Big Blue Interactive The Corner Forum  
Back to the Corner

Archived Thread

NFT: 4-4 in the Championship or 4-0

Osi Osi Osi OyOyOy : 5/20/2019 9:23 pm
What’s more impressive for a team or player over a 10 year period?

Going 4-0 in 4 Finals or 4-4 over 8 Finals? Over 10 years.

Which would you rather see as a fan?

Philosophical question here. I find those that take the 4-0 record to be dead wrong. Would love to see that stance defended.
Anyone  
MookGiants : 5/20/2019 9:27 pm : link
who takes 4-0 over 4-4 needs to be slapped silly.

4-4.  
SFGFNCGiantsFan : 5/20/2019 9:50 pm : link
I hate the Francesa argument that Montana is better than TB12 because Montana went undefeated in the Super Bowl (4-0) while TB12 has gone 6-3.
RE: 4-4.  
Jim in Fairfax : 5/20/2019 10:20 pm : link
In comment 14450495 SFGFNCGiantsFan said:
Quote:
I hate the Francesa argument that Montana is better than TB12 because Montana went undefeated in the Super Bowl (4-0) while TB12 has gone 6-3.

Particularly since Montana played in an era of NFC dominance, when the conference won 15 of 16 Super Bowls.
This logic would mean  
bluepepper : 5/20/2019 10:30 pm : link
that if Eli leads us to the next 2 Super Bowls but we lose then his career is actually worse than if he gets benched for Jones in week 5 and never plays again. 2-0 > 2-2. Makes no sense.
I'll be the guy who takes 4-0  
BH28 : 5/20/2019 10:58 pm : link
The goal is to win championships, not just get there. What if the team that went 4-4 lost every time to the team that went 4-0? Who's better? I'll take the 'perfect' record.

I think every person would rather be 4-0 than 3-5? How many appearances negates the extra championship?

The fallacy of this whole argument is it is such a hindsight question. In the moment, you want to get to as many championship games as possible because it maximizes your chances of winning. But if you already know that double the amount of championship appearances doesn't equal more wins whats the point?
two of Brady's wins are tainted  
gtt350 : 5/20/2019 11:32 pm : link
Oakland got jobbed and Seattle had a brain fart
very little acknowledgement goes to Buffalo who went  
gtt350 : 5/20/2019 11:34 pm : link
0-4 and in consecutive years so getting there id Meh
RE: RE: 4-4.  
Eman11 : 5/20/2019 11:43 pm : link
In comment 14450514 Jim in Fairfax said:
Quote:
In comment 14450495 SFGFNCGiantsFan said:


Quote:


I hate the Francesa argument that Montana is better than TB12 because Montana went undefeated in the Super Bowl (4-0) while TB12 has gone 6-3.


Particularly since Montana played in an era of NFC dominance, when the conference won 15 of 16 Super Bowls.


I think that strengthens the case for how tough it was to actually get out of the NFC. If the Conference didn't have so many great teams over those years, there's no telling how many SB's Montana and the Niners would've gotten to.
RE: I'll be the guy who takes 4-0  
Mad Mike : 5/20/2019 11:50 pm : link
In comment 14450579 BH28 said:
Quote:
The goal is to win championships, not just get there. What if the team that went 4-4 lost every time to the team that went 4-0? Who's better? I'll take the 'perfect' record.

Well, the two teams won the same number of championships, but one of them also played for the championship four additional times. Isn't losing in the SB four times better than losing earlier in the playoff, or not even making the playoffs? I suppose some people don't think losing in the championship is the 2nd best outcome a season could have. I think such people are kind of, well, dumb.

RE: RE: I'll be the guy who takes 4-0  
BH28 : 5/21/2019 12:03 am : link
In comment 14450598 Mad Mike said:
Quote:
In comment 14450579 BH28 said:


Quote:


The goal is to win championships, not just get there. What if the team that went 4-4 lost every time to the team that went 4-0? Who's better? I'll take the 'perfect' record.


Well, the two teams won the same number of championships, but one of them also played for the championship four additional times. Isn't losing in the SB four times better than losing earlier in the playoff, or not even making the playoffs? I suppose some people don't think losing in the championship is the 2nd best outcome a season could have. I think such people are kind of, well, dumb.


If the goal every year is to win a championship, who cares about the second best outcome. Again, if the math was slightly different, 4-0 vs 3-5 in championship, what are you taking? The 4 championships because they outweigh losses by a far margin. So the question becomes how many championships losses equate one championship win? Is 1-9 better than 2-0? If the answer is zero, then championship losses have no value.
If you have to ask me  
RicosRoidedElbow : 5/21/2019 1:48 am : link
I wouldn't care. Isn't 4 championships... 4 championships at the end of the day?

4 losses, hell 10 losses doesn't devalue your 4 championships.
Obviously, 4-4 is better  
George from PA : 5/21/2019 5:44 am : link
But it will also lead to an easier division, conference conversation.

I am proud of our 4-1......but would be annoyed if we lose the next 3 Super Bowls.

I am also the guy who cursed the Giants while sitting in the stands with my son during last Super Bowl, Giants losing, and NE driving for a clitching score.....and prayed for a win....even if I need to suffer for the next 10 years.

Wes Walker drops pass, Manningham makes that great catch right in front of us....and my son and I will always have that experience......but the past years have been tough
The fallacy in this  
Mike in NY : 5/21/2019 6:37 am : link
Is that both teams won 4 times. If 4-4 team had been 3-5 or worse this is a different conversation.
umm  
mdthedream : 5/21/2019 6:51 am : link
He never lost.
I'm also the guy who picks 4-0.  
Beezer : 5/21/2019 10:53 am : link
One of the most miserable sports-fan days/night for me was watching the Giants lose to the hated Ravens and that phony prick wanna-be preacher. Fuck him.

4-0 > 4-1 for me. Don't think I'd have wanted to watch THREE more Super Bowl losses. I get it, those saying it's "great" to be able to get there. But for me, nah.
The question..  
FatMan in Charlotte : 5/21/2019 2:06 pm : link
is posed incorrectly.

It shouldn't be 4-0 vs. 4-4 - It should be 4-0 vs. 2-4 or something less that the number won.

The goal is to win championships. So 4-4 is better than 4-0. But 4-0 is better than any number less than that on the front end.

If you asked somebody in 2006 if they'd take 2 SB's and shitty play over the next decade - they'd take it. especially if the flip was consistently good play with no titles.
RE: two of Brady's wins are tainted  
Gmen1982 : 5/21/2019 4:17 pm : link
In comment 14450594 gtt350 said:
Quote:
Oakland got jobbed and Seattle had a brain fart


And an easy catch dropped by Welker won us ours.
Anyone saying that 4-0 > 4-4  
PaulBlakeTSU : 5/21/2019 4:36 pm : link
is then saying that the memory of the Giants beating the Vikings 41-0 in the NFC Championship is a bad thing and that in hindsight, they wish we would have lost 41-0.

When it comes to comparing teams, the years they don't make the Super Bowl are years in which they lost earlier with an inferior resume up until that point.

A better question would be if a QB plays for only four seasons (or a team only existed for four seasons) and goes 4-0 vs a QB that plays for only 5 seasons and goes 4-1 in the Super Bowl.

In this case it's comparing a season where the end result is making it all the way to the finals and loses with a non-existent season.
RE: Anyone saying that 4-0 > 4-4  
BH28 : 5/21/2019 5:53 pm : link
In comment 14451363 PaulBlakeTSU said:
Quote:
is then saying that the memory of the Giants beating the Vikings 41-0 in the NFC Championship is a bad thing and that in hindsight, they wish we would have lost 41-0.

When it comes to comparing teams, the years they don't make the Super Bowl are years in which they lost earlier with an inferior resume up until that point.

A better question would be if a QB plays for only four seasons (or a team only existed for four seasons) and goes 4-0 vs a QB that plays for only 5 seasons and goes 4-1 in the Super Bowl.

In this case it's comparing a season where the end result is making it all the way to the finals and loses with a non-existent season.


The whole problem with this argument is hindsight vs in the moment. You want to make the playoffs every year because it gives you the greatest chance of making the playoffs. In the moment, 41-0 is great, knowing what followed 41-0 slightly tarnishes the memory.

So if the choice was Team A makes the playoffs 4 times in 10 years and Team B makes the playoffs 8 times in ten years, you Take Team B because it maximizes the chances of winning.

If you know the results, that regardless if you Took Team A or B it produced the same amount of championships, the argument becomes what is more attractive, the winning percentage, or the number of appearances?

In a binary league, you either win or you don't. You don't get accolades for coming in 'second'. Teams are ranked by number of championships. How would you break a tie? Winning percentage or number of appearances?
RE: two of Brady's wins are tainted  
Mr. Nickels : 5/21/2019 8:14 pm : link
In comment 14450594 gtt350 said:
Quote:
Oakland got jobbed and Seattle had a brain fart


And Montana beat the Bengals twice
If only winning the championship counts then  
chuckydee9 : 5/21/2019 8:47 pm : link
its never 4-0 vs 4-4... its really 4-6 vs 4-6 with the later being 4 SB, 4 Conf Championships and 2 worse seasons.. so its never really 4-0.. looking at just the SB means that nothing else mattered.. please tell me some of you prefer the 2000 season over the 3-13 season..
4-4  
GothamGiants : 5/21/2019 9:55 pm : link
because I would enjoy seasons a lot more that involved 8 SBs rather than winning 1 here and there while spiraling towards ineptitude in between
RE: RE: Anyone saying that 4-0 > 4-4  
Osi Osi Osi OyOyOy : 5/22/2019 11:02 am : link
In comment 14451438 BH28 said:
Quote:
In comment 14451363 PaulBlakeTSU said:


Quote:


is then saying that the memory of the Giants beating the Vikings 41-0 in the NFC Championship is a bad thing and that in hindsight, they wish we would have lost 41-0.

When it comes to comparing teams, the years they don't make the Super Bowl are years in which they lost earlier with an inferior resume up until that point.

A better question would be if a QB plays for only four seasons (or a team only existed for four seasons) and goes 4-0 vs a QB that plays for only 5 seasons and goes 4-1 in the Super Bowl.

In this case it's comparing a season where the end result is making it all the way to the finals and loses with a non-existent season.



The whole problem with this argument is hindsight vs in the moment. You want to make the playoffs every year because it gives you the greatest chance of making the playoffs. In the moment, 41-0 is great, knowing what followed 41-0 slightly tarnishes the memory.

So if the choice was Team A makes the playoffs 4 times in 10 years and Team B makes the playoffs 8 times in ten years, you Take Team B because it maximizes the chances of winning.

If you know the results, that regardless if you Took Team A or B it produced the same amount of championships, the argument becomes what is more attractive, the winning percentage, or the number of appearances?

In a binary league, you either win or you don't. You don't get accolades for coming in 'second'. Teams are ranked by number of championships. How would you break a tie? Winning percentage or number of appearances?


"How would you break a tie? Winning percentage or number of appearances?"

Pretty obviously, it should be appearances imo. A loss in the NFC Championship game is worse than a loss in the Super Bowl from a success standpoint.
4-0 for me  
vonritz : 5/22/2019 11:10 am : link
Fuck 4-4. The absolute worst feeling you can have as a sports fan is losing a championship game. The Giants losing to the Ravens and Rangers losing to the Kings were fucking horrible and made the seasons a waste. I'd rather my team not even make the playoffs than lose.
RE: Anyone saying that 4-0 > 4-4  
Beezer : 5/22/2019 11:17 am : link
In comment 14451363 PaulBlakeTSU said:
Quote:
is then saying that the memory of the Giants beating the Vikings 41-0 in the NFC Championship is a bad thing and that in hindsight, they wish we would have lost 41-0.



That's silliness. It's not at all what's being said.

For me that 41-0 win was terrific. But it doesn't have NEARLY the feeling that the Frozen Tundra win in Green Bay or the San Fran rain game had. It's still a nice memory, but it doesn't connect with anything good and, for me, is diminished to a degree. (Again, to a degree. Not erased or reversed.)

My Dad and I never wanted divisional winner Giants shirts or NFC champion Giants shirts (even when they went on to win their Super Bowls). That's not the goal to won the NFC title. The goal is to win the whole thing.

For me, 4-0 >>> 4-4.
Beez  
Osi Osi Osi OyOyOy : 5/22/2019 11:25 am : link
so the Packers and 49ers games would've been completely meaningless had they lost to the Pats in those Super Bowls?

Even if we lost to the Pats, those two games would've been bigtime moments in Eli's career and classic victories for us.

I agree with the T-shirt thing, I'd never get anything other than a Super Bowl/Champion t-shirt.

But all playoff wins still mean something imo.
RE: Beez  
Beezer : 5/22/2019 11:31 am : link
In comment 14452019 Osi Osi Osi OyOyOy said:
Quote:
so the Packers and 49ers games would've been completely meaningless had they lost to the Pats in those Super Bowls?

Even if we lost to the Pats, those two games would've been bigtime moments in Eli's career and classic victories for us.

I agree with the T-shirt thing, I'd never get anything other than a Super Bowl/Champion t-shirt.

But all playoff wins still mean something imo.


No. Not completely meaningless. But less impactful for me as a fan. Still great games. Just less of an emotional response, looking back.

If Eli loses one or both of those Super Bowls, I think conversations change. The HoF one, certainly is different. They're still good wins for Eli, but he would be the guy who "couldn't win the big one." I'm glad that's not the case.

I agree with you that playoff wins mean something. Some playoff losses also mean something. I look at the loss to the Bears that windy day in Chicago in a similar category as the Minnesota 41-0 win. Sure, different results, but both with their own bag of plus-minuses. I realize that's a nuance thing there that some might not understand or agree with. Maybe some will.
The Packers and Niners wins  
Beezer : 5/22/2019 11:33 am : link
would still have been great at the time they occurred, then leading up to the Super Bowls. But had the Giants lost those two title games? As someone else wrote, it would have been even more excruciating, and would have felt like those great outings by Eli and the team(s) were somehow ... wasted. That feeling would be the lowest of lows, so thinking of adding 3 more Super Bowl losses and all that would mean, is a pretty lousy proposition.
I actually feel bad for Buffalo Bills fans I know.  
Beezer : 5/22/2019 11:35 am : link
Especially when the Bills have a decent off-season then start out 3-0 or 5-2. I just know it's going to fall apart, and what do they have left when it does? 0-4. I don't think most of them take solace in saying "well at least we went to four Super Bowls, even though we lost, so ... yippee! What great memories for us!" lol
Imagine the Giants going to the Super Bowl 4 straight years.  
Beezer : 5/22/2019 11:43 am : link
And losing in some spectacular fashion each and every time.

Missed FG at the buzzer. Lose by 1. To a team with a backup QB as the starter!

Trailing 17-0 at halftime, and 24-0 before getting a FG, losing 37-24.

Taking a 7-0 lead, but still trailing 28-10 at halftime, then scoring a long TD to get it to 2 scores heading to the 4th only to see your team implode down the stretch, losing 52-17.

Then thinking this HAS to be our year, and OH MY GOD! We're going to pull it off, leading 13-6 at halftime, only to see our team fumble away the lead, then be completely shut down after intermission, losing 30-13, to the same team we lost to last year.

Them's some shitty-ass parties, man.

No thanks for me. lol
RE: RE: Anyone saying that 4-0 > 4-4  
PaulBlakeTSU : 5/22/2019 2:40 pm : link
In comment 14452008 Beezer said:
Quote:
In comment 14451363 PaulBlakeTSU said:


Quote:


is then saying that the memory of the Giants beating the Vikings 41-0 in the NFC Championship is a bad thing and that in hindsight, they wish we would have lost 41-0.





That's silliness. It's not at all what's being said.

For me that 41-0 win was terrific. But it doesn't have NEARLY the feeling that the Frozen Tundra win in Green Bay or the San Fran rain game had. It's still a nice memory, but it doesn't connect with anything good and, for me, is diminished to a degree. (Again, to a degree. Not erased or reversed.)

My Dad and I never wanted divisional winner Giants shirts or NFC champion Giants shirts (even when they went on to win their Super Bowls). That's not the goal to won the NFC title. The goal is to win the whole thing.

For me, 4-0 >>> 4-4.


Of course that is what's being said. Rather, it's your point about the feeling of the win over the Vikings not comparing to the win in Green Bay or SF that is irrelevant to the argument. No one is saying anything to the contrary.

The Giants are 4-1 in the Super Bowl because they lost to the Ravens in the Super Bowl. They don't make that Super Bowl, they are 4-0 in Super Bowls. They made that Super Bowl because of an awesome performance in the NFC Championship game where they won 41-0.

People on here are saying that 4-0 is better than 4-1. If that's the case, the only thing that can be inferred is that in hindsight-- since the Giants lost to the Ravens-- beating the Vikings 41-0 was a worse outcome than losing 41-0 to the Vikings. A loss would have prevented the Super Bowl loss from happening.

You look at wins first...  
TheEvilLurker : 5/22/2019 3:10 pm : link
So if you have 4-0, it should be the same as 4-4 or 4-30.

Then you can look at the next level if they have the same number of wins. 4-4 means that got to the last game twice as often as the 4-0. Does that mean they are the better team? Maybe, but it also indicates they lost those games...maybe they have trouble winning the big game (pressure issues?) Maybe they are the better team?

They are still better than 3-1 or 0-4.

I lived through one Superbowl defeat...  
Torrag : 5/22/2019 3:23 pm : link
...I was depressed for weeks. I'll take 4-0 everyday and twice on Sunday.

I would add this the Montana over Brady because he's 4-0 is so dumb it's not worth mentioning. Teams win or lose games not individuals.
RE: I lived through one Superbowl defeat...  
Osi Osi Osi OyOyOy : 5/22/2019 3:44 pm : link
In comment 14452460 Torrag said:
Quote:
...I was depressed for weeks. I'll take 4-0 everyday and twice on Sunday.

I would add this the Montana over Brady because he's 4-0 is so dumb it's not worth mentioning. Teams win or lose games not individuals.


I understand the human element of "it hurts".

But by that same logic, wouldn't not making the playoffs at all "hurt less" than losing in the NFC Championship Game?
Who the hell would take 4 finals appearances over 8  
Mike in Long Beach : 5/22/2019 5:20 pm : link
knowing the championships are equal regardingless?
Honestly  
Mike in Long Beach : 5/22/2019 5:21 pm : link
I think anyone who is saying 4-0 on this thread is doing so to just "be different." There's no way anyone can legitimately have that opinion.
Back to the Corner