How Bad Do The Squealers Suck?
-
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!!!
-
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!!!
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!
First off, the NFL only had a one game playoff right up until 1967. The AAFC and the NFL at the time were in parity. Also, the AAFC had just as many teams as the NFL in those years.
You cannot compare those AAFC teams to today's system any more you can compare the NFL teams of that era to today's system. If the AAFC league titles are in your mind illegitmate, then the NFL team's titles of those years you must also declare to be illigitimate.
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!!!
Again, those teams were every bit as good as the corresponding NFL teams. Probably better because they paid their players more, had black players where the NFL refused to, and had more attendance.
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!!!
If the system in the 50s and 60s had called for more playoff games, like today's system does, then the Browns would have won more playoff games. I note parenthetically that while the Browns were winning those playoff games the Steelers were winning exactly zero of those playoff games. If it was so freeking easy to do, then why weren't the Steelers doing it?
-
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.
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.
Well, likewise maybe 20% of today's fans could tell you who the best team of the 1970s were. Steeler fans can probably tell you because that is their team. Browns fans know their team's history because that is their teams. But, most fans don't know jackshit about their NFL history...or AFL history...or AAFC history. But just because some people are uninformed doesn't mean we all have to be uninformed.
As far as the "level", the fact is, the AAFC and the NFL of the 40s and 50s indeed WERE on the same level as the NFL of today. They were the top of the top level of professional football.... There were say, in 1948, 18 professional teams operating in a nation of about 150 million people. Today there are 32 professional teams operating in a nation of over 300 million people. I believe Silverback questioned the size of the AAFC. In 1948 it had 8 teams. The NFL had 10 teams. The size of these leagues was appropriate for the size of the nation. At that time you had 1 pro football team for each 8.3 million of population. Today with the 32 team you have 1 pro football team for each 9.3 million of population. To have kept the same ratio per the population the NFL should actually now have about 38 teams.
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