How Bad Do The Squealers Suck?
-
We could add Oakland And Miami Washington ...and a few More Teams as well for some impressive Runs. Too much freaking Time wasted Dissin~ each other here at times. IMHO
-
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz..... come on man The Browns were Great ! Phenomenal even. And Pittsburgh was Crap. We know it and Understand it. You cant tell me that what they have done During the Super Bowl ERA isnt Impressive correct ? Hey I respect the Pack the Browns the Giants as the Early Stud Franchises of the Game ! But all of them have had Stretches of Ordinary and worse... Just as Pittsburgh did early on. I would say the Most Impressive thing about the Steelers Franchise has been how Long they have Held Strong since. Props to the Trailblazing Squads NY GB ( and GB and NY have also represented in the Modern ERA as well ) And C`Town... But Props also to Pittsburgh Dallas SF and NE for what they have done since ! They ALL Hold Royal Spots on the NFL Crest.
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz..... come on man The Browns were Great ! Phenomenal even. And Pittsburgh was Crap. We know it and Understand it. You cant tell me that what they have done During the Super Bowl ERA isnt Impressive correct ? Hey I respect the Pack the Browns the Giants as the Early Stud Franchises of the Game ! But all of them have had Stretches of Ordinary and worse... Just as Pittsburgh did early on. I would say the Most Impressive thing about the Steelers Franchise has been how Long they have Held Strong since. Props to the Trailblazing Squads NY GB ( and GB and NY have also represented in the Modern ERA as well ) And C`Town... But Props also to Pittsburgh Dallas SF and NE for what they have done since ! They ALL Hold Royal Spots on the NFL Crest.
Well, that is the pure cyclical nature of the sport. Those crowns you are passing out are the result of good organizations, and as often as not a stellar coach/QB combination. Think about the great dynasties:
The early Packers combo of Curly Lambeau and Arnie Herber
The 40s Bears combo of George Halas and Sid Luckman
The 40s/50s Browns with Paul Brown and Otto Graham
The 60s Packers with Vince Lombardi and Bart Starr
The 70s Steelers with Chuck Noll and Terry Bradshaw
The 80s 49ers with Bill Walsh and Joe Montana
The 90s Cowboys with Jimmy Johnson and Troy Aikman
The 00s Patriots with Belichick and Brady
A couple of organizations have had a reprise, like the Cowboys who with Landry and Staubach who except for a couple of close losses to the Steelers in the SB could have been one of the great dynasties. The Steelers have had somewhat of a reprise lately with a couple wins and a loss in the SB. Who knows who is poised to be the next dynasty. It could be someone from out of left field. Maybe the Saints run off a couple of SBs in a row here to get them into this team picture. Maybe it will be the Seattle Seahawks or the Jacksonville Jaguars...or the Cleveland Browns or the Cincinnati Bengals. Stay tuned.
-
So much for the few responses by tim couch pulls out on how stupid this thread was....these arguments and comments make for some good shit to read. Bottom line no matter how much you hate it...fans fighting for their favorite team makes for a great column
Agree with zombo as well....theres no way in hell you can say Pittsburgh is a better franchise then the Packs or Bears
-
Zombo said:
This is why everyone hates Steeler fans. You don't see any other fanbase try and wipe out half of the NFL's history .. especially when they were part of it!
According to http://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/
By Championships:
1. Packers 13
2. Bears 9
3. Browns 8 <--- 4 NFL Championships
4. Giants 7
5. Steelers 6
Still love counting those old AAFC titles like they're world championships, eh??
Well fine, since we're on the history debate let's go to the NFL records book...
World Champions:
1946 - Chicago Bears
1947 - Chicago Cardinals
1948 - Philadelphia Eagles
1949 - Philadelphia Eagles
The AAFC titles are noteworthy but it was a league that only lasted 4 years and had only one other team go to the NFL, the pre-Montana 49ers. The AAFC championships banners from '46-'49 can be hung proudly in CBS but if you try to pass them off as "World Championship banners" then Cleveland should have joined the league a few years earlier.
“Football is a game played with arms, legs and shoulders but mostly from the neck up” -
Zombo said:
Pro Football Reference recognizes the AFL and AAFC champonships, as they are considered major professional leagues. As does the Pro Football Hall of Fame.
If you want to throw away the history of teams like the Raiders, Bills, 49ers and Browns ... that's par for the course as a Steeler fan ... but true NFL historians include those franchises from their birth.
Zombo
The NATIONAL FOOTBALL LEAGUE Period. AAFC is like the OLD NCAA Div 1~AA Titles ( and whatever they call it now ) Granted the Browns Squads during those years had NFL Caliber talent Most of the League was 2nd level. Argue all you want The NFL DOESN'T Recognize it .
-
Zombo said:
Pro Football Reference recognizes the AFL and AAFC champonships, as they are considered major professional leagues. As does the Pro Football Hall of Fame.
If you want to throw away the history of teams like the Raiders, Bills, 49ers and Browns ... that's par for the course as a Steeler fan ... but true NFL historians include those franchises from their birth.
Zombo
Yes, much respect that the profootballreference.com and the HOF recognize the championships, but you will not find those titles listed as "world championship" in the record books of the most important source of all: the National Football League.
We'll make a deal: Steelers fans won't try to ignore history as long as Browns fans don't try to rewrite history.
-
Zombo said:
I'm not rewriting anything. They are league championships recognized by The Pro Football Hall of Fame. It's Steeler fans that want to narrow it down to make themselves look better.
It happened. While your team blew chunks, Otto Graham, Marion Motley, Len Dawson, Joe Namath, etc. Happened.
Bingo, league championships. That we both agree.
-
Zombo said:
I'm not rewriting anything. They are league championships recognized by The Pro Football Hall of Fame. It's Steeler fans that want to narrow it down to make themselves look better.
It happened. While your team blew chunks, Otto Graham, Marion Motley, Len Dawson, Joe Namath, etc. Happened.
Bingo, league championships. That we both agree.
Go said:
Bingo, league championships. That we both agree.
Are you really making the argument that there is a difference between the name "league" championship and "world" championship? Look man, it's called the world championship today because it is the title they have given it. No other country in the world competes so is it really a world championship? If they called the "league" championship a "world" championship back then, we wouldn't be having this conversation. Look at the NBA. Everyone says the Mavericks just won the "world" championship yet there are actually TWO other competitions that constitute world champions: The Basketball World Championships and the Olympics. So are the Mavs really "world champions"? Not really. Just like the NFL can't boast about having the world championship. It's just what it's called. The Superbowl is still a league championship no matter how you look at it. Quit trying to stir the pot while trying to make an argument that doesn't exist.
once a fan, always a fan. married to a steeler fan. aaaaaaaaah! --andy -
World champion is funny to me cause....well, there only maybe 2 leagues outside the US....baby brother CFL and euro league....which I'm not sure exists anymore.
CFL has what....8 teams. Lmao...
Now....the world cup....that a WORLD sport....football, purely an American sport. Sure world champions sounds good, but no one else plays it so its world by default only.
Its a semantic argument used by stool fans to justify their arrogance...that's all. Revisionist history to erase their years of suckitude
-
Go said:
Bingo, league championships. That we both agree.
Are you really making the argument that there is a difference between the name "league" championship and "world" championship? Look man, it's called the world championship today because it is the title they have given it. No other country in the world competes so is it really a world championship? If they called the "league" championship a "world" championship back then, we wouldn't be having this conversation. Look at the NBA. Everyone says the Mavericks just won the "world" championship yet there are actually TWO other competitions that constitute world champions: The Basketball World Championships and the Olympics. So are the Mavs really "world champions"? Not really. Just like the NFL can't boast about having the world championship. It's just what it's called. The Superbowl is still a league championship no matter how you look at it. Quit trying to stir the pot while trying to make an argument that doesn't exist.
Are you really making the argument that there is a difference between the name "league" championship and "world" championship? Look man, it's called the world championship today because it is the title they have given it. No other country in the world competes so is it really a world championship? If they called the "league" championship a "world" championship back then, we wouldn't be having this conversation. Look at the NBA. Everyone says the Mavericks just won the "world" championship yet there are actually TWO other competitions that constitute world champions: The Basketball World Championships and the Olympics. So are the Mavs really "world champions"? Not really. Just like the NFL can't boast about having the world championship. It's just what it's called. The Superbowl is still a league championship no matter how you look at it. Quit trying to stir the pot while trying to make an argument that doesn't exist.
Nooooo, my argument is that the AAFC titles are indeed league championships. But the championships you won in the NFL are WORLD championships. The NFL crowned their own champions in the late 40's.
Yes, the Browns won 8 league titles, no disagreeing. Four of them were not technically "world championships" is all but I'm sure I'd make a different argument if I was a Browns fans.
“Football is a game played with arms, legs and shoulders but mostly from the neck up” -
Zombo said:
You are talking semantics, we are talking football.
They were a GREAT championship team. Not only did they dominate their league, but when they joined the NFL they trounced the defending champion Eagles and beat the Rams for the Championship. The AAFC Champs were BETTER than the NFL champs. They were the best team in the land. Don't know if they referred to themeselves as "world" champions, but I doubt there was a Uraguan team or something out there that was going to beat Paul Brown's men.
Zombo
Now you're talking semantics. What if I told you insane was working a 50-hour week for 50 years, at the end of which they tell you to piss off. Ending up in some retirement village, hoping to die rather than suffering the indignity of trying to make it to the toilet on time. Wouldn't you consider that to be insane??
-
Zombo said:
Glengarry Glen Ross?
Zombo
He's a font of misplaced rage. Name your cliché; Mother held him too much or not enough, last picked at kickball, late night sneaky uncle, whatever. Now he's so angry moments of levity actually cause him pain; gives him headaches. Happiness, for that gentleman, hurts.
Con Air, Garland Green
-
Zombo said:
Glengarry Glen Ross?
Zombo
coffee is for closers
-
Zombo said:
This is why everyone hates Steeler fans. You don't see any other fanbase try and wipe out half of the NFL's history .. especially when they were part of it!
According to http://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/
By Championships:
1. Packers 13
2. Bears 9
3. Browns 8 <--- 4 NFL Championships
4. Giants 7
5. Steelers 6
Still love counting those old AAFC titles like they're world championships, eh??
Well fine, since we're on the history debate let's go to the NFL records book...
World Champions:
1946 - Chicago Bears
1947 - Chicago Cardinals
1948 - Philadelphia Eagles
1949 - Philadelphia Eagles
The AAFC titles are noteworthy but it was a league that only lasted 4 years and had only one other team go to the NFL, the pre-Montana 49ers. The AAFC championships banners from '46-'49 can be hung proudly in CBS but if you try to pass them off as "World Championship banners" then Cleveland should have joined the league a few years earlier.
Go said:
Still love counting those old AAFC titles like they're world championships, eh??
Well fine, since we're on the history debate let's go to the NFL records book...
World Champions:
1946 - Chicago Bears
1947 - Chicago Cardinals
1948 - Philadelphia Eagles
1949 - Philadelphia Eagles
The AAFC titles are noteworthy but it was a league that only lasted 4 years and had only one other team go to the NFL, the pre-Montana 49ers. The AAFC championships banners from '46-'49 can be hung proudly in CBS but if you try to pass them off as "World Championship banners" then Cleveland should have joined the league a few years earlier.
They were "Professional Football Championships. When I do my annual title count, yes, they count....the same that I count AFL titles, ABA titles, and WHL titles, all leagues that merged with the current leagues. (even the NFL has never marketed their champions as "world champions)
As for the 4 teams you mention above, recall that in those final three years it was proposed by many that a "World Series of Football" be played between the AAFC champ and the NFL champ. The NFL would have no part of as they knew the Browns would have wiped the field clean of those teams mentioned...at least those last 3. The only "game" that would have been a hell of a matchup would have been the 46 Bears vs. '46 Browns. Othewise the Browns would have slaughtered those other teams.
-
Are you really making the argument that there is a difference between the name "league" championship and "world" championship? Look man, it's called the world championship today because it is the title they have given it. No other country in the world competes so is it really a world championship? If they called the "league" championship a "world" championship back then, we wouldn't be having this conversation. Look at the NBA. Everyone says the Mavericks just won the "world" championship yet there are actually TWO other competitions that constitute world champions: The Basketball World Championships and the Olympics. So are the Mavs really "world champions"? Not really. Just like the NFL can't boast about having the world championship. It's just what it's called. The Superbowl is still a league championship no matter how you look at it. Quit trying to stir the pot while trying to make an argument that doesn't exist.
Nooooo, my argument is that the AAFC titles are indeed league championships. But the championships you won in the NFL are WORLD championships. The NFL crowned their own champions in the late 40's.
Yes, the Browns won 8 league titles, no disagreeing. Four of them were not technically "world championships" is all but I'm sure I'd make a different argument if I was a Browns fans.
Go said:
Nooooo, my argument is that the AAFC titles are indeed league championships. But the championships you won in the NFL are WORLD championships. The NFL crowned their own champions in the late 40's.
Yes, the Browns won 8 league titles, no disagreeing. Four of them were not technically "world championships" is all but I'm sure I'd make a different argument if I was a Browns fans.
Auhh, NONE of the championships won by any NFL team ever is a "World Championship" that includes any title ever won by the Browns, the Steelers, the Canton Bulldogs or the Rhein Fire.
And that includes the winner of the "World Series". These are just marketing names.
You want a world championship in Football? See this:
http://www.americanfootball2011.com/en/
Now, it is a joke to call the winner of this title "World Champions" but they do. The guys that play in this are Division III or II level graduates. Should the NFL champion be considered the best (american) football team in the world? Now, Of course.
Could the 1947 Cardinals, '48 and '49 Eagles claim to have been the best (american) football team in the world. F88k NO, because they weren't.
-
Zombo said:
Glengarry Glen Ross?
Zombo
He's a font of misplaced rage. Name your cliché; Mother held him too much or not enough, last picked at kickball, late night sneaky uncle, whatever. Now he's so angry moments of levity actually cause him pain; gives him headaches. Happiness, for that gentleman, hurts.
Con Air, Garland Green
He's a font of misplaced rage. Name your cliché; Mother held him too much or not enough, last picked at kickball, late night sneaky uncle, whatever. Now he's so angry moments of levity actually cause him pain; gives him headaches. Happiness, for that gentleman, hurts.
Con Air, Garland Green
Put the bunny back.
-
Go said:
Still love counting those old AAFC titles like they're world championships, eh??
Well fine, since we're on the history debate let's go to the NFL records book...
World Champions:
1946 - Chicago Bears
1947 - Chicago Cardinals
1948 - Philadelphia Eagles
1949 - Philadelphia Eagles
The AAFC titles are noteworthy but it was a league that only lasted 4 years and had only one other team go to the NFL, the pre-Montana 49ers. The AAFC championships banners from '46-'49 can be hung proudly in CBS but if you try to pass them off as "World Championship banners" then Cleveland should have joined the league a few years earlier.
They were "Professional Football Championships. When I do my annual title count, yes, they count....the same that I count AFL titles, ABA titles, and WHL titles, all leagues that merged with the current leagues. (even the NFL has never marketed their champions as "world champions)
As for the 4 teams you mention above, recall that in those final three years it was proposed by many that a "World Series of Football" be played between the AAFC champ and the NFL champ. The NFL would have no part of as they knew the Browns would have wiped the field clean of those teams mentioned...at least those last 3. The only "game" that would have been a hell of a matchup would have been the 46 Bears vs. '46 Browns. Othewise the Browns would have slaughtered those other teams.
They were "Professional Football Championships. When I do my annual title count, yes, they count....the same that I count AFL titles, ABA titles, and WHL titles, all leagues that merged with the current leagues. (even the NFL has never marketed their champions as "world champions)
As for the 4 teams you mention above, recall that in those final three years it was proposed by many that a "World Series of Football" be played between the AAFC champ and the NFL champ. The NFL would have no part of as they knew the Browns would have wiped the field clean of those teams mentioned...at least those last 3. The only "game" that would have been a hell of a matchup would have been the 46 Bears vs. '46 Browns. Othewise the Browns would have slaughtered those other teams.
Yea, thanks Dude. It is. But it is an educated one.
-
Zombo said:
You are talking semantics, we are talking football.
They were a GREAT championship team. Not only did they dominate their league, but when they joined the NFL they trounced the defending champion Eagles and beat the Rams for the Championship. The AAFC Champs were BETTER than the NFL champs. They were the best team in the land. Don't know if they referred to themeselves as "world" champions, but I doubt there was a Uraguan team or something out there that was going to beat Paul Brown's men.
Zombo
We are talking the National Football League. And Poll ALL NFL Fans in the Nation and I bet less than 20% would agree with you. But I understand your need to cling to this. It is after all highly Impressive... and I am being serious. But its not on the same level. Being it was 60 yrs ago we are far removed from it all. Perhaps back in the 60s I might have felt differently. But you guys are entitled to your opinion. Most think its nit relevant that's all. And really I am not knocking the Titles. Its an impressive entry into PRO Football. I dont discount them so much as have BIG *`s by them.
Climbing the Stairway...To SEVEN !! -
Zombo said:
Less than 20% can find Viet Nam on a map, it doesn't mean it's not there.
Less than 20% could tell you anything about the Korean War it doesn't mean it didn't happen.
The Browns of the forties and fifties were great dynasty that was probably the most innovative and influential team in the Modern Era. It happaned. It doesn't matter what some snot nosed fan that can remember ten years back thinks.
Z
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz... As I said NOT Knocking it. Its impressive. Most dont care thats all.
-
Let me be the first to congratulate you guys on beating the New York Yankees in a 1 game playoff for some mythical title. Can you please email me some caveman drawings of those games so I can view them? Winning a whopping 8 team league must have taken some herculean efforts!
I mean coming in first place in a 4 team conference to make the mytical playoff championship thingie must have been awesome to watch. And beating such powerhouses as the Los Angeles Dons, the storied Chicago Rockets, and those pesky New York Yankees... Man, talk about murderers row!!!
Since 1951 the Browns have won 9 playoff games. 9 playoff wins in 60 years is just awesome!
Since 2004 the Steelers have won 10 playoff games. 10 playoff wins in 7 years totally sucks.
It is my pleasure to be in the presence of living dinosaurs that can remember games from 60 years ago that weren't televised!!!
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