Super Bowl Rings, Cowboys, all, even losers get rings

[DandyDon52]

http://www.sports-rings.com/gallery.htm
Thought you guys might like looking at all the rings.

Stumbled on this site looking for if losers of SB got rings and they do!
Usually not as fancy and they don't say world champion.
You can see all the Cowboy rings here (even the losing rings) and all others, 3 views of each ring.

The colts that lost to jets in # 3 are the only team to not get a ring, guess owners were mad
at being beat by AFC team? lol they got a watch!

Bad news is the eagles do have SB rings lol just not winner rings.
The first few the loser rings did not say SB, until V where the losing cowboy rings said SB on the ring.
After that they all did.

NFL pays for 150 rings, maybe more now, and the team can order more and different types.
all players even practice squad, all coaches and other staff, and even cheerleaders get rings!
The rings do vary in expense up to $7000 each maybe more, for the main players and FO and Coaches.
But everyone involved gets a ring of some type.

 

[Doomsday101]

People only count the ones you won as SB rings

 

[jrumann59]

Yes the loser gets a ring it is the conference championship ring, its not a SB ring.

 

[DandyDon52]

Yes the loser gets a ring it is the conference championship ring, its not a SB ring.

then why do they say super bowl on them ??
they are also championship rings for AFC or NFC .
Just because a Team loses doesnt mean they dont deserve [a lesser] ring for getting there.
2nd best team in the world isnt all that bad is it ?? lol

 

[DandyDon52]

People only count the ones you won as SB rings

that is because people are obsessed with winning, like losing the SB is shameful.
you have to be a winner and a champion just to play in the SB, but if you lose, all of a sudden your nothing just a loser lol.

 

[AmericasTeam81]

Losers shouldn't be rewarded.

 

[jrumann59]

Losers shouldn't be rewarded.

More reward for winning there Conference

 

[jrumann59]

then why do they say super bowl on them ??
they are also championship rings for AFC or NFC .
Just because a Team loses doesnt mean they dont deserve [a lesser] ring for getting there.
2nd best team in the world isnt all that bad is it ?? lol

If you look it has the Super bowl number but only the loser of the super bowl gets the ring that says NFC/AFC/AFL/NFL Champions on it. It is sort of implied that Winning the SB means you won your Conference. I do not see any issue with giving a conf champship ring to the super bowl loser. Takes a lot to get to the conference championship game

 

[DandyDon52]

If you look it has the Super bowl number but only the loser of the super bowl gets the ring that says NFC/AFC/AFL/NFL Champions on it. It is sort of implied that Winning the SB means you won your Conference. I do not see any issue with giving a conf championship ring to the super bowl loser. Takes a lot to get to the conference championship game

Well if you look at the first 2 raider rings, they won SB and the rings both say afc champs and even have the score and who they beat on the ring.,
It depends on the design of the ring which varies.
The main difference is the winner says "world champion".

 

[DandyDon52]

Losers shouldn't be rewarded.

they should be shot ! get rid of the loser genes!

 

[jrumann59]

Well if you look at the first 2 raider rings, they won SB and the rings both say afc champs and even have the score and who they beat on the ring.,
It depends on the design of the ring which varies.
The main difference is the winner says "world champion".

I think the designs are picked by the teams especially the sides don't know why you would put the conf championship game score on the ring if you won the SB but was Al davis For you.

 

[plymkr]

one question I've always wondered is do teams get rings for winning the division?

 

[Doomsday101]

that is because people are obsessed with winning, like losing the SB is shameful.
you have to be a winner and a champion just to play in the SB, but if you lose, all of a sudden your nothing just a loser lol.

True but then I don't think losing a SB is shameful. I take great pride in all 8 SB games the Cowboys played in even in losing 3 of them. I also respect other teams greatness.

 

[LittleBoyBlue]

Losers shouldn't be rewarded.

Why not?

Gaylord Focker.... Hello???

 

[AmericasTeam81]

Why not?

Gaylord Focker.... Hello???

Achievers should be rewarded, not losers. Awards shouldn't be given for participation.

 

[LittleBoyBlue]

Achievers should be rewarded, not losers. Awards shouldn't be given for participation.

I was agreeing. Lol

See the movies?

 

[ElGatoGrande]

 

[Super_Kazuya]

This reminds me of one of my favorite counterpoints when someone tells me that Eli Manning has two rings: "So does the equipment manager."

 

[LittleBoyBlue]

DeNiro: "I didn't know they gave out ribbons for 9th place Greg?"

 

[DandyDon52]

Achievers should be rewarded, not losers. Awards shouldn't be given for participation.

Well that is true to a point, but I think getting to a SB is more than "participation" .
It is 2 champions slugging it out for the title of world champion, but it is just one game , it should be 3 games and the one that wins 2
is world champ.
During the season beating another team does not always mean your team is outright the better team, they just won that one game.
Some SB's are like that, a team scores last or gets penatlys, and barely loses, or barely wins.
the SB last year is classic example, it all came down to one play.
Was NE clearly the superior team? no some guy I never heard of made a good play, which looked like should have drawn a flag,but
that one play made them world champions and seattle a shameful loser ! lol

I am happy if dallas makes the playoffs, and plays good even in a loss, like last year, nothing wrong with that.