Ah, the last millennium. Got it.93henfan wrote:Vidav wrote:
Eagles are at 4 then.
Ah, the last millennium. Got it.93henfan wrote:Vidav wrote:
Upon further review.................The Bears Still Suck.93henfan wrote:The broadcast crew missed it, but the Eagles' Treyvon Hester tipped the missed FG by the Bears' Cody Parkey:
I'm not so sure. They were holding up pretty damn well and it was only a tipped FG that cost them the game. The Bears were impressive.Gil Dobie wrote:Upon further review.................The Bears Still Suck.93henfan wrote:The broadcast crew missed it, but the Eagles' Treyvon Hester tipped the missed FG by the Bears' Cody Parkey:
Not talking about their play on the field, talking trash about them as a rival.Ibanez wrote:I'm not so sure. They were holding up pretty damn well and it was only a tipped FG that cost them the game. The Bears were impressive.Gil Dobie wrote:
Upon further review.................The Bears Still Suck.
My mistake....Gil Dobie wrote:Not talking about their play on the field, talking trash about them as a rival.Ibanez wrote: I'm not so sure. They were holding up pretty damn well and it was only a tipped FG that cost them the game. The Bears were impressive.
This goes back to my preseason question. If the Cowboys win it this year what will the Eagles fans find to shit on us about? You wont have the "what have you done lately" argument anymore.93henfan wrote:Ah, the last millennium. Got it.93henfan wrote:
Eagles are at 4 then.
Only? Not the Eagles INT overturned, not the dropped INT in the endzone that allowed the Bears 3, not the personal foul on 3rd down that kept a dead drive alive and got the Bears 3, not the hands to the face on 3rd down that kept a drive alive, not the 2 point conversion that would have stood had they called it good... the Bears were quite lucky to be in that game IMO.Ibanez wrote:I'm not so sure. They were holding up pretty damn well and it was only a tipped FG that cost them the game. The Bears were impressive.
Yeah, agreed. That's how I feel about Super Bowls from 23 seasons ago.Vidav wrote:This goes back to my preseason question. If the Cowboys win it this year what will the Eagles fans find to shit on us about? You wont have the "what have you done lately" argument anymore.93henfan wrote:
Ah, the last millennium. Got it.
Eagles are at 4 then.
Also no one cares about NFL championships prior to the Super Bowl, except teams who only/mostly have them. It was a different league and a different game then.
I wasn't taking the totality of the game into account, just the last offensive play.89Hen wrote:Only? Not the Eagles INT overturned, not the dropped INT in the endzone that allowed the Bears 3, not the personal foul on 3rd down that kept a dead drive alive and got the Bears 3, not the hands to the face on 3rd down that kept a drive alive, not the 2 point conversion that would have stood had they called it good... the Bears were quite lucky to be in that game IMO.Ibanez wrote:I'm not so sure. They were holding up pretty damn well and it was only a tipped FG that cost them the game. The Bears were impressive.
I missed the Ravens game thankfully.Ibanez wrote:I wasn't taking the totality of the game into account, just the last offensive play.89Hen wrote: Only? Not the Eagles INT overturned, not the dropped INT in the endzone that allowed the Bears 3, not the personal foul on 3rd down that kept a dead drive alive and got the Bears 3, not the hands to the face on 3rd down that kept a drive alive, not the 2 point conversion that would have stood had they called it good... the Bears were quite lucky to be in that game IMO.
But still, the Bears weren't getting kicked around all evening. They last 70-90 seconds of the game were the most exciting.
It was better than the Chargers and Baltimore. My god was that a dull game.
Yeah, the Ravens game was a snoozer.89Hen wrote:I missed the Ravens game thankfully.Ibanez wrote: I wasn't taking the totality of the game into account, just the last offensive play.
But still, the Bears weren't getting kicked around all evening. They last 70-90 seconds of the game were the most exciting.
It was better than the Chargers and Baltimore. My god was that a dull game.
But I disagree that the "Bears were impressive"... home against an Eagles team that barely eked into the playoffs... I was very underwhelmed by the Bears. Honestly it should have been at least 13-3 Eagles at the half and 20-3 after 3.
Agreed. Heck, the cowboys have won all of 4 playoff games since that last Super Bowl (so about 1 every 6.93 years), and all 4 games have come in the Wild Card Round, so it's not like, even with the absence of Super Bowl wins in that past 23 years, that the cowboys have been competitive deep into postseasons.93henfan wrote:Yeah, agreed. That's how I feel about Super Bowls from 23 seasons ago.Vidav wrote:
This goes back to my preseason question. If the Cowboys win it this year what will the Eagles fans find to **** on us about? You wont have the "what have you done lately" argument anymore.
Also no one cares about NFL championships prior to the Super Bowl, except teams who only/mostly have them. It was a different league and a different game then.
People who can actually remember a Cowboys Super Bowl are pushing 30 or older now.
I remember that game, 1996. Aikman, Smith, Walker..Irvin doing coke on the sidelines and stabbing people in the neck with scissors.93henfan wrote:Yeah, agreed. That's how I feel about Super Bowls from 23 seasons ago.Vidav wrote:
This goes back to my preseason question. If the Cowboys win it this year what will the Eagles fans find to shit on us about? You wont have the "what have you done lately" argument anymore.
Also no one cares about NFL championships prior to the Super Bowl, except teams who only/mostly have them. It was a different league and a different game then.
People who can actually remember a Cowboys Super Bowl are pushing 30 or older now.
Yes, I'm picking the Cowboys, but don't call this one a done deal yet. Two reasons:Vidav wrote:Cowboys D will easily win this game.css75 wrote:NFC East gone after Rams and Saints dispose of them.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
You are totally right. One Super Bowl win is 1000000x better than five, because it happened more recently. You would obviously feel the same way if the situations were reversed.GannonFan wrote:Agreed. Heck, the cowboys have won all of 4 playoff games since that last Super Bowl (so about 1 every 6.93 years), and all 4 games have come in the Wild Card Round, so it's not like, even with the absence of Super Bowl wins in that past 23 years, that the cowboys have been competitive deep into postseasons.93henfan wrote:
Yeah, agreed. That's how I feel about Super Bowls from 23 seasons ago.
People who can actually remember a Cowboys Super Bowl are pushing 30 or older now.
Things fade with time, including memories. I was alive for both the Flyers Stanley Cup wins (2 of them) and the last time the Sixers won (in 1983). They don't matter to me because they were so long ago. They're nice that they won them, but they're little more than footnotes in history now. Give me the past 20 years and even some of the distant ones have little relevance anymore. Do you think Browns fans are still stalking message boards declaring the awesomeness of Otto Graham?Vidav wrote:You are totally right. One Super Bowl win is 1000000x better than five, because it happened more recently. You would obviously feel the same way if the situations were reversed.GannonFan wrote:
Agreed. Heck, the cowboys have won all of 4 playoff games since that last Super Bowl (so about 1 every 6.93 years), and all 4 games have come in the Wild Card Round, so it's not like, even with the absence of Super Bowl wins in that past 23 years, that the cowboys have been competitive deep into postseasons.
I don't know...the Bears are still boasting about 1985.GannonFan wrote:Things fade with time, including memories. I was alive for both the Flyers Stanley Cup wins (2 of them) and the last time the Sixers won (in 1983). They don't matter to me because they were so long ago. They're nice that they won them, but they're little more than footnotes in history now. Give me the past 20 years and even some of the distant ones have little relevance anymore. Do you think Browns fans are still stalking message boards declaring the awesomeness of Otto Graham?Vidav wrote:
You are totally right. One Super Bowl win is 1000000x better than five, because it happened more recently. You would obviously feel the same way if the situations were reversed.
And it gets sadder and sadder every year.Ibanez wrote:I don't know...the Bears are still boasting about 1985.GannonFan wrote:
Things fade with time, including memories. I was alive for both the Flyers Stanley Cup wins (2 of them) and the last time the Sixers won (in 1983). They don't matter to me because they were so long ago. They're nice that they won them, but they're little more than footnotes in history now. Give me the past 20 years and even some of the distant ones have little relevance anymore. Do you think Browns fans are still stalking message boards declaring the awesomeness of Otto Graham?
Just saying, if the Cowboys win another one this year or in the next 5 years or whatever, it shows continued success in different eras. The Eagles have one good year to boast about. But you guys will still try to find a reason to shit on the Cowboys. Because Philly.GannonFan wrote:And it gets sadder and sadder every year.Ibanez wrote: I don't know...the Bears are still boasting about 1985.
Success in different eras? How about championships in three different decades and trips to the Superbowl in two other decades? How about being the only team to beat the Lombardi Packers in the postseason?Vidav wrote:Just saying, if the Cowboys win another one this year or in the next 5 years or whatever, it shows continued success in different eras. The Eagles have one good year to boast about. But you guys will still try to find a reason to shit on the Cowboys. Because Philly.GannonFan wrote:
And it gets sadder and sadder every year.
No one cares about the pre Super Bowl championships. That isn't me, that is just reality. I mentioned different eras because the 90s didn't have a salary cap so things were different. My argument is this, in Super Bowl years, the Cowboys are much better than the Eagles. There is no arguing that.93henfan wrote:Success in different eras? How about championships in three different decades and trips to the Superbowl in two other decades? How about being the only team to beat the Lombardi Packers in the postseason?Vidav wrote:
Just saying, if the Cowboys win another one this year or in the next 5 years or whatever, it shows continued success in different eras. The Eagles have one good year to boast about. But you guys will still try to find a reason to shit on the Cowboys. Because Philly.
You can't have it both ways. You can't say "old championships don't count" and then count how many old championships you have, but only after 1966. How many rules are you going to layer into your argument? C'mon, man.
Let's just say the Cowboys were better than the Eagles in the 1970s and the 1990s. I don't think GF and I will disagree with that. The Eagles were better in the 1960s, 1980s, 2000s, and 2010s. Deal?
Win one this millennium and we'll talk.Vidav wrote:If the Cowboys win a Super Bowl in the next 5 years, what will you use to shit on them?
So just to be clear. If the Eagles had 20 Lombardi Trophies but none more recent than 19 years ago, you would think they were trash?93henfan wrote:Win one this millennium and we'll talk.Vidav wrote:If the Cowboys win a Super Bowl in the next 5 years, what will you use to shit on them?