Rorbotron said:

Ravens were 12-4 and without beating a shit browns team twice could have been 10-6, the same as the 6th seed colts. Not sure if they would have been out of the playoffs or in at that point, but there's no question that two cakewalks helped them reach the superbowl and win it.

Rorbotron said:

Agreed. I really do think the best example yet of this point is that 2008 season where the Ravens "benefitted" from playing in a division with a couple of "doormats"....with the Patriots being the "victim" in that case.

I suspect if one researched long and hard enough you could probably come up with a few other examples.

@samoth said:

Not so sure about that one. I believe they were 12-4 that year. Even if the Browns would have beaten them once, they still probably make the playoffs and go on their postseason run.

@samoth said:

Unfortunately this couldn't be more off base because a good Browns team isn't beating the Ravens in 2000. Just like a good Browns team wasn't going to beat the Steelers three seasons ago. Sure they're going to put up more of a fight but in recent memory those are two of the best defenses in the history of the league (arguably, but the stats don't lie) Pretty Retarded statement if we're being honest. They would have been less of a door mat.

Formerly Stone said:

Also, there is no such thing as "patriotism" to a sports team. Love, loyalty, excitement, etc are all things you feel for a sports team but patriotism is something totally different. Patriotism is what makes you willing to die for your country rather than sit on on your lazy a$$ and complain about war just because you are a coward and don't have the backbone to accept that war is a necessary evil. Patriotism is what makes you realize that, yes, we the United States are bullies and we often dictate our wants and wishes on other countries.......but patriotism is what makes you proud to realize that "someone has to be the leader" and thank God every day that it's us, a country who's goals are freedom and peace!

wow, you really took it way too far. it's not that deep, man. not for you to post something like this. you have a habit of blowing things out of proportion. i guess it's just the dumb ass in you. i understand, you can't help it. it just comes natural to you. you're a natural born idiot.

and you're actually worse off than rich. based on all of your idiotic posts and the amount of time you spend on a rival teams board, your the one that needs to look in the mirror. i have you steeler trolls blocked so i can't see your insane posts, but opccasionally i unblock you morons just to get a good laugh. thanks for the entertainment, little man. you've served your purpose for today.

@rich4eagle said:

this question and thread needs destroyed useless and irrelevant

you should look in the mirror and concentrate on yourself instead of trying to criticize someone else. your posts are always a bunch of gibberish, your opinion is absolutley worthless and your patriotism to pittsburgh is pathetic. get a f*cking clue, little man.

@sj_browns said:

So what happens to the AFCN if Holmgren is the real deal (as many of us believe) and he gets the Browns back to prominence? What happens to the Bengals, Ravens and Steelers if they can no longer benefit from a weak Browns team. What happens if there are no more guaranteed wins against the Browns and the competition heats up in the AFCN?

In a weakened state, the Browns have (on a few occassions) held their AFCN rivals out of the playoffs by beating them once or twice. So what happens if the Browns are more competitive? What happens if the Browns become a winning organization? Will this expose a team (or teams) in the AFCN and show they're not as good as people thought they were?

As less than adequate as this question is and as obvious are the answers are..............yes the other teams benefitted from the browns stankage.............get off the injury bs, .........what happens is more of the same winners win and losers lose..................cause if the Browns stank less they win against other teams that make the bengals and steelers and ravens competitive

this question and thread needs destroyed useless and irrelevant

Formerly Stone said:

The original poster is probably 14!

Actually, in this case I think what I was doing was simply ignoring the "flamer" part of the post. I simply didn't think I needed to support his flamethrowing with some of my own, especially when I didn't agree with it, thus, I forgot the "Overrated" comment was even made"

I chose to look at the interesting analytical question contained in that post.

Recall that when reminded by you of the "overrated" comment, I agreed with your statement about it.

WhatsamattaU? Are you so insecure that you can't figure out how to take it when I agree with you?

Rorbotron said:

Its not so much that I am "skipping over" a part of someone statement purposely, its just that I am perhaps concentrating on some other portion of the question at hand.

Like here, as I was trying to elucidate with certain examples that a team in a division could have "benefitted" from a lack of success of other teams in that division, I completely overlooked the statement that "therefor they were overrated".

I was simply oblivious to that comment, but when reminded of it I went back and saw saying "Oh, OK, there it is".

The issue of those teams being "overrated" simply wasn't germaine to my thought processes, so I must have blocked it out. In the back of my mind I must have also perhaps thought it was an irrelevent portion of the statement.

@sj_browns said:

So what you're saying is you have a inferiority complex? and Gipper does routinely skip over portions of posts and only highlights what he believes are strengths in his argument. He doesn't do it all the time but it happens often enough that I find myself saying "WTF" out loud because of his routine elimination of certain points he deems not worth discussing. Mostly because a "witty answer" can't be provided. I certainly don't have a superiority complex but I know the Steelers are certainly the better team and the people here claiming otherwise live in the land of delusion. I also thought this thread was RetardED when it was first posted and it's still severely lacking. The Browns will be a under .500 team this season. Write it down.

@the-gipper said:

BINGO! this sums up every steeler troll on this board. they take anything they can to create an argument. that's their agenda on this board. to be an arrogant schmuck somehow thinking being a steeler fan gives them superiority over other people. what a bunch of losers. no life, too much time on their hands=troll on a browns board.

Formerly Stone said:

you often fail to understand the difference between a question and a statement....................dumb ass. do you see the question mark used in the thread title, you f*cking moron?

Formerly Stone said:

What I got wrapped up in is the facts. If you want me to say, no, I don't think those teams were overrated, but they may indeed have benefitted from the Browns lack of success, Well, I think I did just say that.

Apparently you got so wrapped up in worrying about finding some small chink of an error in my statements that you lost sight of the interesting substance of this discussion.

You're so worried about the cover, you forgot to read the book.

@the-gipper said:

I think clearly the 2008 Ravens in my example "benefitted" from being in a division with a couple of doormats over the Pats who were in a much tougher division. That doesn't mean they were overrated as in "they are likely to get unceremoniously bounced out of the playoffs because they weren't all that good to begin with".

I don't think its that the Ravens say, were a "bad" team that got in over a good team, but that the Pats, who may in fact have been a better team, got knocked out in favor of the Ravens."

Maybe the original poster can explain his statement.

(I note parenthetically that the Ravens met the Steelers in the AFC title game that year, so I can't say that either of those teams were overrated. On the other hand, had the Pats made the playoffs we can only speculate how far they could have gone given how well they had performed in recent postseasons.)

taken from my post #11

my op was completely taken out of context. i never said the browns afcn rivals weren't good. my point was that in the past there were times when the browns afcn rivals looked better than they actually were, thanks to the browns. i was trying to tie this into the present state of the afcn and the future. with some of the issues the steelers and the bengals are facing this upcoming season (along with the bengals lack of consistency), these teams can easily get by if the browns have another down season. but an improved browns team can change the game completely.

you're correct, gipper. i NEVER said the browns afcn rivals were bad teams. i asked a question and presented some some info, then i gave my opinion on the matter. i just wanted to open up a discussion about this on this board. i shouldn't have to explain myself because my op was self explanatory. you and brownsfan althaus understood where i was coming from. you two didn't need any further explanation.

Formerly Stone said:

And ........as a die hard Steeler fan who knows that the Steelers have been far superior to the Browns for a long, long, time, it's a game I fear twice every year!

Maybe I misread the question. I don't recall that he said that teams in a division with a couple of "doormats" are "overrated". I thought he said do those good teams "benefit" from being in a division with a doormat or two.

I think clearly the 2008 Ravens in my example "benefitted" from being in a division with a couple of doormats over the Pats who were in a much tougher division. That doesn't mean they were overrated as in "they are likely to get unceremoniously bounced out of the playoffs because they weren't all that good to begin with".

I don't think its that the Ravens say, were a "bad" team that got in over a good team, but that the Pats, who may in fact have been a better team, got knocked out in favor of the Ravens."

Maybe the original poster can explain his statement.

(I note parenthetically that the Ravens met the Steelers in the AFC title game that year, so I can't say that either of those teams were overrated. On the other hand, had the Pats made the playoffs we can only speculate how far they could have gone given how well they had performed in recent postseasons.)

FREAKofSTEEL08 said:

Look at my example from 2008. If the Ravens had sustained just one extra loss then it would have been a very big deal. Unless you think that going from making the playoffs to not making the playoffs is no big deal. Most teams think its a pretty big deal. I mean, in 2005, your 6th seed Steelers would have stayed home with an extra loss. Instead, they end up winning the SB.....sounds like a big deal to me! Maybe winning a Super Bowl is no longer a big deal for certain Steeler fans? Hmm?

@brownsfan_althaus said:

Good post!

thanks and let's hope we do see an improved browns team this season and beyond!

Good post!

@sj_browns said:

So what happens to the AFCN if Holmgren is the real deal (as many of us believe) and he gets the Browns back to prominence? What happens to the Bengals, Ravens and Steelers if they can no longer benefit from a weak Browns team. What happens if there are no more guaranteed wins against the Browns and the competition heats up in the AFCN?

In a weakened state, the Browns have (on a few occassions) held their AFCN rivals out of the playoffs by beating them once or twice. So what happens if the Browns are more competitive? What happens if the Browns become a winning organization? Will this expose a team (or teams) in the AFCN and show they're not as good as people thought they were?

Then Maybe they get and extra Loss each Year. Not that Big a deal.

@sj_browns said:

But you can play those hypotheticals to no end. I think Gips pretty well nailed the variables. And sometimes stuff happens that's out of your control- like in the Browns great Anderson year- where they would have made the playoffs if the Colts hadn't decided to tank the game against the Titans.

@the-gipper said:

Examples: Say, the AFC North ends up like this (this is just a hypothetical):

Bengals 10-6

Browns 9-7

Steelers 8-8

Ravens 7-9

But you have this in another division:

Colts 11-5

Titans 10-6

Jags 3-13

Texans 2-14

The 10-6 Titans may in fact not be as good a team really as the 9-7 Browns or the 8-8 Steelers, but, the fact is those Titans are going to make the playoffs because they and the Colts were able to say go 4-0 against the lowly Jags and Texans. Where on the other hand all 4 teams in the AFC North end up going 3-3 in Division games. In a sense, you may be right. It may help your playoff chances to have 2 weak teams in your division that you can beat up on and get easy wins from.

This may in fact have happened in the recent past in the AFC North. In fact, we need go no further back than 2008.

That year the AFC North finished like this:

Steelers 12-4

Ravens 11-5

Bengals 4-11-1

Browns 4-12

The AFC East finished like this:

Dolphins 11-5

Patriots 11-5

Jets 9-7

Bills 8-8

Elsewhere in the AFC the Titans finished 13-3 and the Colts 12-4 and both made the playoffs. Thus, the second Wildcard choice came down to the Ravens and the Patriots. The Ravens won out on the tiebreaker for the WC, and the Pats stayed home.

Clearly the Pats played in a stronger division, the Ravens in a weaker one. So, it is clearly arguable that the Ravens benefitted from playing in a weaker division with 2 bad teams and were able to take advantage of that to make the playoffs over the Patriots, who arguably could have been considered the better team.

So your theory could be right. A stronger division could in fact keep a good team out of the playoffs.

glad you seen where i was coming from, gipper. if you look at what i posted in post#11, i show in detail how the steelers directly benefitted from a lowly browns team in 05. you brought up some really good points to. there isn't necessarily a right or wrong answer to my op (or my follow up posts), it's just about having a legit response. thanks for the good input.