The late great NFL

poptart · Post by **poptart** » Mon Feb 05, 2007 11:13 am

In the 'Roger Wehrli' thread, kcdave did a drive-by bemoaning the fact that the naked emperor, Paul Tagliablow, was snubbed for the Hall of Fame.
Certainly yesterday's "Super"(??) Blow game slapped dave back to his senses.
The reality of what Taggie has done TO (not for) the league was displayed like a proud peacock yesterday.

Indy and Chicago are nice little teams, yes.
Last I checked the game is not called the Nice Little Team Bowl, though, it's called the SUPER Bowl.
Super, you see, doesn't fill the coffers like medicore, mundane, and ..... SUCK, apparantly do.

Who was really great last year .... ?
Sure, Bri' will thump his chest and claim the Steelers were the real thang.
Uhh ... no, they were not.
They weren't very good.
Seattle ... ?
hahaha

Pats fan will brag of it's recent 'dynasty', and make claims of TRUE greatness.
But no, they are myopic and delusional.
The Pats were pretty good, but they often got by by the skin of their teeth against ...... other teams who were not really all that good either.

Hey, maybe your team can make a couple o' nifty off-season moves, mr fan.
Make a move.
Get in position to catch lightning in a bottle in January.
Rise up and really be GRRRRRREAT!!!!

Sure, bang away at that blow-up doll.
She's a hot little thing.
Close your eyes, drift off, mr fan ......
Jessica Alba .... i luv u.
Havin' my baby .........

Watered down, packaged, commied, sanitized, pre-programmed, neutered.

Let's play nice, children, and give everyone a chance ........

Tags for the Hall of Fame .... ?

Srzly now .... ???

The greatness of the NFL is not in the future.

War Wagon · Post by **War Wagon** » Mon Feb 05, 2007 12:43 pm

zzzzzzz

'tart, just what exactly do you think you're going to accomplish with these hissy fits? Perhaps no team was ever really GREAT, they just had woeful competition to go up against? These teams of the past that you so fondly recall would get stomped by the Colts of today.

It is what it IS, man. Live with it.

Mike the Lab Rat · Post by **Mike the Lab Rat** » Mon Feb 05, 2007 2:57 pm

Criminy pops, you sound like Dana Carvey's "Angry Old Man" character from SNL.

"Back in my day..."

I'd rather watch an NFL in which the majority of teams have a shot at a Super Bowl instead of one in which only three or four are in the mix until their players get old and the "torch" gets passed to a different set of three of four teams. In the meantime, fans of the other couple dozen teams go into the September knowing full well that their team hasn't got a shot in hell. Frig the "good old days."

Free agency and parity have helped make the NFL the undisputed favorite American sport to watch, and "purists" longing for the halycon days of leather helmets should just adjust the frigging rabbit ears on their B&W TV's to get the Soupy Sales show and settle down with one of them newfangled TV dinners out of the icebox.

Get the fuck over it already.

trev · Post by **trev** » Mon Feb 05, 2007 2:59 pm

Word to Wags.

Rack Peyton. Manning.

Rack Wags.

Poptart isn't getting it. Which is unusual and sad.

Mike the Lab Rat · Post by **Mike the Lab Rat** » Mon Feb 05, 2007 3:20 pm

Gee, I'm sure some of the pre-Tags SB's listed below were just OUTSTANDING entertainment for Americans who weren't fans of the winning team...

XXII Jan. 31, 1988 Washington 42, Denver 10
XXI Jan. 25, 1987 N.Y. Giants 39, Denver 20
XX Jan. 26, 1986 Chicago 46, New England 10
XIX Jan. 20, 1985 San Francisco 38, Miami 16
XVIII Jan. 22, 1984 L.A. Raiders 38, Washington 9
XV Jan. 25, 1981 Oakland 27, Philadelphia 10
XII Jan. 15, 1978 Dallas 27, Denver 10
XI Jan. 9, 1977 Oakland 32, Minnesota 14
VIII Jan. 13, 1974 Miami 24, Minnesota 7
VI Jan. 16, 1972 Dallas 24, Miami 3
II Jan. 14, 1968 Green Bay 33, Oakland 14
I Jan. 15, 1967 Green Bay 35, Kansas City 10

There have always been suckass SB's (of which my Bills were responsible for 2 or 3...) as well as great ones. Folks bitching that last night's game was "the worst Super Bowl ever" obviously haven't watched too many SB's or have issues with long-term memory.

Cuda · Post by **Cuda** » Mon Feb 05, 2007 4:54 pm

Actually ALL of those SB's were more entertaining than XLI

Worst SB Ever: XL with an insurmountable lead

Mile-Hi T · Post by **Mile-Hi T** » Mon Feb 05, 2007 5:05 pm

Did anyone else see all of the empty seats in the 4th quarter?

If you pay a grand for a seat and leave early, the game must suck.

quacker backer · Post by **quacker backer** » Mon Feb 05, 2007 6:57 pm

those 95 Cirnhuskers could have dry fu$%ed those two teams yesterday and left them begging for more

sincerely
Bradhusker

Mikey · Post by **Mikey** » Mon Feb 05, 2007 8:27 pm

Mile-Hi T wrote:Did anyone else see all of the empty seats in the 4th quarter?

If you pay a grand for a seat and leave early, the game must suck.

Or the postgame party has great potential.

Cuda · Post by **Cuda** » Mon Feb 05, 2007 9:32 pm

Two different levels of post-game party.

The $10k seats came with a complimentary 8-ball of blow

The $1k seats had to buy their own

RadioFan · Post by **RadioFan** » Tue Feb 06, 2007 3:07 am

I think I understand where pop is coming from ...

Overrated game, in terms of competitiveness? Check.

Way, way too much hype for an average football game? Check.

Raiders not in it. Check.

That being said, the SB has been -- for many years now, and will probably never be -- about football, ever again.

That's probably why it's a good idea to avoid most TV and radio "coverage" -- two weeks leading up to and 6 hours on gameday of complete BULLSHIT of everything except Xs and Os -- in advance, from now until the end of time.

I managed to do that this year, for the most part, though I had to change TV channels and radio stations several times in order to do it, and I'm not talking about ESPN or FoxSports. You know it's bad when the fucking Weather Channel bitches are trying to tell me about how "wonderful" the weather in Miami is going to be, a week in advance. Just wear a tight sweater and STFU, you dumb fucking idiots.

As I've said in the in-game thread, RACK the weather. This probably goes against pop's sentiment of "watered down," but that part of the game I loved, precisely because it was unexpected and no doubt made the CBS crew and all of the fucking nonfans miserable. About time a championship in the NFL is played in some elements, you fucking pussies.

poptart wrote:Watered down, packaged, commied, sanitized, pre-programmed, neutered.

RACK ... errr ... I mean, the NFL is monitoring my posts.

What I really mean is that it was the greatest game ever, with the greatest halftime show and the greatest commercials I've ever seen in the history of the universe.

poptart · Post by **poptart** » Tue Feb 06, 2007 3:11 am

trev wrote:Poptart isn't getting it.

Oh, I get it.

The league has about 3 teams that are pretty good, about 3 that are horrible, and about 26 that are interchangeable depending on the whims of the league's parity roulette wheel.

Btw, Mike, nice list of Super Bowl games you posted.
The winning teams there are almost ALL outstanding teams .... historic teams.
It's GREAT stuff.

The league once had a LOT of flavor, personality, and character.
It had distinct differences between teams.
It was interesting, watchable, and there were great teams.

The NFL is a shell of it's former self, sorry.

RadioFan · Post by **RadioFan** » Tue Feb 06, 2007 3:16 am

The abortion that is the SB would be exponentially worse with dynasties, pop.

godzilla2002 · Post by **godzilla2002** » Tue Feb 06, 2007 3:20 am

poptart wrote:The league has about 3 teams that are pretty good, about 3 that are horrible, and about 26 that are interchangeable depending on the whims of the league's parity roulette wheel

It sure as hell used to be a lot easier to make weekly picks.

poptart · Post by **poptart** » Tue Feb 06, 2007 3:30 am

RadioFan wrote:The abortion that is the SB would be exponentially worse with dynasties, pop.

Worse how ... ?

Because one team might really kick the living snot out of another team ... ?

Is that bad somehow ... ?

I don't care if the Super Bowl is a blowout.

trev · Post by **trev** » Tue Feb 06, 2007 3:46 am

I avoided all the SB hype. Didn't watch any of it on TV. Didn't listen to any radio commentary if possible. A true fan wants to watch the game, not 2 weeks of hype, not the commercials, or Katie CouricCommie, "reporters" rattling off crap to hear themselves talk, fill air time and plug their shit. I get all that. It's ridiculous that the Chi offense had to be off the field for almost an hour. If you don't like the NFL, quit following it. But I enjoyed watching Peyton take his team to this victory. The Colts were serious about winning. You can't fault the passion and heart, unless you just don't see it. There's still plenty to be enjoyed in the NFL. If you don't like it, find something else. It's not going to be perfect. Obviously poptart, you've lost your lust for the NFL. And you won't be getting it back anytime soon.

RadioFan · Post by **RadioFan** » Tue Feb 06, 2007 3:51 am

poptart wrote:
RadioFan wrote:The abortion that is the SB would be exponentially worse with dynasties, pop.
Worse how ... ?

Because one team might really kick the living snot out of another team ... ?

Is that bad somehow ... ?

I don't care if the Super Bowl is a blowout.

Well, given that you are in Korea and the rest of us have to endure nonstop bullshit about the championship game ... think about it.

Example: If this were '85, we'd have ALL heard the "Super Bowl Shuffle" 850,000,000 times instead of 850,000 times, back then. Now imagine if the Dallas Cowboys become dominant, now.

Pretty sweet, eh?

MgoBlue-LightSpecial · Tue Feb 06, 2007 3:55 am

poptart wrote:The NFL is a shell of it's former self, sorry.

Perhaps you should send a letter to every high school blue chip football player in the country, and ask them to stop getting faster, stronger, and smarter.

Face it. The level of athlete continues to evolve, and is becoming greater and more dominant as each decade passes. No more can just two or three NFL teams dominate by having a significant talent edge over everybody else. These freakish athletes are found in vast numbers scattered all over D1 college programs nationwide, and many are headed straight for NFL rosters.

If you want less competitive balance, then you're essentially asking for less talent throughout the league. THAT, my friend, is what would truly water down the league.

MgoBlue-LightSpecial · Tue Feb 06, 2007 4:09 am

trev wrote:I avoided all the SB hype. Didn't watch any of it on TV. Didn't listen to any radio commentary if possible. A true fan wants to watch the game, not 2 weeks of hype, not the commercials, or Katie CouricCommie, "reporters" rattling off crap to hear themselves talk, fill air time and plug their shit. I get all that. It's ridiculous that the Chi offense had to be off the field for almost an hour. If you don't like the NFL, quit following it. But I enjoyed watching Peyton take his team to this victory. The Colts were serious about winning. You can't fault the passion and heart, unless you just don't see it. There's still plenty to be enjoyed in the NFL. If you don't like it, find something else. It's not going to be perfect. Obviously poptart, you've lost your lust for the NFL. And you won't be getting it back anytime soon.

I'll go ahead and rack this.

Yeah, sure, much of the Super Bowl consists of an extended commercialized wankfest, but the consumer still has a choice to not be spoonfed all the bullshit if he/she so desires.

I didn't watch any pre-game. I didn't watch any post-game. I turned it to the Discovery Channel when commercials aired. I dozed in and out for a bit in the first half. If it wasn't for this board, I wouldn't have known Prince was performing at the half. All I did was tune in when the football was getting snapped.

poptart · Post by **poptart** » Tue Feb 06, 2007 4:40 am

What has watered down the league is that it has over-expanded, Mgo.
Lop off about a half-dozen teams.

Also, a team is no longer able to keep many of it's good players.
This is a major problem.

Organizations ought to be REWARDED for building and maintaining.
Shouldn't they ... ?

kcdave · Post by **kcdave** » Tue Feb 06, 2007 4:43 am

My bad on the "Tags," take ..... I guess. I heard somewhere today, that Al "Peanut head," Rozelle failed to make the Hall of Fame 6 or 7 times before making it in. Although ..... Al did make it in while he was still the commish.

As for you tart ...... why the red ass? If you want to be assured of watching great teams and players, with only a handfull of teams having a chance to win, start watching baseball.

As for the whole Super Bowl thing ....... as a rule .... most of the games are below average. Its one game. It is over hyped, watered down, packaged, commied, sanitized, pre-programmed, and neutered. Its the New Years Eve of football. Its fucking amateur night.

MgoBlue-LightSpecial · Tue Feb 06, 2007 4:48 am

poptart wrote:Organizations ought to be REWARDED for building and maintaining.
Shouldn't they ... ?

Well, look no further than your 2007 champs. The core group of this bunch has been around for awhile, and haven't exactly come out of nowhere. The Colts have been a dominant mainstay in the league; just haven't been able to win the big one until now.

Qbert · Post by **Qbert** » Tue Feb 06, 2007 5:05 am

Damn Mgo....

you've got a couple RACKS or so....^^^^^^^^^^^

MUCKFICHIGAN--->fyi!

'tart

salary cap and FA is what it is...the PLAYERS aren't going to give back their "golden goose."

so, nothing is going to change "back."

as Robert Montgomery Knight once said---->" "

Tom In VA · Post by **Tom In VA** » Tue Feb 06, 2007 5:07 am

Nice takes Mgo.

Can I send your takes to Dan Snyder ?

WAR Building a "Core Group"

poptart · Post by **poptart** » Tue Feb 06, 2007 6:30 am

Oakland's season has nothing to do with my takes.

Yeah, good thang Indy kept that 23rd ranked defense together.
Otherwise they couldn't have gotten over on murderer's row in the playoffs.

KC - sucked
Balt - terrible offense
NE - not the same team
Chi - woeful QBing, woeful S.B. team

The team with the 23rd ranked defense just won the whole ball of wax ....... and quite easily.

Let that soak in.

Mike the Lab Rat · Post by **Mike the Lab Rat** » Wed Feb 07, 2007 1:04 am

For all the bitching about how much the NFL and this Super Bowl sucked...

...the fact remains that this postseason has had some of the most entertaining playoff football I've seen in a long time.

Then again, since my team managed to improve to 7-9 and wound up with one of its alumni elected to the HOF this past weekend, I'm just not as bitter as some folks.

poptart · Post by **poptart** » Wed Feb 07, 2007 1:54 am

mvscal wrote:A unit that stepped up in the postseason .....

I'm not impressed by KC, Baltimore, NE, or Chicago.
If you are, .... ok.

Tiny's pre-KC-game rant about his team said it.
He knew his team was not really all that good.

Sure, they got on a roll when it mattered, and props to them for it.
Super Bowl Champs.

They're just not really that great.

War Wagon · Post by **War Wagon** » Wed Feb 07, 2007 2:05 am

I suggest that my brother poptart (and all football fans, for that matter) read the book excerpt in last weeks SI by David Halberstan entitled "The Ritual Begins" if they want to understand America's devotion to both the NFL and the SuperBowl. You can get your hands on a copy of SI in S. Korea, can't you 'tart?

I tried finding the article on their cum-sucking, pop-up infested website, but can't find it. Apparently, they have to have some content in that mag that keeps folks like me sending in $72 each year to re-subscribe.

poptart · Post by **poptart** » Wed Feb 07, 2007 2:14 am

Paul, where would you rank Indy among the 41 Super Bowl winners ... ?
Where would you rank Chicago among the 41 Super Bowl losers ... ?

How good were these teams, historically speaking ... ?

What do you think ... ?

War Wagon · Post by **War Wagon** » Wed Feb 07, 2007 3:14 am

poptart wrote:...where would you rank Indy among the 41 Super Bowl winners ... ?
Where would you rank Chicago among the 41 Super Bowl losers ... ?

How good were these teams, historically speaking ... ?

Historically speaking, they won the last one, and that is all that matters.

Any more meaningless questions?

godzilla2002 · Post by **godzilla2002** » Wed Feb 07, 2007 3:25 am

poptart wrote:Where would you rank Chicago among the 41 Super Bowl losers?

The Super Bowl XXIV Denver Broncos would have beat the Bears 55-10

poptart · Post by **poptart** » Wed Feb 07, 2007 4:06 am

War Wagon wrote:
poptart wrote:...where would you rank Indy among the 41 Super Bowl winners ... ?
Where would you rank Chicago among the 41 Super Bowl losers ... ?

How good were these teams, historically speaking ... ?
Historically speaking, they won the last one, and that is all that matters.

Any more meaningless questions?

It's only a meaningless question if you make it one.
Why dodge it .... ?
Fans always rank players, teams, etc., don't they ... ?
It's part of the fun.

Here are possibly the worst 3 Super Bowl losing teams of all-time.

1979 Rams - 9-7 record, barely scored more points than allowed, Ray Malavasi, Vince Ferragamo
2006 Bears - Defense fell off very badly in the back end of the season, QBed by a total stiff, NFC sucked total dick in '06
2003 Panthers - Just barely scored more points than allowed, only 2 pro bowl players on the roster

I'll give my 3 worst Super Bowl winning teams later.

War Wagon · Post by **War Wagon** » Wed Feb 07, 2007 4:27 am

poptart wrote: It's only a meaningless question if you make it one.
Why dodge it .... ?
Fans always rank players, teams, etc., don't they ... ?
It's part of the fun.

Part of the fun?

Dude, you've had a fucked up agenda going back to before T1B about how the league is all conspiracy this, Tagliablow that, and now you want me to believe that you're just trying to have some fun? I was born at night, but it wasn't last night.

Whatever. Morbid sense of humor there. Get back to me in about two years, and maybe I'll take your pointless questions in this regard seriously.

In the meantime, I still luv you 'tart... but you're not trolling me in this manner. Just Rack! the fucking Colts for being this years best pro-football team, 'k?

poptart · Post by **poptart** » Wed Feb 07, 2007 4:40 am

I'm not trolling you.
I'm talkin' football.

Worst Super Bowl winning teams (I won't rank them specifically, I'll just list a few teams):

2006 Colts - lost 4 of it's last 7 reg. season games, gave up a lot of points, beat weak playoff comp., 21st ranked defense
1987 Redskins - One of two teams with a lower ranked defense than the '06 Colts to win a Super Bowl, Jay Schroeder - Doug Williams-barf, excellent o-line, but no real great runner
2005 Steelers - Rookie QB, excellent o-line, no stud running back, is there a Hall of Fame player on the roster? A. Faneca, maybe
2001 Patriots - league gift, other team with a lower ranked defense than the '06 Colts to win a SB, 24th ranked defense, 19th ranked offense, parity slop winner

Felix · Post by **Felix** » Wed Feb 07, 2007 4:54 am

poptart wrote: I'm not trolling you.

2001 Patriots

so what if Oakland had won that game.....

you shouldn't smack the duds like that tart.......

poptart · Post by **poptart** » Wed Feb 07, 2007 5:01 am

If Oakland had not had that game stolen they would have had a helluva time beating the Steelers the next week at Pittsburgh.

The Raider defense was not all that great in '01.
Very mediocre ..... particularly against the run.

The Assassin · Post by **The Assassin** » Wed Feb 07, 2007 5:04 am

poptart wrote:If Oakland had not had that game stolen they would have had a helluva time beating the Steelers the next week at Pittsburgh.

The Raider defense was not all that great in '01.
Very mediocre ..... particularly against the run.

You're fucking kidding me right? That 2001 run defense was solid!

signed,

Shawn Alexander and his 250+ rushing yards.

kcdave · Post by **kcdave** » Wed Feb 07, 2007 5:10 am

poptart wrote:2005 Steelers - Rookie QB, excellent o-line, no stud running back, is there a Hall of Fame player on the roster? A. Faneca, maybe

Well, thats it. Mark the chart. T1B time of death, 10:40pm central. This board will now be known as poptart vs Bsmack.

poptart · Post by **poptart** » Wed Feb 07, 2007 6:02 am

Well actually what I said about Rothlisberger was not true.
He was in his 2nd yr in '05.

To his credit, he played quite well in 3 playoff wins.
He sucked complete ass in the Super Bowl game though.

Qbert · Post by **Qbert** » Wed Feb 07, 2007 6:10 am

kcdave wrote: Well, thats it. Mark the chart. T1B time of death, 10:40pm central. This board will now be known as poptart vs Bsmack.

Shirley you jest...shurely....