Eagles win NFC East (?)...

[dbldwn711]

So if, (hypothetically) if the 2000 and 2001 Chargers win the SB and over the next 17 years have the very worst record in the NFL. Never make the playoffs once you are saying the had a better two decade span? Come on man, just give it up

Nice strawman EXCEPT none of the examples I gave have that scenario so you are wrong. Also, I said it’s NOT exclusively one stat (like you are trying to portray) but rather a number of stats with some being much more important than others so you are wrong... again

 

[PhoenixEagles1]

You can't just find your tags. Once you open your alerts it drops off. It should be really simple, just re tag what you already tagged.

1. You call me a liar and say I never said that I think Dak is good and some Cowboy fans are wrong.
2. I post proof I said that more than once and you comment on it.
3. Now you’re insinuating I’m lying again and I need to repost it for you.
4. If I do repost it you will say something point like “Moving the goalposts”

 

[dbldwn711]

So if, (hypothetically) if the 2000 and 2001 Chargers win the SB and over the next 17 years have the very worst record in the NFL. Never make the playoffs once you are saying the had a better two decade span? Come on man, just give it up

I can play this game too... so if the chargers had the most wins during these 20 years but NO championships you would say they were the most successful team?

Cmon man, just give it up.

 

[PhoenixEagles1]

Nice strawman EXCEPT none of the examples I gave have that scenario so you are wrong. Also, I said it’s NOT exclusively one stat (like you are trying to portray) but rather a number of stats with some being much more important than others so you are wrong... again

Oooh we are wrong. There are a number of stats more important then wins and playoff wins. Tell me 5 if there are a number of things showing a teams ranking over 20 years.

 

[PhoenixEagles1]

I can play this game too... so if the chargers had the most wins during these 20 years but NO championships you would say they were the most successful team?

Cmon man, just give it up.

possibly yeah. One more SB win over 20 years doesn’t means they’ve been the better team for 20 years.

 

[PhoenixEagles1]

I can play this game too... so if the chargers had the most wins during these 20 years but NO championships you would say they were the most successful team?

Cmon man, just give it up.

Is NFC East champions one of the numerous cause it’s 9-3 Philly.

 

[RememberTheKoy]

very insightful as to how you define “success”. So going to conference championships and winning playoff games is the best barometer for “success”?

Bwhahaha.

No. Success is defined by a LOT of things. There is no one stat that is controlling. However, the overriding stat that IS controlling is CHAMPIONSHIPS. First SB championships and then Conference championships (is going to the SB and losing).

The giants beat the eagles in BOTH of those categories. Are you really going to tell us that you’d rather win one SB and PLAY in more conference championship games than WIN TWO SBs? Bwhahaha.

another liar exposed

I'd rather be an Eagles fan for the past 20 years than a Giants fan, for sure. We are competitive far more often, we have a lot more playoff wins, and we have also won a title. I love watching football, the more often my team is winning enough to make the playoffs and win in the playoffs to contend is the thrill you hope your team gives you every year. The deeper the playoff run the better.


Also I don't even know why you are looking at my post and losing your mind over the Giants. I already said they are one of the teams you could arguably say have been better the past two decades. Because of the two titles. Your goofy ass response though does nothing but deflects away from your non-existent arguments that the Broncos, Colts & Rams had a better past two decades.

 

[Brees#1]

No repeat NFC East Champ last 14 seasons:
2005 NYG
2006 PHI
2007 DAL
2008 NYG
2009 DAL
2010 PHI
2011 NYG
2012 WAS
2013 PHI
2014 DAL
2015 WAS
2016 DAL
2017 PHI
2018 DAL
2019 ???

Number of division titles during that span:
DAL 5
PHI 4
NYG 3
WAS 2

I have brought this up numerous times.

 

[dbldwn711]

I'd rather be an Eagles fan for the past 20 years than a Giants fan, for sure. We are competitive far more often, we have a lot more playoff wins, and we have also won a title. I love watching football, the more often my team is winning enough to make the playoffs and win in the playoffs to contend is the thrill you hope your team gives you every year. The deeper the playoff run the better.


Also I don't even know why you are looking at my post and losing your mind over the Giants. I already said they are one of the teams you could arguably say have been better the past two decades. Because of the two titles. Your goofy ass response though does nothing but deflects away from your non-existent arguments that the Broncos, Colts & Rams had a better past two decades.

So you’d rather have one SB than 2 SBs?

Liar.

 

[dbldwn711]

Is NFC East champions one of the numerous cause it’s 9-3 Philly.

Divisional championships do count but MUCH less than 1) conference championships and 2) SB championships.

It’s really not that hard to understand unless you’re being disingenuous ... like right now.

 

[Brees#1]

Dallas could lose to Washington. So Eagles may not have to beat the Giants. I just get a losing mentality with Dallas that makes them vulnerable to teams that want to beat them. Washington plays them tough.

 

[dbldwn711]

Dallas could lose to Washington. So Eagles may not have to beat the Giants. I just get a losing mentality with Dallas that makes them vulnerable to teams that want to beat them. Washington plays them tough.

I love that the nfl is moving games around so teams with competing interests play at the same time.

 

[Manster7588]

no, go to alerts... hit “all” and it was there. You already commented on them so why do I have to bring it up again for you. You read it. You replied to it. Why do I have to look for it again?

Do you have any clue how many alerts I got? I don't have the time to go click each one. I don't even know what day you supposedly bumped them.

 

[Manster7588]

1. You call me a liar and say I never said that I think Dak is good and some Cowboy fans are wrong.
2. I post proof I said that more than once and you comment on it.
3. Now you’re insinuating I’m lying again and I need to repost it for you.
4. If I do repost it you will say something point like “Moving the goalposts”

If you repost them I'm going show 10 maybe 20 more times where you weren't saying it was ridiculous. In fact odds are you changed your tune because someone here explained how ridiculous the notion is.

 

[Manster7588]

I love that the nfl is moving games around so teams with competing interests play at the same time.

Quite now, the NFL doesn't want everyone to know they do this.

 

[RememberTheKoy]

So you’d rather have one SB than 2 SBs?

Liar.

What's the argument for the Packers, Rams, Colts and Broncos?

 

[dbldwn711]

What's the argument for the Packers, Rams, Colts and Broncos?

Again, I said it was “off the top of my head” but here goes:

The packers have pretty much owned that division for a long time and were double digits in wins most of the years in this time period. That makes them a perennial playoff team and they are a tough out primarily due to Rodgers. They, like the Eagles, have one SB win but that was their only SB appearance. Of the teams I listed they are the one team with a lower SB resume than the eagles however, when people think of successful teams over the past 2 decades I’m confident most would pick the packers over the eagles.

The rams entered the time period with a team dubbed “the greatest show on turf”. They were considered one of the best offenses in this period and had a HOF QB. If they had beaten the pats in the SB (and they were a 2 TD favorite) they would have had a legitimate dynasty. Their recent SB appearance gives them one more appearance than the eagles (thus a better SB resume) and they were in that game till the end. That teams offense was dynamic as well and the defense featured great individual players.

The colts had manning early in this time period and if it weren’t for the patriots and Brady we’d be talking about multiple SBs. That team just had the misfortune of having to go thru the pats each year. Again, if you ask people which team they think had more success many will pick Peyton Manning and the colts over the eagles. They then had continued success with Andrew luck. However, they too ran into the pats. The colts have the same SB resume as the eagles.

The broncos entered this time period with mike Shannahan as the coach and despite not having great players they put together some nice seasons of double digit wins. Then later they got manning and for a period of 4 years they were considered one of the best teams in the league but again... you guessed it ... they had to deal with Brady and the pats. Their SB resume is the same as the eagles but they were more dominant at times than the eagles ever were.

Almost all of the eagles success occurred early in this time period. They were a double digit winner with mcnabb early on but after that they were mediocre for the most part except for the SB year and they never were “dominant” for multiple years like the teams above. They were good but never considered “the best” for any real length of time.

 

[Pure Steel]

So you’d rather have one SB than 2 SBs?

Liar.

“I’d rather make out with hot babes than fuck them” ~ Said no one ~

 

[handicappers]

Colts made it to 4 conference championship games, 2 Super Bowls, won 1 and then watched their QB go to another team win a Super Bowl while their replacement QB retired young a week before the season. 13 total playoff appearances in the past two decades.

Broncos have made it to three conference championship games, 2 Super Bowls, won 1 of them but all of their success over the past two decades have been confined to two fairly small windows with a lot of middling late year Shannahan seasons or bad post-Peyton seasons. 9 total playoff appearances in the past two decades.

Rams have been completely dog shit for most of the past two decades outside of the post Super Bowl win greatest show on turf years (99 the Super Bowl win does not fall in the past two decade seasons of 00-19)and two McVay years where they got embarrassed in the Super Bowl. 6 total playoff appearances in the past two decades.

Packers have been to 4 conference championship games, 1 Super Bowl which they won but mostly the past two decades are going to represent how Rodgers was wasted by Mike McCarthy. 14 total playoff appearances in the past two decades (including this year)


Again, compared to the Eagles of the past two decades they have made it to 6 conference championship games, two Super Bowls, winning 1 of them. 12 total playoff appearances (will be 13 total if they beat the Giants Sunday).







So let's say we create a point system here for success: 1 Super Bowl win = 4 points. 1 Super Bowl appearance = 3 points, 1 Conference Championship Game appearance = 2 points, & 1 playoff appearance = 1 point. Based on this very simple formula you have:


Patriots 93 points
Steelers 41 points
Eagles 34 points (35 points if they beat Giants and make playoffs Sunday)
Ravens 33 points
Seahawks 31 points
Colts 31 points
Giants 31 points
Packers 29 points
Broncos 25 points
Rams 16 points
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Cowboys 7 points

If Super Bowl trophies were worth 10 points, Dallas would have 50 points
























Philly would have 10

 

[handicappers]

I have brought this up numerous times.

Thanks stat guy. You’re doing a bang up job