The Saints didn't have a winning season through their first 20 seasons.

The only one I don't really understand is the Bucs.

Cards - in the league for 47 more years than the Saints
Titans/Oilers - in the league for 7 more years than the Saints and have been to the playoffs 21 times.
Bengals - went to 2 superbowls
Seahawks - went to 2 won 1

2 ...

Report Post

Posted by EmperorGout

I hate all of you.

Member since Feb 2008

11281 posts

Posted on 8/16/14 at 12:41 pm to Noplacelikehome

The Cardinals are ranked higher than NO because they won two championships in the 20's or something. Kinda ridiculous. They actually have less playoff appearances than NO despite being almost half a century older, too.

0 ...

Report Post

Posted by Jake88

Member since Apr 2005

68742 posts

Posted on 8/17/14 at 10:23 am to Noplacelikehome

quote:
Cards - in the league for 47 more years than the Saints
Titans/Oilers - in the league for 7 more years than the Saints and have been to the playoffs 21 times.
Bengals - went to 2 superbowls
Seahawks - went to 2 won 1

I've watched the Saints since 1977 so I'm well aware of their first 20 years. The Cards though are one of the worst, if not worst history in the NFL. They've had 47 more years of futility than the Saints.

The Bengals lost two Superbowls. I'd say winning one is leaps and bounds superior to losing two. In fact their is a poster in this thread that couldn't recall if they'd made it to more than one.

Oilers/Titans made one Superbowl and had some "near success" during the 1970's. They are suspect being placed ahead of the Saints. How many Titans fans wouldn't trade their history for the Saints' history and a Superbowl win?

Seahawks? Maybe. I just recall the Jim Zorn years and their history of futility. I suppose their being ahead of the Saints is fair.

1 ...

Report Post

Saints Talk - Replies to Post

Return To Board

Page 1

Return To Board