Posted on 01/11/2005 6:18:33 PM PST by malakhi
| Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. |
After a nine month hiatus, The Neverending Story, the granddaddy of daily threads, has returned to Free Republic. Originally begun on March 24, 2001, as a religious discussion thread, the NES evolved over time into a daily thread spanning a wide variety of topics. The new and improved Neverending Story will feature conversation on religion, politics, culture, current events, business, sports, family, hobbies, general fellowship and more. We welcome you to hang your hat in our little corner of FR. We ask you to abide by the FR posting rules and, even in the midst of serious debate, to keep the discussion friendly and respectful. Those who wish to "duke it out" are asked to take it over to the Smoky Backroom. I placed this thread in "General/Chat" for a reason, so play nice and have fun! :o)
Hey conservonator, what's new and exciting? :o)
Rugby Fan Cuts off Own Testicles
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1338445/posts
The drunker I stand here, the longer I get. :)
BigMack
Well, at least we don't need to worry about him reproducing. =:'O
Ever eat with chop sticks? I'm out of plastic forks and eating my lunch with two straws:')
Freepmail.
Thus saith the LORD: stand ye in the ways and see, and ask for the old paths, where is the good way, and walk therein, and ye shall find rest for your souls. But they said: 'We will not walk therein.' (Jeremiah 6:16)
Back at ya.
BigMack
Replied.
Ernie "Fats" Holmes, from the Steelers of the 70s, said that there's no "dynatsy" claim until they win 4.
I can't aruge with a Steeler. :-)
SD
As long as its cut into small piece, you're OK. :-)
SD
Toledo?
Hey there. You on the road again?
Heheheh... "soccer on ice". I like that! :o)
Again
BigMack
Pong back to you.
Technically there is no such thing as a sports dynasty. It is a current era abuse of the English language, similar to the statement "he gives 110%".
But, but, but, the Patriots do satisfy the modern definition of Dynasty especially when you consider it was done in the free agent - salary cap era.
BTW, tell the Fat one the Cowboys and 49'ers each won 5 SuperBowls and they have set the bar at 5..
Clearly, 12 NFL championships is the threshhold for being considered a dynasty. ;o)
How have the Packer's done in the salary cap - free agency period?
Apples and oranges.
Okay, I'll give you credit for being a one-man soccer dynasty. :o)
How have the Packer's done in the salary cap - free agency period?
Two Super Bowl appearances, and one Super Bowl victory in the salary cap era.
The free agent/salary cap system was instituted in 1993. Judging "success" by both Super Bowl appearances and victories, here is how it stacks up:
1. Patriots. 4 appearances, 3 victories.
2(t). Denver & Dallas. 2 appearances, 2 victories.
3(t). Green Bay & St. Louis. 2 appearances, 1 victory.
So the Packers have, since 1993, been more successful than 27 other NFL franchises. Not bad. In the salary cap era, the Patriots have been the most successful franchise. That is indisputable.
Looking at the entire history of the league, the Packers won three titles by league standing from 1929-1931. Since the league instituted a championship game, the Packers have appeared in the championship game 12 times, winning 9 of them, for a total of 12 NFL championships. In the history of the league, then, the Packers have been the most successful franchise. That is also indisputable.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.