Most Frustrated Franchises
-
Minnesota Vikings defeated the Cleveland Browns on January 4, 1970 for the NFL Championship.
Was this pre-merger?
Was this pre-merger?
No, the true "Merger" occurred during the 1966 season when the AFL and NFL agreed to play the Championship game known as the NFL-AFL Championship game, which about 4-5 years later became known as the Super Bowl.
During a shoulder period of the 1966, 1967, 1968, and 1969 seasons the AFL and NFL kept their existing formats until all details of the merger could be worked out. And during those 4 years they played those Championship games, the first two being won by the Packers over the Chiefs and Raiders and the next two won by the Jets over the Colts and Chiefs over the Vikings. So, theoretically, during those 4 years there were still "NFL Championship games" and AFL Championship games....which determined who would go on to play in the NFL/AFL Championship game. So, to me, and to just about every other historian, those games are tantamount to an NFC/AFC Championship game, which is what they became called starting with the 1970 season. What happened in 1970 is simply that 3 teams shifted from the NFC to the AFC, the Browns, Steelers, and Colts, mererly to even up the numbers on each side of the ledger. At one point it was thought that perhaps instead of these established teams moving over, the new expansion teams of the NFL i.e. the Saints and Falcons would be moved. But since these were new expansion team it was thought to best balance out the strength of the two conferences and the geography by leaving the Saints and Falcons in the NFC side.
Remember, during this "shoulder" period, 4 new team were created: Dolphins, Bengals, Saints, and Falcons. Like I said, they didn't want to put all these in the AFC because they thought it was much weaker already than the NFL. That is why the Browns, Colts, Steelers shifted instead.
-
Minnesota Vikings defeated the Cleveland Browns on January 4, 1970 for the NFL Championship.
The Vikings lost the Super Bowl that year. In order to win a Championship, they have to win a Championship, not lose the Championship game. That game, plus the others that took place in those 4 shoulder years were essentially the same as the NFC/AFC Conference championship games. That is why I don't count them. Unlike, say the Browns 1964 title or the Bills 1964 titles which teams went as far as they could and won the championship game that was finally played, the Vikings did not do that.
The Vikings lost the Super Bowl that year. In order to win a Championship, they have to win a Championship, not lose the Championship game. That game, plus the others that took place in those 4 shoulder years were essentially the same as the NFC/AFC Conference championship games. That is why I don't count them. Unlike, say the Browns 1964 title or the Bills 1964 titles which teams went as far as they could and won the championship game that was finally played, the Vikings did not do that.
Okay, got it.
-
Was this pre-merger?
No, the true "Merger" occurred during the 1966 season when the AFL and NFL agreed to play the Championship game known as the NFL-AFL Championship game, which about 4-5 years later became known as the Super Bowl.
During a shoulder period of the 1966, 1967, 1968, and 1969 seasons the AFL and NFL kept their existing formats until all details of the merger could be worked out. And during those 4 years they played those Championship games, the first two being won by the Packers over the Chiefs and Raiders and the next two won by the Jets over the Colts and Chiefs over the Vikings. So, theoretically, during those 4 years there were still "NFL Championship games" and AFL Championship games....which determined who would go on to play in the NFL/AFL Championship game. So, to me, and to just about every other historian, those games are tantamount to an NFC/AFC Championship game, which is what they became called starting with the 1970 season. What happened in 1970 is simply that 3 teams shifted from the NFC to the AFC, the Browns, Steelers, and Colts, mererly to even up the numbers on each side of the ledger. At one point it was thought that perhaps instead of these established teams moving over, the new expansion teams of the NFL i.e. the Saints and Falcons would be moved. But since these were new expansion team it was thought to best balance out the strength of the two conferences and the geography by leaving the Saints and Falcons in the NFC side.
Remember, during this "shoulder" period, 4 new team were created: Dolphins, Bengals, Saints, and Falcons. Like I said, they didn't want to put all these in the AFC because they thought it was much weaker already than the NFL. That is why the Browns, Colts, Steelers shifted instead.
No, the true "Merger" occurred during the 1966 season when the AFL and NFL agreed to play the Championship game known as the NFL-AFL Championship game, which about 4-5 years later became known as the Super Bowl.
During a shoulder period of the 1966, 1967, 1968, and 1969 seasons the AFL and NFL kept their existing formats until all details of the merger could be worked out. And during those 4 years they played those Championship games, the first two being won by the Packers over the Chiefs and Raiders and the next two won by the Jets over the Colts and Chiefs over the Vikings. So, theoretically, during those 4 years there were still "NFL Championship games" and AFL Championship games....which determined who would go on to play in the NFL/AFL Championship game. So, to me, and to just about every other historian, those games are tantamount to an NFC/AFC Championship game, which is what they became called starting with the 1970 season. What happened in 1970 is simply that 3 teams shifted from the NFC to the AFC, the Browns, Steelers, and Colts, mererly to even up the numbers on each side of the ledger. At one point it was thought that perhaps instead of these established teams moving over, the new expansion teams of the NFL i.e. the Saints and Falcons would be moved. But since these were new expansion team it was thought to best balance out the strength of the two conferences and the geography by leaving the Saints and Falcons in the NFC side.
Remember, during this "shoulder" period, 4 new team were created: Dolphins, Bengals, Saints, and Falcons. Like I said, they didn't want to put all these in the AFC because they thought it was much weaker already than the NFL. That is why the Browns, Colts, Steelers shifted instead
.Question for you Gipper :
Who coined the term or phrase "Super Bowl"
NewEraDawg -
No, the true "Merger" occurred during the 1966 season when the AFL and NFL agreed to play the Championship game known as the NFL-AFL Championship game, which about 4-5 years later became known as the Super Bowl.
During a shoulder period of the 1966, 1967, 1968, and 1969 seasons the AFL and NFL kept their existing formats until all details of the merger could be worked out. And during those 4 years they played those Championship games, the first two being won by the Packers over the Chiefs and Raiders and the next two won by the Jets over the Colts and Chiefs over the Vikings. So, theoretically, during those 4 years there were still "NFL Championship games" and AFL Championship games....which determined who would go on to play in the NFL/AFL Championship game. So, to me, and to just about every other historian, those games are tantamount to an NFC/AFC Championship game, which is what they became called starting with the 1970 season. What happened in 1970 is simply that 3 teams shifted from the NFC to the AFC, the Browns, Steelers, and Colts, mererly to even up the numbers on each side of the ledger. At one point it was thought that perhaps instead of these established teams moving over, the new expansion teams of the NFL i.e. the Saints and Falcons would be moved. But since these were new expansion team it was thought to best balance out the strength of the two conferences and the geography by leaving the Saints and Falcons in the NFC side.
Remember, during this "shoulder" period, 4 new team were created: Dolphins, Bengals, Saints, and Falcons. Like I said, they didn't want to put all these in the AFC because they thought it was much weaker already than the NFL. That is why the Browns, Colts, Steelers shifted instead
.Question for you Gipper :
Who coined the term or phrase "Super Bowl"
Question for you Gipper :
Who coined the term or phrase "Super Bowl"
Can anyone answer this?
Lamar Hunt
-
No, the true "Merger" occurred during the 1966 season when the AFL and NFL agreed to play the Championship game known as the NFL-AFL Championship game, which about 4-5 years later became known as the Super Bowl.
During a shoulder period of the 1966, 1967, 1968, and 1969 seasons the AFL and NFL kept their existing formats until all details of the merger could be worked out. And during those 4 years they played those Championship games, the first two being won by the Packers over the Chiefs and Raiders and the next two won by the Jets over the Colts and Chiefs over the Vikings. So, theoretically, during those 4 years there were still "NFL Championship games" and AFL Championship games....which determined who would go on to play in the NFL/AFL Championship game. So, to me, and to just about every other historian, those games are tantamount to an NFC/AFC Championship game, which is what they became called starting with the 1970 season. What happened in 1970 is simply that 3 teams shifted from the NFC to the AFC, the Browns, Steelers, and Colts, mererly to even up the numbers on each side of the ledger. At one point it was thought that perhaps instead of these established teams moving over, the new expansion teams of the NFL i.e. the Saints and Falcons would be moved. But since these were new expansion team it was thought to best balance out the strength of the two conferences and the geography by leaving the Saints and Falcons in the NFC side.
Remember, during this "shoulder" period, 4 new team were created: Dolphins, Bengals, Saints, and Falcons. Like I said, they didn't want to put all these in the AFC because they thought it was much weaker already than the NFL. That is why the Browns, Colts, Steelers shifted instead
.Question for you Gipper :
Who coined the term or phrase "Super Bowl"
Question for you Gipper :
Who coined the term or phrase "Super Bowl"
Lamar Hunt. named after the hard rubber bouncy ball his kids played with.
-
Question for you Gipper :
Who coined the term or phrase "Super Bowl"
Lamar Hunt. named after the hard rubber bouncy ball his kids played with.
Lamar Hunt. named after the hard rubber bouncy ball his kids played with.
yah i had typed that bouncy ball part too then deleted. knew you'd want to be a one upper.
Soccer, Futball, Fusball, Futsal, Foosball, Europe ... Mods are all gay. -
Think how close some teams came to getting off this list:
Cardinals came within 15-20 seconds and a decent defensive stop of winning the SB a couple of years back.
The Indians were within 2 outs in 1997.
The Tits/Oilers were 1 yard shy of tieing up the game against the Rams (but if they won, then the Rams would have gone nearly 60 years without a title)
The Bills were a wide right FG from winning a SB in the 90s.
Bengals were also a defensive stop away from winning in 1988.
and maybe a few more.
-
Lamar Hunt. named after the hard rubber bouncy ball his kids played with.
yah i had typed that bouncy ball part too then deleted. knew you'd want to be a one upper.
yah i had typed that bouncy ball part too then deleted. knew you'd want to be a one upper.
I just didn't see your post before I responded.
-
Think how close some teams came to getting off this list:
Cardinals came within 15-20 seconds and a decent defensive stop of winning the SB a couple of years back.
The Indians were within 2 outs in 1997.
The Tits/Oilers were 1 yard shy of tieing up the game against the Rams (but if they won, then the Rams would have gone nearly 60 years without a title)
The Bills were a wide right FG from winning a SB in the 90s.
Bengals were also a defensive stop away from winning in 1988.
and maybe a few more.
Think how close some teams came to getting off this list:
Cardinals came within 15-20 seconds and a decent defensive stop of winning the SB a couple of years back.
The Indians were within 2 outs in 1997.
The Tits/Oilers were 1 yard shy of tieing up the game against the Rams (but if they won, then the Rams would have gone nearly 60 years without a title)
The Bills were a wide right FG from winning a SB in the 90s.
Bengals were also a defensive stop away from winning in 1988.
and maybe a few more.
All good examples and there is where the hope lies. That is why as much as I've said I would give up on the Browns in the past I haven't and don't think I really could.
IT HAS TO HAPPEN SOMETIME!
-
Notice of course that from this list of franchises that have gone 40 years or more since winning a title that it is none other than:
Cleveland
which has the most franchises on this list with all 3 of our teams. Buffalo, Los Angeles, San Diego, Atlanta, and Phoenix have two each (but with LA and Phoenix there are transplant team where all 40 years in purgatory were not necessarily spent in that city).
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login