Should I be ashamed of this?

[Sonny#9]

if the championships were all the same sure, but they aren't and that argument is flawed on so many levels its even more stupid than being a Commanders fan

Really, how so?

 

[gambit187]

if the championships were all the same sure, but they aren't and that argument is flawed on so many levels its even more stupid than being a Commanders fan

Yeah no one cares about the time they played in leather helmets, played on dirt, and when there were like 8 teams.....LOL

 

[Sonny#9]

Yeah he did for the simple reason is you guys had a 23 year head start on us. (1937 vs 1960). You guys had a bigger fan base and were more established.

So Hypothetical if the aliens were to arrive today, they would see that we
1. Won a superbowl way before you team.
2. We have won more superbowls then your team
3. We have won more division titles then your team
4. We have won more playoff games then your team
5. We have the overall lead in head to head competition with your team.
6. We punked your racist owner with his own song to get in the league in 1960.

I SAY THAT MAKES OUR FRANCHISE BETTER THEN YOURS.

"Men lie, women lie, numbers dont lie" Jay Z

Yep, and I admitted it. They have a better HISTORY.

 

[Sonny#9]

Yeah no one cares about the time they played in leather helmets, played on dirt, and when there were like 8 teams.....LOL

You would if you won the games.

 

[Sonny#9]

Obviously I can't wear my Cowboys attire. It's a shame I don't have some very subtle pin or something. Any other ideas?

I think you should don the full Crazy Cowboy get up

 

[Vintage]

Christy Cooley pictures are encouraged. So long as you splice out any picture of Chris Cooley.

 

[gambit187]

Yep, and I admitted it. They have a better HISTORY.

Thats right HISTORY, anything that happened yesterday is HISTORY.
Win a superbowl with out Coach Gibbs, then u have a leg to stand on.


Thats my new line to use in the DC Metro area "Win a Superbowl with out Gibbs, then we can talk."

 

[1fisher]

Yep, and I admitted it. They have a better HISTORY.

Did the cat fart again or was that another redstink fan yapping? :laugh2:

 

[1fisher]

Thats right HISTORY, anything that happened yesterday is HISTORY. Win a superbowl with out Coach Gibbs, then u have a leg to stand on.

THEY don't understand that part. I think you are wasting your time!

 

[Rampage]

THEY don't understand that part. I think you are wasting your time!

I like chicken. i like it when it's kentucky fried too.

 

[BehindEnemyLinez]

P.S. Before you go on one of your diatribes about how great the Cowboys are, yes, they are the prohibitive favorite in the NFC. But then again, they were that last year too...before losing their NFL Record 6th consecutive playoff game.

P.P.S. Before you go on another of your "WE ARE THE GREATEST TEAM EVER WHOO-WHEEE" tirades. I have openly questioned my team, and looked as objectively as I can at my team -- can you?

I love (nah, loathe is a better term) how Dallas haters like to count "playoff wins" instead of "Super Bowl wins" as a measure of a successful season. Point being, only one team every season is TRULY successful while the rest are grouped together as losers! Now, there's something to be said for the S/B loser (getting there is an accomplishment...kinda) but there are 12 playoff teams every year so just getting there, even w/ a win or two, isn't that big of a deal, IMO. So, Sonny boy, if you're content w/ your favorite team winning a playoff game more recently than ours it just shows how low your expectations have become since your "glory days" (AKA the strike seasons)!!

 

[1fisher]

I like chicken. i like it when it's kentucky fried too.

uke:

:laugh2:

 

[gambit187]

I love (nah, loathe is a better term) how Dallas haters like to count "playoff wins" instead of "Super Bowl wins" as a measure of a successful season. Point being, only one team every season is TRULY successful while the rest are grouped together as losers! Now, there's something to be said for the S/B loser (getting there is an accomplishment...kinda) but there are 12 playoff teams every year so just getting there, even w/ a win or two, isn't that big of a deal, IMO. So, Sonny boy, if you're content w/ your favorite team winning a playoff game more recently than ours it just shows how low your expectations have become since your "glory days" (AKA the strike seasons)!!

:beer2:
:skins:

 

[BehindEnemyLinez]

Gambit, thanx to your sig line I cannot get that song outta my head!!
"What more can I say...what more can I do...."

 

[Hostile]

You would if you won the games.

I can honestly say I would and I wouldn't.

Let me explain.

I take nothing away from the team's that won NFL Championships. It is a Championship and no one can take that away.

However, I do place a lot more relvance upon the Super Bowl because it combined the NFL (later NFC) Champion versus the AFL (later AFC) Champion and a tournament to crown a true Champion.

The AFL kicked off in 1960. From 1960 to 1965 that means there were two leagues and two Champions. The Super Bowl kicked off after the 1966 season to crown an undisputed champion. They then created a playoff format.

In the early years of the NFL (1920 to 1932) the Champion was simply announced. There was no game to crown a champion.

Then from 1933 to 1964 they simply took the two best teams in the 2 NFL divisions and they played for the Championship. There was no tournament to crown a Champion.

In 1965 the NFL created the first tournament style Championship because the Packers and the Colts finished in a dead tie. They called the game to determine the winner who would go on to face the Browns the Superbowl. Yep, clear back in 1965.

Then in 1966 began the true Super Bowl with the NFL Champion playing the AFL Champion and there was a true tournament to find the Champion.

It was expanded after the 1970 merger with the creation of more than 2 divisions per Conference. It has evolved into the tournament we have today.

So yes, I do recognize those teams as NFL Champions because History says they are and I love and appreciate History.

But, it simply is not as impressive to me as the Super Bowl Championship and I would say this even if my team had no Super Bowl wins.

Why not? Because at what point do you draw a line for the NFL Championship? Yes, the Packers have 12 Championships, but 3 of them were simply awarded to them as the best regular season record before 1932, and 6 of them were a win one game and be crowned the Champion. Their 3 Super Bowl wins are simply more impressive to me than the other 9 Championships.

I put more emphasis on the Super Bowl because it is a tournament, and it is what has evolved into the grandest Championship of them all; in any sport.

So yes, I can understand why you count 1937 and 1942. I would still put more emphasis on the 3 Super Bowl Trophies than I do the other 2.

 

[BehindEnemyLinez]

I can honestly say I would and I wouldn't.

Let me explain.

I take nothing away from the team's that won NFL Championships. It is a Championship and no one can take that away.

However, I do place a lot more relvance upon the Super Bowl because it combined the NFL (later NFC) Champion versus the AFL (later AFC) Champion and a tournament to crown a true Champion.

The AFL kicked off in 1960. From 1960 to 1965 that means there were two leagues and two Champions. The Super Bowl kicked off after the 1966 season to crown an undisputed champion. They then created a playoff format.

In the early years of the NFL (1920 to 1932) the Champion was simply announced. There was no game to crown a champion.

Then from 1933 to 1964 they simply took the two best teams in the 2 NFL divisions and they played for the Championship. There was no tournament to crown a Champion.

In 1965 the NFL created the first tournament style Championship because the Packers and the Colts finished in a dead tie. They called the game to determine the winner who would go on to face the Browns the Superbowl. Yep, clear back in 1965.

Then in 1966 began the true Super Bowl with the NFL Champion playing the AFL Champion and there was a true tournament to find the Champion.

It was expanded after the 1970 merger with the creation of more than 2 divisions per Conference. It has evolved into the tournament we have today.

So yes, I do recognize those teams as NFL Champions because History says they are and I love and appreciate History.

But, it simply is not as impressive to me as the Super Bowl Championship and I would say this even if my team had no Super Bowl wins.

Why not? Because at what point do you draw a line for the NFL Championship? Yes, the Packers have 12 Championships, but 3 of them were simply awarded to them as the best regular season record before 1932, and 6 of them were a win one game and be crowned the Champion. Their 3 Super Bowl wins are simply more impressive to me than the other 9 Championships.

I put more emphasis on the Super Bowl because it is a tournament, and it is what has evolved into the grandest Championship of them all; in any sport.

So yes, I can understand why you count 1937 and 1942. I would still put more emphasis on the 3 Super Bowl Trophies than I do the other 2.

Well said, Hos!

 

[DaBoys4Life]

I can honestly say I would and I wouldn't.

Let me explain.

I take nothing away from the team's that won NFL Championships. It is a Championship and no one can take that away.

However, I do place a lot more relvance upon the Super Bowl because it combined the NFL (later NFC) Champion versus the AFL (later AFC) Champion and a tournament to crown a true Champion.

The AFL kicked off in 1960. From 1960 to 1965 that means there were two leagues and two Champions. The Super Bowl kicked off after the 1966 season to crown an undisputed champion. They then created a playoff format.

In the early years of the NFL (1920 to 1932) the Champion was simply announced. There was no game to crown a champion.

Then from 1933 to 1964 they simply took the two best teams in the 2 NFL divisions and they played for the Championship. There was no tournament to crown a Champion.

In 1965 the NFL created the first tournament style Championship because the Packers and the Colts finished in a dead tie. They called the game to determine the winner who would go on to face the Browns the Superbowl. Yep, clear back in 1965.

Then in 1966 began the true Super Bowl with the NFL Champion playing the AFL Champion and there was a true tournament to find the Champion.

It was expanded after the 1970 merger with the creation of more than 2 divisions per Conference. It has evolved into the tournament we have today.

So yes, I do recognize those teams as NFL Champions because History says they are and I love and appreciate History.

But, it simply is not as impressive to me as the Super Bowl Championship and I would say this even if my team had no Super Bowl wins.

Why not? Because at what point do you draw a line for the NFL Championship? Yes, the Packers have 12 Championships, but 3 of them were simply awarded to them as the best regular season record before 1932, and 6 of them were a win one game and be crowned the Champion. Their 3 Super Bowl wins are simply more impressive to me than the other 9 Championships.

I put more emphasis on the Super Bowl because it is a tournament, and it is what has evolved into the grandest Championship of them all; in any sport.

So yes, I can understand why you count 1937 and 1942. I would still put more emphasis on the 3 Super Bowl Trophies than I do the other 2.

that makes sense something Commanders fans lack...

I'd rather be dead in my skin than be a Commander fan.

 

[gambit187]

I can honestly say I would and I wouldn't.

Let me explain.

I take nothing away from the team's that won NFL Championships. It is a Championship and no one can take that away.

However, I do place a lot more relvance upon the Super Bowl because it combined the NFL (later NFC) Champion versus the AFL (later AFC) Champion and a tournament to crown a true Champion.

The AFL kicked off in 1960. From 1960 to 1965 that means there were two leagues and two Champions. The Super Bowl kicked off after the 1966 season to crown an undisputed champion. They then created a playoff format.

In the early years of the NFL (1920 to 1932) the Champion was simply announced. There was no game to crown a champion.

Then from 1933 to 1964 they simply took the two best teams in the 2 NFL divisions and they played for the Championship. There was no tournament to crown a Champion.

In 1965 the NFL created the first tournament style Championship because the Packers and the Colts finished in a dead tie. They called the game to determine the winner who would go on to face the Browns the Superbowl. Yep, clear back in 1965.

Then in 1966 began the true Super Bowl with the NFL Champion playing the AFL Champion and there was a true tournament to find the Champion.

It was expanded after the 1970 merger with the creation of more than 2 divisions per Conference. It has evolved into the tournament we have today.

So yes, I do recognize those teams as NFL Champions because History says they are and I love and appreciate History.

But, it simply is not as impressive to me as the Super Bowl Championship and I would say this even if my team had no Super Bowl wins.

Why not? Because at what point do you draw a line for the NFL Championship? Yes, the Packers have 12 Championships, but 3 of them were simply awarded to them as the best regular season record before 1932, and 6 of them were a win one game and be crowned the Champion. Their 3 Super Bowl wins are simply more impressive to me than the other 9 Championships.

I put more emphasis on the Super Bowl because it is a tournament, and it is what has evolved into the grandest Championship of them all; in any sport.

So yes, I can understand why you count 1937 and 1942. I would still put more emphasis on the 3 Super Bowl Trophies than I do the other 2.

Thanks Hostile, its true you learn something every day. I guess back in the day the Patriots would have been automatically crowned the champ.
Hence the phrase "ANY GIVEN SUNDAY"

 

[Mansta54]

I may end up visiting Commanders training camp next weekend.

(GASP!)

My wife and I work for the same employer. She works full time, while I do a little work for them on the side in addition to my public relations business. She told me last night that our employer is a sponsor of training camp this year (I don't keep up with that stuff, really) and that the A/V department is going to Skins training camp next weekend to shoot some video. She asked if I wanted to go because they needed someone to help identify players and maybe conduct some interviews.

I'll probably go. Even if it IS the hated Commanders, it's professional football and it's pretty cool to go to camp for a day. As sponsors we'll probably get free food and such. If they give me shirts and hats or something, I'll just give them to friends who are Skins fans, or I'll sell them on eBay, or I'll burn them ... whatever mood strikes me.

Obviously I can't wear my Cowboys attire. It's a shame I don't have some very subtle pin or something. Any other ideas?

Ahh, is it really? :laugh2:

 

[Danny White]

I may end up visiting Commanders training camp next weekend.

(GASP!)

My wife and I work for the same employer. She works full time, while I do a little work for them on the side in addition to my public relations business. She told me last night that our employer is a sponsor of training camp this year (I don't keep up with that stuff, really) and that the A/V department is going to Skins training camp next weekend to shoot some video. She asked if I wanted to go because they needed someone to help identify players and maybe conduct some interviews.

I'll probably go. Even if it IS the hated Commanders, it's professional football and it's pretty cool to go to camp for a day. As sponsors we'll probably get free food and such. If they give me shirts and hats or something, I'll just give them to friends who are Skins fans, or I'll sell them on eBay, or I'll burn them ... whatever mood strikes me.

Obviously I can't wear my Cowboys attire. It's a shame I don't have some very subtle pin or something. Any other ideas?

I've done this for the past couple of years, as their training camp is right on my way home. There's nothing wrong with getting in a football fix by checking it out. It's not like you're going to start rooting for them.

I decided not to go this year, though. It's always so darn hot sitting there in the sun watching it. And ultimately it's kind of boring. Firstly, there's not a whole lot of action going on. Just a few drills run at 50% speed. If it were the Cowboys, then that would be tolerable, but ultimately you're watching a bunch of players you hate... and you're surrounded by a bunch of d-bag Redsk*n fans to boot.

It was an experience that got old fast. But there's no harm in checking it out once or twice.

Why not?

It would be a very foolish idea to wear Cowboys gear there.

First of all, you're there by "invitation" and it wouldn't surprise me if they turned you away if you were wearing any other team's garb.

Secondly, this is much different than, say, going to a game here in DC wearing Cowboys gear. At a game, it makes sense, since the Cowboys are actually represented on the field, and you're going to have about 20% of the fans there to have your back.

But at training camp, it's basically 99.99% Redsk*n fans, and you would be horribly outnumbered. You'd just be asking for a fight. Also, you don't have the security there to bail you out. I can't imagine that it wouldn't get very ugly if you tried that... even as big and nasty as you are, Hos! :