1. Welcome to Green Bay Packers NFL Football Forum & Community!
    Packer Forum is one of the largest online communities for the Green Bay Packers.

    You are currently viewing our community forums as a guest user.

    Sign Up or

    Having an account grants you additional privileges, such as creating and participating in discussions. Furthermore, we hide most of the ads once you register as a member!
    Dismiss Notice

NFC Predictions for next year

Discussion in 'Packer Fan Forum' started by Green_Bay_Packers, Feb 13, 2010.

  1. PackersRS

    PackersRS Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2008
    Messages:
    8,471
    Ratings:
    +979
    The thing is, I'm not arguing who's better. It would take a blind idiot to make the claim that the Vikings franchise is better than the Packers franchise in terms of winning history.

    I'm arguing that they aren't even good. That, combined with the Bills, they are the most choker franchise in NFL history.

    There are worse franchises than them, that's for sure, but almost every franchise won a pro football tittle. They simply didn't.

    When the tittle was decided by wins, they didn't win. When it was decided by the last game, they didn't win.

    They may want to make the claim that in the last decade they were better than us. That during the 70s they were better than us. Then I'm going to make the claim that the Dolphins, the team that has he better regular season record of all time, is the greatest franchise ever...

    But in 12 years, we were better than EVERYBODY ELSE. They were NEVER better than everybody else.
     
  2. AllouezPackerFan

    AllouezPackerFan Section 121 Row 47

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2010
    Messages:
    1,602
    Ratings:
    +339
    Then apparently there are at least two blind idiots in this forum. I won't name names. LOL
     
  3. Raptorman

    Raptorman Vikings fan since 1966.

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2006
    Messages:
    2,255
    Ratings:
    +861
    So what your saying then is that Tampa, the New York Jets, and New Orleans have a "Winning Tradition" because they have all won the "Big Game" After all, it's only the that game can bring a "winning tradition" to a team. Or do you have to win more then one? Does two count? Or do you have to win more games then you lose plus win the Big Game to have a "winning tradition"? I'm curious. Because the Jets haven't won squat since 1968 and the Saints hadn't won squat until this year. And Tampa, they haven't won more the 40% of the games they have played since they came into this league.

    So I want to know, what's the formula for having a "Winning Tradition"?
     
  4. AllouezPackerFan

    AllouezPackerFan Section 121 Row 47

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2010
    Messages:
    1,602
    Ratings:
    +339

    Success over several decades and multiple Super Bowls. The Buccaneers, Jets, and Saints, IMO, would not be teams that I would consider having a winning tradition. That must make you feel crappy that even notorious losers in this league have won Super Bowls. What does that say about the L.A. Vikings? Hahahahahahahahaha :viksux::viksux::viksux::viksux::viksux:
     
  5. Raptorman

    Raptorman Vikings fan since 1966.

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2006
    Messages:
    2,255
    Ratings:
    +861
    So what does that make San Fran? 4 decades of winning nothing, a decade of winning and then a decade of losing. Not what you would call an overall winning tradition.

    Just so all of you know, I am not arguing that the Packers don't have a winning tradition. And I am not arguing that the Vikings have a bigger "winning tradition" then the Packers. By virture of winning multiple Championships the Packers would be put them in that category. But what else qualifies? MN is the only team that has an above average winning percentage that has not won a Super Bowl. I understand the idea of winning Super Bowl/Championships(I think they have, well, we had that discussion so we won't go back to it here.) and would love to win a Super Bowl in my lifetime. (This year really ticked me off because the Vikings could have easily taken the Colts.) But if your like SF and have string of good years preceeded by nothing and crap after, is that really a winning tradition?
     
  6. AllouezPackerFan

    AllouezPackerFan Section 121 Row 47

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2010
    Messages:
    1,602
    Ratings:
    +339

    Yes. The 49ers have 17 division championships and 5 super bowl wins in two different decades. Of course the 49ers have a winning tradition.

    My point is this.....franchises that are historically much worse regular season teams than the Vikings have won the Super Bowl. If I'm a Viking fan that makes me feel bad about myself and my team. If the Packers had never won an NFL championship I wouldn't talk **** to fans of a team that had won 12. Its that simple.
     
  7. Hauschild

    Hauschild Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2009
    Messages:
    1,104
    Ratings:
    +11
    Ah, subjective fact-finding. You can't beat it. :)
     
  8. AllouezPackerFan

    AllouezPackerFan Section 121 Row 47

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2010
    Messages:
    1,602
    Ratings:
    +339

    Number of NFL Championships:
    Packers: 12
    Bears: 10
    Lions: 4
    Buccaneers: 1
    Saints: 1
    VIKINGS: ZERO

    You have nothing to talk trash about. Nothing. You're team has never won anything. The Lions are a better franchise! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA :viksux::viksux:
     
  9. PackersRS

    PackersRS Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2008
    Messages:
    8,471
    Ratings:
    +979
    You could make a case that the 49ers have a poorer winning tradition that the Packers, Cowboys and Steelers, but 5 SBs? The biggest winning record in a decade?

    It's really, really hard to argue that they are even a mediocre franchise.

    I'd say that, winning a SB, would elevate the Vikings above a lot of franchises, given their regular season record.

    But having won so much in the regular season and failing so much in the big time COULD be said it's worse than winning only one time followed by seasons of mediocrity...
     
  10. AllouezPackerFan

    AllouezPackerFan Section 121 Row 47

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2010
    Messages:
    1,602
    Ratings:
    +339

    Thank you.
     
  11. Hauschild

    Hauschild Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2009
    Messages:
    1,104
    Ratings:
    +11
    That's my point - Championships are great - who wouldn't want them on their resume? But, to somehow claim that other teams that have winning records but no Championships are not "winning" franchises seems misleading at best, and dishonest at worst.

    Personally, I'd rather the Packers continue to dominate in the regular season and let the chips fall where they may in the post season, rather than winning a Championship every 10 years and being mired in medocrity the rest of the time.

    To each, his own.
     
  12. PackersRS

    PackersRS Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2008
    Messages:
    8,471
    Ratings:
    +979
    Oh! Didn't catch it before.

    Brett Favre only won one tittle, but had a terrific regular season record...

    But I'm sure it has nothing to do with your opinion on "winning tradition"...
     
  13. AllouezPackerFan

    AllouezPackerFan Section 121 Row 47

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2010
    Messages:
    1,602
    Ratings:
    +339

    And the Vikings aren't mediocre? Since 2000 the Packers have been to the playoffs 6 times and lost in the NFC Championship game. The Vikings have gone 4 times and lost in the NFC Championships. Over the course of the history of the two teams the Pack has gone to the playoffs 25 times to 26 times of the Vikings. The difference between the two is 12 NFL championships for the Packers and 0 for the Vikings. The two franchises are similar except for the fact that the Packers have been able to win when it counts and the Vikings have not. Regular season success is fine, if all you care about is finishing 12-4 every year. 20 years from now no one will give a **** that the Vikings were 13-3 last year and lost in the NFC championship game. No one will care that they "could have beat the Colts in the Super Bowl." People remember Championships. Its that simple. Dan Marino and Jim Kelly were great quarterbacks, but didn't win a championship. When people talk about them, no one says, "wow, what a great regular season quarterback." They say, "they were good, but never won the big game."

    So my point is....if you can't win the big game, ever, than you are a loser.:viksux:
     
  14. Hauschild

    Hauschild Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2009
    Messages:
    1,104
    Ratings:
    +11
    And, the Packers have been a franchise for, what, 50 years longer than Minnesota, yet they've gone to ONE LESS playoff game?

    I'm not exactly sure what you're arguing, but you're digging yerself a hole to China, Bubs.

    :happy0005:
     
  15. AllouezPackerFan

    AllouezPackerFan Section 121 Row 47

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2010
    Messages:
    1,602
    Ratings:
    +339

    12 Championships to 0 championships. I can't dig myself a hole. The argument makes itself. What are you? A Packer fan? If not, seriously, why do you post here? Boggles my mind.
     
  16. Hauschild

    Hauschild Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2009
    Messages:
    1,104
    Ratings:
    +11
    Well, that's not the argument, championships. The argument, at least what I was led to believe, was the ingredients of a "winning" franchise. Championships are icing on the cake, not necessarily the focal point, which I believe is simply winning more football games than losing, as consistently as possible.

    You're a classic example of what has gone so horribly wrong with the minds in this country. Instead of embracing healthy debate, you run like hell from it because it frightens you and takes you outta your comfort zone. So, in your mind, anybody that doesn't think in lock-step with your beliefs, is not only imbecilic, but should be stifled and not allowed to be heard.

    I'd suggest manning-up, letting go of the pacifier and making arguments that have merit.
     
  17. AllouezPackerFan

    AllouezPackerFan Section 121 Row 47

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2010
    Messages:
    1,602
    Ratings:
    +339

    My argument is all merit. Thinking that championships are "icing on the cake" is a loser mentality. I have been saying that the argument is about championships in this entire thread. My point was that no one gives a **** how many times a team makes the playoffs unless they win championships. My argument is that the Packers are a winning franchise (12 championships) and the Vikings are not (0 championships). Its that simple.

    Your loser mentality is what is wrong with this country. You are a defeatist. :viksux::viksux::viksux::viksux::viksux::viksux:
     
  18. Raptorman

    Raptorman Vikings fan since 1966.

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2006
    Messages:
    2,255
    Ratings:
    +861
    There is one aspect to those 12 championships that no one ever discusses. And that is that 11 of them were won when there were at most, 14 teams in the league(one year had 15, 1966). So if one wanted to, one could argue that it was easier for a team to win a championship since all they had to do was win their division and the championship game, maybe a playoff game, if they tied for the division lead.

    But those were the rules and the teams of the day.
     
  19. AllouezPackerFan

    AllouezPackerFan Section 121 Row 47

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2010
    Messages:
    1,602
    Ratings:
    +339

    One could also say, that with fewer teams, the talent wasn't spread as thin and the level of competition from top to bottom was much better. You can't say that because it happened 40 years ago or more that they don't matter, because then 30 years from now we could say that the Patriots championships didn't matter.
     
  20. AllouezPackerFan

    AllouezPackerFan Section 121 Row 47

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2010
    Messages:
    1,602
    Ratings:
    +339
    I just want to know if we could label Haus as a Packer Hater?
     
  21. Raptorman

    Raptorman Vikings fan since 1966.

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2006
    Messages:
    2,255
    Ratings:
    +861
    Why don't you just label him as a Packer fan who doesn't agree with you? Just because he has a different opinion than yours doesn't mean he hates the Packers.
     
  22. PackersRS

    PackersRS Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2008
    Messages:
    8,471
    Ratings:
    +979
    Exactly.

    And the Vikings had 9 years to compete in the same conditions.

    Since the Vikings exist, we have 8 championships more than you. (I'm not going into the discussion of the 69' tittle)
     
  23. AllouezPackerFan

    AllouezPackerFan Section 121 Row 47

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2010
    Messages:
    1,602
    Ratings:
    +339
    I mean....no one says that the World Series' that the Yankees won in the 20s and 30s don't matter because there were WAY fewer teams in major league baseball. I think pro leagues were much more competitive from top to bottom in those days.
     
  24. PackersRS

    PackersRS Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2008
    Messages:
    8,471
    Ratings:
    +979
    In my dictionary, and in pretty much everybody elses, one who roots against a team isn't a fan of that team...
     
  25. PackersRS

    PackersRS Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2008
    Messages:
    8,471
    Ratings:
    +979
    He's starting to act like a troll... But he's not agressive, offensive, or such...

    He's only stating his opinions, don't matter how twisted, in my opinion, they are.

    In my judgment, he's not doing so to piss everybody.

    But if you feel like it, ask Robdog to take a look...
     

Share This Page