Is an era 2 years? ntohing compares to '68 but that era does not have the sustained success of this era. It's like saying Brad Johnson is better than Dan marino b/c Brad won a SB.
That's a terrible analogy. Players don't win Championships all alone. It takes a team effort. We have not won a SB title in this past decade and until we do the late 60's will always trump Wildcard berths
It's a perfect analogy, one QB had sustained greatness, the other had a nice run to a SB. We haven't had sustained greatness but we have had a sustained level of success never before seen in the history of the franchise. No one in taking away '68, it was our best year but 2 years does not make an era and from 1960-1980 we only made 2 postseasons.
Lets see there are many 10/20 of us that actually saw the 68 team play & win SB3 in 69 so that leaves all the youngies who NEVER saw that team play & are unaware of the play of that team except thru reading books about that team (if they have) which means all the youngies would vote for say teams they are more familiar with like the current team or teams maybe 5/7 years ago which is what they would say because the 68 team is not even on there radar :jets:
read the posts, no one is taking anything away from the SB win but an era isn't 2 years and the only playoff years we had in those days were those 2 years in '68 & '69.
Respectfully disagree since the 68 team is the ONLY TEAM EVER to win the SB & that automatically makes them the GREATEST NYJ team ever. If you like U can say it another way since no other team but the 68 team were WORLD CHAMPIONs that again automatically makes them the greatest NYJ game ever. No other team qualifies since they all have won NOTHING & that is a big zippo, nada, nothing, nil :jets:
I agree with the fierst sentence and disagree with the 2nd. How do we know that just because we've been an annual contender for two seasons that it is sustainable? I certainly don't know that yet, not at 3-3 this year, with some obvious weaknsses and two very tough games approaching. I don't think we should consider ourselves "annual contenders" until after this season. Let's wait until then and maybe we can talk about it. Otherwise, our "annual contending" status based on two years and 4 playoff games has the potential to dissapate like a fart in the wind. Yes, this has been the best stretch of football so far, but if this stretch fails to produce the 2nd VLT, it goes down in history as just another decent stretch of good football which produced nothing in the end.
Well being a STH back then I attended ALL the home games including that most thrilling win over those big bad Oakland Raiders in the PO game that propelled them to SB3 :smile:
I think Junc deludes him self that winning championship is the same as being just a so called "contenders" like at least 10 other teams in the league.. If we again go down the tubes WITHOUT the VLT trophy then I have to respectfully disagree that being a "contenders" since it means zippo except that Woody/Rex & the NY Press hype it up so that Woody can sell tix & the media can sell magazines & newspapers JMHO:jets:
I said over and over '68 is #1 but when discussing eras, we made 2 playoff apps and won 2 playoff games in that era. We haven't won a SB but this era we have consistently been a top franchise in the AFC. We've made the playoffs 6 times in the last 10 years, only Indy(9), NE(8) and Pitt(7) have made more. Even if this season goes south I would expect we'd be back quickly w/ the young nucleus we have.
It's a terrible analogy. You're suggesting the 68-69 teams were mediocre teams. They weren't mediocre teams. They were great teams. That brief era was much better than our current era because we came away with a Championship. The current era is great because we are consistent contenders, but we have not yet acheived the same level of success...thus not as great of an era as the one that came away with a championship
And we're the only team in that bunch that doesn't have a Super Bowl. We've been thru 4 coaches and 4 starting QBs (not counting Brooks). To me that's 4 different eras and none ended with a SB championship.
Sorry U did not get my point. In MHO you delude your self when U say well we did this or that when IN FACT we have done NOTHING since we have not won a World Championship since 1/12/69. That means all the years since then when that years season closers out just like 30 other teams in the league we are losers just like those 30 other teams. It does not matter if they do or do not make the POs the only thing that matters no matter how you twist or turn it is winning the VLT. If you chose to believe that being a contender like the media makes us + 10/12 other teams then again in MHO you are just deluding your self. You can argue this or that but in the end no VLTs makes them failures just like the other 30 teams that did not snag the trophy either :sad:
If this is going to turn into a knock down drag out between Champ and Junc, I'm getting out my popcorn machine and putting beer in the fridge. This'll be a weekend's worth of entertainment.
it's really 3 different starting QBs b/c I don't count the one year of favre failure. an era is more than 2 years though. We don't have a SB but we have continualyl been one of the better AFC teams. You can't get to a SB w/o getting to the playoffs.
This statement is a perfect example of the lofty expectations and irrational exhuberance created by none other than Woody Johnson and Rex Ryan to dupe the public into buying the cockamamie PSLs and overpriced tickets. I have news for you. Our "young nucleus" isn't getting any younger and this team is still mostly built on winning now. We have a defense who can't stop the run very well and has no pass rush. If this season "goes south," how do you "expect" that "we'd be back quickly?" Your expectations in that department are as lofty as Woody's prices. A lot has to change in order for us to return to the #1 defense in the league, IMO. We've obviously got problems on the defensive side of the ball. And we have an offense that can't achieve a 1st down until well into the 2nd quarter. We've got a "ground and pound" that's quickly becoming laughable, with receivers (Holmes excluded) who aren't producing either. And a young QB who requires O-line perfection, otherwise we go 3 and out. If this season "goes south," how do you "expect" that "we'd be back quickly" with a fix on this as well? People don't realize how precious PO appearances are and how infrequently they happen to most teams in the NFL. We've been fortunate to have pulled this off lately, but the way this team is playing right now they smell like an 8-8 team on the verge of yet another rebuild. To say that if this season goes south, we'll be back quickly is to succomb to all the NY-Woody Johnson hype and ignore what this team really looks like right now. Very sorry to have to say this too.
