@badnewsbrowns said:

Pretty sure you need to have a mother fuckin team and be part of a league to be considered a franchise.

Actually, no, you don't. During WWII several teams suspended operations, including the Steelers and Rams and Cardinals.

Right now today, the Seattle Supersonics are still a franchise of the NBA on suspension. When they will reactivate who knows, but they exist.

On that note, guess what guys? I am the proud owner of a new professional football franchise.

Now if I could only get this damn city to build me a fuckin stadium and the NFL to accept me into it's rankings.

But...nonetheless I am a franchise owner, take that bitches.

You are not a franchise owner unless the NFL grants you a franchise.

@badnewsbrowns said:

Pretty sure you need to have a mother fuckin team and be part of a league to be considered a franchise.

On that note, guess what guys? I am the proud owner of a new professional football franchise.

Now if I could only get this damn city to build me a fuckin stadium and the NFL to accept me into it's rankings.

But...nonetheless I am a franchise owner, take that bitches.

Difference is- you have no legal standing with the NFL as an existing franchise. Sorry to bust your bubble, but the Browns did. Head on down to the Big Apple and see how far you get with that idea.

Al Lerner paid $430 million to buy the rights to the existing Browns franchise. I'll list the starting bid for yours on eBay for wet fart.

@the-cysko-kid said:

Ok the name and colors didn't move, but the team, all its management and, functionally, all its history and the lessons that foundation learned from that history DID leave. The browns returned to existence with a completely new base from the owner down.

To me, its splitting hairs. The browns became the ravens. Therefore the team did move. The franchise stayed, but the franchise is just name and colors.

They all vacated and formed their own new team, browns didnt go anywhere

On that note, guess what guys? I am the proud owner of a new professional football franchise.

Now if I could only get this damn city to build me a fuckin stadium and the NFL to accept me into it's rankings.

But...nonetheless I am a franchise owner, take that bitches.

@represent said:

You would be wrong tho Gip i renmember the team leaving without a doubt, I think it was like week 7 of the 95 season they announced they were moving, legal cases were set to block the move, but in the end we settled for the our franchise name colors logos etc in 1996.

The plain fact that lawsuits were pending to block a move does not mean they were not already gone, the old browns franchise was offically gone Christmas Day 1995, The Batltimore Ravens became the offical name on March 29th 1996, the new browns expansion team was announced February 9th 1996.

The Browns from December 25th - February 8th were factually not a team anymore until that settlement was reached FACT.

Again, no.

The Cleveland Browns franchise never fucking left Cleveland. An announcement that you are going to leave doesn't mean shit.

I can announce that I am going to have sex with all the Playboy Centerfolds for the year 2012. It doesn't mean I am going to do it.

Zombo said:

We are getting too technical here. My Browns are the Browns. We saved them. Call that purple team anything you want.

Z

I call them Ratbirds

@represent said:

You would be wrong tho Gip i renmember the team leaving without a doubt, I think it was like week 7 of the 95 season they announced they were moving, legal cases were set to block the move, but in the end we settled for the our franchise name colors logos etc in 1996.

The plain fact that lawsuits were pending to block a move does not mean they were not already gone, the old browns franchise was offically gone Christmas Day 1995, The Batltimore Ravens became the offical name on March 29th 1996, the new browns expansion team was announced February 9th 1996.

The Browns from December 25th - February 8th were factually not a team anymore until that settlement was reached FACT.

Nope, there has never been but one "Cleveland Browns" Franchise. 1946 to present.

Damn, we've tried to get it though thick skulls for 17 years now- there's a freaking difference between TEAM and FRANCHISE. I can own a McDonald's FRANCHISE in Cleveland even if the building is empty, and I don't have any employees- get it? It's- "We're closed, reopening in 3 years". The Browns FRANCHISE was put in a trust and never went anywhere FYI. And that included the records, colors, and history.

In 1999 the Browns were an expansion TEAM. In 1996, the Ravens were an expansion FRANCHISE. Those are the facts- if you don't want to believe them- fine. Still don't want to believe me and Gip? Here's the official historian of the NFL- the HOF- take note of the date and byline- "Honor, Preserve, Educate, Promote..... Ravens history.... Gee, here's the Browns history- if you want to hallucinate two franchises out of it- be my guest.

Browns franchise facts......

.....

BTW- the Browns were factually not a team again until the expansion draft February 1999, not February of 1996, when the Ravens became the expansion franchise.

@the-gipper said:

Yes, I said I would wager your next week's salary on the fact that legally and factually the Cleveland Browns Franshise never moved from here.

That is not even a subject for debate. That is like you arguing that we human beings live on the planet Uranus, not the planet Earth.

Well, maybe you are living up Uranus....but the rest of us live on Earth.

You would be wrong tho Gip i renmember the team leaving without a doubt, I think it was like week 7 of the 95 season they announced they were moving, legal cases were set to block the move, but in the end we settled for the our franchise name colors logos etc in 1996.

The plain fact that lawsuits were pending to block a move does not mean they were not already gone, the old browns franchise was offically gone Christmas Day 1995, The Batltimore Ravens became the offical name on March 29th 1996, the new browns expansion team was announced February 9th 1996.

The Browns from December 25th - February 8th were factually not a team anymore until that settlement was reached FACT.

@the-cysko-kid said:

Excuses are always valid

Yes, I said I would wager your next week's salary on the fact that legally and factually the Cleveland Browns Franshise never moved from here.

That is not even a subject for debate. That is like you arguing that we human beings live on the planet Uranus, not the planet Earth.

Well, maybe you are living up Uranus....but the rest of us live on Earth.

@the-gipper said:

If I am an asshole, it is because you made me one because I have had to suffer fools like you for 17 years on this subject.

And whatever else I may be, I am right.

Excuses are always valid

@the-gipper said:

You know how the old adage goes: Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it.

And here is the lesson the Browns and their fans need to recall: That it isn't necessarily the QB with the big strong arm and the lively legs that makes the best QB.

Back in the early 60s the Browns had a mobile, strong armed QB by the name of Milt Plum, but the Browns brought in from a trade a thin wiry egghead of a QB named Frank Ryan.

Who proved to be the better QB? The skinny egghead.

About a decade later the Browns had a strong armed, mobile QB they took with the third overall pick of the first round named Mike Phipps. A year later, they picked up a short, skinny QB with a noodle arm in the 13th round, just to be a roster filler...by the name of Brian Sipe.

Who proved to be the better QB? The skinny noodle armed kid.

A decade later, Mr. Howard Schnellenberger at the University of Miami had a choice to make for his QB from a couple of guys he recruited.... a kid with a bazooka arm and pistons for legs...or a big nosed, skinny, slow, stork like kid with a deceant arm but not a bazooka like the other guy. The first guy was Vinny Testaverde, the second Bernie Kosar.

Who proved to be the better QB? The big skinny, slow stork.

So, just be aware that simply because a guy has legs like Betty Grable and an arm like a baking soda label, it doesn't necessarily mean that he is the best man for the job.

These lessons of course all come from just Browns history.

I agree with this post. I truly do not care who the franchise QB is, he could be fat and slow and blind in one eye, I don't care. I am pretty sure that guy is not McCoy and I don't think its Flynn either. And it may not be RG3, but where ever he is, we need to find him, sooner rather than later.

@represent said:

I'll tell you exactly the reason it would be different, His name is Ozzie Newsome.

That is a possibility. The point is, you never know. Ozzie Newsome IS responsible for the Ravens success in my opinion, for sure.

But the Browns franchise, which was being held in trust at the time still didn't move anywhere, and was not in a position at that time to hire a General Manager. Modell offered Ozzie the job, and no one blames him for taking it.

@badnewsbrowns said:

Yeah the Ravens winning the Superbowl in 2000 and Belichick having a lot of the staff here in Cleveland that were with the Pats Superbowl teams would of meant nothing. Right.

Correct. It means nothing because no one on earth can say that any of that could have happened. You would have needed a whole herd of butterflies rendering their effects to jump to that conclusion.

@the-cysko-kid said:

Whatever, gipper. Calling me dumb and attacking me personally doesn't make you right. It makes you an asshole. An asshole who is wrong.

If I am an asshole, it is because you made me one because I have had to suffer fools like you for 17 years on this subject.

And whatever else I may be, I am right.

@the-gipper said:

You want to engage in a whole shit load of angels on the head of a pin speculating. The Browns trouble recently all have to do with suckass management. Assume Modell never moved....that he decided to sell instead of go to Baltimore. Who would he 99% likely to have sold to? Al Lerner....and today, we still would have Randy Lerner as the owner.

Not much would have changed.

I'll tell you exactly the reason it would be different, His name is Ozzie Newsome.

@the-cysko-kid said:

Whatever, gipper. Calling me dumb and attacking me personally doesn't make you right. It makes you an asshole. An asshole who is wrong.

I think what Lipper is saying is that Modell was considered the owner of the Ravens like the Ravens were considered an "expansion" team.

Zombo said:

Where were you guys when this all went down? Are you really young or something?

It was truly historical how the Browns fans fought for the team, the colors and the history. It's something to be proud of.

I don't care what you call Baltimore. But we are the one and only Cleveland Browns, always was, always will be.

Zombo

I was fifteen when the browns left. You don't think that broke my heart? But then during the legal battle I was busy trying to get laid like any 16 year old. All I know is that legal battles aside, the browns moved.

@the-gipper said:

I know these facts.....like I said, Modell was a caretaker...not the equitable owner. That was Biscotti. Modell was a El Cid....a dead man riding a horse. Owning doesn't mean controlling.

Whatever, gipper. Calling me dumb and attacking me personally doesn't make you right. It makes you an asshole. An asshole who is wrong.

@badnewsbrowns said:

No other city but Cleveland would have kept their team. I'm not saying the Ravens are the true Browns or any of that bullshit. But the Browns died and came back to life and it has not been the same since.

It's kind of like our body left to Baltimore and our soul wandered for 3 seasons here in Cleveland and found a weaker,less intelligent body in 99.

You want to engage in a whole shit load of angels on the head of a pin speculating. The Browns trouble recently all have to do with suckass management. Assume Modell never moved....that he decided to sell instead of go to Baltimore. Who would he 99% likely to have sold to? Al Lerner....and today, we still would have Randy Lerner as the owner.

Not much would have changed.

@brownsfan said:

Actually it was still Models team in 2001. On March 27, 2000, NFL owners approved the sale of 49% of the Ravens to Bisciotti. In the deal, Bisciotti had an option to purchase the remaining 51% for $325 million in 2004 from Art Modell. On April 9, 2004 the NFL approved Steve Bisciotti's purchase of the majority stake in the club. So when the Ravens won the SB in 2001 Model still owned 51% of the team, thus it was still his team.

And of course there are also all the articles following that SB talking about Modell getting his first SB win as an owner, over his good friend Wellington Mara

I know these facts.....like I said, Modell was a caretaker...not the equitable owner. That was Biscotti. Modell was a El Cid....a dead man riding a horse. Owning doesn't mean controlling.

It's kind of like our body left to Baltimore and our soul wandered for 3 seasons here in Cleveland and found a weaker,less intelligent body in 99.

@the-gipper said:

See how little you know about the situation? It wasn't his team, it was Biscotti's team.

.

Actually it was still Models team in 2001. On March 27, 2000, NFL owners approved the sale of 49% of the Ravens to Bisciotti. In the deal, Bisciotti had an option to purchase the remaining 51% for $325 million in 2004 from Art Modell. On April 9, 2004 the NFL approved Steve Bisciotti's purchase of the majority stake in the club. So when the Ravens won the SB in 2001 Model still owned 51% of the team, thus it was still his team.

And of course there are also all the articles following that SB talking about Modell getting his first SB win as an owner, over his good friend Wellington Mara