WAIT... Exactly What "is" a Superbowl Team!

[Vintage]

I guess PT could come back and claim that the loser of the Super Bowl is still a Super Bowl Team.

I hate having to make his arguements for him....

But it seems unfair to allow him to continue for himself.

 

[superpunk]

The answer is simple ...

There are actually two superbowl teams every year! Even though they both compete for the ultimate Championship, win or loose, they are both Superbowl Teams!

So you knew the answer already.....

I'm going to go microwave my own head.

 

[Phoenix-Talon]

It's the team that has the best combination of staying healthy, catching some favorable schedule breaks, having just enough talent and coaching in the right places and the ability to play your best football in December and January.

You should know, the Eagles fell just short of it each and every year save one.

Also a real good response Alexander ...but the Eagles did make it in 2004!

 

[Vintage]

I guess PT could come back and claim that the loser of the Super Bowl is still a Super Bowl Team.

I hate having to make his arguements for him....

But it seems unfair to allow him to continue for himself.

Vintage, you are an idiot.

Can you read? Can you comprehend? At all?

Did I say there was only one Super Bowl team? No. All I said was that the winner was a Super Bowl team? I didn't necessarily preclude the Super Bowl loser from being a Super Bowl team. I just said that the Super Bowl winner was a Super Bowl team.

Learn to read, idiot.

 

[superpunk]

Vintage, you are an idiot.

Can you read? Can you comprehend? At all?

Did I say there was only one Super Bowl team? No. All I said was that the winner was a Super Bowl team? I didn't necessarily preclude the Super Bowl loser from being a Super Bowl team. I just said that the Super Bowl winner was a Super Bowl team.

Learn to read, idiot.

You just pwn3d yourself. Take it easy.

 

[Alexander]

Also a real good response Alexander ...but the Eagles did make it in 2004!

Oh, did you mean "What is a 'winning' Super Bowl team"? Why didn't you say so?

Add "QB that doesn't choke" into my response, please.

 

[Vintage]

Vintage, you are an idiot.

Can you read? Can you comprehend? At all?

Did I say there was only one Super Bowl team? No. All I said was that the winner was a Super Bowl team? I didn't necessarily preclude the Super Bowl loser from being a Super Bowl team. I just said that the Super Bowl winner was a Super Bowl team.

Learn to read, idiot.

Me?

An idiot?

Laughable. You couldn't spell if I spotted you the "c", "a", AND the "t."

Your post alluded to it. While not stated, it was alluded to. And you know that. Saying otherwise is sheer denial.

 

[5Stars]

Also a real good response Alexander ...but the Eagles did make it in 2004!

So what? I used to date a FINE blonde who absoutely loved it...

I don't see her anymore...she moved to California....

Get it?

 

[Vintage]

Me?

An idiot?

Laughable. You couldn't spell if I spotted you the "c", "a", AND the "t."

Your post alluded to it. While not stated, it was alluded to. And you know that. Saying otherwise is sheer denial.

No. You'd like to think that. All I said was that the winner was a Super Bowl team.

Is that not true?

Argue the facts.

 

[Hostile]

I appreciate your answer Vintage ...also KMD24. Your answers were at least without intentional tom-foolery!

The answer is simple ...

There are actually two superbowl teams every year! Even though they both compete for the ultimate Championship, win or loose, they are both Superbowl Teams!

Lose not loose. Lose is the opposite of win. Loose is the opposite of tight.

Actually you described Super Bowl contenders not Super Bowl teams. A Super Bowl team is and always has been the Champion of the given year's Super Bowl.

At no time will you hear the NFL talking heads calling the Seattle Seahawks of 2006 a Super Bowl Team unless they win XLI.

 

[Phoenix-Talon]

Oh, did you mean "What is a 'winning' Super Bowl team"? Why didn't you say so?

Add "QB that doesn't choke" into my response, please.

You completely erase a great response by attempting to use some lame excuse and rearrange your words ...that's beneath you ALexander; pitiful attempt!

 

[Alexander]

You completely erase a great response by attempting to use some lame excuse and rearrange your words ...that's beneath you ALexander; pitiful attempt!

I know.

I shame myself.

 

[Phoenix-Talon]

Me?

An idiot?

Laughable. You couldn't spell if I spotted you the "c", "a", AND the "t."

Your post alluded to it. While not stated, it was alluded to. And you know that. Saying otherwise is sheer denial.

I felt you both alluded to it. At least you both were leaps and bounds ahead of all of the other posters.

 

[Phoenix-Talon]

I know.

I shame myself.

I forgive you!

 

[THUMPER]

It has become very difficult to say what a SB team is anymore because most of the recent winners have just gotten lucky.

If Vanderjagt makes the FG then the Colts go to the SB, not the Stealers. How many times has New England won it on a last second FG by Vinatieri (twice)? The Rams won a close one over the Titans, the Ravens beat up on a Giants team that shouldn't have been there. We just don't see dominant teams anymore.

Staying healthy, getting lucky at the right times, taking advantage of the breaks that come your way, are all things that could help a good team win it all.

You still need to have talent and good coaching in order to get close and injuries tend to play a bigger part than they used to because teams can't stock the depth that they used to.

I would also say that you need to have a well balanced team in order to have a chance which is why most people tend to discount the Eagles chances. They have no running game to speak of (please don't bring up the Raiders pre-season game) and their WRs are not guys who demand a double team. Their best weapon is the TE.

An attacking defense would also be a benefit, something the Cowboys haven't had since 1995.

Just my opinion but I hope it helps.

 

[superpunk]

all you need is love.

http://cache.********.com/sports/toandmcnabbworldsgreat.jpg

 

[Phoenix-Talon]

It has become very difficult to say what a SB team is anymore because most of the recent winners have just gotten lucky.

If Vanderjagt makes the FG then the Colts go to the SB, not the Stealers. How many times has New England won it on a last second FG by Vinatieri (twice)? The Rams won a close one over the Titans, the Ravens beat up on a Giants team that shouldn't have been there. We just don't see dominant teams anymore.

Staying healthy, getting lucky at the right times, taking advantage of the breaks that come your way, are all things that could help a good team win it all.

You still need to have talent and good coaching in order to get close and injuries tend to play a bigger part than they used to because teams can't stock the depth that they used to.

I would also say that you need to have a well balanced team in order to have a chance which is why most people tend to discount the Eagles chances. They have no running game to speak of (please don't bring up the Raiders pre-season game) and their WRs are not guys who demand a double team. Their best weapon is the TE.

An attacking defense would also be a benefit, something the Cowboys haven't had since 1995.

Just my opinion but I hope it helps.

Very intelligent response. Thanks

 

[Phoenix-Talon]

all you need is love.

What You talkin bout Willis?

 

[THUMPER]

Very intelligent response. Thanks

Thanks. I would also add that if our running game doesn't improve from last year we will be watching someone else representing the NFC in the SB.

 

[adbutcher]

all you need is love.

http://cache.********.com/sports/toandmcnabbworldsgreat.jpg

I don't know why but that made me laugh.:laugh2: