TradeTheBeal! Posted March 5, 2006 Share Posted March 5, 2006 Well based upon this logic maybe the Redskins will be superior to a team like the Cleveland Browns someday! 'Skins all time records against the powerhouse Browns? 9-33-1 The post was designed to point out, simply, that the Eagles have no real tradition of excellence or achievement. Their record against the cardinals (53-53-5) is meaningful in this context because the teams played in the same division for many years and the home/away breakdown is probably very close to 50/50. So, to reiterate, the NFL franchise the Eagles most closely resemble in terms of their overall position in the hierarchy of NFL history is the St. Louis/Arizona Cardinals. I would give the Eagles a very slight edge because they've been better recently but, naturally, havent really broken through in terms of championships or sustained excellence and, as is the case with the Cards, there is really no evidence to suggest a change in the near future. Other qualities both organizations possess would include a shared and well-deserved reputation of ownership apathy and greed, a fanbase whose fractured relationship with the team manifests itself as indifference (cards), capricious violence (eagles) and utter denial (both), and the sad fact that both organizations, deluded by misery and justified self-loathing, convinced themselves that the spectacularly incompetent Buddy Ryan was their savior. Lastly, I really just wanted to help Eagle fans see who they truly are...the misguided and petulant supporters of a team known overwhelmingly for its crushing failures and incompetence, just like cardinal fans. In fact, the official forum of the Cardinals is certainly a place where Eagles posts can be appreciated and valued - An Island of Broken Toys, if you will. So take flight and let the healing begin!! With Sympathy, Mike Boyd - Redskin season ticket holder since 1965 Did I mention that neither have any SB wins? The Browns also have zero. And the Redskins have 3 which is more than enough to offset the lifetime losing % they may have against any particular team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westbrook36 Posted March 5, 2006 Share Posted March 5, 2006 11. Please do not use the “Quote” feature to quote huge blocks of text or pictures. If you would like to respond to the contents of a particular post, simply quote the sentence or idea that you're commenting upon, not necessarily the entire post. It wastes space on the database and unnecessarily extends and clutters threads. Wow, you are an amazing man. You are old, yet you don't recognize any championships other than Superbowls? How lame is that? You do know the Eagles have several NFL championships. Only team to beat Lombardi in the championship game. For you to say the Eagles have no tradition of excellence is about as foolish a statement as I have ever read on this forum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lil Kenzo Posted March 5, 2006 Share Posted March 5, 2006 Wow, you are an amazing man. You are old, yet you don't recognize any championships other than Superbowls? How lame is that? You do know the Eagles have several NFL championships. Only team to beat Lombardi in the championship game.For you to say the Eagles have no tradition of excellence is about as foolish a statement as I have ever read on this forum. I don't mean to rain on your parade...but no buddy really cares about NFC or AFC championships. This is a new day. What happened in the past, stays in the past. The Eagles have never won a Super Bowl. Plain and simple. The skins have won 3 and the boys' have won 5. The Eagles can say that they have won all the Conference championships that they want. But in the end, all that anybody remembers is the super bowls. It feels so good to know that we have won 3 super bowls compared to the Eagles 0. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Weirdo Posted March 5, 2006 Share Posted March 5, 2006 I don't mean to rain on your parade...but no buddy really cares about NFC or AFC championships. This is a new day. What happened in the past, stays in the past. The Eagles have never won a Super Bowl. Plain and simple. The skins have won 3 and the boys' have won 5. The Eagles can say that they have won all the Conference championships that they want. But in the end, all that anybody remembers is the super bowls. It feels so good to know that we have won 3 super bowls compared to the Eagles 0. Read WB's post again. He didn't say anything about NFC Championship games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lil Kenzo Posted March 5, 2006 Share Posted March 5, 2006 Read WB's post again. He didn't say anything about NFC Championship games. Conference Championships or NFL championships...doesn't matter. How many Super Bowls.....ZERO! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Weirdo Posted March 5, 2006 Share Posted March 5, 2006 Conference Championships or NFL championships...doesn't matter. How many Super Bowls.....ZERO! So I guess the Redskin's NFL Championships in 1937 and 1942 don't matter either? Since when did it become okay to completely disregard history? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westbrook36 Posted March 5, 2006 Share Posted March 5, 2006 Conference Championships or NFL championships...doesn't matter. How many Super Bowls.....ZERO! You are just a young buck so I'll educate rather than embarrass. Before the Superbowl, they used the same exact method to determine the champion of the NFL. Sure it didn't have the glossy name of "Superbowl", but there was a champion determined at the end of the year. The Eagles won 3 championships. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TradeTheBeal! Posted March 5, 2006 Author Share Posted March 5, 2006 Fair enough. League, not conference, championships from 1920 - 2005: http://football.about.com/od/nflhistory/a/nflchampions.htm Cards - 3 Browns - 3 Eagles - 3 Redskins - 5 How come no one ever gives the Cards props for their 1921 title when they were known as the Chicago Staleys? It's a shame! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elkabong82 Posted March 5, 2006 Share Posted March 5, 2006 Back in the championship days there were two leagues that were separate from each other. There was less competition then. If you really are going to compare franchises, it is probably best to keep the teams in a context still measurable to today's team. The best way is to count it from 1970, when the afl and nfl officially merged (the season of the fifth superbowl), although you could technically count the first four. Since there are no more multiple leagues, that is when you should start the comparisons. Besides, football was very different back then compared to today. Either way, the Eagles have had just as many bad seasons as good. I still would have to give them the edge since they have been to two more bowls than the cards. However, amongst the redskins, cowgirls, and gnats franchises, the Eagles come in dead last. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Weirdo Posted March 5, 2006 Share Posted March 5, 2006 Fair enough. League, not conference, championships from 1920 - 2005:http://football.about.com/od/nflhistory/a/nflchampions.htm Cards - 3 Browns - 3 Eagles - 3 Redskins - 5 How come no one ever gives the Cards props for their 1921 title when they were known as the Chicago Staleys? It's a shame! At least you're acknowledging history. I can accept this post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.