NFL (2024 Season)

[Henry]

I know what it feels like to be a long-suffering fan. My fondest memories of da Bears remain the Walter Payton-Mike Ditka era, which also included the legendary Monsters of the Midway defense and the Super Bowl Shuffle that preceded their first, and so far only, win back in '86. And to boot, this was in one of the darkest eras for the Packers, who wouldn't be a factor for several more years. But ever since that Super Bowl triumph, I've seen Chicago come up short in the playoffs and then miss them altogether thanks to increasingly incompetent ownership, and that Super Bowl loss to the Colts in '07 hurts the most. Meanwhile, I've had to suffer through the Packers' supremacy in the NFC Central/North in the same timeline, winning three conference championships and two Super Bowls (although I couldn't help but gloat when they lost to the Broncos in '98). On top of this, now there's talk of the Bears moving out to the suburbs and leaving Soldier Field in limbo; and speaking of which, it was once a glorious place to be due to its history, but the early-aughts renovations ruined it for me. As the old saying goes, at least we're not Detroit. (a reference to the fact that the Lions have never played in a Super Bowl, and most likely never will)

So yeah, count me in as someone who shares a Cowboys fan's pain.

[Max Rockatansky]

^^^

Funny, people used to say the Cardinals would never play in a Super Bowl either.  They got hot one year with Kurt Warner and almost won the whole thing as a 9-7 team.  I don't consider myself "suffering"  as a Lions given we have U of M football and every other Detroit team has won a championship in my lifetime.  I guess if the Cardinals can get to a Super Bowl there is hope for any team.   

That said, the Lions are the only team I follow that I would go pay to attend a championship game.  The Lions winning the Super Bowl was more my Dad's dream, I was just happy they went 9-8. 

[thspfc]

If you need more evidence that the relentless mocking of the Cowboys today is more emotion-based than it is football-based, look at the difference in treatment between the Cowboys and the Bills.

Total record over the last 10 seasons
Cowboys: 97-74
Bills: 96-74

Division titles over the last 10 seasons
Cowboys: 4
Bills: 3

Playoff berths over the last 10 seasons
Cowboys: 5
Bills: 5

Playoff record over the last 10 seasons
Cowboys: 3-5
Bills: 4-5

If the narrative is that the Cowboys always overperform in the regular season and underperform in the playoffs, why isn't Buffalo getting the same treatment? They're getting some heat from what I've heard, but not nearly to the extent Dallas is. Buffalo's loss was undoubtedly more embarrassing. They were the higher seed, at home, favored to win, and got stomped from the first drive of the game to the last. The Cowboys were the lower seed, on the road, underdogs. The game was tied going into the 4th and in the end the margin was one touchdown.

Sure, there's the fact that the Cowboys haven't made a conference title game in 27 years. But here's why I take issue with using that as a "gotcha": if the point is that the Cowboys have not been successful recently, then why do the late 90s and 2000s matter now? Does "recent" simply mean every year since they last won it all? Because that's obvious cherry picking. 1997 is recent but 1996 is not? OK. I think 10 years is a fair definition of "recent" when it comes to sports. And in those 10 years, Dallas and Buffalo have been basically the same franchise. Buffalo made it one game further one time. That's the only difference. And they benefited from a Lamar Jackson injury in that divisional game they won in 2020.

[epzik8]

I was all in on the Bills...

[ethanhopkin14]

The Cowboys could be considered the luckiest franchise in the NFL. When the NFL and AFL merged in 1970, there were five different options for organizing the NFC into divisions. Only one of the five grouped the Cowboys with the huge markets in NY, Philly and DC, and that's the one that got drawn. That undoubtedly improved their exposure.

I will respectfully disagree.

I have heard the "Cowboys are lucky" defense before and I honestly don't get it.

1966 NFL Championship game Dandy Don Meridith throws an interception in the endzone against Green Bay which sealed the deal or the Cowboys would have gone to the first Super Bowl.

1967 NLF Championship game, The Ice Bowl, Jerry Kramer delivers The Block to Jethro Pugh and he slips and can't stop Bart Starr from sneaking in for the game winning touchdown.  If he's stopped, the Cowboys go to the second Super Bowl.

Super Bowl V, in the worst played Super Bowl ever, the Cowboys came a field goal away from winning.

Super Bowl VII, I don't want to get into Jackie Smith dropping the pass in the endzone.  Had he made that catch, the inflection of that game would have been way different. 

1982 NFC Championship Game, The Catch happens.  So what, there were still 0:58 left.  The Cowboys got the ball and Danny White hits Drew Pearson on a slant and he almost got away and The Catch would have been a footnote.  It was a one-point game so even after Drew Pearson was tackled, they still had a shot, but Danny White muffed the snap, and the 49ers recovered the ice the game and missed a chance to go to another Super Bowl.

1995 NFC Championship Game, had Troy Aikman not started the game off with a pick 6 and Michael Irvin had not fumbled the ball for a 49er touchdown, they would have won that game and gone to Super Bowl XXIX.

It's arrogant to say, I know, that each of the times the Cowboys lost the game to advance to the Super Bowl it would also been a Super Bowl win given the disparity of the NFL/NFC vs the AFL/AFC at the time.

Everyone says the Cowboys are lucky, I just look at all the times their luck couldn't have been any worse.  They were so close to having way more accolades than they currently do. 

[Max Rockatansky]

If you need more evidence that the relentless mocking of the Cowboys today is more emotion-based than it is football-based, look at the difference in treatment between the Cowboys and the Bills.

Total record over the last 10 seasons
Cowboys: 97-74
Bills: 96-74

Division titles over the last 10 seasons
Cowboys: 4
Bills: 3

Playoff berths over the last 10 seasons
Cowboys: 5
Bills: 5

Playoff record over the last 10 seasons
Cowboys: 3-5
Bills: 4-5

If the narrative is that the Cowboys always overperform in the regular season and underperform in the playoffs, why isn't Buffalo getting the same treatment? They're getting some heat from what I've heard, but not nearly to the extent Dallas is. Buffalo's loss was undoubtedly more embarrassing. They were the higher seed, at home, favored to win, and got stomped from the first drive of the game to the last. The Cowboys were the lower seed, on the road, underdogs. The game was tied going into the 4th and in the end the margin was one touchdown.

Sure, there's the fact that the Cowboys haven't made a conference title game in 27 years. But here's why I take issue with using that as a "gotcha": if the point is that the Cowboys have not been successful recently, then why do the late 90s and 2000s matter now? Does "recent" simply mean every year since they last won it all? Because that's obvious cherry picking. 1997 is recent but 1996 is not? OK. I think 10 years is a fair definition of "recent" when it comes to sports. And in those 10 years, Dallas and Buffalo have been basically the same franchise. Buffalo made it one game further one time. That's the only difference. And they benefited from a Lamar Jackson injury in that divisional game they won in 2020.

Texas "exceptionalism"  coupled with how Cowboy fans tend to behave spurs a lot of people to root against them.  It's not too dissimilar to how people react to when the New York Yankees lose in the post season, the mentality of the fan base is similar.  The Bills on the other hand come from a depressed blue collar city and are generally thought of as an underdog.  More casual fans tend to find the so-called underdog appealing.

[wanderer2575]

If the narrative is that the Cowboys always overperform in the regular season and underperform in the playoffs, why isn't Buffalo getting the same treatment? They're getting some heat from what I've heard, but not nearly to the extent Dallas is. Buffalo's loss was undoubtedly more embarrassing. They were the higher seed, at home, favored to win, and got stomped from the first drive of the game to the last. The Cowboys were the lower seed, on the road, underdogs. The game was tied going into the 4th and in the end the margin was one touchdown.

I wonder if it's simply that a lot of people hold to a conspiracy theory that Jerry Jones is somehow pulling s*** behind the scenes to benefit his team, and they still lose.

[triplemultiplex]

For me, hating on the Cowboys is a product of being football conscious 30 years ago.  They had several players with off-field issues that made it easy to cast the whole team as villains.  Hell, that characterization even made into 1998's "Baseketball" where the rival team for the good guys to beat is the Dallas Felons.

Element two for hating the Cowboys is that googly-eyed prick Jerry Jones.  Most NFL owners are kind of shitheels; seems to be a requirement of the job; but it's worse when a billionaire shitheel wants to be popular.  During any Cowboys game, you're 10 times more likely to see a shot of Jones in the luxury box compared to any other owner.  The media likes to put him in the spotlight and I hate that about both sports media and the way Jones seems to relish the attention.  Screw that guy.

Element three for hating the Cowboys is the mediocre broadcasting career of Troy Aikmen.  I just don't like listening to Buck/Aikmen; they don't have good broadcasting voices, in my opinion, so add that to the fact that he's an ex-Cowboy and I relate my disdain for his calling games to my dislike of the Cowboys in general.

Jumping off what someone else mentioned, it bothers me that they are in a division with three east coast teams when it would make so much more geographic sense to put them in the West back when they went to four divisions per conference.  This bullcrap that they have 'preserve the rivalries' with east coast teams reeked of sports media hogwash and Jerry Jones putting his thumb on the scale.  More attention for me, the googly-eyed billionaire prick!

Finally, when I was a kid and "my" team was climbing its way out of the basement after a generation of being terrible, the Cowboys were the team to beat. They were the ones standing in the way of the promised land, so they are the bad guys forever now.  The 13 year old inside of me still smiles every time they sputter out in the post-season or like their soon to be unemployed kicker misses three extra points in a row.

[02 Park Ave]

NFL Films, ironically, was (and still is) headquartered in Mt. Laurel, NJ, just outside of Philly.  Baseball's Philadelphia Phillies main broadcaster for several decades including the 1980's, Harry Kalas, did a lot of narrating for NFL Films' productions.  So there's a little sting that Dallas got that nod as "America's Team"!

John Facenda was The Voice of NFL Films!

[TheHighwayMan3561]

Ironically enough, the Bills' end to the season was very Vikings-esque in one particular way, pertaining to their season as a whole. Curious if anyone picks up on what I mean by that. Otherwise, I'll check back in a few weeks if I've found anything worthwhile to say.

Vikings of the AFC, I'm assuming. Four Superbowl visits, all losses. And numerous playoff failures.

Yes, I absolutely believe that's true in the big picture, but I was referring to a specific irony of the way this season ended for both teams.

Losing at home?

[jeffandnicole]

If the narrative is that the Cowboys always overperform in the regular season and underperform in the playoffs, why isn't Buffalo getting the same treatment?

How many Superbowl victories are we talking about? 

Dallas fans are much louder in proclaiming their 5 wins, even though any fan under 28 years of age has never seen one.

Their owner and players also tend to be more well known and more notable than most players on the Bills.

I don't think you really want the same reaction from people mocking the Bills' 4 straight SB losses.

[thspfc]

If the narrative is that the Cowboys always overperform in the regular season and underperform in the playoffs, why isn't Buffalo getting the same treatment?

even though any fan under 28 years of age has never seen one.

And this is precisely the cherry picking I spoke of:

Sure, there's the fact that the Cowboys haven't made a conference title game in 27 years. But here's why I take issue with using that as a "gotcha": if the point is that the Cowboys have not been successful recently, then why do the late 90s and 2000s matter now? Does "recent" simply mean every year since they last won it all? Because that's obvious cherry picking. 1997 is recent but 1996 is not? OK. I think 10 years is a fair definition of "recent" when it comes to sports. And in those 10 years, Dallas and Buffalo have been basically the same franchise.

Their owner and players also tend to be more well known and more notable than most players on the Bills.

Yeah, my entire point was that the earful the Cowboys are receiving from NFL fans and media following yesterday's game is mostly rooted in emotions, not in what happened on the field. If it was 100% about the football being played, the Bills would be getting bashed the same amount (or harder because their loss was worse). But they're not.

[jeffandnicole]

Their owner and players also tend to be more well known and more notable than most players on the Bills.

Yeah, my entire point was that the earful the Cowboys are receiving from NFL fans and media following yesterday's game is mostly rooted in emotions, not in what happened on the field. If it was 100% about the football being played, the Bills would be getting bashed the same amount (or harder because their loss was worse). But they're not.

There could be some toning down because of what the Bills went through over the past month.  But remember...4 teams lost this weekend.  None of those 3 have the national hatred towards them that the Cowboys have.

And not that a bunch of laterals usually works anyway, but the Cowboys' Turpin got pancaked before they even had a chance to try to get a game-ending TD.  It was a spectacular ending to their season.

[webny99]

Ironically enough, the Bills' end to the season was very Vikings-esque in one particular way, pertaining to their season as a whole. Curious if anyone picks up on what I mean by that. Otherwise, I'll check back in a few weeks if I've found anything worthwhile to say.

Vikings of the AFC, I'm assuming. Four Superbowl visits, all losses. And numerous playoff failures.

Yes, I absolutely believe that's true in the big picture, but I was referring to a specific irony of the way this season ended for both teams.

Losing at home?

Yes, that's true as well - the only two teams to lose at home so far besides the Bucs.

But even more specifically, the Vikings hadn't lost a close game all season, and then what do they do in the playoffs?
Likewise, the Bills had never been blown out all season - three losses by a combined eight points - and then what do they do in the playoffs? Sure enough, a stinker performance was lurking all along, even despite an eight game win streak.

[jakeroot]

But even more specifically, the Vikings hadn't lost a close game all season, and then what do they do in the playoffs?
Likewise, the Bills had never been blown out all season - three losses by a combined eight points - and then what do they do in the playoffs? Sure enough, a stinker performance was lurking all along, even despite an eight game win streak.

The Vikings losing by a touchdown is a lot less humiliating than what happened to the Bills. I don't see how you can compare the two performances.

[jgb191]

Dallas fans are much louder in proclaiming their 5 wins

Bingo! Bullseye! Jackpot! etc.  You hit the nail on the head.

Every single Fall season, I have to hear it from the legions of Cowboys religious-like followers (even from many of my own relatives) here in my home-state:

"Cowboys have five Super Bowl rings; the Texans have ZERO!"

"Any JV team could beat the Texans!"

Anybody remember the movie "The Little Giants?"  It goes like that:  The Cowboys is that accomplished big brother widely admired accordingly, and the Texans are the youngest franchise, the little brother if you will, that just wants to be counted as a pro NFL team, but is mostly ignored (in some cases ridiculed) even by many in my state; so they have something to prove with that burning desire to beat the big brother.

And normally I am adamant that any loss is on every player that played a minute in the game.  But when you (talking about Dak) make salary demands (like $40 million) on a hard cap, and if you force management to cave in to your demands, then you (again on Dak) accept full responsibility of the results of the season.  And if you don't deliver, then good luck finding another contract in your playing career; reputation ruined.  That's what I anticipate will happen to Dak after his current contract expires; nobody else will want him no matter how dire the team's QB situation may be.

[thspfc]

That's what I anticipate will happen to Dak after his current contract expires; nobody else will want him no matter how dire the team's QB situation may be.

Wanna bet on that?

[webny99]

But even more specifically, the Vikings hadn't lost a close game all season, and then what do they do in the playoffs?
Likewise, the Bills had never been blown out all season - three losses by a combined eight points - and then what do they do in the playoffs? Sure enough, a stinker performance was lurking all along, even despite an eight game win streak.

The Vikings losing by a touchdown is a lot less humiliating than what happened to the Bills. I don't see how you can compare the two performances.

Well, aside from the fact that the Bengals are also way better than the Giants... the point of comparison is that both teams did something they had not done all season. In other words, they suffered an atypical loss based on their season. But of course, it was still highly predictable to their fan base. Indicative in both cases of a team that seems to be allergic to winning a championship.

[Henry]

^^^

Funny, people used to say the Cardinals would never play in a Super Bowl either.  They got hot one year with Kurt Warner and almost won the whole thing as a 9-7 team.  I don't consider myself "suffering"  as a Lions given we have U of M football and every other Detroit team has won a championship in my lifetime.  I guess if the Cardinals can get to a Super Bowl there is hope for any team.   

That said, the Lions are the only team I follow that I would go pay to attend a championship game.  The Lions winning the Super Bowl was more my Dad's dream, I was just happy they went 9-8. 

You do have a point, because of the success of the other three Detroit teams. In a similar vein, I've seen every other Chicago team win its own championships after 1986, but the Cubs' 2016 World Series title is the one I've enjoyed the most, since prior to that I (and all the other Cub faithful) had to endure their drought going into the triple digits.

[ethanhopkin14]

Every single Fall season, I have to hear it from the legions of Cowboys religious-like followers (even from many of my own relatives) here in my home-state:

"Cowboys have five Super Bowl rings; the Texans have ZERO!"

"Any JV team could beat the Texans!"

Anybody remember the movie "The Little Giants?"  It goes like that:  The Cowboys is that accomplished big brother widely admired accordingly, and the Texans are the youngest franchise, the little brother if you will, that just wants to be counted as a pro NFL team, but is mostly ignored (in some cases ridiculed) even by many in my state; so they have something to prove with that burning desire to beat the big brother.

Don't act like your fanbase are saints.  I constantly get trash talked by Texans fans who say, "Dallas hasn't done anything recently (it's true, I can't lie)" or "All the players are arrogant and overpaid".  "The fans are obnoxious." 

Mind you I didn't say anything in these beratings other than answer their question of "which NFL team do you root for?"  Then get trash talk spewed at me for ten minutes.  Like the Cowboys are the only team in the league that has underperformed or been an atrocity in the playoffs in the 21st century (look at the teams that have gone years without finishing better than last).  I guess the Cowboys have the only arrogant and overpaid players in the league (Deshawn Watson I guess is not overpaid?)  The Cowboys fans are obnoxious, I will own that, but I guess no other fanbase is obnoxious in the entire NFL? 

I think those reasons to hate the Cowboys are just enough, I will admit, but if you are going to hate them for that, then you have to hate the other 30 teams for the same reason, except I guess the Rams since they won the Super Bowl last year so they don't qualify as "hasn't done anything lately" (although that joke of a season they just concluded might cancel that out). 

I guess my point is, in a year when the Texans make the playoffs and the Cowboys don't, the Texan fans are insufferable.  The road goes both ways.  The kicker is most Texan fans I know are former Cowboys fans.  Not a lot of Texan fans are former Oiler fans, so their fanbase is mostly ex-Cowboys fans.  So, when they complain about the Cowboys fanbase, I'm like, "Don't pretend like you weren't just doing that exact thing you are mad about a few years ago."  It's like when someone loses weight after being overweight for years, then they berate everyone for eating donuts like they weren't just doing that three months ago. 

[webny99]

In terms of who I want to see win the Superb Owl:

1) Bengals
2) 49ers
3) Chiefs
4) Eagles

I know way too many annoying Eagles fans. The only time I've ever actively rooted for them was when they won the Super Bowl with backup Nick Foles (and it helped that that was against the Patriots). I have no problem with the Chiefs but would be happy to see someone else win.

Life comes at you fast. There was a lot of mutual respect between the Bills and Bengals dating back to Andy Dalton ending the playoff drought, and extending to the Damar Hamlin injury, which they handled with class. But things have taken a hard left turn thanks to the Bengals' seeming obsession with the neutral site game that wasn't and especially Eli Apple invoking Hamlin while trash talking Diggs. So, it seems much of Western NY will be rooting for the Chiefs.

[Hot Rod Hootenanny]

In terms of who I want to see win the Superb Owl:

1) Bengals
2) 49ers
3) Chiefs
4) Eagles

I know way too many annoying Eagles fans.

I don't believe Jeff & myself are that obnoxious as Eagle phans.

[Max Rockatansky]

At this point I think the 49ers would be the most interesting Super Bowl winner.  It would absolutely drive my brother in law nuts (which has massive entertainment value) and quite the story unto itself with the emergence of Brock Purdy.

[thspfc]

In terms of who I want to see win the Superb Owl:

1) Bengals
2) 49ers
3) Chiefs
4) Eagles

I know way too many annoying Eagles fans. The only time I've ever actively rooted for them was when they won the Super Bowl with backup Nick Foles (and it helped that that was against the Patriots). I have no problem with the Chiefs but would be happy to see someone else win.

Life comes at you fast. There was a lot of mutual respect between the Bills and Bengals dating back to Andy Dalton ending the playoff drought, and extending to the Damar Hamlin injury, which they handled with class. But things have taken a hard left turn thanks to the Bengals' seeming obsession with the neutral site game that wasn't and especially Eli Apple invoking Hamlin while trash talking Diggs. So, it seems much of Western NY will be rooting for the Chiefs.

Can't blame them for rubbing the neutral site AFC championship back in everyone's faces. Media was literally talking about it becoming a permanent thing depending on how it went. Talk about jumping the gun. Honestly it's pretty funny how Cincy has ruined everyone's fantasies about coin flips and neutral site games and the NFL "scripting" a Bills Super Bowl win because of Hamlin. Speedrunning "lovable losers to big bad winners" even faster than the Chiefs did.

[webny99]

Life comes at you fast. There was a lot of mutual respect between the Bills and Bengals dating back to Andy Dalton ending the playoff drought, and extending to the Damar Hamlin injury, which they handled with class. But things have taken a hard left turn thanks to the Bengals' seeming obsession with the neutral site game that wasn't and especially Eli Apple invoking Hamlin while trash talking Diggs. So, it seems much of Western NY will be rooting for the Chiefs.

Can't blame them for rubbing the neutral site AFC championship back in everyone's faces. Media was literally talking about it becoming a permanent thing depending on how it went. Talk about jumping the gun. Honestly it's pretty funny how Cincy has ruined everyone's fantasies about coin flips and neutral site games and the NFL "scripting" a Bills Super Bowl win because of Hamlin. Speedrunning "lovable losers to big bad winners" even faster than the Chiefs did.

They were looking for motivation and fuel for the "no one believes in us" argument. Zac Taylor even admitted it this week. But the whole neutral site thing is so ridiculous because literally every team sells advance tickets to the championship before they know if they'll be in it. Are the Chiefs riled up because the Bengals sold tickets to a potential Jags-Bengals championship? Of course not.

And I'm actually glad there won't be a neutral site game FWIW. I didn't like anything about that situation or the narratives it created. But the Bengals spinning it as "us against the world" -- and especially that the NFL used the Hamlin situation to negatively impact their season -- is just a bad look and taking it way too far.