Vikings fans: America's team should be your most despised

[Aikbach]

You cannot deny the mileage they got out of that one victory though.

Favre was suddenly a great clutch QB who did not get a case of the yips in big games (never mind he has repeated that tendency four or five times over since).

Holmgren was suddenly a personnel genius who could build teams (nevermind that Ron Wolf was actually the architect).

All that out of one Super Bowl win that is owed for the most part to Desmond Howard. Very impressive.

And you have to forgive Vikings fans. Anyone who actually wins a Super Bowl has to be a God to them.

But what is funny is one glance at the 1996 rosters and those packers were the third or fourth best team in football.

They had the Niners number and the Cowboys collapsed under the weight of injuries and player suspensions so it cleared their path.

But for crying outloud Favre was handing the ball off to guys named Edgar Bennett and Dorsey Levens while throwing to Robert Brooks, Antonio Freeman and a washed up Andre Rison.

Hardly a premeire lineup to boast about.

 

[CowboysFaninBaltimore]

They beat up a Pre Tom Brady Patriots squad. Whom was coached by Bill Parcells at the time.

 

[bbgun]

Yes, they did need it. At least Tex did.

It was not long before that the franchise was known more for losing big games than a tradition of winning. If anything, that installed a sense of worth for the franchise. We were not the only team with colorful personalities or a sharp uniform. That did not "sell itself". That persona is responsible for this franchise being one of the most recognized in professional sports. It even helped overcome times when it was underperforming.

I don't care that that team appears arrogant or conceited due to a moniker. When we are good, it is great. When we are struggling it is like a curse. I just do not appreciate the extra bullseye the team on the field has to deal with when even your lowest dog of a franchise gets "up" for playing "America's Team". Like the Yankees or the Celtics, they will have to overcome the extra attention and the pitfalls that go along with it.

Couldn't disagree more. The "America's Team" label didn't surface 'til 1979. By that time, we were two-time world champions coming off yet another Super Bowl and were a TV ratings hit. And then there were the sexy cheerleaders, who were a sensation unto themselves. The gratuitous nickname could only hurt, not help, our cause. No need to give our opponents yet another incentive to beat our brains in.

 

[Hostile]

Couldn't disagree more. The "America's Team" label did surface 'til 1979. By that time, we were two-time world champions coming off yet another Super Bowl and were a TV ratings hit. And then there were the sexy cheerleaders, who were a sensation unto themselves. The gratuitous nickname could only hurt, not help, our cause. No need to give our opponents yet another incentive to beat our brains in.

Which pretty much describes why the nickname happened in the first place. Ya think?

 

[bbgun]

Which pretty much describes why the nickname happened in the first place. Ya think?

But per Alexander, we didn't need it to cement or enhance our popularity. It existed well before NFL Films cooked up the title. Nor does it excuse the Boys from arrogantly embracing it themselves.

 

[Hostile]

But per Alexander, we didn't need it to cement or enhance our popularity. It existed well before NFL Films cooked up the title. Nor does it excuse the Boys from arrogantly embracing it themselves.

My goodness we are delusional today.

There is nothing arrogant about any nickname.

 

[Alexander]

Couldn't disagree more. The "America's Team" label didn't surface 'til 1979. By that time, we were two-time world champions coming off yet another Super Bowl and were a TV ratings hit. And then there were the sexy cheerleaders, who were a sensation unto themselves. The gratuitous nickname could only hurt, not help, our cause. No need to give our opponents yet another incentive to beat our brains in.

The Cowboys were two time champions, but also three time Super Bowl losers at the time. It was first mentioned by Schramm in 1979, the year after being beaten by the Steelers for the second time in four years. For the record, it was said Landry resisted. But to claim the Cowboys would be of the same stature without Schramm pushing Ryan's label is a bit revisionist. He capitalized on something that struck a nerve for business purposes.

 

[5Stars]

But per Alexander, we didn't need it to cement or enhance our popularity. It existed well before NFL Films cooked up the title. Nor does it excuse the Boys from arrogantly embracing it themselves.

Again, since you did not answer the last time...how do you know this to be true?

You said it was a burden for the players awhile ago, now you say they arrogantly embrace it?

Really, are you OK today, or just wishing to argue?


:laugh2:

 

[bbgun]

My goodness we are delusional today.

I wouldn't expect you to know anything about class. Right, "sweetie"?

 

[5Stars]

I wouldn't expect you to know anything about class. Right, "sweetie"?

Oh, oh...are we getting frustrated?

 

[bbgun]

Again, since you did not answer the last time...how do you know this to be true?

You said it was a burden for the players awhile ago, now you say they arrogantly embrace it?

Really, are you OK today, or just wishing to argue?


:laugh2:

Um, other people here have conceded that Schramm and Jones have embraced and marketed the moniker. We know of what we speak. Do some googling if you're still unconvinced.

 

[5Stars]

Um, other people here have conceded that Schramm and Jones have embraced and marketed the moniker. We know of what we speak. Do some googling if you're still unconvinced.

Answer my second question...don't avoid that one.

 

[bbgun]

Answer my second question...don't avoid that one.

Boys = front office. The players wouldn't be caught dead wearing an "America's Team" t-shirt. Well, Bennett might be dense enough, so let's wait and see.

 

[Nova]

I don't know if anyone has mentioned it yet because I just kind of skimmed through the comments, but is anyone else tired of hearing about our $1.2 Billion stadium being singled out under attack due to the national economic status?

The New Yankees stadium cost 1.5 billion (which is baffeling considering it's a BALLPARK with half the capacity), and the New Giants Stadium took 1.6 Billion-- Which I believe is an overall smaller stadium.

 

[5Stars]

Boys = front office. The players wouldn't be caught dead wearing an "America's Team" t-shirt. Well, Bennett might be dense enough, so let's wait and see.

:laugh2:

Oh, OK...

Nice work....



I'll be back when your meds kick in.

 

[bbgun]

The Cowboys were two time champions, but also three time Super Bowl losers at the time. It was first mentioned by Schramm in 1979, the year after being beaten by the Steelers for the second time in four years. For the record, it was said Landry resisted. But to claim the Cowboys would be of the same stature without Schramm pushing Ryan's label is a bit revisionist. He capitalized on something that struck a nerve for business purposes.

I know, but let's stop pretending this was 1970 or something. Nobody thought of them as "losers" by 1979, Super Bowl records notwithstanding. And since there was very little to market back then in terms of NFL Merchandise compared to today, what did Tex really gain?

 

[Dodger]

How many of these ridiculous crybaby articles are we going to see this week?

Ugh.

 

[Hostile]

I wouldn't expect you to know anything about class. Right, "sweetie"?

Well, you've never been averse to being wrong, so why break a hot streak when you are on it?

 

[Hostile]

Where are all the blasted articles decrying the Vikings use of "Purple People Eaters?" Why is cannibalism acceptable in a nickname? I think it is arrogant to boast of eating people. How dare anyone walk around with a t-shirt announcing cannibalistic tendencies. How unprofessional is that? Have a little humility in your marketing.





Sorry, I couldn't resist. They were such softballs.

 

[Alexander]

I know, but let's stop pretending this was 1970 or something. Nobody thought of them as "losers" by 1979, Super Bowl records notwithstanding. And since there as very little to market back then in terms of NFL Merchandise compared to today, what did Tex really gain?

Schramm gained the backing of CBS as the network's darling at that point. I know I lived outside of the Southwest at the time and never had much of an issue catching a Cowboys game after the 1979 season. And I believe he latched onto the moniker out of desire for exposure. We might have won two Super Bowls. But we also had lost three in the previous decade. Wouldn't you grasp at that to compete for your share of the pie after the Steelers had four titles? He was laying claim to the NFC at a time when no one else could. It was not arrogant, just smart business sense.