Green Bay closing in on Cleveland
-
Surf and Turf said:
The Browns could in theory take credit for the Steelers Super Bowls - from a geographical standpoint. Why not?Because the Browns don't want to be associated with high levels of cheating. Tainted championships are worse than none at all.
Because the Browns don't want to be associated with high levels of cheating. Tainted championships are worse than none at all.
Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz..
.....................................
-
Now this is funny. Look at all the Stiller fans on a Browns board after their team gets to the Super Bowl. What's even more priceless are the one's getting defensive and butt-hurt over this thread.
Comedy Gold. Must be a slow day at the local Yinzer McDonalds.
Now this is funny. Look at all the Stiller fans on a Browns board after their team gets to the Super Bowl. What's even more priceless are the one's getting defensive and butt-hurt over this thread.
Comedy Gold. Must be a slow day at the local Yinzer McDonalds.
Yes we stop by ...and if you guys aint Talking S*** we walk on by. But That never seems to be the Case. You have NOTHING to stand on man. I Know hat you Sissy asses want. To Post S*** with NO Response and no one to answer to...how lame is that ? You want to talk S*** .. then be man enough to answer .
-
Now this is funny. Look at all the Stiller fans on a Browns board after their team gets to the Super Bowl. What's even more priceless are the one's getting defensive and butt-hurt over this thread.
Comedy Gold. Must be a slow day at the local Yinzer McDonalds.
Yes we stop by ...and if you guys aint Talking S*** we walk on by. But That never seems to be the Case. You have NOTHING to stand on man. I Know hat you Sissy asses want. To Post S*** with NO Response and no one to answer to...how lame is that ? You want to talk S*** .. then be man enough to answer .
Yes we stop by ...and if you guys aint Talking S*** we walk on by. But That never seems to be the Case. You have NOTHING to stand on man. I Know hat you Sissy asses want. To Post S*** with NO Response and no one to answer to...how lame is that ? You want to talk S*** .. then be man enough to answer .
Now come on now BUNSofSTEEL08.. you're starting to melt. You're teams going to the Super Bowl for pete's sake. Why so mad?
I have an idea.. how bout you keep on "walking by". Getting melty on what's said on a 5-11 team's board is awfully pathetic.
-
Yes we stop by ...and if you guys aint Talking S*** we walk on by. But That never seems to be the Case. You have NOTHING to stand on man. I Know hat you Sissy asses want. To Post S*** with NO Response and no one to answer to...how lame is that ? You want to talk S*** .. then be man enough to answer .
Now come on now BUNSofSTEEL08.. you're starting to melt. You're teams going to the Super Bowl for pete's sake. Why so mad?
I have an idea.. how bout you keep on "walking by". Getting melty on what's said on a 5-11 team's board is awfully pathetic.
Now come on now BUNSofSTEEL08.. you're starting to melt. You're teams going to the Super Bowl for pete's sake. Why so mad?
I have an idea.. how bout you keep on "walking by". Getting melty on what's said on a 5-11 team's board is awfully pathetic.
DUDE... I am 90% Positive toward you guys. By why do I need to hear S*** and walk on by ? Why dont you guys just ignore the Pittsburgh Steelers ? Or at the very least be rational ?
Climbing the Stairway...To SEVEN !! -
Yes we stop by ...and if you guys aint Talking S*** we walk on by. But That never seems to be the Case. You have NOTHING to stand on man. I Know hat you Sissy asses want. To Post S*** with NO Response and no one to answer to...how lame is that ? You want to talk S*** .. then be man enough to answer .
Now come on now BUNSofSTEEL08.. you're starting to melt. You're teams going to the Super Bowl for pete's sake. Why so mad?
I have an idea.. how bout you keep on "walking by". Getting melty on what's said on a 5-11 team's board is awfully pathetic.
Now come on now BUNSofSTEEL08.. you're starting to melt. You're teams going to the Super Bowl for pete's sake. Why so mad?
I have an idea.. how bout you keep on "walking by". Getting melty on what's said on a 5-11 team's board is awfully pathetic.
And Green Bay ... is a Hell of a Team. A Steeler win ..will be an Upset. Can the Steelers do it Yes ...but its a Tall TAsk... we will see !
-
"Yes we stop by" Seems you've stopped by 2,717 times..
Why don't you listen to your own players... Baltimore is your rival, why are you stopping by here so much..
I'll tell you why, because your lookin for your momma..
Get in line and go hump bathroom ben
Peace (my ass)
T.Dawg
-
Mr. Gipper,
You never cited specific references other than vaguely referring to NFL rules for TV coverage. So I'll agree with you that we refer to NFL rules to decide your championships. First I can find no record of any team from Akron or Canton in the NFL (you may submit links in your replies to demonstrate otherwise). By NFL rules the Browns accomplishments prior to joining the NFL are not recognized. The Browns were considered an "expansion" team of the 1950 season. Since you played against the Philadephia in 1950 to decide the national champion of 1949, that will count as one championship for your franchise. The NFL also recognizes your championships from 1950, 1954, 1955 and 1964. Totalling that up equals a grand total of 5 championships, which is less than your hated rivals.
Prior to joining the NFL, your team played primarily against other Ohio based teams. There were roughly around 7 teams from Cleveland, Akron and Canton areas combined. These were seperate teams, each competing against one another. If one of these teams won, typically someone else with deeper pockets bought out all of their players. Cleveland did not win the championships, the seperate cities, or even the seperate regions of those particular cities did. Trying to claim them to boost your ego and falsely promote the football greatness of your city is sad and pathetic.
-
Hey Gipper. Take a moment and think about what you're doing.
Sad, isn't it.
I'm sorry the Steelers reached the Super Bowl again. It is tough take. i agree. I don't like it at all.
But you pathetic attempts to grab any dignity and success and attribute it to the Browns, is heartbreaking to watch. I almost expect you to include Soap Box derby championships that happened in Akron.
Consider this an intervention.
The Soldier said:
Hey Gipper. Take a moment and think about what you're doing.Sad, isn't it.
I'm sorry the Steelers reached the Super Bowl again. It is tough take. i agree. I don't like it at all.
But you pathetic attempts to grab any dignity and success and attribute it to the Browns, is heartbreaking to watch. I almost expect you to include Soap Box derby championships that happened in Akron.
Consider this an intervention.
Steelers? This thread was mainly about the Green Bay Packers.
-
You keep referring to talking s***. The OP stated GB was one behind Cleveland in professional football titles. What's the problem again?
Isn't it time to troll the Bengals or Ravens board?
You keep referring to talking s***. The OP stated GB was one behind Cleveland in professional football titles. What's the problem again?
Isn't it time to troll the Bengals or Ravens board?
Check. All I did was count up the titles won in the various geographic regions as they were listed in on the pro-football-reference website, which was also reflected on the Pro Football HOF website and on Wikipedia, and numerous other places.
Maybe these trolls have a certain anathema to the act of counting. Latent fear of Kindergarten?
They also seemed to have a problem with the fact that I added Canton and Akron with Cleveland. Yet they didn't object to combining LA and Anaheim, or SanFran/Oakland/San Jose, or the New York Market, or Boston/Providence.
Perhaps I should go back and edit the original post to call it the Green Bay/Milwaukee market, because, yes, as someone pointed out, for many years the Packers played about a third of their games in Milwaukee. Would they have objected to that? At one time Milwaukee did have teams in the NFL, though they never won a title.
-
Mr. Gipper,
You never cited specific references other than vaguely referring to NFL rules for TV coverage. So I'll agree with you that we refer to NFL rules to decide your championships. First I can find no record of any team from Akron or Canton in the NFL (you may submit links in your replies to demonstrate otherwise). By NFL rules the Browns accomplishments prior to joining the NFL are not recognized. The Browns were considered an "expansion" team of the 1950 season. Since you played against the Philadephia in 1950 to decide the national champion of 1949, that will count as one championship for your franchise. The NFL also recognizes your championships from 1950, 1954, 1955 and 1964. Totalling that up equals a grand total of 5 championships, which is less than your hated rivals.
Prior to joining the NFL, your team played primarily against other Ohio based teams. There were roughly around 7 teams from Cleveland, Akron and Canton areas combined. These were seperate teams, each competing against one another. If one of these teams won, typically someone else with deeper pockets bought out all of their players. Cleveland did not win the championships, the seperate cities, or even the seperate regions of those particular cities did. Trying to claim them to boost your ego and falsely promote the football greatness of your city is sad and pathetic.
Endymion said:
Mr. Gipper,You never cited specific references other than vaguely referring to NFL rules for TV coverage.
This isn't a doctoral thesis, and I am not getting paid to do this, so I don't know that I had to cite reference. Furthermore, I did cite my source: pro-football-reference.
So I'll agree with you that we refer to NFL rules to decide your championships.
No, I dont' agree with that. The NFL has proven to be petty when it comes to the AAFC and NFL.com has refused to "recognize" the AAFC records. And the reason they did this was because Bert Bell who was the Commissioner of the NFL and the owner of the Philadelphia Eagles refused to allow the NFL to recognize the legitimacy of the AAFC equality or perhaps superiority over the NFL. Why? Because he was petty, jealous and bitter over the ass-kicking that the Browns gave his Eagles in that first ever meeting between them in 1950 after the leagues merged. Every other authority except the official NFL recognizes the Browns AAFC titles.
In this regard you simply have to ask two questions: are or are not the Cleveland Browns a franchise of the National Football League? Yes. Did or did not the Cleveland Browns win titles in the years 1946-1949? Yes. So, every authority counts those titles but that one.
First I can find no record of any team from Akron or Canton in the NFL (you may submit links in your replies to demonstrate otherwise).
Are you serious? Where did you look? Only in the vacuous space between your ears? I don't need to give you links to prove that the Akron and Canton teams won titles in the NFL. It is common knowledge even amongst the most uninformed of people.
By NFL rules the Browns accomplishments prior to joining the NFL are not recognized.
I explained above why the NFL rules are based on jealousy, pettiness, and bitterness. They seem a lot like you.
Do you squirm and whine this much on your job?
The Browns were considered an "expansion" team of the 1950 season. Since you played against the Philadephia in 1950 to decide the national champion of 1949, that will count as one championship for your franchise. The NFL also recognizes your championships from 1950, 1954, 1955 and 1964. Totalling that up equals a grand total of 5 championships, which is less than your hated rivals.
Count them up. Thirteen. No squirming by you will make them go away.
Prior to joining the NFL, your team played primarily against other Ohio based teams. There were roughly around 7 teams from Cleveland, Akron and Canton areas combined. These were seperate teams, each competing against one another. If one of these teams won, typically someone else with deeper pockets bought out all of their players. Cleveland did not win the championships, the seperate cities, or even the seperate regions of those particular cities did. Trying to claim them to boost your ego and falsely promote the football greatness of your city is sad and pathetic.
I didn't claim the Ohio League titles....only the NFL titles and leagues that merged into the NFL won by teams in NE Ohio.
What is pathetic is you attempt to boost your ego and falsely denigrate the titles won by those teams from Northeast Ohio.
Again, all I did was count the ones on the list. I guess the real question is: Why do you Pittsburghers have such an inferiority complex about this?
Do you also object to the inclusion of the Dallas Texans title in the count that I made for Dallas?
Do you object to the Frankford Yellow Jackets in the count I made for Philadelphia? Frankford was a suburb of Philly.
Do you object to the inclusion of the Providence Steam Roller title under the Boston/Providence count? FYI, the New England Patriots today play their games closer to the center of Providence than to the center of Boston.
Maybe we should carry your pettiness to the ultimate. Maybe we should only award Pittsburgh with titles won in Heinz Field. How can you possibly claim anything other than that when those old games were played in a different location!!!
Maybe we should count only the titles won by the Irving Cowboys, and if that team wins any more titles in their new location we must count them separate as the Arlington Cowboys.
Sad and pathetic is right....on your part.
-
One conclusion that may be drawn from these lists: That football has been the most "democratic" of the 4 sports.
Baseball has obviously been dominated by New York and the Yankees and their money. For a long time hockey had been dominated by Montreal. I am not sure if "big money" was a factor then. It is less so now. Basketball has, except for a brief interim here or there been dominated by two teams. The Lakers and Celtics.
Football on the other had has been much more spread around and even in the cities that have earned titles.
For a long time hockey had been dominated by Montreal. I am not sure if "big money" was a factor then. It is less so now.
Prior to 1963 The Montreal Canadiens had exclusive rights to all French Canadian players and all players born in Quebec. That advantage help them all the way into the mid-70's because the young players they signed before the proprietary rule was changed.
-
For a long time hockey had been dominated by Montreal. I am not sure if "big money" was a factor then. It is less so now.
Prior to 1963 The Montreal Canadiens had exclusive rights to all French Canadian players and all players born in Quebec. That advantage help them all the way into the mid-70's because the young players they signed before the proprietary rule was changed.
Prior to 1963 The Montreal Canadiens had exclusive rights to all French Canadian players and all players born in Quebec. That advantage help them all the way into the mid-70's because the young players they signed before the proprietary rule was changed.
Thanks. I did not know that. That certainly would have given them an advantage in that sport.
Could you imagine if something like that was done in football?
Actually, I think something like that was done in the USFL or WFL or some such league wasn't it?...
In fact, in looking it up I do see that the USFL had it. Here is a blurb from Wiki regarding rules of the USFL that differed from the NFL:
The two-point conversion (since adopted by the NFL, in 1994).
The college rule of stopping the clock after first downs was used only for the final two minutes of each half.
For the 1985 season, a method of challenging officials' rulings on the field via instant replay (using a system that is almost identical to that used by the NFL today).
A salary cap of $1.8 million to reduce inevitable losses and spread talent throughout the league. The NFL introduced a salary cap in 1994.
A territorial draft, in hopes of stocking teams with local stars to help the gate. (Similar to the proposed All-American Football League)
-
Some of you ask why I didn't include titles won in the likes of the USFL or the XFL in my championship tally: For one reason: those leagues were neither absorbed nor merged with the NFL, unlike both the AFL and the AAFC. None of the teams from those leagues still exist. The AFL is of course represented by the AFC, and the AAFC has continued membership in the NFL with the Browns, 49ers, and the presumptive Colts. Those 3 teams alone represent 13 NFL titles in the intervening years. So what they did in the AAFC counts.
That does not mean that I would not have like to have seen the USFL merge with the NFL. On the contrary. A lot of the problems and issues with franchise movement would have been solved in my opinion if several of the USFL franchises had been absorbed by the NFL. Example, if the NFL had taken on the Arizona Wrangler USFL franchise, then that market would not have been open for Bidwill to move the Cardinals there, thus leaving them in St. Louis, which then would not have been open for Georgia Frontiere to move the Rams there.
Had the Memphis Showboats been absorbed, the presence of that franchise might have kept Bud Adams from moving the Oilers to Tennessee from Houston. And of course if the Baltimore Stars franchise, which may have been the most successful of the USFL teams had been absorbed Baltimore would not have been open for Modell to have attempted his move there.
If the Oakland Invaders had been absorbed then Al Davis who had already moved to LA would not have been able to move back there.
Large markets like New York and LA could have had 2-3 teams. In my opinion the NYC area could have easily supported 3 teams: Jets, Giants, and New Jersey Generals. LA could have probably kept The Raiders and also have The Express. the San Antonio Gunslingers could have been part of the league. The expansion that occurred later with the Jags (Jacksonville Bulls), Panthers, Ravens, and Texans would not have been necessary. (though I realize that NFL owners wanted it because it meant big $$$ in their pockets for expansion fees, which they might not have gotten from the USFL teams.)
-
Now come on now BUNSofSTEEL08.. you're starting to melt. You're teams going to the Super Bowl for pete's sake. Why so mad?
I have an idea.. how bout you keep on "walking by". Getting melty on what's said on a 5-11 team's board is awfully pathetic.
DUDE... I am 90% Positive toward you guys. By why do I need to hear S*** and walk on by ? Why dont you guys just ignore the Pittsburgh Steelers ? Or at the very least be rational ?
DUDE... I am 90% Positive toward you guys. By why do I need to hear S*** and walk on by ? Why dont you guys just ignore the Pittsburgh Steelers ? Or at the very least be rational ?
This thread was designed as a question about the Green Bay--Cleveland connection. The Steelers WERE ignored in this thread, other than listing them along with the 20 or so other communities that won titles at some point in time. It was your ilk that turned into another psychotic steeler fan episode.
-
you are right - Super Bowls are B.S. who needs them? The Browns have proven that those types of championships are irrelevant when you look at the history of the game.
-
mikeyP72 said:
Besides the 70's and this decade, your franchise has been abysmal. When you were good you were really good though and if you win this one, 3 in a decade is a really fine accomplishment.Semantics aside, the Browns have won their fair share of championships.
Recognize them or don't, no one is asking you to and quite frankly I could care less. But realize that Gipper isn't making the stuff up. Under his parameters that he set and used from other sources, which he stated, this list is the outcome.
Come up with something different that proves him wrong and make your own list. Crying and moaning on a Cleveland Browns board while your team is heading into the super bowl (in a post not even directed at you) shows how much the Browns franchise success, although not recent, must still get under your skin.
Talk your s*** now and enjoy it. You and I both know better days are coming for the Browns and things here, in NE Ohio all the way down to that sewer city of yours will be a changin'.
See ya soon douche bags.
Mike
How can you say the Steelers were absymal in the 80's and 90's, I think that is far from it.
1999 6 10 0 4th
1998 7 9 0 3rd
1997 11 5 0 1st Playoffs
1996 10 6 0 1st Playoffs
1995 11 5 0 1st Playoffs
1994 12 4 0 1st Playoffs
1993 9 7 0 2nd Playoffs
1992 11 5 0 1st Playoffs
1991 7 9 0 2nd
1990 9 7 0 3rd
1989 9 7 0 2nd Playoffs
1988 5 11 0 4th
1987 8 8 0 3rd
1986 6 10 0 3rd
1985 7 9 0 2nd
1984 9 7 0 1st Playoffs
1983 10 6 0 1st Playoffs
1982 6 3 0 4th Playoffs
1981 8 8 0 2nd
1980 9 7 0 3rd
-
In terms of championships, the NFL’s official position is to promote championships beginning with the start of the Super Bowl era. The NFL has chosen to recognize the accomplishments of earlier eras, primarily through the Hall of Fame and by maintaining records of wins an loses of team match-ups from their inclusion into the NFL.
Further, the NFL only counts pre-Super Bowl championships (for Hall of Fame players) that occurred within the context of the NFL. Of all the cities affected by the NFL’s view of championships, the city of Cleveland appears to have the most trouble with how football history is handled. When the AAFC folded, the Browns were one of three teams that “merged” with the NFL. The term “merged” is used loosely, because the city of Cleveland did not have the leverage that the AFL would later have with the NFL.
While Browns fans may feel slighted as a result of the merger, the terms of the deal were clear to them at the time, in that the NFL would not recognize the “championships” obtained in their former league. So history as written by the NFL claims that the city of Cleveland has a total of 4 “NFL” championships (not 8). Had the tables been reversed and the AAFC were the more viable of the two leagues, football history would have been remembered differently. History in and of itself though is almost always told through the eyes of the victors.
Many have complained that other sports recognize past championships equally, so the NFL must as well. The NFL is a different sport and how they choose to address their past was similar to the way in which history has been handled with BC/AD. While fans of certain teams may disagree, the NFL is the authority in the sport of football and that is how they have chosen to handle their sport. However, most of what might be called “revisionist” history was brought upon by the negotiating power of the AFL and their merger into the NFL.
As time marches on and those who remember the football eras preceding the Super Bowl begin to disappear from the earth the minor controversy of excluding the pre-superbowl championships from discussion will essentially disappear. Further, even Super Bowls of different eras are considered to weigh differently. As the NFL adds more teams the chances of acquiring a trophy become harder. For example, the Browns won their first three (non-NFL) titles in an 8 team league, and the fourth in a seven team league. Those odds 12.5% (14.3%) are significantly better than the current odds of 3.1%.
Also of note is the fact that over the years the NFL has put rules in place to keep teams from gaining an unfair competitive advantage. Pre-Superbowl powerhouses could essentially stockpile the best players (as the Yankees do in modern baseball). The advent of the salary cap, revenue sharing and free agency have made acquiring a Super Bowl victory and subsequently creating a dynasty very difficult endeavors.
Further, there are no official NFL or non-NFL records that I can find which attribute championships of Akron and/or Canton directly to the city of Cleveland. From the official standpoint of the NFL, Cleveland has no Super Bowl appearances and therefore no world championships. As time marches on, footnotes of their previous 4 NFL championships will fade from mention.
-
you are right - Super Bowls are B.S. who needs them? The Browns have proven that those types of championships are irrelevant when you look at the history of the game.
you are right - Super Bowls are B.S. who needs them? The Browns have proven that those types of championships are irrelevant when you look at the history of the game.
Whoever said that? Super Bowls are NFL championships.
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