Are you a dynasty if you go 9 straight yrs w/o a championshi

ctown28
Sophomore

@ctown28
Posts: 507
Likes: 391

Are you a dynasty if you go 9 straight yrs w/o a championshi Mar 18, 2017 21:43:52 GMT shadyvsesham likes this

Quote

Post by ctown28 on Mar 18, 2017 21:43:52 GMT

yet, no other team back then or now has ever been able to have 20 straight winning seasons like the Cowboys did. A winning record every year for 2 whole decades.

Give it a few years, the Patriots are about to do just that. What is it now 16 years with a winning record?

No, that's like saying Lance Armstrong won every Tour de France race legit. The Patriots first 4 Super Bowl wins are tainted by cheating from SpyGate and DeflateGate and are no more legitimate wins than Lance Armstrong's 7 Tour de France wins or Rosie Ruiz' Boston Marathon win.

You know it's the strangest thing. I just went and looked up Tour de France wins and Lance Armstron isn't listed as the winner and I looked up Rosie Ruiz nd she does not have any Boston Marathon wins. When I looked up SuperBowl wins I saw the Patriots listed 5 times and get this, with no asterisks

Yes, we do know what would've happened. If referee Walt Coleman hadn't blown that call, then the Raiders get the ball with a 3-point lead. The Raiders kneel down and the Patriots don't have enough time outs to keep the clock from running out. The Raiders win that game and go to the AFC Championship Game. The Patriots lose and their season is over.

And you know this how? Did you use your magic time machine that told you Steve Young would be a HoF fame QB when he played his first game for the 49ers? How do you know the Raiders wouldn't have fumbled the snap?

OrsonSwelles
Junior Member

IMDb member March 30 1999

@orsonswelles
Posts: 3,200
Likes: 1,830

Are you a dynasty if you go 9 straight yrs w/o a championshi Mar 18, 2017 21:54:58 GMT marsexplorer likes this

Quote

Post by OrsonSwelles on Mar 18, 2017 21:54:58 GMT

Obviously you have to win at least 2 championships in a row to be considered a dynasty no questions asked. Winning at least 2 but not in a row depends on other factors. How many were won? How close to winning in non-champion years? How many years without winning? How good were the regular seasons? Were there other teams with similar winning resumes?

For me, I'd say NE is in their second dynasty. No way can 9 years without a win make this a continuation of their first dynasty.

J: You still eating? K: I'm still hungry. (CK 1941)
T: You should lay off those candy bars. (TOE 1958)

DC-Fan
Elite Member

@dcfan
Posts: 10,412
Likes: 4,569

Are you a dynasty if you go 9 straight yrs w/o a championshi Mar 19, 2017 0:12:29 GMT

Quote

Post by DC-Fan on Mar 19, 2017 0:12:29 GMT

Mar 18, 2017 21:54:58 GMT OrsonSwelles said:

Obviously you have to win at least 2 championships in a row to be considered a dynasty no questions asked.

No way can 9 years without a win make this a continuation of their first dynasty.

Agreed. Doesn't matter if this is a different era. The definition of dynasty has been around for a long time and has never changed. And there is no definition of dynasty that includes going 9 straight years without a championship.

Last Edit: Mar 20, 2017 0:03:47 GMT by DC-Fan

www.youtube.com/watch?v=mD0vARpus-g

ctown28
Sophomore

@ctown28
Posts: 507
Likes: 391

Are you a dynasty if you go 9 straight yrs w/o a championshi Mar 19, 2017 0:31:51 GMT shadyvsesham likes this

Quote

Post by ctown28 on Mar 19, 2017 0:31:51 GMT

Mar 19, 2017 0:12:29 GMT DC-Fan said:

Mar 18, 2017 21:54:58 GMT OrsonSwelles said:

Obviously you have to win at least 2 championships in a row to be considered a dynasty no questions asked. Winning at least 2 but not in a row depends on other factors. How many were won? How close to winning in non-champion years? How many years without winning? How good were the regular seasons? Were there other teams with similar winning resumes?

For me, I'd say NE is in their second dynasty. No way can 9 years without a win make this a continuation of their first dynasty.

Agreed. Doesn't matter if this is a different era. The definition of dynasty has been around for a long time and has never changed. And there is no definition of dynasty that includes going 9 straight years without a championship.

Wow, so you are agreeing that the Patriots are on their 2nd Dynasty of the 21st century. I didn't think you had it in you to give them credit for anything.

DC-Fan
Elite Member

@dcfan
Posts: 10,412
Likes: 4,569

Are you a dynasty if you go 9 straight yrs w/o a championshi Mar 19, 2017 1:39:36 GMT

Quote

Post by DC-Fan on Mar 19, 2017 1:39:36 GMT

Mar 19, 2017 0:31:51 GMT ctown28 said:

Mar 19, 2017 0:12:29 GMT DC-Fan said:

Agreed. Doesn't matter if this is a different era. The definition of dynasty has been around for a long time and has never changed. And there is no definition of dynasty that includes going 9 straight years without a championship.

Wow, so you are agreeing that the Patriots are on their 2nd Dynasty of the 21st century. I didn't think you had it in you to give them credit for anything.

No, I'm agreeing that the 2014 and 2016 Patriots aren't part of any dynasty. They're not part of the 2001, 2003, and 2004 teams because you can't be part of a dynasty when you go 9 straight years without a championship.

As for whether winning 2 championships in 3 years makes a dynasty, I would lean towards No. To be a dynasty, you not only have to win multiple championships but you have to win at least 2 championships in consecutive years. The Packers did that. The Steelers did that. The 49ers did that. The Cowboys did that. The Broncos did that.

A dynasty is like a hitting streak in baseball. It has to include championships in consecutive years to be considered a dynasty. Teams like the Raiders and Joe Gibbs' Redskins each won 3 Super Bowls in 8 years, but never back-to-back so they've not mentioned among the great dynasties like the 60s Packers, the 70s Steelers, the 80s 49ers, and the 90s Cowboys.

But the discussion is moot anyway since the Patriots first 4 Super Bowl wins are tainted by cheating and have asterisks. So the Patriots hav only 1 legitimate Super Bowl win (and that may still be proven to be not legitimate; it took 6 years to uncover the cheating from SpyGate so it's possible and likely that the Patriots cheated for their 5th Super Bowl win as well but the cheating just hasn't been uncovered yet).

Last Edit: Mar 19, 2017 17:20:50 GMT by DC-Fan

www.youtube.com/watch?v=mD0vARpus-g

ctown28
Sophomore

@ctown28
Posts: 507
Likes: 391

Are you a dynasty if you go 9 straight yrs w/o a championshi Mar 19, 2017 6:13:22 GMT

Quote

Post by ctown28 on Mar 19, 2017 6:13:22 GMT

Mar 19, 2017 1:39:36 GMT DC-Fan said:

Mar 19, 2017 0:31:51 GMT ctown28 said:

Wow, so you are agreeing that the Patriots are on their 2nd Dynasty of the 21st century. I didn't think you had it in you to give them credit for anything.

No, I'm agreeing that the 2014 and 2016 Patriots aren't part of any dynasty. They're not part of the 2001, 2003, and 2004 teams because you can't be part of a dynasty when you go 9 straight years without a championship.

As for whether winning 2 championships in 3 years makes a dynasty, I would lean towards No. To be a dynasty, you not only have to win multiple championships but you have to win at least 2 back-to-back championships. The Packers did that. The Steelers did that. The 49ers did that. The Cowboys did that. The Broncos did that.

A dynasty is like a hitting streak in baseball. It has to include championships in consecutive years to be considered a dynasty. Teams like the Raiders and Joe Gibbs' Redskins each won 3 Super Bowls in 8 years, but never back-to-back so they've not mentioned among the great dynasties like the 60s Packers, the 70s Steelers, the 80s 49ers, and the 90s Cowboys.

But the discussion is moot anyway since the Patriots first 4 Super Bowl wins are tainted by cheating and have asterisks. So the Patriots hav only 1 legitimate Super Bowl win (and that may still be proven to be not legitimate; it took 6 years to uncover the cheating from SpyGate so it's possible and likely that the Patriots cheated for their 5th Super Bowl win as well but the cheating just hasn't been uncovered yet).

You quoted a post stating the Patriots are on their second dynasty and said you agree.

Oh, as far as winning back to back championships twice, only the steelers have done it twice. The others have done it once.

shadyvsesham
Revered Member

@shadyvsesham
Posts: 27,824
Likes: 20,225

Are you a dynasty if you go 9 straight yrs w/o a championshi Mar 19, 2017 9:08:25 GMT

Quote

Post by shadyvsesham on Mar 19, 2017 9:08:25 GMT

0-16 has only happened once in NFL history. But the Dolphins went 1-15 in 2007. And the Jets went 4-12 while the Bills went 7-9 that year. So the Bills, Dolphins, and Jets combined to go 12-36 in 2007. So the year the Patriots went 16*-0, they had 6 games against 3 teams that combined to go 12-36.

And they all started with a 0-6 record, so lets minus 6 off those loses. Now it's 12-30, and, bad seasons happen? Youre grasping for any reason to dislike the NE Pats. Youre obviously angry and bitter, and dude I get it. You are a cowboys fan. You arent the "it" team anymore, NE has passed you by.

That's why the Patriots win so many games each year. Because they have pathetic teams like the Bills, Dolphins, and Jets in their division.

Yea, that's it because every year they suck. Seriously, no, again Jets made the playoffs a few times, Miami has as well, the Bills have been in a blah place lately. Again, idc who is in your division, it's hard to win as many titles as they are. They arent even the worse division, if you wanna get in the worse divisions in football we can, you wont win.

The Cowboys had a winning record every year for 20 straight seasons. Tell me, how many of those Cowboys players do you think were on the team for 20 straight seasons?

First, idgaf about the Cowboys, when did this happen, what were the years. My guess, they kept their key pieces. What years did this happen?

My guess would be ZERO. The Cowboys lost players over those 20 straight years, but the Cowboys continued to have a winning record every year over those 20 straight years.

Again, when was this.

And yet, no other team back then or now has ever been able to have 20 straight winning seasons like the Cowboys did. A winning record every year for 2 whole decades.

And how many titles have NE won, youre playing tit for tat here. This is your issue, youre a Cowboys fan, and as much as you hate NE fans, understand, people think Cowboys fans are just about as annoying.
You talk about chokes....Dallas had the same record as NE..who got bounced out of the first round by a sub par defense? You guys couldnt make it out of round 1....so if you wanna talk about chokes, you lose to a team in GB with a sub par defense.
Not only that, you didnt even lose to your conference champs, Atlanta smacked them around. Nothing new, that's what Dallas does now.

No, it wasn't a witchhunt. Are you claiming that Professor Marlow (the most respected physicist in the world today and the most qualified physicist in the world to speak on the science of DeflateGate) and Judge Chin (an unbiased federal appellate court judge who has no affiliation with the NFL and who took an oath to review evidence objectively and without bias) both conspired to participate in a witchhunt against Brady?

Yes *And no, Marlow isnt the most respected physician, who cares.

Now that's ridiculous. Like I said, 3 independent and unbiased sources confirmed that Brady was guilty of cheating.

Ted Wells wasnt independent, sorry.
profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/08/09/nfl-hasnt-admitted-that-ted-wells-wasnt-independent-but-that-doesnt-matter/

Now Marlow:

I explained the problem in greater detail. Although his manner seemed hostile to such a possibility that he might have missed something, he did ask me to send him an email explaining the problem.

betterdialogue.com/marlow/

He seems like a hostile pr*ck, I bet you can I find 50x more respectable physicians.

Yes, this was the dumbest witch hunt I ever seen. Brady even jokingly talked about balls, we had to listen on ESPN about fn balls for what, months. The fruitest nutcake crap Ive ever seen.

Incompetent Berman was overturned by a higher court so what incompetent Berman says doesn't matter. It's been proven that Berman was incompetent and didn't understand the case, which is why Berman got slapped down by the higher court.

Yes, when someone doesnt agree with you, theyre incompetent.

Nothing that this Naughton says contradicts what Professor Marlow said. Professor Marlow didn't say that weather didn't play a role in the deflation of the footballs. Professor Marlow said that weather didn't play the ONLY role in the deflation of the footballs. Professor Marlow said that weather AND human tampering both played a role in the deflation of the footballs.

And? Here is a hint, professors arent 100 percent right.

Professor Marlow isn't just any Professor. Professor Marlow was also Chairman of the Department of Physics at Princeton University, where Albert Einstein was a resident scholar. So the highly-respected Ivy League university where Albert Einstein (the most brilliant physicist in history) was a resident scholar made Professor Marlow the Chairman of their Department of Physics.

LMAO because Einstein went to Princeton, it makes him, Marlow, also respected, roflmao, what!?

Einstein wasn't just any physicist. Einsteain was the most brilliant physicist in history. Likewise, Professor Marlow isn't just any Professor. Professor Marlow is the most respected physicist in the world today and the most qualified physicist in the world to speak on the science of DeflateGate.

No, he isnt, he is just a physicist, that's it, comparing him to Einstein is wow, like Im trying not to laugh. Ok, well, people say Joe Montana is the best QB ever (He is 2nd now to Brady, ouch right) but lets go with Montana. Well, you gotta respect Jimmy Clausen and Brady Quinn, they also went to Notre Dame.

It is't goofy. You clearly realize that your argument was dumb so now you're trying to claim that the comparison is invalid. But it's a compltely valid and legitimate comparison. In both cases, an athlete attempted to cheat and got caught cheating.

No, it is irrelevant, notice most people here are basically messing with you? You clearly realize you got nothing and are comparing apples to oranges, has no valid and isnt a legitimate comparison, you can say it is all day, it isnt, which is why now most comments are basically now laughing at you bro.

At least the first 4 are tainted by cheating and have asterisks.

Lets check wikipedia super bowl history.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Super_Bowl_champions

Scream asterisks all day, they got not a 1. Sorry, it's the truth, you can make believe though. Whatever helps you sleep at night.

SpyGate and DeflateGate have already changed that. Just like Shoeless Joe Jackson will always be associated with the Black Sox Scandal, Brady will always be known for cheating with SpyGate and DeflateGate.

And Jackson had how many titles? NE has 5, no asterisks, sorry.

No, that's like saying Lance Armstrong won every Tour de France race legit. The Patriots first 4 Super Bowl wins are tainted by cheating from SpyGate and DeflateGate and are no more legitimate wins than Lance Armstrong's 7 Tour de France wins or Rosie Ruiz' Boston Marathon win.

Yet, Brady has 5 rings and not one thing has been over-turned like Bush and the USC. 5 titles, history will show it and there is nothing you can do about it.

I started hating them in 2007 after it was discovered that they had been nothing but cheaters and frauds, like Ben Johnson was.

Have fun with that.

And in 2007, we found out the reason why they won. Because they had been cheating for 6+ seasons with SpyGate. Then in 2014, Brady got caught cheating again.

But he didnt, he wanted to keep fighting the NFL, he finally said F It. Sorry, 5 titles, like it or not. (I bet youd love Dallas to cheat so you guys can be relevant. Youll deny, we know the truth)

DeflateGate is legit. 3 independent and unbiased sources confirmed that the evidence proves that Brady cheated.

No it's a joke.

The courts exist to protect the innocent. No U.S. federal appellate court would ever uphold the punishment for a defendant unless the court believed that defendant was guilty. And in DeflateGate, the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals upheld (not just upheld but overturned a lower court ruling) Brady's punishment because the evidence proved that Brady was guilty of the violatons that he had been charged with.

Whatever helps you sleep at night, it's hard to take this serious.

Again, that's completely irrelevant. You're trying to use the 2nd half of the DeflateGate game to suggest how the 1st half would've played out. That's invalid.

HHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAAHHHA

What happened in the 1st half of this year's Super Bowl vs the 2nd half of this years Super Bowl? What happened in the 1st half of the 49ers-Patriots game in 2012 vs the 2nd half?

LMAO, bait and switch. No deflated balls, howd NE do...uh oh.

Well, in both games, the Patriots played horrible in the 1st half and then played better in the 2nd half. Against the Falcons, the Patriots came back to win (with some help from the refs missing an obvious facemask penalty against the Patriots that would've given the Falcons a chance to kick a game-clinching FG late in the 4th quarter). Against the 49ers, the Patriots comeback fell short and the Patriots lost.

5 rings.

So just because a team played well in the 2nd half doesn't mean that they would've played just as well in the 1st half. If the Patriots had used regular-sized footballs in the 1st half, then maybe the Colts would've blown out the Patriots in the 1st half (like the 49ers did in 2012 and the Falcons did in the Super Bowl) and taken a 30+ point at halftime.

Right, NE made the best comeback in a superbowl ever, and got their 5th ring, and have a nice shot to get a 6th (Unlike Dallas)

But since the Patriots used deflated footballs in the 1st half, that gave the Patriots an advantage in the 1st half and allowed the Patriots to get a double-digit halftime lead, instead of the Colts possibly having a 30+ point halftime lead.

Yea, wasnt gonna happen.

The Patriots are the best only when it comes to cheating. Without cheating, they're not the best.

NE > Dallas

Brady's pass that was tipped straight into the air and should've been intercepted but was caught by Bennett who was lucky to be standing right where the tipped ball came down and also Brady's pass that was tipped and should've been intercepted but was caught by Edelman in this year's Super Bowl were both more lucky passes than Eli's pass.

Nope

Yes, we do know what would've happened. If referee Walt Coleman hadn't blown that call, then the Raiders get the ball with a 3-point lead. The Raiders kneel down and the Patriots don't have enough time outs to keep the clock from running out. The Raiders win that game and go to the AFC Championship Game. The Patriots lose and their season is over.

5 rings

If Pete Carroll gives the ball to Marshawn Lynch at the 1-yard line, the Patriots lose that Super Bowl.

Nope, Lynch wasnt beast mode at goal line.

Of course, any receiver is going to say that rather than throw his QB under the bus for throwing an inaccurate pass. It's only Brady who allowed his wife to publicly throw Welker and the rest of the Patriots receivers under the bus. Whats more, Brady didn't want to seem like he was the 1 who was throwing them udner the bus so Brady had his wife publicly throw them under the bus so that he could pretend to be the good guy.

5 rings

Yet Brady never came forward and said "I apologize to Welker and my teammates for my wife's comments. She's a very passionate person and she misspoke in the heat of the moment." Instead, Brady just silently approved of dumb Gisele throwing Welker and the rest of the Patriots receivers under the bus for his inaccurate passes.

Wife, who you live with > A player that screw you out of a 6th ring. Lets see....my wife I live with, I make love to my wife, I love my wife or some guy who couldnt make a catch.
I pick my wife.

Welker isn't the 1 who proclaimed to be "the greatest receiver ever". Brady was the 1 who proclaimed before the game to be "the greatest QB ever". When you proclaim to be the greatest QB ever and you have a wide-open receiver sprinting towards the end zone in the 4th quarter of the Super Bowl, the your pass should be in front of the receiver so that the receiver can catch the pass in stride without slowing down or turning his body or leaping in the air (like Eli's perfectly-placed pass to Manningham). Your pass shouldnt be so far behind the wide-open receiver that he has to slow down and spin his body 180 degrees from the direction he's sprinting and leap high in the air and try to make an acrobatic catch.

You think other great QBs havent missed passes? Seriously?

That pass to a wide-open Welker sprinting towards the end zone with no defender within 10 yards of Welker was an easy pass that any high school QB could've made. If you proclaim to be the "greatest QB ever" and you can't even make an accurate throw on such an easy pass, that's a BIG-TIME, EPIC choke!

Kind of how Dallas couldnt make it out the first round.

This from the same idiot who claimed Dak would be the first rookie to ever win a SuperBowl. How did that work out for you? Kind of hard for a player to win a SuperBowl when he's nevereven won a single playoff game!

Daks already 0-1, gl catching Brady's playoff record. LMAO, Dallas will win this years, I hope they make the superbowl (They might not even make the playoffs with what the NYG have done) and Brady will get....his 6th. Against Dallas...cake.

You quoted a post stating the Patriots are on their second dynasty and said you agree.

Oh, as far as winning back to back championships twice, only the steelers have done it twice. The others have done it once.

So this is what it's come to, silly "well 2nd dynasty." Cool, fine, 2nd dynasty, this is what youre doing, semantics, fine, 2nd dynasty, who cares. In the end theyre a fn dynasty of this time period.

Ctown Im with you man. (Loved your post on no Armstrong or Rosie, checkmate, I didnt even think to look that up, gold bro)

Last Edit: Mar 19, 2017 9:14:49 GMT by shadyvsesham

DC-Fan
Elite Member

@dcfan
Posts: 10,412
Likes: 4,569

Are you a dynasty if you go 9 straight yrs w/o a championshi Mar 19, 2017 17:49:12 GMT

Quote

Post by DC-Fan on Mar 19, 2017 17:49:12 GMT

Mar 19, 2017 9:08:25 GMT shadyvsesham said:

lets minus 6 off those loses. Now it's 12-30

12-30 is pretty bad so you've just confirmed my point that the Patriots win their division because they have no real competition in their division every year.

Mar 19, 2017 9:08:25 GMT shadyvsesham said:

My guess, they kept their key pieces.

So your guess is that the Cowboys kept the exact same players for 20 straight years?

Nobody has the exact same players for 20 straight years. The Cowboys lost plenty of players over those 20 straight years, but the Cowboys still had a winning record every year over those 20 straight years.

Mar 19, 2017 9:08:25 GMT shadyvsesham said:

when was this.

WEAK ARGUMENT! Over 20 other teams played in that same era, but no other team in that same era was able to have 20 straight winning seasons like the Cowboys did. In fact, no other team in this era or any other era has been able to have 20 straight winning seasons like the Cowboys did. The Cowboys NFL-record 20 straight winning seasons is the standard of continued excellence over a long period in the NFL, just like DiMaggio's 56-game hitting streak is the standard of continued excellenece over a long period in MLB.

Mar 19, 2017 9:08:25 GMT shadyvsesham said:

how many titles have NE won

4 by cheating. And 1 in which cheating hasn't been uncovered so far, but it took 6+ seasons to uncover the cheating in SpyGate so the 1 title may have also been won by cheating but the cheating hasn't been uncovered yet.

Mar 19, 2017 9:08:25 GMT shadyvsesham said:

Marlow isnt the most respected physician

1st, Professor Marlow isn't a physician. Professor Marlow is a physicist.

2nd, Professor Marlow was Chairman of the Department of Physics at Princeton University, where Albert Einstein was a resident scholar. When the highly-respected Ivy League University that the most brilliant physicist in history was a resident scholar of makes someone the head of their Department of Physics, that person is clearly the most respected physicist in the world.

And the most respected physicist in the world confirmed that the deflation in the Patriots footballs was caused by both weather AND human tampering.

Mar 19, 2017 9:08:25 GMT shadyvsesham said:

Yes, when someone doesnt agree with you, theyre incompetent.

It's not me who's saying that Berman is incompetent. The 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals said that Berman is incompetent by slappeing down Berman and overturning his incorrect decision.

Mar 19, 2017 9:08:25 GMT shadyvsesham said:

5 rings

At least 4 by cheating. And 1 in which cheating hasn't been uncovered so far, but it took 6+ seasons to uncover the cheating in SpyGate so the 1 title may have also been won by cheating but the cheating hasn't been uncovered yet.

Last Edit: Mar 19, 2017 17:51:05 GMT by DC-Fan

www.youtube.com/watch?v=mD0vARpus-g

shadyvsesham
Revered Member

@shadyvsesham
Posts: 27,824
Likes: 20,225

Are you a dynasty if you go 9 straight yrs w/o a championshi Mar 19, 2017 18:08:57 GMT

Quote

Post by shadyvsesham on Mar 19, 2017 18:08:57 GMT

12-30 is pretty bad so you've just confirmed my point that the Patriots win their division because they have no real competition in their division every year.

Because of one bad year? Sorry, Jets have been competitive...actually didnt they face off in two titles games? My memory is cloudy...hmm...2 people in the same division facing off for the AFC crown...interesting. Yea, ok

So your guess is that the Cowboys kept the exact same players for 20 straight years?

"key" PIECES
K-E-Y = MAIN cogs. Meaning their best players, not a random CB, a random RB, their 3rd string QB, when I said key pieces I mean their MAIN cogs.

Nobody has the exact same players for 20 straight years. The Cowboys lost plenty of players over those 20 straight years, but the Cowboys still had a winning record every year over those 20 straight years.

And NE is at 16...I believe UH OH. Again, K-E-Y pieces. IDK how that's hard to comprehend.

WEAK ARGUMENT!

What argument, I asked when was this 20 season winning streak, the hell you talking about?

Over 20 other teams played in that same era, but no other team in that same era was able to have 20 straight winning seasons like the Cowboys did.

NE has done 16, theyre getting close buddy. Soon your past will be eaten by NE.

In fact, no other team in this era or any other era has been able to have 20 straight winning seasons like the Cowboys did.

NE at 16.

The Cowboys NFL-record 20 straight winning seasons is the standard of continued excellence over a long period in the NFL, just like DiMaggio's 56-game hitting streak is the standard of continued excellenece over a long period in MLB.

Again, WHEN-WAS-THIS.

4 by cheating

Nope

And 1 in which cheating hasn't been uncovered so far, but it took 6+ seasons to uncover the cheating in SpyGate so the 1 title may have also been won by cheating but the cheating hasn't been uncovered yet.

5 rings, ctown already ate up your Lance Armstrong argument, crushed it.

1st, Professor Marlow isn't a physician. Professor Marlow is a physicist.

2nd, Professor Marlow was Chairman of the Department of Physics at Princeton University, where Albert Einstein was a resident scholar. When the highly-respected Ivy League University that the most brilliant physicist in history was a resident scholar of makes someone the head of their Department of Physics, that person is clearly the most respected physicist in the world.

No it doesnt.

And the most respected physicist in the world confirmed that the deflation in the Patriots footballs was caused by both weather AND human tampering.

It's not me who's saying that Berman is incompetent. The 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals said that Berman is incompetent by slappeing down Berman and overturning his incorrect decision.

Who cares

At least 4 by cheating. And 1 in which cheating hasn't been uncovered so far, but it took 6+ seasons to uncover the cheating in SpyGate so the 1 title may have also been won by cheating but the cheating hasn't been uncovered yet.

5 rings, sorry, again CTown already crushed your asterisk argument.

ctown28
Sophomore

@ctown28
Posts: 507
Likes: 391

Are you a dynasty if you go 9 straight yrs w/o a championshi Mar 19, 2017 23:54:19 GMT shadyvsesham likes this

Quote

Post by ctown28 on Mar 19, 2017 23:54:19 GMT

Mar 19, 2017 18:08:57 GMT shadyvsesham said:

The Cowboys NFL-record 20 straight winning seasons is the standard of continued excellence over a long period in the NFL, just like DiMaggio's 56-game hitting streak is the standard of continued excellenece over a long period in MLB.

Again, WHEN-WAS-THIS.

Since he can't answer, I went and looked it up. The Cowboys 20 consecutive winni g seasons was 1966 - 1985. Know how many SuperBowls/NFL championships they won in that Time? A whopping 2, and those two SuperBowls were 6 years apart. Now the Patriots current 16 year streak resulted in 5 SuperBowls wins. Now even if the Patriots were to break their streak this year, I think most people would take their success over the past 16 years than the success of the Cowboys over their 20 year streak

Last Edit: Mar 19, 2017 23:55:15 GMT by ctown28

DC-Fan
Elite Member

@dcfan
Posts: 10,412
Likes: 4,569

Are you a dynasty if you go 9 straight yrs w/o a championshi Mar 20, 2017 0:22:54 GMT

Quote

Post by DC-Fan on Mar 20, 2017 0:22:54 GMT

Mar 19, 2017 18:08:57 GMT shadyvsesham said:

My memory is cloudy...hmm...2 people in the same division facing off for the AFC crown...interesting. Yea, ok

There hasn't been an AFC Championship Game with 2 AFC East teams facing off since the 1992 season. That's over 25 years ago.

Mar 19, 2017 18:08:57 GMT shadyvsesham said:

"key" PIECES]]
K-E-Y = MAIN cogs. Meaning their best players, not a random CB, a random RB, their 3rd string QB, when I said key pieces I mean their MAIN cogs.

And NO TEAM in NFL history has ever kept their KEY PIECES or MAIN COGS for 20 straight years. The Cowboys DIDN"T keep their key pieces or main cogs for 20 straight years, but the Cowboys still had a winning season every year for 20 straight years.

Mar 19, 2017 18:08:57 GMT shadyvsesham said:

And NE is at 16

NE was at 18*-0. But they couldn't get to 19*-0. So NE at 16 still means nothing because NE still doesn't have 20 and won't get to 20 (just like they couldn't get to 19*-0).

Mar 19, 2017 18:08:57 GMT shadyvsesham said:

What argument, I asked when was this 20 season winning streak, the hell you talking about?

Your WEAK ARGUMENT! The one where you're trying to argue that since the Cowboys had their 20 straight winning seasons in the pre-free agency era, it wasn't hard to do. But I completely destroyed your WEAK ARGUMENT simply by pointing out that there were more than 20 other teams that played in the same pre-free agency ear and none of them were able to have 20 straight winning seasons like the Cowboys did.

In fact, no other team in this era or any other era has been to have 20 straight winning seasons like the Cowboys did. So when it happened is irrelevant because it's damn hard to have 20 straight winning seasons in any era. The Cowboys are the only team to accomplish that in any era.

And just as the NE couldn't match the 1972 Dolphins perfect season, NE won't be able to match the Cowboys' NFL-record 20 straight winning seasons either.

Mar 19, 2017 18:08:57 GMT shadyvsesham said:

NE has done 16, theyre getting close buddy.

NE was at 18*-0. But they couldn't get to 19*-0. So NE at 16 still means nothing because NE still doesn't have 20 and won't get to 20 (just like they couldn't get to 19*-0).

Mar 19, 2017 18:08:57 GMT shadyvsesham said:

Again, WHEN-WAS-THIS.

Again, WEAK ARGUMENT. Since you're clearly slow at getting things, I'll explain it to you again. Your argument that since the Cowboys had their 20 straight winning seasons in the pre-free agency era, it wasn't hard to do is a HUGE FAIL! There were more than 20 other teams that played in the same pre-free agency ear and none of them were able to have 20 straight winning seasons like the Cowboys did.

In fact, no other team in this era or any other era has been to have 20 straight winning seasons like the Cowboys did. So when it happened is irrelevant because it's damn hard to have 20 straight winning seasons in any era. The Cowboys are the only team to accomplish that in any era.

And just as the NE couldn't match the 1972 Dolphins perfect season, NE won't be able to match the Cowboys' NFL-record 20 straight winning seasons either.

Last Edit: Mar 20, 2017 0:24:38 GMT by DC-Fan

www.youtube.com/watch?v=mD0vARpus-g

klawrencio79 Senior Member @klawrencio79 Posts: 9,589 Likes: 13,450	Are you a dynasty if you go 9 straight yrs w/o a championshi Mar 20, 2017 0:25:30 GMT Quote Select Post Deselect Post Link to Post Member Give Gift Back to Top Post by klawrencio79 on Mar 20, 2017 0:25:30 GMT How do you fucking live with yourself? Sweet merciful christ, man.

DC-Fan
Elite Member

@dcfan
Posts: 10,412
Likes: 4,569

Are you a dynasty if you go 9 straight yrs w/o a championshi Mar 20, 2017 2:40:32 GMT

Quote

Post by DC-Fan on Mar 20, 2017 2:40:32 GMT

Mar 19, 2017 23:54:19 GMT ctown28 said:

Mar 19, 2017 18:08:57 GMT shadyvsesham said:

Again, WHEN-WAS-THIS.

Since he can't answer, I went and looked it up. The Cowboys 20 consecutive winni g seasons was 1966 - 1985. Know how many SuperBowls/NFL championships they won in that Time? A whopping 2, and those two SuperBowls were 6 years apart. Now the Patriots current 16 year streak resulted in 5 SuperBowls wins. Now even if the Patriots were to break their streak this year, I think most people would take their success over the past 16 years than the success of the Cowboys over their 20 year streak

LOL!!! You're giving shadyvsesham some competition for dumbest argument.

1st, shadyvsesham (with a name like that, he must be a Shady Brady fanboy) is trying to argue that the Cowboys' 20 straight winning seasons wasn't hard to do since it happened during the pre-free agency period when teams could keep their "key players". But I bet that shadyvsesham can't name a single "key player" that the Cowboys kept for all 20 straight winning seasons. That's because there weren't any.

No team keeps players, whether "key players" or role players for 20 straight winning seasons. The Cowboys lost plenty of "key players" over those 20 straight winning seasons, but the Cowboys kept winning more games than they lost over those 20 straight winning seasons. Moreover, there were over 20 other franchises (including the Patriots) who played in the pre-free agency era. Yet no team other than the Cowboys were able to have 20 straight winning seasons. So contrary to shadyvsesham's BS claims, having 20 straight winning seasons is pretty hard to do (even in the pre-free agency era) since only 1 team (the Cowboys) have ever done it in any era.

2nd, shadvsesham is trying to argue that the Patriots at 16 straight winning seasons are close to the Cowboys record. But dumb Patriots fans should know by now that "close" doesn't count. The Patriots at 18*-0 came close to a perfect season, but couldn't get to 19*-0. So the Patriots at 16 straight winning seasons doesn't mean anything since they won't match the Cowboys' record, especially since Brady won't be playing for another 4 years. Even if Brady plays another 4 years, he'll be nothing more than a scrub (like Steve DeBerg when he was in his 40s) for the last 3 and 1/2 years. And Brady might not even be with the Patriots since Belicheat will replace Brady long before the next 4 years are up.

3rd, you're trying to cherry-pick in your comparison by ignoring the Cowboys history. The Cowboys have 5 (not 2) Super Bowl wins. The Cowboys and Patriots both had their inaugural seasons of pro football in 1960 (the Cowboys in the NFL and the Patriots in the AFL before the merger). So we have an equal number of seasons to compare both teams' histories.

The Cowboys have 5 Super Bowl wins and a pro football record 20 straight winning seasons. The Patriots have 5 Super Bowl wins (at least 4 that we know were won by cheating and 1 that still might have been won by cheating but the cheating hasn't been uncovered yet - remember that it took 6+ seasons to uncover the cheating in SpyGate) and 16 straight winning seasons.

So which is better?

5 legitimate Super Bowl wins (all by double-digit margin of victory) and a pro football record 20 straight winning seasons

OR

5 Super Bowl wins (at least 4 tainted by cheating) and 16 straight winning seasons

Last Edit: Mar 20, 2017 2:43:46 GMT by DC-Fan

www.youtube.com/watch?v=mD0vARpus-g

ctown28
Sophomore

@ctown28
Posts: 507
Likes: 391

Are you a dynasty if you go 9 straight yrs w/o a championshi Mar 20, 2017 5:50:20 GMT

Quote

Post by ctown28 on Mar 20, 2017 5:50:20 GMT

Mar 20, 2017 2:40:32 GMT DC-Fan said:

Mar 19, 2017 23:54:19 GMT ctown28 said:

Since he can't answer, I went and looked it up. The Cowboys 20 consecutive winni g seasons was 1966 - 1985. Know how many SuperBowls/NFL championships they won in that Time? A whopping 2, and those two SuperBowls were 6 years apart. Now the Patriots current 16 year streak resulted in 5 SuperBowls wins. Now even if the Patriots were to break their streak this year, I think most people would take their success over the past 16 years than the success of the Cowboys over their 20 year streak

LOL!!! You're giving shadyvsesham some competition for dumbest argument.

1st, shadyvsesham (with a name like that, he must be a Shady Brady fanboy) is trying to argue that the Cowboys' 20 straight winning seasons wasn't hard to do since it happened during the pre-free agency period when teams could keep their "key players". But I bet that shadyvsesham can't name a single "key player" that the Cowboys kept for all 20 straight winning seasons. That's because there weren't any.

No team keeps players, whether "key players" or role players for 20 straight winning seasons. The Cowboys lost plenty of "key players" over those 20 straight winning seasons, but the Cowboys kept winning more games than they lost over those 20 straight winning seasons. Moreover, there were over 20 other franchises (including the Patriots) who played in the pre-free agency era. Yet no team other than the Cowboys were able to have 20 straight winning seasons. So contrary to shadyvsesham's BS claims, having 20 straight winning seasons is pretty hard to do (even in the pre-free agency era) since only 1 team (the Cowboys) have ever done it in any era.

2nd, shadvsesham is trying to argue that the Patriots at 16 straight winning seasons are close to the Cowboys record. But dumb Patriots fans should know by now that "close" doesn't count. The Patriots at 18*-0 came close to a perfect season, but couldn't get to 19*-0. So the Patriots at 16 straight winning seasons doesn't mean anything since they won't match the Cowboys' record, especially since Brady won't be playing for another 4 years. Even if Brady plays another 4 years, he'll be nothing more than a scrub (like Steve DeBerg when he was in his 40s) for the last 3 and 1/2 years. And Brady might not even be with the Patriots since Belicheat will replace Brady long before the next 4 years are up.

3rd, you're trying to cherry-pick in your comparison by ignoring the Cowboys history. The Cowboys have 5 (not 2) Super Bowl wins. The Cowboys and Patriots both had their inaugural seasons of pro football in 1960 (the Cowboys in the NFL and the Patriots in the AFL before the merger). So we have an equal number of seasons to compare both teams' histories.

The Cowboys have 5 Super Bowl wins and a pro football record 20 straight winning seasons. The Patriots have 5 Super Bowl wins (at least 4 that we know were won by cheating and 1 that still might have been won by cheating but the cheating hasn't been uncovered yet - remember that it took 6+ seasons to uncover the cheating in SpyGate) and 16 straight winning seasons.

So which is better?

5 legitimate Super Bowl wins (all by double-digit margin of victory) and a pro football record 20 straight winning seasons

OR

5 Super Bowl wins (at least 4 tainted by cheating) and 16 straight winning seasons

Are you aware of something called parity that was introduced? Of course no team has the same players for 20 years. A key position leaves, you replace it best you can. Free agency and parits did away with that. If a player retires, that's one thING. How many player did the Cowboys lose to free agency from 66 to 85 as compared to the current Patriots?

As far as your cherry picking claim,you are the one who brought up the 20 year streak, how many championships I those 20 Years? How many in the Patriots 16? No matter how you want to spin it the record books showith exactly zero asterisks for the Patriots.

Why don't you give us another Lance Armstrong or Rosie Ruin reference who aren't mentioned in the record books for the winners?

DC-Fan
Elite Member

@dcfan
Posts: 10,412
Likes: 4,569

Are you a dynasty if you go 9 straight yrs w/o a championshi Mar 20, 2017 7:55:52 GMT

Quote

Post by DC-Fan on Mar 20, 2017 7:55:52 GMT

Mar 20, 2017 5:50:20 GMT ctown28 said:

you are the one who brought up the 20 year streak

Because the NFL-record 20-straight winning seasons is part of the Cowboys' history just like the 5 Super Bowl wins are also part of Cowboys' history. Just like SpyGate and DeflateGate are part of Patriots' history.

Mar 20, 2017 5:50:20 GMT ctown28 said:

the record books showith exactly zero asterisks for the Patriots.

The record books showith exactly zero asterisks for the home run records in MLB. But everyone knows that the home run records were achieved by using steroids. Likewise, the whole country outside New England knows that the Patriots first 3 Super Bowl wins are tainted by cheating with SpyGate and the Patriots 4th Super Bowl win is tainted by cheating with DeflateGate.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=mD0vARpus-g

shadyvsesham
Revered Member

@shadyvsesham
Posts: 27,824
Likes: 20,225

Are you a dynasty if you go 9 straight yrs w/o a championshi Mar 20, 2017 8:36:54 GMT

Quote

Post by shadyvsesham on Mar 20, 2017 8:36:54 GMT

Since he can't answer, I went and looked it up. The Cowboys 20 consecutive winni g seasons was 1966 - 1985. Know how many SuperBowls/NFL championships they won in that Time? A whopping 2, and those two SuperBowls were 6 years apart. Now the Patriots current 16 year streak resulted in 5 SuperBowls wins. Now even if the Patriots were to break their streak this year, I think most people would take their success over the past 16 years than the success of the Cowboys over their 20 year streak

TYVM, my god I asked this bozo like 15x, ty my friend.

2 titles, TWO in this big 20 year streak, you have two titles to show. Isnt that as pathetic as those Atlanta Brave teams who won pennant after pennant (Hey if he can compare dumb sports I can too) and had one title to show.

Congrats, two titles, WHOOOOOOOOOOOO

Now onto Dallas fanboy.

here hasn't been an AFC Championship Game with 2 AFC East teams facing off since the 1992 season. That's over 25 years ago.

Ok, it was the divisional round in 2010, still pretty nice. That be the final 8. (NE Vs NYJ)

And NO TEAM in NFL history has ever kept their KEY PIECES or MAIN COGS for 20 straight years. The Cowboys DIDN"T keep their key pieces or main cogs for 20 straight years, but the Cowboys still had a winning season every year for 20 straight years.

And you have 2 titles to show for it, two. Ill look up the Cowboys roster from 66 to 85, Id have to check the roster, see who stayed that long. Regardless, FA wasnt as big as a deal freom 60s-90s, it wasnt. Players move like hot cakes now, back then so many players did stay with one team, it really wasnt until a guy like Deion came around when he started the whole go team to team, as Jerry M would say, Deion was,"show me the money." There was loyalty back then. Hell name players now - Brady who stayed with one team the entire time? Most of the time, older players had no choice to move, but theyd give them their prime years.

CTown eats up your entire 20 year argument.

Since he can't answer, I went and looked it up. The Cowboys 20 consecutive winning seasons was 1966 - 1985. Know how many SuperBowls/NFL championships they won in that Time? A whopping 2, and those two SuperBowls were 6 years apart. Now the Patriots current 16 year streak resulted in 5 SuperBowls wins. Now even if the Patriots were to break their streak this year, I think most people would take their success over the past 16 years than the success of the Cowboys over their 20 year streak

2 wins avgs to 1 super bowl per 10 years, youre impressed by this? (6 years apart, Im doing the avg, 20 divided by 2). Now I looked up their history from 66 to 85...you made 5 super bowls and cashed the deal in twice!? NE went to 7 and cashed their checks FIVE TIMES. Super bowls from 66-85

1970,* 1971,* 1975,* 1977,* 1978,
71-77 is their title wins, they lost in 71-77-78, and you wanna discuss choking? 20 fn winning seasons, 5 superbowls, 2-3 record for superbowls. Yea, this isnt much to brag about.
In 1970 they lost to Baltimore Colts 16 to 13 (Maybe you shouldnt discuss if Brady could have only scored 14 points, hey, he'd beaten that 1970 Dallas team with a "measly" 14 points)
They cashed the check in 71: 24-3 against Miami
75 lost against Pitt - 21-17 (Great classic superbowl btw, too bad youre on the losing end of this classic)
77 You beat Denver 27-10
78 You lost to PITT AGAIN! 35-31

2 checks cashed, well bravo.
Brady era....7 super bowls, 5 checks cashed. You lose.
What would you rather have...20 winning seasons or 16
BUT in 20 winning seasons you get 5 superbowls and 2 titles, and in the 16 winning season you get 7 superbowls and 5 titles.
Anyone with a half a brain (Even you!) can easily answer this.

NE was at 18*-0. But they couldn't get to 19*-0. So NE at 16 still means nothing because NE still doesn't have 20 and won't get to 20 (just like they couldn't get to 19*-0).

NE IS AT A 16 GAME WINNING STREAK, GET OVER THE 18-0, MEANING 4 MORE GAME WINNING STREAK, they caught your Cowboys, this year we can chalk up most likely...uh oh, 3 more. (And they could even win another title or two).
Hey, yea they messed up the perfect 19-0, yes, still got
5 titles > 2 titles (TY Ctown, youre gold man)

shadyvsesham Avatar

Your WEAK ARGUMENT! The one where you're trying to argue that since the Cowboys had their 20 straight winning seasons in the pre-free agency era, it wasn't hard to do. But I completely destroyed your WEAK ARGUMENT simply by pointing out that there were more than 20 other teams that played in the same pre-free agency ear and none of them were able to have 20 straight winning seasons like the Cowboys did.

You scream weak argument to everything, you notice no one agrees with you, no one dude. Youre on "Revis" Island and you aint catching a pass.
20 winning seasons, 2 titles, who cares. Ask how Atlanta feels about all them pennants with one little title to show for it.

In fact, no other team in this era or any other era has been to have 20 straight winning seasons like the Cowboys did. So when it happened is irrelevant because it's damn hard to have 20 straight winning seasons in any era. The Cowboys are the only team to accomplish that in any era.

NE is at 16, wait 4 more years, and if they do it....uh oh. Theyll match you with more superbowls (7 to 5) and more cashed in checks (5 to 2)

And just as the NE couldn't match the 1972 Dolphins perfect season, NE won't be able to match the Cowboys' NFL-record 20 straight winning seasons either.

Even if they dont, they did what matters, WON MORE SUPERBOWLS.

What is more impressive folks...16 winning seasons with 7 superbowls (almost 2 a year, almost) or 20 winning seasons with 5 (that be 4 per ever year).
It's basic what is more impressive, lets go further, shall we?
20 winning seasons, 2 superbowl wins (10 per year) or 16 winning seasons, 5 superbowl wins (almost 3 per year).
What's more impressive folks?

Now your next nonsensical argument:

LOL!!! You're giving shadyvsesham some competition for dumbest argument.

Youre giving a baby for the biggest whiner ever. You got that going.

1st, shadyvsesham (with a name like that, he must be a Shady Brady fanboy)

I had this back when I was 18. Youre acting like a child, going after handles, really?

is trying to argue that the Cowboys' 20 straight winning seasons wasn't hard to do since it happened during the pre-free agency period when teams could keep their "key players". But I bet that shadyvsesham can't name a single "key player" that the Cowboys kept for all 20 straight winning seasons. That's because there weren't any.

Id need to look up their roster 66-85, and it take a while. Im js players dont move around, and I already showed (By easy math even you can understand....maybe) how NE is 10x more impressive.

No team keeps players, whether "key players" or role players for 20 straight winning seasons. The Cowboys lost plenty of "key players" over those 20 straight winning seasons, but the Cowboys kept winning more games than they lost over those 20 straight winning seasons.

You got 2 cashed checks bro, 2. That's weak.

Moreover, there were over 20 other franchises (including the Patriots) who played in the pre-free agency era.

Lets see....over 20 franchises...Im pretty sure we got more NFL teams today. Lesser teams = easier thing to do. This is basic 3rd grade math ****.

Yet no team other than the Cowboys were able to have 20 straight winning seasons. So contrary to shadyvsesham's BS claims, having 20 straight winning seasons is pretty hard to do (even in the pre-free agency era) since only 1 team (the Cowboys) have ever done it in any era.

With 2 titles, WOW!

2nd, shadvsesham is trying to argue that the Patriots at 16 straight winning seasons are close to the Cowboys record. But dumb Patriots fans should know by now that "close" doesn't count.

But you know what NE did that Dallas couldnt do....cash in their checks.
Dallas, with less teams to compete, which means you can acquire better players. In 1966, 15 teams folks, now, 32. What does that mean, you have now only the cream of the crop. Now 32 teams try to get the best, 66, only 15 teams did. By 85...28 teams, and I guess Dallas couldnt keep it up once they couldnt get the cream of the crop...could they?

The Patriots at 18*-0 came close to a perfect season, but couldn't get to 19*-0. So the Patriots at 16 straight winning seasons doesn't mean anything since they won't match the Cowboys' record, especially since Brady won't be playing for another 4 years.

He can probably go 3 more years, and look at how Bellicheck did with Matt fn Cassel. One cog out, one cog in, it's how NE/SA do it. (SA is the only thing close to NE, different sports I know.)
Who cares if they dont, what theyve done is more impressive, make a poll bro, make it:

What's more impressive, NE 16 game winning seasons with 7 superbowls and 5 superbowl wins
Or Dallas 20 game seasons with 5 superbowls and 2 superbowl wins.
Checkmate, you dont got the balls to make the poll.

Even if Brady plays another 4 years, he'll be nothing more than a scrub (like Steve DeBerg when he was in his 40s) for the last 3 and 1/2 years. And Brady might not even be with the Patriots since Belicheat will replace Brady long before the next 4 years are up.

3rd, you're trying to cherry-pick in your comparison by ignoring the Cowboys history. The Cowboys have 5 (not 2) Super Bowl wins. The Cowboys and Patriots both had their inaugural seasons of pro football in 1960 (the Cowboys in the NFL and the Patriots in the AFL before the merger). So we have an equal number of seasons to compare both teams' histories.

You lose again:
(the Cowboys had two superbowl wins in that massive 20 season streak, im not trying to be rude but are you this dense?)
9 New England Patriots†
8 Dallas Cowboys*

Theyve been to one more super bowl, yes you both have 5...but all NEs were with one guy..Dallas cant say the same. Sorry buddy boy.

The Cowboys have 5 Super Bowl wins and a pro football record 20 straight winning seasons. The Patriots have 5 Super Bowl wins (at least 4 that we know were won by cheating and 1 that still might have been won by cheating but the cheating hasn't been uncovered yet - remember that it took 6+ seasons to uncover the cheating in SpyGate) and 16 straight winning seasons.

WAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH WAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

So which is better?

By my math which I showed, NE.

5 legitimate Super Bowl wins (all by double-digit margin of victory) and a pro football record 20 straight winning seasons

OR

5 Super Bowl wins (at least 4 tainted by cheating) and 16 straight winning seasons

New England.

Even so, youre now seeing youll lose, so you changed the entire narrative. The thing was:
what's more impressive Dallas's 20 game streak Vs NE's 16.
Dallas 5 superbowls...NE 7
Dallas 2 Sbowl titles....NE 5

That is what you were trying to say, now you had to change the narrative because youre on the losing side and everyone sees it.

But you wanna play that game, ok.

Dallas won 5 superbowls from a span of 1971 to 1995
NE won 5 superbowls from a span of 2001 to 2016
What's more impressive?

__________

Also CTown:

Are you aware of something called parity that was introduced? Of course no team has the same players for 20 years. A key position leaves, you replace it best you can. Free agency and parits did away with that. If a player retires, that's one thING. How many player did the Cowboys lose to free agency from 66 to 85 as compared to the current Patriots?

TY for having some gosh darn common sense!

_____________

Now to the Dallas fanboy one more time to end this. Now, here is the thing NE does:
They might lose Macolm Butler (Can we say a key hog...Ill be real he gave NE a title) but they might lose him. What do they do...acquire Gillmore.
Not only that...they might get the 11th round pick, AHAHAHHAHAHA

www.csnne.com/new-england-patriots/new-england-patriots-michael-lombardi-malcolm-butler-will-cost-saints-no-11-pick

Im a Texan fan but man it brings me joy to watch people like you cry about what NE has done.

Last Edit: Mar 20, 2017 9:05:05 GMT by shadyvsesham

SportsFan19
Junior Member

@sportsfan19
Posts: 2,843
Likes: 2,245

Are you a dynasty if you go 9 straight yrs w/o a championshi Mar 20, 2017 12:21:24 GMT OrsonSwelles likes this

Quote

Post by SportsFan19 on Mar 20, 2017 12:21:24 GMT

Mar 17, 2017 19:18:51 GMT klawrencio79 said:

Mar 11, 2017 18:28:32 GMT DC-Fan said:

I agree. I can't think of any other example in sports where a team that went 9 straight years without a championship was considered to be a dynasty. A "dynasty" that goes 9 straight years without a championship is as lame as Avengers: Age of Ultron having a "speedster" (Quicksilver) who isn't even fast enough to catch bullets in mid-air and toss them away. LOL!!!

You're not a real "speedster" if you're not faster than a speeding bullet, and you're not a real dynasty if you go 9 straight years without a championship.

I don't understand, isn't the point of trolling to make other people look like retards? You just constantly outdo yourself with this shit.

The people who legitimately try to argue with him look like just as big of retards.

NewtJorden Junior Member @newtjorden Posts: 3,198 Likes: 1,481	Are you a dynasty if you go 9 straight yrs w/o a championshi Mar 20, 2017 15:17:40 GMT Quote Select Post Deselect Post Link to Post Member Give Gift Back to Top Post by NewtJorden on Mar 20, 2017 15:17:40 GMT I would consider that they had a dynasty from 2001-2004 and they will have a second dynasty if they win next year. Its not all part of one dynasty to me.

DC-Fan
Elite Member

@dcfan
Posts: 10,412
Likes: 4,569

Are you a dynasty if you go 9 straight yrs w/o a championshi Mar 21, 2017 1:45:37 GMT

Quote

Post by DC-Fan on Mar 21, 2017 1:45:37 GMT

Mar 20, 2017 8:36:54 GMT shadyvsesham said:

FA wasnt as big as a deal freom 60s-90s, it wasnt.

WEAK ARGUMENT! You're still too slow to understand it so I'll explain it to you slowly. It DOESN'T MATTER that there was free agency and the Cowboys were able to keep some of their players. EVERY TEAM back then was also able to keep some of their players, but NO TEAM other than the Cowboys were able to have 20 straight winning seasons. And no team since then has been able to have 20 straight winning seasons.

Mar 20, 2017 8:36:54 GMT shadyvsesham said:

CTown eats up your entire 20 year argument.

Nope, I destroyed ctown28's arguments just like I destroyed your weak arguments.

Mar 20, 2017 8:36:54 GMT shadyvsesham said:

In 1970 they lost to Baltimore Colts 16 to 13 (Maybe you shouldnt discuss if Brady could have only scored 14 points

LOL!!! You've just proven how dumb you are! You're trying to compare scoring 13 points in a Super Bowl in 1970 to scoring just 14 points in a Super Bowl in 2007, when the rules have been changed a lot to favor the offense heavily?

Scoring 14 points in a Super Bowl in 1970 isn't bad. When the 1972 Dolphins completed the ONLY undefeated season in NFL history, they won the Super Bowl with 14 points. Scoring 14 points in a Super Bowl in 2007 is awful, especially when your playing against a defense ranked #17 in the NFL (ranked in the bottom half of the NFL) in points allowed. Brady choked I 007, plain and simple.

Mar 20, 2017 8:36:54 GMT shadyvsesham said:

Brady era....7 super bowls, 5 checks cashed.

And at least 4 of those checks are bad checks, tainted by cheating and have asterisks.

NE was at 18*-0. But they couldn't get to 19*-0. So NE at 16 still means nothing because NE still doesn't have 20 and won't get to 20 (just like they couldn't get to 19*-0).

Mar 20, 2017 8:36:54 GMT shadyvsesham said:

NE IS AT A 16 GAME WINNING STREAK, GET OVER THE 18-0, MEANING 4 MORE GAME WINNING STREAK

Like I said before, NE was at 18*-0. But they couldn't get to 19*-0. So NE at 16 still means nothing because NE still doesn't have 20 and won't get to 20 (just like they couldn't get to 19*-0).

Mar 20, 2017 8:36:54 GMT shadyvsesham said:

5 titles > 2 titles (TY Ctown, youre gold man)

Typcial dumb Patriots fan, trying to use revisionist history. The Cowboys have 5 (not 2) Super Bowl wins in addition to an NFL-record 20 straight winning seasons.

Oh yeah, the Cowboys also have the highest winning percentage of all NFL teams. That's not highest winning percentage for 1 year or 5 years or 10 years or 15 years or 20 years. That's highest winning percentage for the entire history of the franchise.

Both the Cowboys and Patriots had their inaugural seasons in 1960 (the Cowboys in the NFL and the Patriots in the AFL before the merger). So they've had the same number of seasons. In addition to 5 Super Bowl wins, the Cowboys have the highest winning percentage among all NFL franchises. Clearly, the Cowboys have been a better and more successful franchise than the Patriots.

Mar 20, 2017 8:36:54 GMT shadyvsesham said:

NE is at 16, wait 4 more years

Like I said before, NE was at 18*-0. But they couldn't get to 19*-0. So NE at 16 still means nothing because NE still doesn't have 20 and won't get to 20 (just like they couldn't get to 19*-0).

Mar 20, 2017 8:36:54 GMT shadyvsesham said:

more cashed in checks (5 to 2)

The Cowboys have 5 (not 2) Super Bowl wins in addition to an NFL-record 20 straight winning seasons.

Oh yeah, the Cowboys also have the highest winning percentage of all NFL teams. That's not highest winning percentage for 1 year or 5 years or 10 years or 15 years or 20 years. That's highest winning percentage for the entire history of the franchise.

Both the Cowboys and Patriots had their inaugural seasons in 1960 (the Cowboys in the NFL and the Patriots in the AFL before the merger). So they've had the same number of seasons. In addition to 5 Super Bowl wins, the Cowboys have the highest winning percentage among all NFL franchises. Clearly, the Cowboys have been a better and more successful franchise than the Patriots.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=mD0vARpus-g

klawrencio79 Senior Member @klawrencio79 Posts: 9,589 Likes: 13,450	Are you a dynasty if you go 9 straight yrs w/o a championshi Mar 21, 2017 2:40:27 GMT shadyvsesham likes this Quote Select Post Deselect Post Link to Post Member Give Gift Back to Top Post by klawrencio79 on Mar 21, 2017 2:40:27 GMT Anne Hathaway Fan, what asterisks? I can't seem to find any.

Are you a dynasty if you go 9 straight yrs w/o a championshi

Post by ctown28 on Mar 18, 2017 21:43:52 GMT

Post by OrsonSwelles on Mar 18, 2017 21:54:58 GMT

Post by DC-Fan on Mar 19, 2017 0:12:29 GMT

Post by ctown28 on Mar 19, 2017 0:31:51 GMT

Post by DC-Fan on Mar 19, 2017 1:39:36 GMT

Post by ctown28 on Mar 19, 2017 6:13:22 GMT

Post by shadyvsesham on Mar 19, 2017 9:08:25 GMT

Post by DC-Fan on Mar 19, 2017 17:49:12 GMT

Post by shadyvsesham on Mar 19, 2017 18:08:57 GMT

Post by ctown28 on Mar 19, 2017 23:54:19 GMT

Post by DC-Fan on Mar 20, 2017 0:22:54 GMT

Post by klawrencio79 on Mar 20, 2017 0:25:30 GMT

Post by DC-Fan on Mar 20, 2017 2:40:32 GMT

Post by ctown28 on Mar 20, 2017 5:50:20 GMT

Post by DC-Fan on Mar 20, 2017 7:55:52 GMT

Post by shadyvsesham on Mar 20, 2017 8:36:54 GMT

Post by SportsFan19 on Mar 20, 2017 12:21:24 GMT

Post by NewtJorden on Mar 20, 2017 15:17:40 GMT

Post by DC-Fan on Mar 21, 2017 1:45:37 GMT

Post by klawrencio79 on Mar 21, 2017 2:40:27 GMT