T1B

Give fans a new stadium and a 1-2 record and let the bandwagon roll!!

http://arizonasportsfans.com/vb/showthread.php?t=98538

I wonder if John Q. Elliot posts there?

I don't think they have a gay bondage forum.

I went to the Pats V Cardinals a couple years ago. The game where they had the Pat Tillman tribute even. It was Foxboro Mass out West. Just like a home game honestly. TH was there and he can attest. I would say the ratio was at least 3 Pats fans for every bird fan.....

BSmack wrote:Give fans a new stadium and a 1-2 record and let the bandwagon roll!!

http://arizonasportsfans.com/vb/showthread.php?t=98538

Adrian Wilson is badass, though.

Cardinal Nation?




I went to a Raider/Card game a few years ago, and the entire place was Silver and Black.......I literally saw maybe 20 card fans altogether the entire day.

And I thought KC had the market cornered for myopian living; DAMN!!! That shit was pathetic.

BSmack wrote:Give fans a new stadium and a 1-2 record and let the bandwagon roll!!

Try an upgraded OLine, a new head coach, and a new offensive coordinater (a guy named Whisenhunt and another named Russ Grimm, you might have heard of them).

And oh yeah....



How did that taste, Biotch?

:twisted:

Diogenes wrote:How did that taste, Biotch?[/b]

:twisted:

It tastes like a bandwagon fuck coming out only after the coast is clear.

If ever there was a trap game, that was it. Props to Coach Wiz for setting and springing the trap. It looks to me like some of the guys forgot they still need to work to win games.

Neely8 wrote:I went to the Pats V Cardinals a couple years ago. The game where they had the Pat Tillman tribute even. It was Foxboro Mass out West. Just like a home game honestly. TH was there and he can attest. I would say the ratio was at least 3 Pats fans for every bird fan.....

Even with the 'new' team and stadium there are ALWAYS more fans for the opposing team at a Cardinals home game. Was funny to watch the Tardinals beat the Steelers today though ;-)

BSmack wrote:If ever there was a trap game, that was it.

What's that you say... they were really looking forward to next week's HOME GAME against their bitter NFC West rivals, the Seahawks next week? I know, bro, this game was a real... "trap." You're right... I am quite sure the "over-confident" Steelers thought they could rest on their laurels after mopping the floor with 3 shit teams to start the season. No really... this sense of invincibility happens to teams coming off .500 seasons ALL OF THE FUCKING TIME!!!


Or


The inevitable happened.... even with one of the easiest (for an AFC team, at least) schedules you'll ever see... this team will get their share of losses this year. Your shit franchise got exposed for the shit team that they are.

Bitter much UCant?

At least the Steelers didn't have to cheat for their FIVE Lombardi Trophies.

BSmack wrote:Bitter much UCant?

Over what? Watching your team getting smoked by a shit NFC squad? Yeah... that's a tough pill to swallow.

ucantdoitdoggieSTyle2 wrote:

BSmack wrote:Bitter much UCant?

Over what? Watching your team getting smoked by a shit NFC squad? Yeah... that's a tough pill to swallow.

You must be bitter about something to call a team with 5 Super Bowls and at least 3 times as many playoff berths as your Pats a "shit franchise".

BSmack wrote:

Diogenes wrote:How did that taste, Biotch?

:twisted:

It tastes like a bandwagon...

Yeah. I'm just going along with the multitude of Cards fans around here who have been supporting them long before me.





Don't forget to swallow.

BSmack wrote:and at least 3 times as many playoff berths as your Pats a "shit franchise".

Your math is a bit fuzzy.

From wiki:

Since the NFL merger in 1970, the Pittsburgh Steelers have compiled an overall record of 334-217-2 , reached the playoffs 22 times, won their division 17 times, played in 13 AFC championship games, and won five of six Super Bowls.

The Patriots won Super Bowl XXXVI, Super Bowl XXXVIII, and Super Bowl XXXIX. They also played in and lost Super Bowl XX, Super Bowl XXXI, and the 1963 AFL Championship Game. In their 47-year history, they have an overall regular season record of 350 wins, 349 losses, and nine ties. They have made fifteen postseason appearances, and have an overall postseason record of nineteen wins and twelve losses.

If we're talking post-merger only, Steelers are up 22-14 in playoff berths. Not exactly 3 times as many as you so outrageously claim. If you're talking total franchise history, I believe Pittsburgh is up 23 (if you count 1947) -15. Not bad, considering the Steelers have been around for 27 years longer, and oh btw, were the laughingstock of the NFL from 1933-1969.

ucantdoitdoggieSTyle2 wrote:If we're talking post-merger only, Steelers are up 22-14 in playoff berths. Not exactly 3 times as many as you so outrageously claim. If you're talking total franchise history, I believe Pittsburgh is up 23 (if you count 1947) -15. Not bad, considering the Steelers have been around for 27 years longer, and oh btw, were the laughingstock of the NFL from 1933-1969.

Yea we're talking post merger. Since that is the only time the two franchises records can be compared on a level playing field.

22-14. Not bad. Thanks for doing my research bitch. I knew you would. Since that's how you bitter chowds always react when someone hits you with a little hyperbole.

Did you know Boston is such a great football town that their first NFL franchise packed up after one year of total futility to become the Washington Redskins?

That's what I thought. So while the Steelers were "the laughingstock" of the NFL, Boston didn't even HAVE a football team. Bode you I guess.

I am quite sure the "over-confident" Steelers thought they could rest on their laurels after mopping the floor with 3 shit teams to start the season.

I'll agree with that. I am always on record that the Steelers need to lose 4-5 games in a season in order to really contend in the postseason. 3 blowout wins over bad teams, and 1 humbling loss to a decent team. That loss is good, necessary medicine.

BSmack wrote:Thanks for doing my research bitch. I knew you would. Since that's how you bitter chowds always react when someone hits you with a little hyperbole.

Anytime you want to flap your cocksucker, you just let me know and I’ll be there to kick your teeth in with the cold, hard facts. If you’re too lazy to do 30 seconds of googling, I’ll be more than happy to oblige you. I guess I am saying… you are very welcome, cunt. Spin it however you want, bitch, but you had no problem reminding me how many titles your shit franchise (<---sound familiar?) has won when I “the nerve” to besmirch their “good name.” I guess I should have thanked you for doing “my research for me” then, as I would have most certainly “gotten over.”

You keep telling yourself that your shit franchise is still relevant, even though the majority of your team’s success happened over a quarter of a century ago. What have you done… this millennium? If it weren’t for a few highly questionable calls against a superior Seattle team, you’d still be crying into your torn and tattered 1970s Steel Curtain binkie and praying to your Franco Harris Buddha for answers.

Tuck rule says what?

Isn't that rich. A Pats fan going to the questionable call card. The whole Pats "dynasty" is based on a HIGHLY questionable call. Not to mention a whole lot of cheating.

But hey, 5 Super Bowls is still more than 3. And 22 playoff bids is still more than 14. Thanks for tracking that down for me. You sure did make my argument for me.

BSmack wrote:Tuck rule says what?

Leg sweep says what??

BSmack wrote:You sure did make my argument for me.

Did I?
Is that how you interpret me railing on you for desperately holding onto the past? Were we even participating in the same thread? Can you... read?

"even though the majority of your team’s success happened over a quarter of a century ago."

"1970s Steel Curtain binkie"

"praying to your Franco Harris Buddha"

"What have you done… this millennium?"

BSmack wrote:Tuck rule says what?

Isn't that rich. A Pats fan going to the questionable call card. The whole Pats "dynasty" is based on a HIGHLY questionable call. Not to mention a whole lot of cheating.

But hey, 5 Super Bowls is still more than 3. And 22 playoff bids is still more than 14. Thanks for tracking that down for me. You sure did make my argument for me.

12 NFL Championships over here, boss.

ucantdoitdoggieSTyle2 wrote:Is that how you interpret me railing on you for desperately holding onto the past? Were we even participating in the same thread? Can you... read?

"even though the majority of your team’s success happened over a quarter of a century ago."

"1970s Steel Curtain binkie"

"praying to your Franco Harris Buddha"

At least the Steelers HAVE a past to be proud of. The Steelers 1974 draft class alone has produced more Hall of Fame inductees than your whole cheating franchise has during its entire history.

"What have you done… this millennium?"

You mean other than win a Super Bowl?

Christ you're a fucking retard.

BSmack wrote:You mean other than win a Super Bowl?

Just one. Wow. Epic.

BSmack wrote:At least the Steelers HAVE a past to be proud of.

Do they?

After his career rumors circulated about his probable steroid use while playing with the Steelers. Former coach and player Jim Haslett said to the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette in 2005:

"It started, really, in Pittsburgh. They got an advantage on a lot of football teams. They were so much stronger [in the] '70s, late '70s, early '80s ... Steve [Courson], Jon [Kolb] and all those guys. They're the ones who kind of started it."


Talk about a tainted dynasty. A bunch of juice monkeys is all they were.

ucantdoitdoggieSTyle2 wrote:Talk about a tainted dynasty. A bunch of juice monkeys is all they were.

That shows how much you know about the Steelers of the 70's. If anything, their linemen were undersized, not oversized. Hasslet is completely full of shit and admitted as much when he immediately backed off his bullshit accusations the second people asked him to back them up. I'll give you that Courson was a juicer. He was also drafted in 1978 and didn't start in either Super Bowl XIII or Super Bowl XIV.

As for Kolb, just look at his fucking picture.



Does it LOOK Like he juiced?

Keep digging asswipe.

Mike Webster was in the same group of dorms as I was as a freshman. That dude almost certainly juiced.

Goober McTuber wrote:Mike Webster was in the same group of dorms as I was as a freshman. That dude almost certainly juiced.

Well there we go. 30+ year old anecdotal evidence. Let's string him up.

That being said, let's put UCant out of his misery and remember that steroids were legal back then. There were no laws against their use or sale and the NFL did not bar players from using steroids. If you don't think there were guys on every NFL team who were juicing, you're being pretty fucking naive. What changed between the mid and late 70's and the late 80's were the diet and workout programs the players were using. Because, as you should know, steroids by themselves do not add muscle mass. They simply optimize the conditions by which mass can be added by allowing the muscle to heal faster.

In contrast, what the Patriots did was very clearly against the rules of the NFL. The Pats taping program was long running, done with full knowledge of the rules against it, and was clearly meant to gain an unfair advantage over their opponents. Comparing what the Asterisks did to some rumors about what Steelers players 30 years ago MIGHT have done is just plain dumb.

BSmack wrote:That being said, let's put UCant out of his misery and remember that steroids were legal back then.

Put me out of my misery? You're the one still obsessed with this topic. You're the one still out there defending your team and dropping my name in posts and other threads where I am not even participating in. Keep on keeping on, cunt. I expect 20 more posts from you by the end of the day spread out over 3-4 forums in numerous threads that I won't be posting in. Make sure you get the last word... times 5... and surely you'll win the argument. Right?

Way to man up by making lame excuses for the loss, btw... I look forward to reading much more of your tripe this season as the losses mount for your pedestrian team.

ucantdoitdoggieSTyle2 wrote:Way to man up by making lame excuses for the loss, btw... I look forward to reading much more of your tripe this season as the losses mount for your pedestrian team.

What excuses? The Steelers threw away a perfectly good chance for a win with stupid penalties and unforced turnovers. I gave the Cards credit for doing what they had to do to get the win. What more do you want?

BSmack wrote:

Goober McTuber wrote:Mike Webster was in the same group of dorms as I was as a freshman. That dude almost certainly juiced.

Well there we go. 30+ year old anecdotal evidence. Let's string him up.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=1972286

Webster also began to display the effects of anabolic steroids -- which had yet to be banned by the NFL -- including the acne, the radical mood swings, the thinning hair. Later, he would matter-of-factly tell a physician, Charles Cobb, that he had experimented with steroids in his 20s. He and teammates Jon Kolb, Steve Courson and Steve Furness were the core of a group that slammed the iron with abandon in the basement of the Red Bull Inn in nearby McMurray. Although Webster publicly denied it, steroid references can be found several times in his voluminous medical records.

Goober McTuber wrote:...which had yet to be banned by the NFL

Or the United States of America.

So again, where was he cheating?

Webster also suffered from a list of mental disorders so severe that even RtS would have stopped calling him. Which ones were steroid related and which ones were the results of faulty genetics and having his head beat on for 16 years is pure speculation.

BSmack wrote:

Goober McTuber wrote:...which had yet to be banned by the NFL

Or the United States of America.

So again, where was he cheating?

Webster also suffered from a list of mental disorders so severe that even RtS would have stopped calling him. Which ones were steroid related and which ones were the results of faulty genetics and having his head beat on for 16 years is pure speculation.

I never said he was cheating, just that he was juicing. You questioned whether that was true. There’s all kinds of evidence out there that he was. I never said anything about his later medical records, I just quoted the part of the article I thought germane to our discussion.

If I didn’t know better, I might think you were flailing.

Goober McTuber wrote:I never said he was cheating, just that he was juicing. You questioned whether that was true. There’s all kinds of evidence out there that he was. I never said anything about his later medical records, I just quoted the part of the article I thought germane to our discussion.

The god damn Germans got nothin' to do with it!

If I didn’t know better, I might think you were flailing.

Of course not. And if I didn't know better I might think you were chiming in to support UCant's assertion that the 70's Steelers cheated.

Now that the mutual bullshit is over, WHERE ARE YOU, YOU SOMBITCH?

BSmack wrote:to support UCant's assertion that the 70's Steelers cheated.

LINK?


I believe all I said was they were a bunch of juice monkeys and their Super Bowl wins were tainted because of it.


Seriously... can you read?

ucantdoitdoggieSTyle2 wrote:

BSmack wrote:to support UCant's assertion that the 70's Steelers cheated.

LINK?

I believe all I said was they were a bunch of juice monkeys and their Super Bowl wins were tainted because of it.

Seriously... can you read?

Oh, that's right. It's the Asterisks who cheated.

Thanks for reminding me.

As for the 70's Steelers, you can't be "tainted" for using a product that is allowed by your league and was perfectly legal for Americans to use.

Well, unless you're a complete dumbfuck.

BSmack wrote:As for the 70's Steelers, you can't be "tainted" for using a product that is allowed by your league.

So... Bonds, McGwire, Sosa, et al didn't didn't taint the game either. Good to know...

ucantdoitdoggieSTyle2 wrote:

BSmack wrote:As for the 70's Steelers, you can't be "tainted" for using a product that is allowed by your league.

So... Bonds, McGwire, Sosa, et al didn't didn't taint the game either. Good to know...

What is it about the words "legal at the time" that you do not understand? Do players taking vitamins "taint" the game? No, because there is nothing illegal or against the rules aboutvitamins. The same logic applies to steroids in the NFL in the 60's, 70's and 80's. You can't be "tainted" for doing something that was not a crime.

On the other hand, the Asterisks most definitely are tainted. Just deal with it.

BSmack wrote:You can't be "tainted" for doing something that was not a crime.

On the other hand, the Asterisks most definitely are tainted. Just deal with it.

Whether it's a crime or not is immaterial. The Stealers were ahead of their time in the area of chemical enhancements and stole 4 Super Bowls based largely upon the advantages they had over less equipped teams. The NFL adopted a steroid policy before they were even deemed illegal in the US because of the unfair advantage Pittburgh had over the rest of the league. They are tainted. Why? Because I said so. Just like your unconfirmed assertions that New England broke any rules during any of their Super Bowl seasons. Until you can offer up any hard evidence to support your claim, you can kindly go fuck yourself.


Futhermore, this whole SpyGate thing is a crock of shit anyways. If these sideline videotapes were so instrumental in their success, then how come they're blowing the fuck out every God damned team they face? 4-0 record and 30+ pts every fucking game out front should have told you it's bogus.

ucantdoitdoggieSTyle2 wrote:Whether it's a crime or not is immaterial. The Stealers were ahead of their time in the area of chemical enhancements and stole 4 Super Bowls based largely upon the advantages they had over less equipped teams. The NFL adopted a steroid policy before they were even deemed illegal in the US because of the unfair advantage Pittburgh had over the rest of the league.

From the same article you cited earlier.

Jim Haslett wrote:Haslett estimated half the league's players, and all its linemen, took steroids in the 1980s before they were banned by the league.

So half the players in the league played for Pittsburgh?

Seriously, when you get done digging, say hello to the Chinese dude on the other side.