How long do you give Coughlin...

[BIGBLUE01]

Ahh, the entertainment begins again...at the risk of boring everyone else here, the Dog will point out that you originally jumped to the point that during the Cowboys "dynasty" years, the Giants still managed to "kick their ass." The Dog incorrectly stated that you the Giants were 0-8 during that time against the cowboys, and was corrected (they were 1-7, and in most cases were blown out...)...you then backpeddled to say that what you meant by "kicking the cowboys ass" was that the Giants beat them once and, in a bizarre point stated that the Giants "ran the division table" before the cowboys did??? That is silly, but then again, you are silly, so the Dog is pretty sure it fits well...and the Dog never back peddled and did in fact graciously apologize for the incorrect statement...do you ever red anything in its entirity, or do you respond aimlessly after reading two or three words in a thread?

 

And the Dog would be more then happy to pull up the thread when you went sniffeling away and said you weren't coming back...the Dog is quite pleased you returned, as prideless as it may be...did you happen to notice while you were scanning the boards this week as a guest that there were few threads that digressed since people were engaging in meanigful debate?

 

Hey, stop using my words! LOL! I know, you were at a loss for words, so you borrowed one of mine.

Looks like YOU may need to learn how to read. I stated CLEARLY, that I wasnt going to say "had minimal success" against the Cowboys. I know you are the type to avoid stating who you root for, but I dont. And Im the type of fan who thinks like this. Giants till I die, fuck the rest. Esp. the Cowgirls. But again, youre avoiding the point, (how ironic, eggy does that alot too!) EVERY YEAR??? Our season doesnt come to a crashing end every year. Unless of course, youre talking about the Cowboys dynasty years, but then, what kinda fan would eggy be if he only rooted for them since they started winning? HMMMMM.........

 

Go ahead, pull up the thread. It says If people on here dont want me calling you names, then I'll leave. But I decided against that. Youare a schmuck, you need to be told that. And show me where it said Im not coming back. I wish I could say I saw what was going on while I was gone, but I didnt. I got a life, you know, that thing you dont have.

[Nesta]

HA HA HA...Oh Boy! Division title! The Cowboys have won a few of those too...Anyone got a calculator? Nevermind, nobody cares...Division title...7-9...8-8...Watch me wave it off...

 

You don't need a calculator Eggy, you need a CALENDAR. It's not the NINETIES anymore kiddo. If you want to compare success let's keep it in this decade with the rest of the world. We're 58-54 in regular season, 2-4 in the postseason, 2 division titles, and one NFC championship.

 

Your wonderful team is 49-63, 0-2 in the postseason, and no titles.

 

Wave off success. That's why you're here criticizing the Giants instead of on the Cowturd board praising your own team.

 

[Sephiroth]

Now, I could be wrong... but I seem to remember BadEgg showing up at the GMB, and here... talking a bunch of smack... then disappearing for weeks when the 'Boys would hit a skid and/or the Giants were surging.

 

I can't remember the guy ever eating crow. But why not make this a bit more interesting?

 

Why not start a new thread (or heck, just post here) where the members can predict how their teams will finish, AND how their most hated team will finish as well? Winners get to gloat... losers swear they'll eat all the crow the opposition can throw on the grill. Those who don't show up for crow servings must change thier avatars to girls in pink tutus, and write, "I love Clay Aiken" in their signatures.

 

Don't be afraid, G-men and Cowboys fans (and whatever fan the 'dog is). Put your money where your mouths are.

[randoff]

You don't need a calculator Eggy, you need a CALENDAR. It's not the NINETIES anymore kiddo. If you want to compare success let's keep it in this decade with the rest of the world. We're 58-54 in regular season, 2-4 in the postseason, 2 division titles, and one NFC championship.

 

Your wonderful team is 49-63, 0-2 in the postseason, and no titles.

 

Wave off success. That's why you're here criticizing the Giants instead of on the Cowturd board praising your own team.

 

I've been sayin' (and posting) these types of facts for Egg for the longest,,,,and the funny thing is...Egg will never get it!

[BadEgg]

You don't need a calculator Eggy, you need a CALENDAR. It's not the NINETIES anymore kiddo. If you want to compare success let's keep it in this decade with the rest of the world. We're 58-54 in regular season, 2-4 in the postseason, 2 division titles, and one NFC championship.

 

Your wonderful team is 49-63, 0-2 in the postseason, and no titles.

 

Wave off success. That's why you're here criticizing the Giants instead of on the Cowturd board praising your own team.

 

 

Now you just being silly. There is no better way to compare two franchises than by simply going by head to head competition. You don't want to go there so you pick a decade. A decade when your team is barely 500, has a losing record in the playoffs, and no championships. Now you are just being silly.

 

Are you having a bad day? You are normally better than this.

[BadEgg]

Now, I could be wrong... but I seem to remember BadEgg showing up at the GMB, and here... talking a bunch of smack... then disappearing for weeks when the 'Boys would hit a skid and/or the Giants were surging.

 

I can't remember the guy ever eating crow. But why not make this a bit more interesting?

 

Why not start a new thread (or heck, just post here) where the members can predict how their teams will finish, AND how their most hated team will finish as well? Winners get to gloat... losers swear they'll eat all the crow the opposition can throw on the grill. Those who don't show up for crow servings must change thier avatars to girls in pink tutus, and write, "I love Clay Aiken" in their signatures.

 

Don't be afraid, G-men and Cowboys fans (and whatever fan the 'dog is). Put your money where your mouths are.

 

Ohhh Boy...Interesting...Very intersting, indeed. Now you're really contributing to the boards. Wow. I was excited about the start of the season but now...with this "eat crow" post and the Clay Aiken twist...can anyone wish for more?

 

Sephiroth, can I borrow your pink Tutu and "I love Clay Aiken" T-shirt...I'll wear them while I post...

[Nesta]

Now you just being silly. There is no better way to compare two franchises than by simply going by head to head competition. You don't want to go there so you pick a decade. A decade when your team is barely 500, has a losing record in the playoffs, and no championships. Now you are just being silly.

 

Are you having a bad day? You are normally better than this.

 

I talk about recent successes and you bring up the nineties. Get a calendar. It's 2007. Welcome.

[Sephiroth]

Sephiroth, can I borrow your pink Tutu and "I love Clay Aiken" T-shirt...I'll wear them while I post...

 

Seeing how your team has finished the past couple of years... and after reading a LOT of your posts... I'll bet you already have one.

[randoff]

Now you just being silly. There is no better way to compare two franchises than by simply going by head to head competition. You don't want to go there so you pick a decade. A decade when your team is barely 500, has a losing record in the playoffs, and no championships. Now you are just being silly.

 

Are you having a bad day? You are normally better than this.

I've got a question? Are the Cowboys STILL 'America's Team'? Because IMO the 'haven't did shit lately' team should be their label. Oh yes, we ALL know that the Giants have never been 'America's Team' and he Giants haven't won 3 Superbowls in a row (I beat you to it Egg)...but why is the Cowboys labeled 'America's Team'? Sooner or later the Cowboys might not be Texas best team....and if the Oilers wouldn't have moved....who knows? My opinion of course.

 

P.S. My guess is that he 'picked a decade' choice, is probably because it's when YOU became a Cowboys fan...would it be fair to compare the years that you wasn't even born (ex. anything before 1994?)

[BadEgg]

I talk about recent successes and you bring up the nineties. Get a calendar. It's 2007. Welcome.

 

Your problem is this: if you want to talk about real success (winning championships) the Cowboys have done all of that more recently. So then you have to resort to these silly arguments narrowing everything to the last 10 years, 5 years (whatever it may be) so you can say look, the Giants have won 2 more playoff games. So sad...But I am used to your game -- if the Cowboys win the Superbowl this year you will say let's compare the franchises from 1997 to 2005...

 

I'm not bringing up just the 90s. Let's start from the first game the Giants and Cowboys played head-to-head and go from there. Let's look at Championships and head-to-head scores. There is no better measuring stick, is there???

 

Better yet, I think we should stop wasting time and clear the slate. If you look through my posts, I don't typically start discussions talking about the past. I only go there when the best that you Giants fans can come up with is that "the Cowboys haven't won a playoff game in 10 years."

 

Nearly every thread I have started has focused on the Giants and what people are saying about the Giants THIS YEAR. And it isn't pretty. Hence, you people resort to the "last 10 years" arguments.

 

I am more than happy to stick with what people are saying about the Cowboys and Giants this year...

 

AND FYI, THE STAR LEDGER THIS WEEKEND (A HOME TOWN PAPER) RANKED THE GIANTS 19 IN THE LEAGUE AND BEHIND ROMO'S COWBOYS...HA HA HA...I GUESS WE CAN OFFICIALLY SAY THAT THE STAR LEDGER IS NOW IN LINE WHAT MOST WRITERS AND COMMENTATORS ARE SAYING, INCLUDING SI...

 

But I give you people credit. You're resiliant...

 

God, it must be tough to be a Giants fan...

 

PS. Let me save you the time and respond to the last line for you: It's tough being a Giants fan...but not as tough as it is for the Cowboys the last 10 years...See, now you officially have nothing to say...

[xxi-xxv]

Pre season rankings should mean as much to the predicted good teams as they do to the predicted poor teams.

[ksm7]

I talk about recent successes and you bring up the nineties. Get a calendar. It's 2007. Welcome.

 

you see shasta, this is why the Dog chooses not to disclose his team of choice...a thread initially designed for football fans to discuss the potential limit on Tom Coughlin has digressed to a battle over which team, the Cowboys or the Giants, have a stronger franchise...

 

anyhow, if the Giants start slowly, the age old question that teams must deal with: is it better to cut the coach loose mid-year and finish with an interim, or do you ride out the year with a lame duck coach and then fire him...the challenge is, in a weaker conference, where 8-8 can get you in the playoffs, you never can tell...fire a coach too early, and you may be bidding farewell to the season (players may check out...)...keep a coach, and if he doesn't become lame duck, you may sneak into the playoffs afterall...fascinating management decisions for all to contemplate...

[Nesta]

Your problem is this: if you want to talk about real success (winning championships) the Cowboys have done all of that more recently. So then you have to resort to these silly arguments narrowing everything to the last 10 years, 5 years (whatever it may be) so you can say look, the Giants have won 2 more playoff games. So sad...But I am used to your game -- if the Cowboys win the Superbowl this year you will say let's compare the franchises from 1997 to 2005...

 

I'm not bringing up just the 90s. Let's start from the first game the Giants and Cowboys played head-to-head and go from there. Let's look at Championships and head-to-head scores. There is no better measuring stick, is there???

 

Better yet, I think we should stop wasting time and clear the slate. If you look through my posts, I don't typically start discussions talking about the past. I only go there when the best that you Giants fans can come up with is that "the Cowboys haven't won a playoff game in 10 years."

 

Nearly every thread I have started has focused on the Giants and what people are saying about the Giants THIS YEAR. And it isn't pretty. Hence, you people resort to the "last 10 years" arguments.

 

I am more than happy to stick with what people are saying about the Cowboys and Giants this year...

 

AND FYI, THE STAR LEDGER THIS WEEKEND (A HOME TOWN PAPER) RANKED THE GIANTS 19 IN THE LEAGUE AND BEHIND ROMO'S COWBOYS...HA HA HA...I GUESS WE CAN OFFICIALLY SAY THAT THE STAR LEDGER IS NOW IN LINE WHAT MOST WRITERS AND COMMENTATORS ARE SAYING, INCLUDING SI...

 

But I give you people credit. You're resiliant...

 

God, it must be tough to be a Giants fan...

 

PS. Let me save you the time and respond to the last line for you: It's tough being a Giants fan...but not as tough as it is for the Cowboys the last 10 years...See, now you officially have nothing to say...

 

First eggy, you may notice I didn't arbitrarily choose the time frame. I chose 2000 to present because it is the decade we are living in. 99% of the time when a team is broken down and discussed it is differentiated by the decade. Cowboys of the nineties, 9'ers of the 80's, etc...

I was comparing your team with mine over this decade, it being the most recent in football history. That more than makes it a valid comparison. One that no doubt hurts you to acknowledge but legitimate comparison nonetheless.

 

The fact that you haven't won a playoff in 10 years, division title in 9 years, and are well below .500 in this decade are all valid arguments when discussing recent successes of both football teams. I'm sure you don't like to admit that, but you can't argue with facts eggy. Get over it and come up with something better than all your cowturd history lessons.

 

Are you eggy, insinuating that the only real success in the NFL is a championship? That would make you as sad as all the people you make fun of here who're expecting superbowls every year. Maybe you just expect a superbowl, but know better than to get your hopes up. That's actually sadder than the others I think.

Couple that with your jealousy of Giant's fans and you're one pathetic dude.

[Sephiroth]

nyhow, if the Giants start slowly, the age old question that teams must deal with: is it better to cut the coach loose mid-year and finish with an interim, or do you ride out the year with a lame duck coach and then fire him...the challenge is, in a weaker conference, where 8-8 can get you in the playoffs, you never can tell...fire a coach too early, and you may be bidding farewell to the season (players may check out...)...keep a coach, and if he doesn't become lame duck, you may sneak into the playoffs afterall...fascinating management decisions for all to contemplate...

 

Has that ever happened? Has anyone ever fired a coach mid-season and "sparked" their team to the playoffs? I can't think of that ever happening.

 

I think once the coach is canned, the players mail it in. But the Giants never fire coaches mid-season anyway. Jeez, if we can stomach Ray Handley for TWO awful seasons, we could deal with Tom Coughlin at 1-7.

[fishgutmartyr]

you see shasta, this is why the Dog chooses not to disclose his team of choice...a thread initially designed for football fans to discuss the potential limit on Tom Coughlin has digressed to a battle over which team, the Cowboys or the Giants, have a stronger franchise...

 

anyhow, if the Giants start slowly, the age old question that teams must deal with: is it better to cut the coach loose mid-year and finish with an interim, or do you ride out the year with a lame duck coach and then fire him...the challenge is, in a weaker conference, where 8-8 can get you in the playoffs, you never can tell...fire a coach too early, and you may be bidding farewell to the season (players may check out...)...keep a coach, and if he doesn't become lame duck, you may sneak into the playoffs afterall...fascinating management decisions for all to contemplate...

The Giants have fired only one coach that I know of in mid-season--Bill Arnsparger. If they didn't fire John McVay midseason, they certainly aren't firing Coughlin mid-season.

[randoff]

if you want to talk about real success (winning championships) the Cowboys have done all of that more recently.

HUH??? Please (anybody) tell me what have the Cowboys won that's recent? Since Egg 'hates' when people bring up the 11 year Cowboy drought.

 

Nearly every thread I have started has focused on the Giants and what people are saying about the Giants THIS YEAR. And it isn't pretty.

Again I am curious into what 'magic' or credability so called experts have over a season that hasn't even started yet. And those same 'geniouses' had Philadelphia winning the NFC East last yr and representing the NFC in a Superbowl...but we all know that didn't happen. Egg, tell you what...I've got a piece of land in Arizona with Oceanfront property. The 'experts' say it's a prime spot and will be worth millions in 2008.

 

If you look through my posts, I don't typically start discussions talking about the past

So let's talk about last year then (the past too I do believe)...Giants 8-8, Dallas 9-7....head to head...a split. Both bounced in the first round of the playoffs. Wooo what a HELL of a difference! One game. Wow! I feel so bad for the Giants. Not even competitive huh?

 

The fact that you haven't won a playoff in 10 years, division title in 9 years, and are well below .500 in this decade are all valid arguments when discussing recent successes of both football teams. That would equal to comparing franchises, what else is there to compare? You aint did shit lately and that's the truth. When will you get it Egg? And the stuff you tried to prove about "well I'd rather have won 3 Superbowls and not have won a playoff game in 11 years....than be a sad Giants ffan" is the MOST ridiculous shit I've ever heard. I know my Giants aren't much better off BUT I would not be happy with a 11 year drought. I'm not real thrilled about the Giants last 6 years either but I know you cannot be happy with your team (since you've started rooting for them in 1994) either.

[BadEgg]

First eggy, you may notice I didn't arbitrarily choose the time frame. I chose 2000 to present because it is the decade we are living in. 99% of the time when a team is broken down and discussed it is differentiated by the decade. Cowboys of the nineties, 9'ers of the 80's, etc...

I was comparing your team with mine over this decade, it being the most recent in football history. That more than makes it a valid comparison. One that no doubt hurts you to acknowledge but legitimate comparison nonetheless.

 

The fact that you haven't won a playoff in 10 years, division title in 9 years, and are well below .500 in this decade are all valid arguments when discussing recent successes of both football teams. I'm sure you don't like to admit that, but you can't argue with facts eggy. Get over it and come up with something better than all your cowturd history lessons.

 

Are you eggy, insinuating that the only real success in the NFL is a championship? That would make you as sad as all the people you make fun of here who're expecting superbowls every year. Maybe you just expect a superbowl, but know better than to get your hopes up. That's actually sadder than the others I think.

Couple that with your jealousy of Giant's fans and you're one pathetic dude.

 

The only way to accurrately measure two franchises is to go head-to-head from the beginning...BUT

 

If you want to focus on this past decade searching for "recent" success then it confirms my belief that the bar is set low in Giantland.

 

Because what you are saying is losing to the Ravins in 2000 by the score of 34-7 is a "recent success." Your next "recent success" was 2001 in which the team finished 7-9 followed by what I believe was the famous 49ers choke in 2002. Personally, I think that was a "recent success" for the 49ers, but I could be wrong. The next "recent success" was 4-12 in 2003 that got the only coach besides Parcells to take the team to a Superbowl fired.

 

The "recent success" continues when the Coughlin era begins and, well we all know the team has been a picture of unity and harmony since then. The team has experiened great "recent success" by not winning a playoff game for Tom, and the jobs of their coach and allged franchise QB (whom they essentially gave 3 players away for) are on the line. Not to mention the team has not won a playoff game in the last 3 years...

 

If the team fails to win a playoff game this season, and the coach gets fired would this also be considered a "recent success"?

 

With all of this great "recent success" in NY in THIS DECADE, I would certainly hate to see the numbers in a decade that the Giant fans believed was unsuccessfull...

 

Go ahead...say it..."but the Cowboys haven't won a playoff game in 10 years..." say it... because you've got nothing...

[Sephiroth]

Go ahead...say it..."but the Cowboys haven't won a playoff game in 10 years..." say it... because you've got nothing...

 

So, what's your argument? That both our teams suck?

 

I don't think that a Super Bowl appearance, four (I believe) playoff appearances, and what... three NFC east titles exactly constitute as "failure." Sure, everyone wants to win the Super Bowl, but unfortunately only one team does that per year.

 

It's not unreasonable to look at this decade as the bar for how successful teams have been recently, either. I don't think anyone can argue that you can point to the Eagles as a more successful francise than the Jets in recent years, even though Philly has NO rings.

 

In this decade, the Giants have been a more successful francise than the Cowboys. The Cowboys have had some success as well, and like it or not, the Eagles top both of us.

 

If you want to point fingers, BadEgg go right ahead... but you had better point that same finger back at your beloved Cowboys.

[BadEgg]

So, what's your argument? That both our teams suck?

 

I don't think that a Super Bowl appearance, four (I believe) playoff appearances, and what... three NFC east titles exactly constitute as "failure." Sure, everyone wants to win the Super Bowl, but unfortunately only one team does that per year.

 

It's not unreasonable to look at this decade as the bar for how successful teams have been recently, either. I don't think anyone can argue that you can point to the Eagles as a more successful francise than the Jets in recent years, even though Philly has NO rings.

 

In this decade, the Giants have been a more successful francise than the Cowboys. The Cowboys have had some success as well, and like it or not, the Eagles top both of us.

 

If you want to point fingers, BadEgg go right ahead... but you had better point that same finger back at your beloved Cowboys.

 

I'll point my finger at any team that plays poorly, including Dallas. The point of it is, if I were a Giants fan, I don't think I would lable the last six years as a "recent success." I also would not proudly compare those last six years to any team...I would lable it as six years of hype and frustration...

 

My last post speaks for itself, but in case you missed it, if that is what you people call "recent success" then it is sad and unfortunate to see just how low the bar has fallen since Tuna left...

[Nesta]

The only way to accurrately measure two franchises is to go head-to-head from the beginning...BUT

 

If you want to focus on this past decade searching for "recent" success then it confirms my belief that the bar is set low in Giantland.

 

Because what you are saying is losing to the Ravins in 2000 by the score of 34-7 is a "recent success." Your next "recent success" was 2001 in which the team finished 7-9 followed by what I believe was the famous 49ers choke in 2002. Personally, I think that was a "recent success" for the 49ers, but I could be wrong. The next "recent success" was 4-12 in 2003 that got the only coach besides Parcells to take the team to a Superbowl fired.

 

The "recent success" continues when the Coughlin era begins and, well we all know the team has been a picture of unity and harmony since then. The team has experiened great "recent success" by not winning a playoff game for Tom, and the jobs of their coach and allged franchise QB (whom they essentially gave 3 players away for) are on the line. Not to mention the team has not won a playoff game in the last 3 years...

 

If the team fails to win a playoff game this season, and the coach gets fired would this also be considered a "recent success"?

 

With all of this great "recent success" in NY in THIS DECADE, I would certainly hate to see the numbers in a decade that the Giant fans believed was unsuccessfull...

 

Go ahead...say it..."but the Cowboys haven't won a playoff game in 10 years..." say it... because you've got nothing...

Eggy, comparing the giants and cows over this decade IS a head to head comparison. Why should we go from the beginning? How many people from the beginning are still on your team today? Let's stick with recent history shall we? I know that really irks you, but time doesn't go backwards eggy.

 

 

Now you're coming along kiddo. You see, even with these 'mediocre' successes, it's still leaps and bounds over what the cowturds have done in this decade.

You're around .400, no playoff wins, only two playoff appearances, no division titles, no championships.

That is why you're here criticizing the team you hate, instead of somewhere else praising the team you love.

 

Obvious: Giants have had much more success than the cowturds in this decade. FACT.

Thank you.

[Sephiroth]

I'll point my finger at any team that plays poorly, including Dallas. The point of it is, if I were a Giants fan, I don't think I would lable the last six years as a "recent success." I also would not proudly compare those last six years to any team...I would lable it as six years of hype and frustration...

 

My last post speaks for itself, but in case you missed it, if that is what you people call "recent success" then it is sad and unfortunate to see just how low the bar has fallen since Tuna left...

 

A Super Bowl appearance, and three other playoff appearances in seven years would be "successful" in my book. If you have some other standard for determining "success," my guess is that you'll be rooting for several "unsuccessful" teams in the future.

 

But hey, different strokes for different folks.

[BadEgg]

Eggy, comparing the giants and cows over this decade IS a head to head comparison. Why should we go from the beginning? How many people from the beginning are still on your team today? Let's stick with recent history shall we? I know that really irks you, but time doesn't go backwards eggy.

Now you're coming along kiddo. You see, even with these 'mediocre' successes, it's still leaps and bounds over what the cowturds have done in this decade.

You're around .400, no playoff wins, only two playoff appearances, no division titles, no championships.

That is why you're here criticizing the team you hate, instead of somewhere else praising the team you love.

 

Obvious: Giants have had much more success than the cowturds in this decade. FACT.

Thank you.

 

 

I've said it before and I'll say it again: It must be tough to be a Giants fan. I really give those of you who stick it out year after year credit though...

 

I think the next time the Giants get embarrassed at home in the first round of the playoffs, NY and NJ should throw a parade with lots of streamers. It's unfair to loyal G-Men fans that all of these recent "successes" are not being recognized and celebrated...

[ksm7]

So, what's your argument? That both our teams suck?

 

While monitoring this debate from the perifory, the Dog sees this as more of a debate over what constitues success. Do both teams suck, not so much...but the Dog would argue that neither team has been overly successful this decade...if consistency is the key compnent, the Dog would argue that the patriots, eagles and colts would be the three teams that fall under the category of having a successful decade...

[BIGBLUE01]

While monitoring this debate from the perifory, the Dog sees this as more of a debate over what constitues success. Do both teams suck, not so much...but the Dog would argue that neither team has been overly successful this decade...if consistency is the key compnent, the Dog would argue that the patriots, eagles and colts would be the three teams that fall under the category of having a successful decade...

 

Instead of wasting all that breath, why dont you just say, "yeah, you both gotta point"?

 

No dog, if consistency is the key compnent, then you could put the Lions in there, they've been consistently crappy. If its SB's you measure it by, then keep the Pats in there, and add the Broncos. They are the only two teams w/ multiple SB wins in the past decade.

[randoff]

I've said it before and I'll say it again: It must be tough to be a Giants fan. I really give those of you who stick it out year after year credit though...

 

I think the next time the Giants get embarrassed at home in the first round of the playoffs, NY and NJ should throw a parade with lots of streamers. It's unfair to loyal G-Men fans that all of these recent "successes" are not being recognized and celebrated...

And I can go around in circles like you do....and say "It really must be hard lately rooting for Americas team year after year" No playoff wins, QB changes, retired coaches, T.O., Romo botched snap....getting bounced out of the first round. And before you say it Egg....you know the "Oh your Giants were embarassed by Carolina" what was YOUR Cowboys doing? And to bring up old shit....YOUR Cowboys botched a sure win vs. Seattle. But oh my, you was O so close to witnessing your FIRST ever playoff win. Must be real hard.

 

And what would YOU expect Giants fans to do? What..."we lost a playoff game one year, so let's abandon this team and become Cowboy fans". Then we'd be like Italian HotDog.....a frontrunner.