Quote:
|
Originally Posted by rome108
Ya, the Skins last superbowl win was in 92 (outside of the 80's), but it's still within 10 years (a decade). What's more, the steelers last superbowl win was in 80 and the 49ers was in 90 (outside the scope their numerical decade). So why no love for the Skins and them not being called a dynasty? I'll tell you why, cuz it's the damn press again, the same a-holes that keep Art Monk out of the HOF.
|
I agree about including the skins as a dynasty, since they won their titles over a 9-10 yr span in much the same way as the 49ers, and they were always play-off competitive even in most years where they didn't win the Super Bowl. In fact, the '82-'92 skins are the truest dynasty since we had successors at key positions (aka 3 different QBs, 3 different RBs) when we won the Super bowls, and not the same bunch of guys each year like the 90s Cowgirls, the 70s Steelers, and the Pats.
As for Monk, I for one will be happy to see him in one day, but am happy enough that Gibbs is in there, and Darrell Green will certainly be in there (might even be before Monk).