Thread: Which franchise is the best in the NFL … period?

"Ragnarok" wrote:

I kinda agree with pack93z
- to a point.
They probably deserve to be further up on the list, but their malaise from 1970-1991 cannot be ignored.

Don't disagree to the validity of such a statement, but it isn't like some of the other franchises on the list haven't had there dark times.. but dang that was a long 20 years.
;D

We did have a heck of an offense in 83-84..

"Zeus" wrote:

"pack93z" wrote:

What a joke of a ranking that is.. the Packers not in the top 10, yet we have been one of the most consistent teams for almost 2 decades running.. are as stable a franchise as there is, we have taken some lumps in the playoffs the last couple years but come on. The Niners are further up the scale.. utter joke.

Unlike you, this ranking is not ignoring the 1970s.

=Z=

Lets see.. we have been to the SB 4 times, won it 3 of them.... have one of the best records, consistently year in and out, 05 was a blemish no doubt, for just about 2 decades.. yet the counts for not.. yep solid rankings indeed.

Wait.. 1970 forward eh.. not just the superbowl era... which makes little sense.. carry on with that silliness.

"pack93z" wrote:

"Zeus" wrote:

"pack93z" wrote:

What a joke of a ranking that is.. the Packers not in the top 10, yet we have been one of the most consistent teams for almost 2 decades running.. are as stable a franchise as there is, we have taken some lumps in the playoffs the last couple years but come on. The Niners are further up the scale.. utter joke.

Unlike you, this ranking is not ignoring the 1970s.

=Z=

Lets see.. we have been to the SB 4 times, won it 3 of them.... have one of the best records, consistently year in and out, 05 was a blemish no doubt, for just about 2 decades.. yet the counts for not.. yep solid rankings indeed.

Wait.. 1970 forward eh.. not just the superbowl era... which makes little sense.. carry on with that silliness.

You're posting rebuttals faster than a one-legged man in an ass kicking contest......oh wait....

"Prophet" wrote:

You're posting rebuttals faster than a one-legged man in an ass kicking contest......oh wait....

I once entered one of those silly contests at a bar one night.. I wound up in jail for disorderly conduct.. the officer didn't appreciate when I asked if I won the contest.. another notch tighter on the cuffs.

"pack93z" wrote:

"Prophet" wrote:

You're posting rebuttals faster than a one-legged man in an ass kicking contest......oh wait....

I once entered one of those silly contests at a bar one night.. I wound up in jail for disorderly conduct.. the officer didn't appreciate when I asked if I won the contest.. another notch tighter on the cuffs.

lmao

"pack93z" wrote:

"Prophet" wrote:

You're posting rebuttals faster than a one-legged man in an ass kicking contest......oh wait....

I once entered one of those silly contests at a bar one night.. I wound up in jail for disorderly conduct.. the officer didn't appreciate when I asked if I won the contest.. another notch tighter on the cuffs.

Don't forget to bring the easily detachable leg to the Vikes-Pack game.
All sorts of people to fuck with there!

=Z=

"pack93z" wrote:

"Prophet" wrote:

That's one of the reasons I liked it.

Imagine that eh.. ESPN propaganda at its finest, another hey look at our article type joke. I hardly ever visit there site..

Give me a break...I can't turn on espn without hearing Rodgers/puker crap....

"Vikestand" wrote:

Give me a break...I can't turn on espn without hearing Rodgers/puker crap....

Yet another reason to avoid it all together.. Rodgers has had two great games.. can't crown him already as the next great QB. It takes a body of work greater than 2 1/2 games to proclaim greatness.. no doubt.

With that said, I like his poise, his ability to read a defense and check down "smartly" when needed.. but I don't need the kings of over reactors on ESPN to tell me that 10,648 times in a single week that he is the real deal.. time will tell not you clowns in Bristol.

But I understand your point.. I used to hate seeing Moss being over hyped as well... or Favre, or Romo and his sidekick clown in TO.. point is, I have not much use for ESPN and it hype on teams that it has multiple broadcasts on.

I'm sorry, but we should not be ranked ahead of the Packers. They've won superbowls, we haven't. That simple.

"pack93z" wrote:

What a joke of a ranking that is.. the Packers not in the top 10, yet we have been one of the most consistent teams for almost 2 decades running.. are as stable a franchise as there is, we have taken some lumps in the playoffs the last couple years but come on. The Niners are further up the scale.. utter joke.

Sure during the Brett Favre era they've been good, but look from 1970 to 1992.... only 3 winning seasons.

If the rankings considered from 1990 to now, Packers would be in the top 3 IMO.