Skip to content

Go Packers!

The Browns Board
242 47 13.9k
  • Homotron said:

    In the 70's there were still droves and droves of EXTREMELY talented players. Sure players are bigger, faster and stronger now but some of the games all time greats came out of that era. The pre-super bowl era on the other hand had some tremendous players but they weren't anywhere close to as abundant. The biggest thing tho was the hodge podge of teams and the league structure. Less teams. Cities combining to make teams. It was even less profitable for anyone to be a football player than it was in the 70's and certainly to the way things are now. The game was much, much different even from the 70's and beyond. All i know is that right now all anyone cares about is Super Bowls and I'd say the same if I were a Browns diehard.

    So sure, if we take your argument to it's logical conclusion we should kick guys like Jim Thorpe and Red Grange out of the HOF, because by today's standards, they sucked- Thorpe would have been at best an undersized KR.

    The playing field was level, and if anything the (available) talent was less diluted, so it was harder to win. And if it was so freaking easy- go explain away how the Steelers sucked from their inception until 1972. History is history, and you're in denial about yours- except the all important (to your mind) recent part of it.

    EDIT: Let's say for fun we shrink the current NFL down to say 16 or so teams like there were back in the 60's- all of a sudden we have ONLY the top two teams out of each division in the league- and guys like Suh, Joe Thomas, and Joe Hayden aren't playing for the Browns or Lions- they're playing for someone else. And if you think the Steelers could suck up all that extra talent on your team- I think not. So it would be a LOT harder to win consistently in a smaller league.

    It will be real funny in 10 years or so when they inaugurate the "World Bowl" and I'm waiting for the day we can rag on the Steelers that they haven't won squat in the new format. But-but-but- I can hear it already- a Championship is a Championship. ๐Ÿ˜†

    BTW, the Packers have you beat in NFL Championships- and I dare you to start trolling on a Green Bay forum to tell them they don't.

    VagitronV Vagitron wrote on last edited by

    @hoorta said:

    So sure, if we take your argument to it's logical conclusion we should kick guys like Jim Thorpe and Red Grange out of the HOF, because by today's standards, they sucked- Thorpe would have been at best an undersized KR.

    The playing field was level, and if anything the (available) talent was less diluted, so it was harder to win. And if it was so freaking easy- go explain away how the Steelers sucked from their inception until 1972. History is history, and you're in denial about yours- except the all important (to your mind) recent part of it.

    EDIT: Let's say for fun we shrink the current NFL down to say 16 or so teams like there were back in the 60's- all of a sudden we have ONLY the top two teams out of each division in the league- and guys like Suh, Joe Thomas, and Joe Hayden aren't playing for the Browns or Lions- they're playing for someone else. And if you think the Steelers could suck up all that extra talent on your team- I think not. So it would be a LOT harder to win consistently in a smaller league.

    It will be real funny in 10 years or so when they inaugurate the "World Bowl" and I'm waiting for the day we can rag on the Steelers that they haven't won squat in the new format. But-but-but- I can hear it already- a Championship is a Championship. ๐Ÿ˜†

    BTW, the Packers have you beat in NFL Championships- and I dare you to start trolling on a Green Bay forum to tell them they don't.

    Never said it was easy but the talent pool was more diluted and I already alluded that there were plenty of exceptional talents during that time. My point was there aren't many people that care about anything besides Super Bowl wins. It's the measuring stick for franchise success here and now. I won't deny the greatness of the Browns during that time but those NFL championships don't equate to Super Bowls and that's my point. I'd say the same if I were a Browns fan. As far as the Steelers are concerned there is a certain formula in place with that organization from the top all the way down. The team drafts well consistently. Doesn't over pay free agents and hangs on to their coaches. It's a way of life for the Steelers and I sincerely doubt you'll see a period any time soon where they aren't near the top as long as that formula is followed continuously. Look how many rookies weren't and haven't been rushed in to the line up but rather were allowed to develop behind veterans. Timmons didn't get thrown in the line up and look at him now. Ziggy Hood, hell even Troy Polamalu. Worilds is behind Woodley and Harrison and may not see significant time until Harrison is done. Mike Wallace, Sanders, Brown. They traded Holmes for a 5th round pick because he was a PR/moral nightmare and people flipped out. However that trade turned in to Bryant McFadden and Antonio Brown. A starting corner and a emerging WR this year as a rookie. You're going to be waiting a long time to rag on the Steelers.

  • nickersN nickers wrote on last edited by nickers

    "I won't deny the greatness of the Browns during that time but those NFL championships don't equate to Super Bowls and that's my point".

    A championship in the 50's,60's is no less greather than the superbowl and your just plain conning yourself to believe otherwise...I dare you to walk up to any of those great players and tell them thier championship was less meaningful...They name has changed and the game has changed and I seriousely doubt the players of today could take the ass kicking those guys dished out. If Big Ben played back themn I guarantee you he wouldnt have survived the season with the allegations that were brought against him. He would be sitting at home recovering from cracked ribs or something...If you dont believe it...Ask Jim Brown how defenses piled up on him and punched and kicked and spit on him in the pile ups yet still came back and dominated...your smokin seriouse crack dude.

  • @hoorta said:

    So sure, if we take your argument to it's logical conclusion we should kick guys like Jim Thorpe and Red Grange out of the HOF, because by today's standards, they sucked- Thorpe would have been at best an undersized KR.

    The playing field was level, and if anything the (available) talent was less diluted, so it was harder to win. And if it was so freaking easy- go explain away how the Steelers sucked from their inception until 1972. History is history, and you're in denial about yours- except the all important (to your mind) recent part of it.

    EDIT: Let's say for fun we shrink the current NFL down to say 16 or so teams like there were back in the 60's- all of a sudden we have ONLY the top two teams out of each division in the league- and guys like Suh, Joe Thomas, and Joe Hayden aren't playing for the Browns or Lions- they're playing for someone else. And if you think the Steelers could suck up all that extra talent on your team- I think not. So it would be a LOT harder to win consistently in a smaller league.

    It will be real funny in 10 years or so when they inaugurate the "World Bowl" and I'm waiting for the day we can rag on the Steelers that they haven't won squat in the new format. But-but-but- I can hear it already- a Championship is a Championship. ๐Ÿ˜†

    BTW, the Packers have you beat in NFL Championships- and I dare you to start trolling on a Green Bay forum to tell them they don't.

    Never said it was easy but the talent pool was more diluted and I already alluded that there were plenty of exceptional talents during that time. My point was there aren't many people that care about anything besides Super Bowl wins. It's the measuring stick for franchise success here and now. I won't deny the greatness of the Browns during that time but those NFL championships don't equate to Super Bowls and that's my point. I'd say the same if I were a Browns fan. As far as the Steelers are concerned there is a certain formula in place with that organization from the top all the way down. The team drafts well consistently. Doesn't over pay free agents and hangs on to their coaches. It's a way of life for the Steelers and I sincerely doubt you'll see a period any time soon where they aren't near the top as long as that formula is followed continuously. Look how many rookies weren't and haven't been rushed in to the line up but rather were allowed to develop behind veterans. Timmons didn't get thrown in the line up and look at him now. Ziggy Hood, hell even Troy Polamalu. Worilds is behind Woodley and Harrison and may not see significant time until Harrison is done. Mike Wallace, Sanders, Brown. They traded Holmes for a 5th round pick because he was a PR/moral nightmare and people flipped out. However that trade turned in to Bryant McFadden and Antonio Brown. A starting corner and a emerging WR this year as a rookie. You're going to be waiting a long time to rag on the Steelers.

    DieHardBrownsFanD DieHardBrownsFan wrote on last edited by

    Homotron said:

    Never said it was easy but the talent pool was more diluted and I already alluded that there were plenty of exceptional talents during that time. My point was there aren't many people that care about anything besides Super Bowl wins. It's the measuring stick for franchise success here and now. I won't deny the greatness of the Browns during that time but those NFL championships don't equate to Super Bowls and that's my point. I'd say the same if I were a Browns fan. As far as the Steelers are concerned there is a certain formula in place with that organization from the top all the way down. The team drafts well consistently. Doesn't over pay free agents and hangs on to their coaches. It's a way of life for the Steelers and I sincerely doubt you'll see a period any time soon where they aren't near the top as long as that formula is followed continuously. Look how many rookies weren't and haven't been rushed in to the line up but rather were allowed to develop behind veterans. Timmons didn't get thrown in the line up and look at him now. Ziggy Hood, hell even Troy Polamalu. Worilds is behind Woodley and Harrison and may not see significant time until Harrison is done. Mike Wallace, Sanders, Brown. They traded Holmes for a 5th round pick because he was a PR/moral nightmare and people flipped out. However that trade turned in to Bryant McFadden and Antonio Brown. A starting corner and a emerging WR this year as a rookie. You're going to be waiting a long time to rag on the Steelers.

    Homo is a bandwagon moron.

  • "I won't deny the greatness of the Browns during that time but those NFL championships don't equate to Super Bowls and that's my point".

    A championship in the 50's,60's is no less greather than the superbowl and your just plain conning yourself to believe otherwise...I dare you to walk up to any of those great players and tell them thier championship was less meaningful...They name has changed and the game has changed and I seriousely doubt the players of today could take the ass kicking those guys dished out. If Big Ben played back themn I guarantee you he wouldnt have survived the season with the allegations that were brought against him. He would be sitting at home recovering from cracked ribs or something...If you dont believe it...Ask Jim Brown how defenses piled up on him and punched and kicked and spit on him in the pile ups yet still came back and dominated...your smokin seriouse crack dude.

    VagitronV Vagitron wrote on last edited by

    @nickers said:

    "I won't deny the greatness of the Browns during that time but those NFL championships don't equate to Super Bowls and that's my point".

    A championship in the 50's,60's is no less greather than the superbowl and your just plain conning yourself to believe otherwise...I dare you to walk up to any of those great players and tell them thier championship was less meaningful...They name has changed and the game has changed and I seriousely doubt the players of today could take the ass kicking those guys dished out. If Big Ben played back themn I guarantee you he wouldnt have survived the season with the allegations that were brought against him. He would be sitting at home recovering from cracked ribs or something...If you dont believe it...Ask Jim Brown how defenses piled up on him and punched and kicked and spit on him in the pile ups yet still came back and dominated...your smokin seriouse crack dude.

    I'm not going to get in to a troll battle here but NFL Championships and Super Bowls are not synonymous and whats with the "I dare you bullsh.it" ? I'm also not questioning their toughness but the talent level is definitely different and with the rule changes the game has become more difficult not less difficult. And Diehard a bandwagon fan? Born and raised in Western PA, not sure where Bandwagon works in to that one. It should also be noted that the ONLY reason people are butt hurt about my comments is because the Browns don't have any Super Bowls but have plenty NFL championships. I respect the Browns franchise. You don't need to reach in every direction for some sort of legitimacy.

    EDIT: and there is absolutely nothing moronic about what I said that you chose to quote. Prove otherwise. I DARE YOU! lol

  • S Slurp and Burp wrote on last edited by

    Look if you ask any Steeler player about the Browns playing in the AAFC and their Title games back in the day they will tell you that those games during those times were tough but nothing like a Super Bowl.

    The Browns should have at least shown up once to the big game since its inception. This is Super Bowl 45 after all.

    Prediction:

    Steelers 35 Pack 17

  • Look if you ask any Steeler player about the Browns playing in the AAFC and their Title games back in the day they will tell you that those games during those times were tough but nothing like a Super Bowl.

    The Browns should have at least shown up once to the big game since its inception. This is Super Bowl 45 after all.

    Prediction:

    Steelers 35 Pack 17

    ClevelandFanForLifeC ClevelandFanForLife wrote on last edited by

    @slurp-and-burp said:

    Look if you ask any Steeler player about the Browns playing in the AAFC and their Title games back in the day they will tell you that those games during those times were tough but nothing like a Super Bowl.

    The Browns should have at least shown up once to the big game since its inception. This is Super Bowl 45 after all.

    Prediction:

    Steelers 35 Pack 17

    Ok Mr Knowitall, please explain how the Championship games were nothing like the Super Bowl. I beg you to come up with one viable reason.

  • WRREBELW WRREBEL wrote on last edited by

    Ok the packers will win by double digits.

    35-17

    bet your house on it

  • S Slurp and Burp wrote on last edited by

    mikeyP72 said:

    Super Bowl 45 and year 11 as a franchise. We'll make it there, maybe even faster than the 40 years it took Pisspuke to win a championship (against inferior talent to boot).

    Year eleven? you mean to tell me that the Browns franchise has only been around for eleven years? If so then you can't claim those titles back in the day. It took 40 years for the Steelers to get there and it's been 45 years and you have never been there. But once we got there we sort of made it our goal every year to be back and with a 7th Lombardi in our reach we have done a super job!

  • mikeyP72 said:

    Super Bowl 45 and year 11 as a franchise. We'll make it there, maybe even faster than the 40 years it took Pisspuke to win a championship (against inferior talent to boot).

    Year eleven? you mean to tell me that the Browns franchise has only been around for eleven years? If so then you can't claim those titles back in the day. It took 40 years for the Steelers to get there and it's been 45 years and you have never been there. But once we got there we sort of made it our goal every year to be back and with a 7th Lombardi in our reach we have done a super job!

    ClevelandFanForLifeC ClevelandFanForLife wrote on last edited by

    @slurp-and-burp said:

    Year eleven? you mean to tell me that the Browns franchise has only been around for eleven years? If so then you can't claim those titles back in the day. It took 40 years for the Steelers to get there and it's been 45 years and you have never been there. But once we got there we sort of made it our goal every year to be back and with a 7th Lombardi in our reach we have done a super job!

    Notice that he completely dodged my question. Pussy.

  • VagitronV Vagitron wrote on last edited by

    mikeyP72 said:

    If the talent level was so shitty why was it so hard for the Steelers to win a game for 40 years?

    Yeah nothing to say... If you do it'll likely be more denial.

    Umm because the Steelers were terrible? Isn't that usually why teams lose games and lose games on a consistent basis?

  • WRREBELW WRREBEL wrote on last edited by

    while Bigben acts like he is black, the same can't be said about Clay matthews. i cant beleive i dont remember hearing about this.

    Clay Matthews, Jr.: "White Nation?"

    USC OLB Clay Matthews reportedly created a Facebook group during his junior season called "White Nation," which showed a photo of an African American baby in handcuffs.

    Under the picture was a caption saying "arrest black babies before they become criminals." It also said "This group is not for the faint of heart. All members are athletes of Caucasion descent. We are just doing our duty of protecting the Arian brotherhood." Brian Cushing, K David Buehler, and former Redskins draft pick Dallas Sartz joined the group. The athletic dept. billed the group as a joke. Matthews later issued a formal apology.

    Read more: http://forums.kffl.com/threads/249396-Clay...t#ixzz1CXeK9uTj

  • Go 'LosersG Go 'Losers wrote on last edited by

    NFL titles before the Super Bowl era absolutely count, just because they is no trophy doesn't make it any less credible.

    Even though there were other world champions from 1946-1949, it is still impressive what the Browns did in the old AAFC.

    The fact that the Steelers were so terrible for their first 40 years only makes the teams turnaround all the more incredible.

    The title count of 10 between the two franchises gives the rivalry great history.

  • C CLEVELandMILIDH wrote on last edited by

    Hypocrite's

  • @nickers said:

    "I won't deny the greatness of the Browns during that time but those NFL championships don't equate to Super Bowls and that's my point".

    A championship in the 50's,60's is no less greather than the superbowl and your just plain conning yourself to believe otherwise...I dare you to walk up to any of those great players and tell them thier championship was less meaningful...They name has changed and the game has changed and I seriousely doubt the players of today could take the ass kicking those guys dished out. If Big Ben played back themn I guarantee you he wouldnt have survived the season with the allegations that were brought against him. He would be sitting at home recovering from cracked ribs or something...If you dont believe it...Ask Jim Brown how defenses piled up on him and punched and kicked and spit on him in the pile ups yet still came back and dominated...your smokin seriouse crack dude.

    I'm not going to get in to a troll battle here but NFL Championships and Super Bowls are not synonymous and whats with the "I dare you bullsh.it" ? I'm also not questioning their toughness but the talent level is definitely different and with the rule changes the game has become more difficult not less difficult. And Diehard a bandwagon fan? Born and raised in Western PA, not sure where Bandwagon works in to that one. It should also be noted that the ONLY reason people are butt hurt about my comments is because the Browns don't have any Super Bowls but have plenty NFL championships. I respect the Browns franchise. You don't need to reach in every direction for some sort of legitimacy.

    EDIT: and there is absolutely nothing moronic about what I said that you chose to quote. Prove otherwise. I DARE YOU! lol

    nickersN nickers wrote on last edited by

    Homotron said:

    I'm not going to get in to a troll battle here but NFL Championships and Super Bowls are not synonymous and whats with the "I dare you bullsh.it" ? I'm also not questioning their toughness but the talent level is definitely different and with the rule changes the game has become more difficult not less difficult. And Diehard a bandwagon fan? Born and raised in Western PA, not sure where Bandwagon works in to that one. It should also be noted that the ONLY reason people are butt hurt about my comments is because the Browns don't have any Super Bowls but have plenty NFL championships. I respect the Browns franchise. You don't need to reach in every direction for some sort of legitimacy.

    EDIT: and there is absolutely nothing moronic about what I said that you chose to quote. Prove otherwise. I DARE YOU! lol

    theres nothing to legitimize...the Superbowl is basically the brainchild of marketing=dollars...its the age we live in...but to say those championships dont count is stupid on your part...without those "championships"...there would be no Superbowl. so if you wanna act like they never existed thats YOUR problem. Its the NFL's problem they choose to ignore it. your not as brilliant as you portend to be so dont tell me about legitimacy kid.

  • BrownsBackerB BrownsBacker wrote on last edited by

    Found my Antonio Freeman jersey from '97 today, WOOT! GO PACKS!

  • Homotron said:

    I'm not going to get in to a troll battle here but NFL Championships and Super Bowls are not synonymous and whats with the "I dare you bullsh.it" ? I'm also not questioning their toughness but the talent level is definitely different and with the rule changes the game has become more difficult not less difficult. And Diehard a bandwagon fan? Born and raised in Western PA, not sure where Bandwagon works in to that one. It should also be noted that the ONLY reason people are butt hurt about my comments is because the Browns don't have any Super Bowls but have plenty NFL championships. I respect the Browns franchise. You don't need to reach in every direction for some sort of legitimacy.

    EDIT: and there is absolutely nothing moronic about what I said that you chose to quote. Prove otherwise. I DARE YOU! lol

    theres nothing to legitimize...the Superbowl is basically the brainchild of marketing=dollars...its the age we live in...but to say those championships dont count is stupid on your part...without those "championships"...there would be no Superbowl. so if you wanna act like they never existed thats YOUR problem. Its the NFL's problem they choose to ignore it. your not as brilliant as you portend to be so dont tell me about legitimacy kid.

    VagitronV Vagitron wrote on last edited by

    @nickers said:

    theres nothing to legitimize...the Superbowl is basically the brainchild of marketing=dollars...its the age we live in...but to say those championships dont count is stupid on your part...without those "championships"...there would be no Superbowl. so if you wanna act like they never existed thats YOUR problem. Its the NFL's problem they choose to ignore it. your not as brilliant as you portend to be so dont tell me about legitimacy kid.

    Call those early championships what you want. If you want to call them Super Bowls call them Super Bowls my point isn't about what the titles are called but the game that is played during one era and the game that was played during the other. There were less teams, the talent was more diluted despite a host of great talents. The rules were drastically different and because of that winning now is much more difficult. Add in the advent of the Salary cap, managing your players, paying your players and maintaining a top tier organizations it's not small feat to win a Super Bowl. I'm not saying that the NFL championships weren't during that time and the Browns were certainly top tier. What I am saying is Super Bowls are now the measuring stick. You don't hear A TON about NFL championships from anyone but the fans from those teams with the most NFL championships and rightfully so. I never said "they never" existed and I'm not sure who you're calling a "kid" old balls.

  • VagitronV Vagitron wrote on last edited by

    mikeyP72 said:

    Had the Browns not moved to Baltimore, we'd be stacking Super Bowl trophies onto our NFL Championships, as we will when the new Browns start winning them.

    Fair enough. However I still don't understand the above. If the Browns didn't move to Baltimore how exactly would that have equated to the Browns stacking Super Bowls? The Ravens team that won in 2000 had how many Browns players? There weren't many and when the Browns left and went to Baltimore there was a complete disconnect. The Ravens are not and were not the Browns so no I don't believe you would have been "stacking super bowl titles"

  • tampadawgsT tampadawgs wrote on last edited by

    I didnt know football was around 46 yrs ago....

    What I think is funny, is everybody including Steeler fans say Jim Brown was the best RB of all time, and if they do not think the best they say top 2 or 3. If you talk about teams and chamionships back then, then you get well it does not count cause they are not SuperBowls..Really???

    So According to Steeler Fans no Sports were around berfore 46 yrs ago

    That being said

    The Yankees only have 7 titles

    THe Celtics only have 9 titles and the Lakers are the Greatest of all time with 10 titles...

    History as Sports we know it is not what it seems.....

  • VagitronV Vagitron wrote on last edited by

    mikeyP72 said:

    The organization was the same. The natural evolution of the Browns could have led to super bowl titles since the Browns left in the early 90's.

    We would have had a much better shot had the team not left than starting from scratch in '99 with an expansion team. Comparing the Browns to the Steelers right now is like comparing the Colts to the Jaguars and you (colts fan) chastising the Jags fan for not winning Super Bowls. Its a stupid argument.

    How was the organization the same? If the Browns had not moved would they still have hired Ozzie Newsome as a executive? would they have drafted the same? Ozzie Newsome despite his ties to the Browns is a major reason for that franchise and it's success post super bowl and you can't say definitively whether or not they would have brought him. You then need to add in the fact the the Ravens have only won, one title so the stacking also doesn't apply. Really grasping straws with the above argument and I agree YOUR argument is stupid in that the current Ravens team would be the current Browns team had it not moved because that is in fact what you are implying. You're still in the North, you're still drafting rookies and signing FA's. You had how many first round picks inside the top 10 over the last 10 years? You aren't going to blame the expansion for the Browns dismal play. It's a hell of a lot more involved than that, be rest assured. Yet I'm the delusional one. lol

  • VagitronV Vagitron wrote on last edited by

    mikeyP72 said:

    New organizations take time, it took your shitty organization 40 years. End of conversation.

    I guess I'm too assume you're going to ignore my actual response and by pass the "stacking trophies" reference? And who said they don't take time? The good ones usually do hang around. Pittsburgh is a top tier organization from top to bottom, some would say a "model franchise". I at no point said the Browns wouldn't turn things around but found the "stacking trophies" reference to be pretty damn funny. Pittsburgh isn't going anywhere boys and girls. You found that out this year with the Chicken little dance after Ben got suspended. Now they're in the Super Bowl. I wonder why that happened? Must-a been the refs!