quote:
Great is a subjective term. Does it matter that my opinion differs on which teams are great or not? Will it make you guys feel better if I said the Rangers and Bills are/were great teams? That is the world we live in now.
It's just that you seem to have very odd criteria for "greatness". You keep talking about titles and even use a team that lost 4 straight Super Bowls in your defense, but there's not a football person in America that wouldn't at least say that those Bills teams were great. You set the criteria as winning a title. That criteria, though, was shown to be lacking given the number of great teams that failed to win a title. Were the 2007 Patriots a great team?
quote:
It's cute how you guys pretend the Rangers and Astros aren't completely average franchises.
I don't think anyone here has ever indicated that historically the Rangers or Astros haven't been average, at best. Both have been mediocre franchises, but over the last 7 years, the Rangers have been a great franchise. You argue they haven't because they didn't win a WS, which the 2007 Patriots prove how absurd that logic is.
It's fine if you don't think the Rangers over the past 7 years, especially their 2 AL champion teams, were great. You're right that it is subjective, but you tried to use objective criteria (winning a title). That's what I disagree with you about. The criteria you set is illogical.