Commanders Post at The Warpath - View Single Post

coggs · 10-31-2012, 07:44 AM

As a Giants fan, I have never once questioned the legitimacy of the 82 and 87 titles. Had the 87 strike continued and they league used replacement players for the play-offs and Super Bowl, then there is an asterik.

As for the Giants in 07 and 11, no they were not a dominant 14-2, 13-3 type team. However, in both seasons they went on the road to beat the #1 and then #2 seed in the NFC and in both years beat the AFC's #1 seed. In 07, they even played their first play-off game on the road. Can't get a much tougher road to the title then what the Giants did.

Secondly, ANY fan who claims they wouldn't celebrate or get a big head over Championships like the Giants won because they didnt dominate the regular season, is more full of $h!t than a politician.

10-31-2012, 07:44 AM	#69
coggs Special Teams Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: staten island Age: 49 Posts: 477	Re: The Legitimacy of Super Bowls 17 & 22 As a Giants fan, I have never once questioned the legitimacy of the 82 and 87 titles. Had the 87 strike continued and they league used replacement players for the play-offs and Super Bowl, then there is an asterik. As for the Giants in 07 and 11, no they were not a dominant 14-2, 13-3 type team. However, in both seasons they went on the road to beat the #1 and then #2 seed in the NFC and in both years beat the AFC's #1 seed. In 07, they even played their first play-off game on the road. Can't get a much tougher road to the title then what the Giants did. Secondly, ANY fan who claims they wouldn't celebrate or get a big head over Championships like the Giants won because they didnt dominate the regular season, is more full of $h!t than a politician. __________________ "Everyone is talking about their dynasty. Well, OUR DYNASTY STARTS TONIGHT."--Michael Strahan, pre-game huddle Pep talk, February 3rd, 2008.