Steven Jackson to Atlanta

[MikeO]

In 2012 if you lose the NFC Championship at HOME. Go add a talent like a Steven Jackson to your roster, and don't reach that same point or go further the next year....your season is a failure. Sorry. No one person is a failure, just the season as a whole is for that organization!

and i still don't understand why a fan of another team (no matter how bad that team is) can't have that opinion? Makes no sense!

[EKnight]

Spider- So then you're honestly saying that it's a greater failure to get to the Superbowl and not win it than to not make it (or even the playoffs) at all?

Don't dodge my Denver question. Do you consider the Broncos for the decade before 1997- with a coach of the year twice, an offensive player of the year, and a league MVP during that stretch- failures?

Mike- you can have any opinion you want (you always do). But let me point out that for all the shit you love to give me about how "great" certain Miami players were last year, by YOUR OWN STANDARDS, the team is filled with failures. Hey- Marino and Shula never won a title together either; guess they were failures as well. -EK

[MikeO]

^^Marino and Shula weren't failures individualy. Some of those years the Dolphins season as whole were YES failures. 1992 and 1985 come to mind. AFC Championship game at HOME with the better team , and lost! Season was a failure.

[Spider-Dan]

EKnight, you seem to have a problem understanding the concept of expectations.  I didn't create that Bills acronym.  Someone else did, and many, many, many people talk about the failure of the Bills to win a ring.

Your Elway question is, um, stupid.  Prior to 1997, Elway was considered an epic choker, who made repeated trips to the Super Bowl just to get blown out.  The Broncos were literally a joke.

And funny that you bring up Marino.  What is the primary context in which people mention Dan Marino, Jim Kelly, Fran Tarkenton, Charles Barkley, Karl Malone, Patrick Ewing, LeBron James (until a year ago), etc.?

Why am I explaining one of the most basic ideas in competitive sports?

[EKnight]

Oh, no, no, no. They never won a Superbowl- by your standards, the ones you set up in this thread- you've defined them as being failures as a whole. In fact, they were specially failures in the 1984 season because they came off of a 12-4 record, two years removed from being in the Superbowl, added the league MVP and offensive player of the year, and didn't win the Superbowl. So the team that historically had one of the top offenses in the history of the franchise- and the only one to EVER top 500 points was a failure? How can you justify that? Why don't you just admit that "failure" was too strong of a word and you were wrong?

Spider- the "primary context" those guys are mentioned is not because they're failures. If you don't get that, there's nothing I can say to explain it to you. -EK

[Spider-Dan]

Again, does the word "expectations" mean anything to you?  The 1984 Dolphins lost to a team with a better record that was favored to beat them.

If you don't understand how expectations define what is and is not considered failure then I don't know what to tell you.

[MikeO]

Again, does the word "expectations" mean anything to you?  The 1984 Dolphins lost to a team with a better record that was favored to beat them.

If you don't understand how expectations define what is and is not considered failure then I don't know what to tell you.

exactly. This is basic common knowledge stuff.....or so I thought! 

[EKnight]

Again, does the word "expectations" mean anything to you?  The 1984 Dolphins lost to a team with a better record that was favored to beat them.

If you don't understand how expectations define what is and is not considered failure then I don't know what to tell you.

And the 2013 Falcons team will likely not be favored to win the Superbowl either. That's EXACTLY my point- no one outside of a few outliers has an expectation that they will be a sure thing Superbowl favorite (in fact at this moment, they're 16-1 odds, with 4 teams MORE likely to win according to future odds sites). So, in actuality, failure would be if they finished worse than fifth. Anything more than that would be meeting their expectations.

Point blank- unless when the season starts, they leapfrog Denver, SF, New England, and Seattle, then their EXPECTATIONS are not that they will be favored to win the title, and thus, not winning does not constitute failure. Whatever expectations you two have don't matter outside of your own thinking. They're your own expectations, and not held by the people making the odds (you know, the actual REAL expectations). -EK

[MyGodWearsAHoodie]

I think the "expectations" thing is overblown. 

The Bills being the only team to win 4 conf champ in a row is an accomplishment (not withstanding the joke)

I know some like to claim that the one win over the Ravens made the Dolphin's season superior to NE's one loss in 2007.  I view it as Bullshit.  I will take 2007 over 1990 without question (NE's 1-15 season). First place is much better than second.  But second beats the hell out of 32nd. 

[Spider-Dan]

And the 2013 Falcons team will likely not be favored to win the Superbowl either. That's EXACTLY my point- no one outside of a few outliers has an expectation that they will be a sure thing Superbowl favorite (in fact at this moment, they're 16-1 odds, with 4 teams MORE likely to win according to future odds sites). So, in actuality, failure would be if they finished worse than fifth. Anything more than that would be meeting their expectations.

Point blank- unless when the season starts, they leapfrog Denver, SF, New England, and Seattle, then their EXPECTATIONS are not that they will be favored to win the title, and thus, not winning does not constitute failure. Whatever expectations you two have don't matter outside of your own thinking. They're your own expectations, and not held by the people making the odds (you know, the actual REAL expectations). -EK

So then, I presume you are saying that if the Broncos or 49ers do not WIN the Super Bowl, their respective season would be a failure, according to The Actual REAL Expectations?

Is your problem here with the idea of a team being expected to play in/win the Super Bowl, or just the idea that Atlanta is a team in that position?

[EKnight]

No, Spider, that's what you two seem to be saying. Im saying it's bipolar assinine stupidity to label anything but a Superbowl a "failure." There are levels of success that go beyond a single game. As Hoodie pointed out, 2nd place and 32nd place are not the same.

Awesome way to dodge my point and try to turn it around though. I admire the effort, but it doesn't hangs the fact that no one but you and Mike seem to share the expectation that it's Superbowl or "failure" for Atl, and the oddsmakers indicate that. -EK

[Spider-Dan]

Is it bipolar assinine [sic] stupidity to label anything but a playoff win a "failure"?  How about anything but a division title?  How about making the playoffs?

Expectations exist, and they shape perception.  The overwhelming majority of Marino discussions include the fact that He Never Won A Title.  The overwhelming majority of 2007 Patriots discussions include 18-1.  The overwhelming majority of '90s Bills discussions are framed as 4 straight SB losses, not 4 straight conference titles.

To continue with your earlier example, the fact that Marino lost that SB against the 49ers most certainly is used to label him a "failure."  It is prominently mentioned in ANY AND EVERY discussion of the best QBs of all time, and is almost universally used to disqualify him from the top spot.  I'm not sure why you would post something like that to a Dolphins message board, as if other MIA fans are somehow unaware of it.

You should also realize that there is a difference between failure and sucking.  The 2002 Dolphins were a better team with a better record than the 2012 Dolphins, and yet the '02 squad was a failure while the '12 squad was not.

Failure is always relative to expectations.

[Fau Teixeira]

If the broncos and the 49ers don't make it to the superbowl this year their seasons will have been failures.

[MikeO]

If the broncos and the 49ers don't make it to the superbowl this year their seasons will have been failures.

Yep! Throw in NE and Atlanta too!

[Spider-Dan]

Just because I know what's coming:

There is no contradiction in saying that both the 49ers and the Falcons would declare their season a failure if they don't make the Super Bowl, even though only one of them can make it.  Expectations are not always fair; there is no happy ending for all.