to mention most teams back then don't even exist anymore. How far can we go back? Teams that don't exist anymore won rings. Why do they count but the pack does? Hell for the lot of the time, teams weren't actually playing football. It's was rugby with pads. Passing was considered a trick play.
    Last edited by GentleGiant; 04-17-2013 at 10:53 PM.

+ Reply to Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts