Go Packers!
-
I'm sure that Retarded poem was really gay. I'm glad I didn't take the time to read homo's gay poetry. What a total inbred fag. A fag who ties his own self worth to a professional football team he has nothing to do with. So not only is he an inbred faggot loser, he is envious of Cleveland fans.
-
You're forgetting an important point
STEELERS FANS THINK THE HISTORY OF THE NFL STARTED IN 1970
Hoorta sir one thing you can't deny is the absolutely diluted nature of the NFL during the earliest parts of the league from a talent stand point. Not to mention far less teams. I don't know that anyone completely discredits those championships but I do believe they carry less weight and I'm not alone. Fact of the matter is where live in the NOW and the now is Pittsburgh in the upper echelon. If the tables turn at some point so be it but right now it is what it is and the Steelers sit near the top.
Homotron said:
Hoorta sir one thing you can't deny is the absolutely diluted nature of the NFL during the earliest parts of the league from a talent stand point. Not to mention far less teamsSo if we go by your analogy... wouldn't the 70's titles also be watered down?
Less teams...slower,less athletic,less talanted players...so ...what year should we pick and choose from ? 1996? 1992?1984? any thing before
that...shouldn't be considered world champs?
We Browns fans can play this card too...football didn't really become "world class "until around 1998 or 99.
-
That's weird, because I found this....
The record, all time, of the Cleveland Browns combined is 415-352-10 a winning percentage of .541.
The record, all time, of the Pittsburgh Steelers combined is 565-529-21 a winning percentage of .516.
Last I checked .541 > .516
Whatever though...
You're forgetting an important point
STEELERS FANS THINK THE HISTORY OF THE NFL STARTED IN 1970
-
Homotron said:
Hoorta sir one thing you can't deny is the absolutely diluted nature of the NFL during the earliest parts of the league from a talent stand point. Not to mention far less teamsSo if we go by your analogy... wouldn't the 70's titles also be watered down?
Less teams...slower,less athletic,less talanted players...so ...what year should we pick and choose from ? 1996? 1992?1984? any thing before
that...shouldn't be considered world champs?
We Browns fans can play this card too...football didn't really become "world class "until around 1998 or 99.
So if we go by your analogy... wouldn't the 70's titles also be watered down?
Less teams...slower,less athletic,less talanted players...so ...what year should we pick and choose from ? 1996? 1992?1984? any thing before
that...shouldn't be considered world champs?
We Browns fans can play this card too...football didn't really become "world class "until around 1998 or 99.
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 if we go by your analogy... wouldn't the 70's titles also be watered down?
Less teams...slower,less athletic,less talanted players...so ...what year should we pick and choose from ? 1996? 1992?1984? any thing before
that...shouldn't be considered world champs?
We Browns fans can play this card too...football didn't really become "world class "until around 1998 or 99.
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.
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.
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.
-
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.
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.
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.
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.
AKA SNATCH98 or Rorbotron. The boards glorious admins decided to get cute and change my name to "homotron" Classy group of people. (Lost a bet with Columbus king and got banned for a month) -
"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.
Nickers...."There are no old running QB's in the NFL "~Sam Rutigliano~ -
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.
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.
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.
"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
AKA SNATCH98 or Rorbotron. The boards glorious admins decided to get cute and change my name to "homotron" Classy group of people. (Lost a bet with Columbus king and got banned for a month) -
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
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.
-
-
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!
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.
-
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?
-
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
-
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.
-
Hypocrite's
-
"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
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.
Nickers...."There are no old running QB's in the NFL "~Sam Rutigliano~ -
Found my Antonio Freeman jersey from '97 today, WOOT! GO PACKS!
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