The Legitimacy of Super Bowls 17 & 22

[MTK]

Originally Posted by REDSKINS4ever

Mattyk, I don't like the Giants and I'm beginning to dislike them more than the Cowboys, believe it or not. You don't live up here in NYC like I do. I don't want and care for their respect. The way they see us is the way I see them.

Born and raised in NY, I've lived here for all of 2 years of my life, I know what it's like.

Either way your totally contradicting yourself in this thread.

[ForkLifter]

In my mind, the best response is this: In 1982, the Redskins beat 4 other teams, including the Cowboys who featured multiple hall of famers in the primes of their careers, in the Championship game to finish the year out at 12-1.

In 1987, the Redskins beat the Bears, a team they had also beaten in the 1986 divisional playoff, in Chicago. That Chicago team was supposed to have won multiple super bowls, but they didn't due in large part to the fact that the Redskins were simply better than they were during 1986-1987. 8-4 in non-scab games. 3-0 in the playoffs. Giants were 6-6 with their regulars that year. And the same basic nucleus formed the 1991 team, which was undoubtedly one of the greatest of all time (despite the short memories of some).

If anything, the 1982 and 1987 teams benefitted from not having to face the 49ers , in 1982 because the 49ers were a mess, and in 1987 due to the Vikings upset. That Vikings team was dangerous in 1987, but the Redskins beat them twice when it mattered (although maybe the regular season game didn't matter so much).

Anyways, I don't know where I'm going with this....