Relocated team to Cleveland - Nope....would have ignored them.

Expansion team - Yep...got my wish...Yay me! Careful what you wish for eh?

Doug

The Soldier said:

Jamal Lewis was the enemy one day, the next he is our starting running back. One day we want Winslow to catch every pass thrown his way, the next day we have no interest in what he does.

Like it or not, the Browns left. It doesn't matter they call this team the Browns, the continuity was broken.

There is no player on this team that can connect with the old Browns. No player played with Metcalf, who played with Kosar, who played with Mack, who played with Slaughter, who e played with Sipe etc. until you get back to Jim and Paul Brown.

Colors are nice.

Well, OK, nice try. But, WRONG. The Browns did not leave. To say that because they took a couple of years off that the continuity is broken is foolish. Nearly EVERY Team in the NFL has had as much change in things since 1995 as the Browns have had. The ONLY team that has the same head coach today that they did in 1995 is the Tennessee Titans....and they weren't even the Tennessee Titans then, they were the Houston Oilers!! I think you would be lucky to find a single player in the league that has been on the same team continuously since 1995. So your argument that we need a player who played with Mack, Byner etc. is specious. Maybe a freekin kicker? Probably half the teams have new owners.

And here is another deal: The fans are the same. And that counts more than anything. We are the true guardians of the Browns legacy.

After the lerner debacle and 10 years of hindsight to think about it..hell yeah i could now be a baltimore browns fan ,but its all water under the bridge now and im still a cleveland clowns fan...

If you loved your Cleveland apple, and somebody stole it,

and poked a bunch of holes in it, and rolled it in clam poop in Baltimore,

would you still love that Cleveland apple?

Just thought I'd top off a really boring, goofy thread.

@samoth said:

Don't be silly. Of course not.

The Soldier said:

Jamal Lewis was the enemy one day, the next he is our starting running back. One day we want Winslow to catch every pass thrown his way, the next day we have no interest in what he does.

Like it or not, the Browns left. It doesn't matter they call this team the Browns, the continuity was broken.

There is no player on this team that can connect with the old Browns. No player played with Metcalf, who played with Kosar, who played with Mack, who played with Slaughter, who e played with Sipe etc. until you get back to Jim and Paul Brown.

Colors are nice.

I think technically Zastudil may have played with Vinny but I didnt check.

Jamal Lewis was the enemy one day, the next he is our starting running back. One day we want Winslow to catch every pass thrown his way, the next day we have no interest in what he does.

Like it or not, the Browns left. It doesn't matter they call this team the Browns, the continuity was broken.

There is no player on this team that can connect with the old Browns. No player played with Metcalf, who played with Kosar, who played with Mack, who played with Slaughter, who e played with Sipe etc. until you get back to Jim and Paul Brown.

Colors are nice.

@samoth said:

What then if Cleveland got some other expansion team?

Hello, McFly, is anybody home? In case you didn't get the message the important part of the name "The Cleveland Browns" is the "Cleveland" part of it, not the "Browns" part of it. At least, that is the case for most non-ijits.

The fact is, it is somewhat serendipitous that with the various franchises that were located here, between the Akron Pros, Canton Bulldogs, Cleveland Bulldogs, Cleveland Indians, Cleveland Rams, the OOrang Indians that one of them didn't survive the early days as did the Bears, Packers, Cards, Giants. In fact, the discussion was that the likely possibility was that if the Browns did "leave", that the Bulldogs name would be resurrected for a new franchise. That would have made some sense. It would have been a tribute to tradition, and would have segwayed in with this new "Dawg" pound business that the franchise had been marketing in recent years.

The good thing is that that didn't happen. The Cleveland Browns franchise stayed right here. All it did was lose some of its equipment for a while.

@chicopee-john said:

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

thanks for the insightful reply

@samoth said:

What then if Cleveland got some other expansion team?

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Now had the Bucs moved here and become the Browns?

Doubtful.

WSS

I'm a huge football fan. I even mentioned it to two friends of mine recently (in separate conversations) and both of them know how fanatical I am about the NFL, not just the Browns.

The three years the Browns were not in the league? I watched maybe 3 football games... total.

I would have eventually come back to watching football. Because I do love it.

And probably would have rooted for the Vikings or the Chiefs. If Cleveland got a new franchise with a different name, I would have rooted for them.

As it is, however, the Browns are in Cleveland, and that's who I root for every Sunday.

Once Art took our team away, it was goodbye & hate spewed from me.

I'm sure it's like that for others who saw their team leave town. I don't know how fans in cities like St. Louis must feel, after losing the Cardinals, then getting the Rams, or even Baltimore. There must have been mixed feelings in there somewhere for the true diehards.

The tragedy is that these carpetbagger owners won a Superbowl, and we can't even string together two first downs.

@samoth said:

the steamers?