There are 150 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

Do you think Lynch will be convicted for DUI and receive suspension?

Do you think Lynch will be convicted for DUI and receive suspension?

Originally posted by crabman82:
Originally posted by fiveoldrings:
Originally posted by crabman82:
this whole thing has flown right over your head. nobody claimed the 49ers were power houses in the 60's or 70's. its the whole notion than from our last title in 1994 until harbaugh that they were all garbage seasons. yeah its been 20 years, but only half of those were non-playoff years, 99-2000 and 03-10. the 49ers didnt stop being sb contenders after their last title win and thats the impression i was getting from zaghawk when he threw out the 20 years of garbage line.

Zag wasn't talking about (nor was I) the 20 years after the last SB win. He was referring (correct me if I am wrong, Zaghawk) to the life of the franchise.

Why would he reference the 5 rings from a period that resulted in zero rings? Clearly I'm not the one that missed the point.

if i'm off base, i'm off base but i'll let him answer that. i thought he was essentially saying, you guys just went through 20 years of garbage and what do you remember? the 5 rings that proceeded that time period. which is true, although it wasnt 20 years, it was about 10 years of bad football but by in large the we tend to remember the 5 rings, not the years of bad football that followed.

Either way, my intent wasn't to incite. Simply providing data that might allow people to come to a decision based on more than assumption from either perspective.
Originally posted by fiveoldrings:
Originally posted by crabman82:
Originally posted by fiveoldrings:
Originally posted by crabman82:
this whole thing has flown right over your head. nobody claimed the 49ers were power houses in the 60's or 70's. its the whole notion than from our last title in 1994 until harbaugh that they were all garbage seasons. yeah its been 20 years, but only half of those were non-playoff years, 99-2000 and 03-10. the 49ers didnt stop being sb contenders after their last title win and thats the impression i was getting from zaghawk when he threw out the 20 years of garbage line.

Zag wasn't talking about (nor was I) the 20 years after the last SB win. He was referring (correct me if I am wrong, Zaghawk) to the life of the franchise.

Why would he reference the 5 rings from a period that resulted in zero rings? Clearly I'm not the one that missed the point.

if i'm off base, i'm off base but i'll let him answer that. i thought he was essentially saying, you guys just went through 20 years of garbage and what do you remember? the 5 rings that proceeded that time period. which is true, although it wasnt 20 years, it was about 10 years of bad football but by in large the we tend to remember the 5 rings, not the years of bad football that followed.

Either way, my intent wasn't to incite. Simply providing data that might allow people to come to a decision based on more than assumption from either perspective.

It sucks in 20 years when you can't enjoy that ring. We'll be enjoying ours forver. Enjoyed that flawed peacock logic.
Originally posted by Young2Rice:
Originally posted by fiveoldrings:
Originally posted by crabman82:
Originally posted by fiveoldrings:
Originally posted by crabman82:
this whole thing has flown right over your head. nobody claimed the 49ers were power houses in the 60's or 70's. its the whole notion than from our last title in 1994 until harbaugh that they were all garbage seasons. yeah its been 20 years, but only half of those were non-playoff years, 99-2000 and 03-10. the 49ers didnt stop being sb contenders after their last title win and thats the impression i was getting from zaghawk when he threw out the 20 years of garbage line.

Zag wasn't talking about (nor was I) the 20 years after the last SB win. He was referring (correct me if I am wrong, Zaghawk) to the life of the franchise.

Why would he reference the 5 rings from a period that resulted in zero rings? Clearly I'm not the one that missed the point.

if i'm off base, i'm off base but i'll let him answer that. i thought he was essentially saying, you guys just went through 20 years of garbage and what do you remember? the 5 rings that proceeded that time period. which is true, although it wasnt 20 years, it was about 10 years of bad football but by in large the we tend to remember the 5 rings, not the years of bad football that followed.

Either way, my intent wasn't to incite. Simply providing data that might allow people to come to a decision based on more than assumption from either perspective.

It sucks in 20 years when you can't enjoy that ring. We'll be enjoying ours forver. Enjoyed that flawed peacock logic.

Are you crabman's little sister? I admire your enthusiasm.
Originally posted by fiveoldrings:
Originally posted by Young2Rice:
Originally posted by fiveoldrings:
Originally posted by crabman82:
Originally posted by fiveoldrings:
Originally posted by crabman82:
this whole thing has flown right over your head. nobody claimed the 49ers were power houses in the 60's or 70's. its the whole notion than from our last title in 1994 until harbaugh that they were all garbage seasons. yeah its been 20 years, but only half of those were non-playoff years, 99-2000 and 03-10. the 49ers didnt stop being sb contenders after their last title win and thats the impression i was getting from zaghawk when he threw out the 20 years of garbage line.

Zag wasn't talking about (nor was I) the 20 years after the last SB win. He was referring (correct me if I am wrong, Zaghawk) to the life of the franchise.

Why would he reference the 5 rings from a period that resulted in zero rings? Clearly I'm not the one that missed the point.

if i'm off base, i'm off base but i'll let him answer that. i thought he was essentially saying, you guys just went through 20 years of garbage and what do you remember? the 5 rings that proceeded that time period. which is true, although it wasnt 20 years, it was about 10 years of bad football but by in large the we tend to remember the 5 rings, not the years of bad football that followed.

Either way, my intent wasn't to incite. Simply providing data that might allow people to come to a decision based on more than assumption from either perspective.

It sucks in 20 years when you can't enjoy that ring. We'll be enjoying ours forver. Enjoyed that flawed peacock logic.

Are you crabman's little sister? I admire your enthusiasm.

Nope. I didn't mean to offend zag's boyfriend. Sorry. Carry on.
[ Edited by Young2Rice on Feb 25, 2014 at 2:27 PM ]
Originally posted by Young2Rice:
Originally posted by fiveoldrings:
Originally posted by Young2Rice:
Originally posted by fiveoldrings:
Originally posted by crabman82:
Originally posted by fiveoldrings:
Originally posted by crabman82:
this whole thing has flown right over your head. nobody claimed the 49ers were power houses in the 60's or 70's. its the whole notion than from our last title in 1994 until harbaugh that they were all garbage seasons. yeah its been 20 years, but only half of those were non-playoff years, 99-2000 and 03-10. the 49ers didnt stop being sb contenders after their last title win and thats the impression i was getting from zaghawk when he threw out the 20 years of garbage line.

Zag wasn't talking about (nor was I) the 20 years after the last SB win. He was referring (correct me if I am wrong, Zaghawk) to the life of the franchise.

Why would he reference the 5 rings from a period that resulted in zero rings? Clearly I'm not the one that missed the point.

if i'm off base, i'm off base but i'll let him answer that. i thought he was essentially saying, you guys just went through 20 years of garbage and what do you remember? the 5 rings that proceeded that time period. which is true, although it wasnt 20 years, it was about 10 years of bad football but by in large the we tend to remember the 5 rings, not the years of bad football that followed.

Either way, my intent wasn't to incite. Simply providing data that might allow people to come to a decision based on more than assumption from either perspective.

It sucks in 20 years when you can't enjoy that ring. We'll be enjoying ours forver. Enjoyed that flawed peacock logic.

Are you crabman's little sister? I admire your enthusiasm.

Nope. I didn't mean to offend zag's boyfriend. Sorry. Carry on.

I appreciate that.
Originally posted by fiveoldrings:
Originally posted by Young2Rice:
Originally posted by fiveoldrings:
Originally posted by Young2Rice:
Originally posted by fiveoldrings:
Originally posted by crabman82:
Originally posted by fiveoldrings:
Originally posted by crabman82:
this whole thing has flown right over your head. nobody claimed the 49ers were power houses in the 60's or 70's. its the whole notion than from our last title in 1994 until harbaugh that they were all garbage seasons. yeah its been 20 years, but only half of those were non-playoff years, 99-2000 and 03-10. the 49ers didnt stop being sb contenders after their last title win and thats the impression i was getting from zaghawk when he threw out the 20 years of garbage line.

Zag wasn't talking about (nor was I) the 20 years after the last SB win. He was referring (correct me if I am wrong, Zaghawk) to the life of the franchise.

Why would he reference the 5 rings from a period that resulted in zero rings? Clearly I'm not the one that missed the point.

if i'm off base, i'm off base but i'll let him answer that. i thought he was essentially saying, you guys just went through 20 years of garbage and what do you remember? the 5 rings that proceeded that time period. which is true, although it wasnt 20 years, it was about 10 years of bad football but by in large the we tend to remember the 5 rings, not the years of bad football that followed.

Either way, my intent wasn't to incite. Simply providing data that might allow people to come to a decision based on more than assumption from either perspective.

It sucks in 20 years when you can't enjoy that ring. We'll be enjoying ours forver. Enjoyed that flawed peacock logic.

Are you crabman's little sister? I admire your enthusiasm.

Nope. I didn't mean to offend zag's boyfriend. Sorry. Carry on.

I appreciate that.

Okay "fiveoldrings", since you want to delve into history, let's do some arithmetic. What happened before the modern Super Bowl era is irrelevant. If it were relevant, then one could say, for example, that it took the Bears 60 years to win a Super Bowl, which would be ridiculous. Plus, there were no playoffs. Let's just talk the modern NFL era. The SF 49er franchise has made the playoffs 23 times in the 46 years of the modern era. That's 50% of the time. The Seahawks, in their 37 years, have made the playoffs 13 times. That's about 35% of the time. And, let's not forget that the Seahawks made the playoffs once with a losing record and made them 6 times with a 9-win season. That's making the playoffs 7 out of 13 times with less than 10 wins. Pretty mediocre if you ask me. The Niners were also contenders in 70, 71 and 72. They went to the conference championship game twice in that three-year period.

The Seahawks all-time winning percentage is .484 (#22 in the league) compared to the Niners percentage of .551 (#7). That's right, the Niners are in the top ten most successful franchises in NFL history and the Seahawks are in the bottom 10.

Here's what you need to do: feel good about your team winning the championship this year but try not to pretend that means that the Seahawks are anywhere near the Niners in terms of where they stand in the history of NFL football. Compared to the San Francisco 49ers, the Seahawks are still an after-thought.
Originally posted by crake49:
Okay "fiveoldrings", since you want to delve into history, let's do some arithmetic. What happened before the modern Super Bowl era is irrelevant. If it were relevant, then one could say, for example, that it took the Bears 60 years to win a Super Bowl, which would be ridiculous. Plus, there were no playoffs. Let's just talk the modern NFL era. The SF 49er franchise has made the playoffs 23 times in the 46 years of the modern era. That's 50% of the time. The Seahawks, in their 37 years, have made the playoffs 13 times. That's about 35% of the time. And, let's not forget that the Seahawks made the playoffs once with a losing record and made them 6 times with a 9-win season. That's making the playoffs 7 out of 13 times with less than 10 wins. Pretty mediocre if you ask me. The Niners were also contenders in 70, 71 and 72. They went to the conference championship game twice in that three-year period.

The Seahawks all-time winning percentage is .484 (#22 in the league) compared to the Niners percentage of .551 (#7). That's right, the Niners are in the top ten most successful franchises in NFL history and the Seahawks are in the bottom 10.

Here's what you need to do: feel good about your team winning the championship this year but try not to pretend that means that the Seahawks are anywhere near the Niners in terms of where they stand in the history of NFL football. Compared to the San Francisco 49ers, the Seahawks are still an after-thought.

its gonna be funny 10-15 years from now when seahawk fans want to brag about their sb win. they'll be fully within their right to do so, but i will remind them that once upon a time they frowned upon us bragging about previous championships. we all know they'll do it, they spent years bragging about divisional championships like they were sb wins.
Admittedly, I am confused. Someone mind telling me where that all came from? Sensing anger.
Originally posted by crabman82:
its gonna be funny 10-15 years from now when seahawk fans want to brag about their sb win. they'll be fully within their right to do so, but i will remind them that once upon a time they frowned upon us bragging about previous championships. we all know they'll do it, they spent years bragging about divisional championships like they were sb wins.

Bears fans are still high on their '85 team. Redskins fans still talk about those powerhouses in the late 80's. I don't give two ****'s what some newbie Seahawks fans think about it. Niner fans have as right to be proud of their teams history. It's much better than most. We're lucky. We could be Browns or Lions fans.
Originally posted by crake49:
Originally posted by crabman82:
its gonna be funny 10-15 years from now when seahawk fans want to brag about their sb win. they'll be fully within their right to do so, but i will remind them that once upon a time they frowned upon us bragging about previous championships. we all know they'll do it, they spent years bragging about divisional championships like they were sb wins.

Bears fans are still high on their '85 team. Redskins fans still talk about those powerhouses in the late 80's. I don't give two ****'s what some newbie Seahawks fans think about it. Niner fans have as right to be proud of their teams history. It's much better than most. We're lucky. We could be Browns or Lions fans.

absolutely. i never had cowboy or packer fans tell me i couldnt brag about previous titles. it was always fans of teams with zero rings who did it. now that they have one they'll figure out theres no expiration date on bragging about it or cherishing it. and when they do down the road, i'll be there to remind them about how they said you couldnt brag about ancient rings.
Originally posted by fiveoldrings:
Admittedly, I am confused. Someone mind telling me where that all came from? Sensing anger.

Very perceptive. Yes. It comes from dealing with Seahawks fans who think their one championship places them in the pantheon of NFL greatness and have little or no respect for the Niners. Glad to explain.
Originally posted by crake49:
Originally posted by fiveoldrings:
Admittedly, I am confused. Someone mind telling me where that all came from? Sensing anger.

Very perceptive. Yes. It comes from dealing with Seahawks fans who think their one championship places them in the pantheon of NFL greatness and have little or no respect for the Niners. Glad to explain.

I must have missed the post about Seattle being in the "pantheon of NFL greatness". Certainly didn't come from me. Perhaps you can see why I'd be confused by the emotional responses to a pretty straight forward and factual post (in which I paid SF a compliment that would usually indicate, respect).
Okay, sorry for the over-reaction. I could have sworn I saw something about "garbage seasons" and I really don't want to hear that from other fans. I'm a little passionate and protective about the team I've been following since I was a grammar school kid in San Francisco taking the bus over to Kezar. (I'd expect the same from a Seahawk fan regarding their team) And, although the Niners have seen some rough periods, the mid to late 70s and the 9 year period from which they recently emerged, they've actually been a much more successful franchise than they often get credit for. It wasn't just the 80's and 90's. Even before the modern period, they played in a championship game and got close a number of times with some amazing, almost revolutionary offenses in the early days. And old-school Niner fans know that if John Brodie, who was MVP of the league one year, had been fortunate enough to play with any of the defenses Joe Montana had, the Niners would have won one or two Super Bowls in the early 70's long before that epic run in the 80's and 90's.
Originally posted by crake49:
Okay, sorry for the over-reaction. I could have sworn I saw something about "garbage seasons" and I really don't want to hear that from other fans. I'm a little passionate and protective about the team I've been following since I was a grammar school kid in San Francisco taking the bus over to Kezar. (I'd expect the same from a Seahawk fan regarding their team) And, although the Niners have seen some rough periods, the mid to late 70s and the 9 year period from which they recently emerged, they've actually been a much more successful franchise than they often get credit for. It wasn't just the 80's and 90's. Even before the modern period, they played in a championship game and got close a number of times with some amazing, almost revolutionary offenses in the early days. And old-school Niner fans know that if John Brodie, who was MVP of the league one year, had been fortunate enough to play with any of the defenses Joe Montana had, the Niners would have won one or two Super Bowls in the early 70's long before that epic run in the 80's and 90's.

Nothing wrong w/ passion for your team. I quoted the term "garbage" because it wasn't mine but I inferred that the person using it, was talking about sub-par seasons and I chose to limit my inference to seasons with fewer wins than losses. 9-7 seasons might be considered sub-par for example, depending on the fan and the team.

No harm intended.
[ Edited by fiveoldrings on Feb 25, 2014 at 3:53 PM ]