Eagles win NFC East (?)...

[dbldwn711]

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

let me put into perspective how important winning a SB is in relation to ALL the other types of “wins”: if the eagles had not won that one SB a few years back NONE of these eagles fans would be here talking about how they are one of the “5 most successful” teams in the last 20 years. NOT A SINGLE ONE would be making these arguments. They’d be embarrassed and hiding under the rocks that they hid under for last 50 years.

They wouldn’t dare talk about how many conference championships they played in or how many division titles they had or how many “wins” they had. No way! They’d be too embarrassed. Yet when other teams “only” have one SB win during the last 20 years... it’s different.

They’re so disingenuous it’s disgusting.

 

[Schmoopy1000]

You’ve see the thread it’s like talking to Harry dunne

 

[PhoenixEagles1]

let me put into perspective how important winning a SB is in relation to ALL the other types of “wins”: if the eagles had not won that one SB a few years back NONE of these eagles fans would be here talking about how they are one of the “5 most successful” teams in the last 20 years. NOT A SINGLE ONE would be making these arguments. They’d be embarrassed and hiding under the rocks that they hid under for last 50 years.

They wouldn’t dare talk about how many conference championships they played in or how many division titles they had or how many “wins” they had. No way! They’d be too embarrassed. Yet when other teams “only” have one SB win during the last 20 years... it’s different.

They’re so disingenuous it’s disgusting.

What’s disingenuous is even though the Eagles won a lot more games over 2 decades, a lot more playoff wins, 9 NFCE championships to 3, 6 NFC title games to 3 you think that one more SB over 19 years means the Giants had a better 2 decades. That’s just how blind you have to be.

 

[Shane_O_Mac812]

Past two decades they've made it to 6 conference championship games, 2 Super Bowls, winning one of the Super Bowls.

The only teams you could argue that have been more successful in the past two decades are New England, Seattle, Pittsburgh, Baltimore and possibly the Giants.

Cowboys in that same time frame have made it to 0 conference title games, 0 Super Bowls and have only won 3 total playoff games. Shiiiiit, Eagles have won more playoff games in the past two seasons alone than Dallas has in the past 20 years.

The Colts say hi.

 

[mcnabb7542]

Aw look mom another thread about the Eagles....

 

[dbldwn711]

What’s disingenuous is even though the Eagles won a lot more games over 2 decades, a lot more playoff wins, 9 NFCE championships to 3, 6 NFC title games to 3 you think that one more SB over 19 years means the Giants had a better 2 decades. That’s just how blind you have to be.

During the 20 year time span in question the eagles won 27 more games than the giants. That averages out to somewhere between 1-1.5 games per year. You are gonna tell us that you’d rather win 1-1.5 more games per year than win another SB?

GTFOH

What’s really disingenuous is you still haven’t said which teams on my list you would put the eagles ahead of and why. You’ve been exposed again.

 

[Manster7588]

During the 20 year time span in question the eagles won 27 more games than the giants. That averages out to somewhere between 1-1.5 games per year. You are gonna tell us that you’d rather win 1-1.5 more games per year than win another SB?

GTFOH

What’s really disingenuous is you still haven’t said which teams on my list you would put the eagles ahead of and why. You’ve been exposed again.

Better yet in the last 10 years the Eagles have just ONE more regular season win than the "Irrelevant" Cowboys. Don't get me wrong, I'd love it if Dallas Overachieved ONE season and came away with another Lombardi, but if they did it wouldn't really change what they've been over that time.

 

[Center Ice]

Schmoop you know there’s a good chance Dallas repeats. We barely beat a bad Giants team at home a few weeks ago in overtime. It’s far from over and I’m positive the Giants would just love to stick it to us

Yep, that's exactly what I'm afraid of. When I saw the Eagles Giants/Dallas Redskins matchup to decide it all, I got a very bad feeling.

 

[RememberTheKoy]

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.

Packers have only made the playoffs one more year than the Eagles. Haven't made it as deep in the playoffs as often as the Eagles. Haven't made it to as many Super Bowls as the Eagles.

Your going outside of the past two decades to add an additional Super Bowl apprarence for the Rams. Plus they have been largely dog shit for the past two decades missing the playoffs A LOT. Already there is no logic at all to your arguments because you say the Packers have been more successful because they have one more playoff apprarence and one less SB appearance yet in the next paragraph you try to say the Rams had a better past 20 years because they have 3 SB apprarence in the past 21 years but have missed the playoffs a lot with a very long over decade period of being flat out awful.

You act like the Colts were always losing to the Pats when they were getting bounced from the playoffs to teams like the Jets.

Broncos in the past 20 years had 3 okay seasons with Mike Shanahan and then they were nothing more than a middling 500 team for years except for a 4-5 year run with Manning and then they have been complete trash since. Again, same number of SB appearences, not no where close to same number of playoff appearences or deep trips in the playoffs.

Eagles were never dominant yet they had a run of 4 straight NFC Championship Games. The longest stretch they ever went without making the playoffs was 3 years (went 3 years without playoffs only once) and when that streak ended they won the Super Bowl with a dominant team.




You clearly have some very weird obsession with the Eagles, guessing you're salty because they beat your team in the Super Bowl. But your logic is very illogical because it seems to apply only to certain teams and not others. Bottom line is that you're a clown.

 

[RememberTheKoy]

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
























Philly would have 10

Not in the past two decades. Cowboys haven't done anything and continue to not do anything

 

[RememberTheKoy]

The Colts say hi.

Same number of SB wins, SB appearences, playoff appearences but Eagles gone deeper in the playoffs more often, didn't watch their QB go to another team and win a SB then watch their new franchise QB retire early.

 

[Shane_O_Mac812]

Same number of SB wins, SB appearences, playoff appearences but Eagles gone deeper in the playoffs more often, didn't watch their QB go to another team and win a SB then watch their new franchise QB retire early.

There is no comparison. The Colts owned that division during the duration of Peyton's tenure. Skipped a year, then won it every year but 2 with Luck. We were a team that was guaranteed to go to the playoffs for about 15 years straight. We knew we were in before the season even started. Not to mention the post season awards, pro bowlers and hall of famers from that team. Overall a bigger success than the Eagles. You realize for the last 20 years the AFC has basically been a battle between 5 teams. 5 out of 16 for 20 years. It has been either Patriots, Steelers, Colts, Ravens, or Broncos.

 

[RememberTheKoy]

There is no comparison. The Colts owned that division during the duration of Peyton's tenure. Skipped a year, then won it every year but 2 with Luck. We were a team that was guaranteed to go to the playoffs for about 15 years straight. We knew we were in before the season even started. Not to mention the post season awards, pro bowlers and hall of famers from that team. Overall a bigger success than the Eagles. You realize for the last 20 years the AFC has basically been a battle between 5 teams. 5 out of 16 for 20 years. It has been either Patriots, Steelers, Colts, Ravens, or Broncos.

And yet, Colts have made the same numbee of times as the Eagles in the past two decades. So you're argument is the Colts owned their division and made the playoffs a lot but Eagles have made the playoffs the same number of times. There is no advantage for playoff appearences for the Colts.

Eagles however do have more playoff wins in that time period.

 

[ericd7633]

The Eagles are behind the Patriots, the Steelers, the Ravens and the Giants since 2000. If we're behind the Seahawks because they've been to an extra SB, that's fine, but then we're ahead of the Colts, Saints and Packers. Rams won the SB in the 1999 season. Does that count or not?

 

[jarntt]

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:

That is the most moronic scoring system I've seen. 1 point for making the playoffs and 4 points for a SB win??? More like 50 points for a SB win and 1 point for pretty much everything else combined. Now see where you stand...

 

[Shane_O_Mac812]

Getting in as a division winner is a bigger accomplishment than wildcard. Ask any analyst, expert, player, the Colts are one of the most successful organizations of the past 20 years. You are literally cherry picking two stats. Look at Cultural relevance, players that have come and gone, awards, hall of famers. The Colts are arguably only behind the Pats and Steelers for the last 20 years.

 

[jarntt]

Reddit? You're using Reddit to back up your point?

How about using an NFL page.
NFL Decade Standings: How the league ranks from 2010-2018

So if Dallas wins and Philly loses they are dead even over that time period? Interesting...

 

[jarntt]

I have brought this up numerous times.

Yeah, so has everyone else...

 

[jarntt]

The Eagles are behind the Patriots, the Steelers, the Ravens and the Giants since 2000. If we're behind the Seahawks because they've been to an extra SB, that's fine, but then we're ahead of the Colts, Saints and Packers. Rams won the SB in the 1999 season. Does that count or not?

If it helps the Eagles argument, no. If it counts against them, yes...

 

[dbldwn711]

Packers have only made the playoffs one more year than the Eagles. Haven't made it as deep in the playoffs as often as the Eagles. Haven't made it to as many Super Bowls as the Eagles.

Your going outside of the past two decades to add an additional Super Bowl apprarence for the Rams. Plus they have been largely dog shit for the past two decades missing the playoffs A LOT. Already there is no logic at all to your arguments because you say the Packers have been more successful because they have one more playoff apprarence and one less SB appearance yet in the next paragraph you try to say the Rams had a better past 20 years because they have 3 SB apprarence in the past 21 years but have missed the playoffs a lot with a very long over decade period of being flat out awful.

You act like the Colts were always losing to the Pats when they were getting bounced from the playoffs to teams like the Jets.

Broncos in the past 20 years had 3 okay seasons with Mike Shanahan and then they were nothing more than a middling 500 team for years except for a 4-5 year run with Manning and then they have been complete trash since. Again, same number of SB appearences, not no where close to same number of playoff appearences or deep trips in the playoffs.

Eagles were never dominant yet they had a run of 4 straight NFC Championship Games. The longest stretch they ever went without making the playoffs was 3 years (went 3 years without playoffs only once) and when that streak ended they won the Super Bowl with a dominant team.




You clearly have some very weird obsession with the Eagles, guessing you're salty because they beat your team in the Super Bowl. But your logic is very illogical because it seems to apply only to certain teams and not others. Bottom line is that you're a clown.

Rams win SB in 2000
Rams lose the SB in 2002 and 2019

That’s 3 SB appearances in the last 20 years... clown.