Demented on Dynasties

Bandwagon jealousy of Patriots highlights The Problem

February 7, 2005 (NHS) -- Thanks to their third Super Bowl win in four seasons, New England is being toasted as a "dynasty"

... and that has the Whiner fans in a tizzy fit.

That's right, the jealous Niner Bandwagon can't handle the fact that despite all the "best ever" years of hype and spin, the 49ers are lower than second-banana when it comes to winning the Super Bowl. After all, despite their end-all, be-all reason for existing -- their five precious little wins -- they can't deny the truth of Super Bowl history.

To wit:

(a) The 49ers are NOT the most dominant team in Super Bowl history in the short term, because they never had three wins in four years like the Cowboys and Patriots; and

(b) The 49ers are NOT the most dominant team over the long run of Super Bowl history, because Dallas has as many Super Bowl wins and won them over a longer span of time.

Can they accept it? No. The Bandwagon is obsessed with fake rationalizations of the 49ers' legacy. They are on a quest to prove their little team is "the best ever" NFL franchise. The facts, of course, say otherwise.

With no actual evidence to back their nonsense, the Whiner fan is forced to stammer some incomprehensible nonsense about being "the best team ever over a 20-year period" -- as if there's some magic category that makes "twenty" special. Whoopee, it's a round number divisible by ten!

With that fallacy exposed, the cornered Bandwagoner resorts to their idiotic little "five-and-oh" claim to "prove" they are "best ever" -- as if five Super Bowl wins by itself is somehow more impressive than Dallas winning five AND reaching the Super Bowl an additional three more times. Yes, Bandwagon logic dictates those three extra trips by the Cowboys were meaningless. Of course, using this Bandwagon logic, that would mean their 2-14 campaign this season was equally as successful as the NFC champion Eagles, just because Philly lost in the Super Bowl.

Well, that's just idiotic -- but hey, it's the 49er Mentality.

Also note that the Bandwagon won't ever mention the bad word "championships" because those were a foreign concept to the 49ers in the 35 years between the franchise's birth 1946 and when they finally won one after the fancy name "Super Bowl" came about. Bottom line, their precious little five championships pales in comparison to the Packer's total of 12 (hint to San Franciscans: that's why they call Green Bay -- and not your overrated city -- "Titletown").

Indeed, the Niner fans and media are so jealous of the reality of where their legacy ranks historically that instead of being grateful that their fake legacy is falsely included among the real dynasties, they continue the ridiculous charade of rationalizing the 49ers into something more than their truth.

"Dynasty Lite"

The latest example was seen the day following the Patriots' last win, when Mark Purdy, a columnist for the San Jose Mercury (you'll remember him as the guy who's greatest moment in life was when Eddie DeBartolo bought him a beer), wrote that New England is "a dynasty with a small 'd,' not a capital 'D.' They are dynasty lite."

In and of itself, the offensive, haughty, holier-than-thou and utterly ignorant attitude is exactly what you've come to expect of the Whiner Bandwagon. No credit is ever given to anyone else because nobody can ever hold a candle to the oh-so-Best Ever 'Frisco "Dynasty" (which, of course, is with a "capital D" -- not to be confused with "Big D", since that would be Dallas).

You would think if a "journalist" would take to time out of their so important life to call a dynasty fake, perhaps it would take a look at a team that:

(a) Won thanks to a payroll of unlimited spending that put George Steinbrenner to shame;
(b) Won thanks to a gimmick system that only succeeded because of watered-down rules changes; and
(c) Hasn't won didly before or after (a) or (b).

But perhaps Mr. Purdy has never heard of such a team? (Hint to him: it's your favorite team, moron.)

Margin of Insanity

But even more ridiculous is the proffered reason why this insult was directed at the innocent Pats. According to Mr. Purdy, it's because, "(The Patriots) three Super Bowl victories have each come by just three points."

And with that, we've officially Seen It All from the Bandwagon, folks.

It's worse than their "20 years" infatuation. It's even worse than their idiotic grinning about being "5-and-0". Now the Bandwagon brings you the argument that Average Margin of Victory is the end all, be all proof of Dynasty Greatness.

(And remember, this was the day after the Super Bowl -- they couldn't even let one day pass for New England to celebrate before whining that the 49ers' precious glory days are "more best ever" than theirs.)

So how warped is the Bandwagon? Niner-haters, of course, know that answer. Legitimate fans know that basing worth on "margin of victory" is simply asinine and no further discussion is needed. Hell, even college football pollsters have given up that criteria. But as it is the NHS's self-appointed role, and since we've put these idiots in their place for years, we might as well go one more and address the Almighty Margin Of Victory argument with a simple question maybe even the Bandwagon will get:

Do you think, perhaps, there's a microscopic possibility that margin of victory has as much to do with the loser as the winner?

Mr. Purdy -- a pathetic Niner fan masquerading as a "journalist" -- has never considered that possibility. Rest assured, it never occurred to any of the thousands of Bandwagoners that read his article. They are so sold on the Best Ever Myth, so brainwashed, that they cannot fathom the mere chance that maybe the 49ers enjoyed such a gaudy margin of victory in their Super Bowl wins because the teams they played in those Super Bowls were among the worst ever to reach a Super Bowl -- not because the 49ers were "best ever".

Further, their very logic is twisted on its head when you consider that "the best Super Bowl ever", according to the Bandwagon, was when the 49ers came back to beat the juggernaut Bengals at the last minute, 20-16.

So how is it that game -- with its margin of victory of four "huge" points -- is "best ever", while all the Patriots wins -- by three "tiny" points -- aren't?

Don't ask us, ask the Bandwagon. On second thought, don't do that either. It's a waste of time, just like their continued naive rationalizations of the 49ers' legacy being something more than it actually was, and their even more pathetic vanity of fooling themselves that they are better than everyone else.

Return home.

We welcome comments.