Home

Who's more disappointing; The Bills of the 90's or the Eagles of the 2000's.

This is a discussion on Who's more disappointing; The Bills of the 90's or the Eagles of the 2000's. within the Pro Football forums.

Go Back   Operation Sports Forums > Football > Pro Football
MLB The Show 24 Review: Another Solid Hit for the Series
New Star GP Review: Old-School Arcade Fun
Where Are Our College Basketball Video Game Rumors?
Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 01-20-2009, 06:10 PM   #33
We Spent Some Money!
 
ZM Punk's Arena
 
OVR: 32
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 6,260
Blog Entries: 2
Re: Who's more disappointing; The Bills of the 90's or the Eagles of the 2000's.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Adam Dayton
Losing 4 Super Bowls in a row is the definition of choking. The ineptitude of the 90's Bills will be remembered for historical reasons for decades to come, the Eagles of the 2000's wont.
I'm sorry but making 4 straight Super Bowls is the exact opposite of ineptitude. Sure it was disappointing that they didn't get the job done when they got to the game. To say that those Bills were inept as an organization, is ludicrous.

Last edited by ZM Punk; 01-20-2009 at 06:14 PM.
ZM Punk is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-2009, 06:35 PM   #34
Bamma
 
ProfessaPackMan's Arena
 
OVR: 36
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: DC/MD
Posts: 63,494
Blog Entries: 3
Re: Who's more disappointing; The Bills of the 90's or the Eagles of the 2000's.

Eagles.

Losing 4 NFC Championship Games, including 2 with HFA and one coming against a team where they had never won a game when the temps were 32 Degrees or below.
__________________
#RespectTheCulture
ProfessaPackMan is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-2009, 06:57 PM   #35
Rookie
 
OVR: 5
Join Date: Jan 2009
Re: Who's more disappointing; The Bills of the 90's or the Eagles of the 2000's.

Clearly the Eagles. 1 super bowl game compared to 4. No comparison. You would rather lose the big game then not make it at all.
TheMonopoly is offline  
Reply With Quote
Advertisements - Register to remove
Old 01-20-2009, 07:15 PM   #36
Hall Of Fame
 
OVR: 23
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: California
Posts: 12,264
Re: Who's more disappointing; The Bills of the 90's or the Eagles of the 2000's.

The 90's Bills are alot better than the 00's Eagles. Not to mention, losing in 4 straight Super Bowls is more disappointing and has a greater magnitude than losing in 4 out of 5 NFC Championship games.
__________________
I write things on the Internet.

Chip Douglass is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-2009, 07:25 PM   #37
Bamma
 
ProfessaPackMan's Arena
 
OVR: 36
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: DC/MD
Posts: 63,494
Blog Entries: 3
Re: Who's more disappointing; The Bills of the 90's or the Eagles of the 2000's.

True but at the same time should we punish the Bills for being the best team in their conference for 4 straight years while the Eagles would have the Super Bowl theirs for the taking only to constantly come up short 4 out of 5 times?

Don't get me wrong, it's disappointing anyway you put it if you don't win the Super Bowl but in regards to these two teams, I'd give the edge to the Eagles in this topic IMO.
__________________
#RespectTheCulture
ProfessaPackMan is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-2009, 08:36 PM   #38
*ll St*r
 
wwharton's Arena
 
OVR: 28
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 26,978
Re: Who's more disappointing; The Bills of the 90's or the Eagles of the 2000's.

Honestly, I'm with those that think the whole discussion is silly. It's disappointing to lose any playoff game so of course it's all disappointing. You can say the bigger the game, the more disappointing but honestly, the most disappointing is not getting to the game.

Losing every game is the most disappointing. Losing enough games to miss the playoffs is next. Then the season is less and less disappointing the farther you go. Ask fans of teams who haven't been to the playoffs in years if ever. Then ask fans of teams that haven't been to the Superbowl in years. Winning 4 Conference Championships in a row is a huge accomplishment. Every non-Bills fan that laughed as they continued to lose Superbowls was a fan of a team that was more disappointed. That doesn't include the fans of the teams that beat them b/c they were too busy celebrating than worrying about it.
wwharton is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-21-2009, 03:41 PM   #39
Marvel's Finest
 
JBH3's Arena
 
OVR: 48
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Northern VA
Posts: 13,523
Blog Entries: 48
Re: Who's more disappointing; The Bills of the 90's or the Eagles of the 2000's.

Quote:
Originally Posted by wwharton
Honestly, I'm with those that think the whole discussion is silly. It's disappointing to lose any playoff game so of course it's all disappointing. You can say the bigger the game, the more disappointing but honestly, the most disappointing is not getting to the game.

Losing every game is the most disappointing. Losing enough games to miss the playoffs is next. Then the season is less and less disappointing the farther you go. Ask fans of teams who haven't been to the playoffs in years if ever. Then ask fans of teams that haven't been to the Superbowl in years. Winning 4 Conference Championships in a row is a huge accomplishment. Every non-Bills fan that laughed as they continued to lose Superbowls was a fan of a team that was more disappointed. That doesn't include the fans of the teams that beat them b/c they were too busy celebrating than worrying about it.


Would gladly take my team losing 4 NFC Championships than being a laughing stock and going 0-16.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edmund Burke
All that is needed for the triumph of evil, is for good men to do nothing.
JBH3 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-21-2009, 05:16 PM   #40
Banned
 
OVR: 8
Join Date: Dec 2007
Re: Who's more disappointing; The Bills of the 90's or the Eagles of the 2000's.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kruza
I will forever and ever and ever... and ever... despise the '91 Redskins.

Kruza

Detroit didn't belong in the same building as us. Hence the 45-0 blowout in week 1 and the 41-10 blowout in the NFC championship game.
tmulk is offline  
Reply With Quote
Reply


« Previous Thread | Next Thread »

« Operation Sports Forums > Football > Pro Football »


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:18 PM.
Top -