Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: Wanted to show my own opinion on the "should pre merger championships matter as much?" debate

          
   
   
    Bookmark and Share

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Waterboy
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Philipsburg, PA
    Posts
    19
    My Mood
    Addicted

    Wanted to show my own opinion on the "should pre merger championships matter as much?" debate

    :WARNING TEXT WALL:

    I recently got a book for christmas called "Sports illustrated Footballs greatest".
    I reccomend this book to any person who wants a history lesson on the best moments in the nfl. They had a section for each player position and a group of editors debated each other and came up with top ten lists for each one. However they also had sections on less "on the field" topics such as best franchise and best uniforms.

    The packers were ranked #1 in franchise with the steelers at #2. Now this itself didn't bother me. I have a lot of respect for green bay. It was why they picked it. It had the big words 13 CHAMPIONS in it.

    Now I myself believe that the pre merger championships do matter. But they're in no way on the same magnitude as SBs.
    The more I read about what the nfl was like, the less and less each individual championship seemed to matter.

    1. The nfl was cut in half. There was no AFC. There was hardly even an NFC do to their being just that few teams.

    2. Their was no overtime. If a game ended in a tie it did not go into overtime. This might not seem so bad but you have to know that the nfl did not count ties back then. One season the packers made it into the champion with a whopping 7-1-6. However because the rules did not count ties, the packers technically were 7-1.

    3. It was a college football system for most of the timespan. You can see how this system is flawed cause now even college football is abandoning it. It was not decided on a field like it should have been, it was decided in a meeting room. And this debate combined with the fact that they did not count ties would lead do some weird matchups in the playoffs.



    So you can go ahead and say the packers are the best franchise because of the old championships. Just make sure you include the browns and lions too. Now you look like idiots. The point is a team needs SBs to back these up. In order to be the best franchise you need more than just pre merger wins because then everyone thinks you just took advantage of the old system.

    Does that mean they don't count? If that team has no SBs then no I don't think they should count. But if they do then yes. Which is why I consider the bears and packers to be legit. But by how much?

    Well because the pack does have 4 SB rings but they just have so many championships(If they only had 1 or 2 I wouldn't think much of it). But because they're so easy compared to SBs they shouldn't BE SBs. 9 old championships just sounds like 1 or 2 SBs. 2 SBs would make them our equals which is kind of the what everybody in the world considers the success of both teams when compared anyway................. Equal. Though I give us the edge because the steelers have been more consistent since the 70s(where were the packers in the 70s and 80s?).


    And if you're wondering. Would I still be saying this if the steelers had won pre merger champions? Yes. Yes I would.

    The eras were so different that they cannot be compared.


    So no matter what a packers fans tells you. Green Bay does not have 13 SBs. They just don't have just their 4 rings either.


    They have 4 SBs rings and 9 old championships. With the 9 holding much, much, much less magnitude than the 4. It's just the fact that they have so many is why I would consider them our equals success wise. I just don't think they're a better all around franchise simply because they're not as consistent or as well run as the steelers.

  2. #2
    Starter
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Northeast Ohio (Clowns country)
    Posts
    1,844
    My Mood
    Clowns
    Well if that were the case we'd have 8 championships. Browns fans argue this all the time. Browns won 4 affc championships between 1946-49. They werent even part of the NFL yet!. Then they won 4 NFL titles between 1950-64? (i think). No its not the same as the sb. I think the NFL had like 8 teams in those years. Unlike todays 32.
    Cleveland Browns suck!

  3. #3
    Starter Raleigh Steel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Posts
    1,340
    My Mood
    Mellow
    using nfl championships is like PITT bragging about their 9 national titles. 8 of them happened between 1915 an 1937. take that to an alabama fan and they will laugh in your face.

    we've had 46 super bowls and closing in on 47. that's almost 5 decades of modern football (which has been reshaped again and again). if you have to go back that far to talk about the greatness of your team than your team really sucks.

    we are in the super bowl era now. that's 2 different time frames. time to put that one to rest.
    "Today, I'm officially retiring a Pittsburgh Steeler. And as much as I will miss football, my teammates, coaches and everything about the game, I don't want to play it in any other uniform. The black and gold runs deep in me, and I will remain a Steeler for life."--Hines Ward

  4. #4
    Starter
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Northeast Ohio (Clowns country)
    Posts
    1,844
    My Mood
    Clowns
    Amen Raleigh.
    Cleveland Browns suck!

  5. #5
    Assistant Coach Real Deal Steel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Rancho Cucamonga, California
    Posts
    5,399
    Quote Originally Posted by Clevelandsux View Post
    Amen Raleigh.
    disagree. Here's why:

    1. Your kids come up to you and you tell them about certain music that you grew up with. Your kids say, " Oh..that's old music. It doesn't matter because that music is 20 years old."

    See my point?

    All championships count. Period. If we were the fan base of a team with 8 championships before the Super Bowl, you wouldn't be saying that.

    So the Lakers Championships when they were in Minneapolis, MN shouldn't count too??


    Just because some of us were not born when these championships were won by other teams does not mean they don't count. Grow up.
    The Steeler way...is the only way.

  6. #6
    Waterboy
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Philipsburg, PA
    Posts
    19
    My Mood
    Addicted
    Quote Originally Posted by Real Deal Steel View Post
    disagree. Here's why:

    1. Your kids come up to you and you tell them about certain music that you grew up with. Your kids say, " Oh..that's old music. It doesn't matter because that music is 20 years old."

    See my point?

    All championships count. Period. If we were the fan base of a team with 8 championships before the Super Bowl, you wouldn't be saying that.

    So the Lakers Championships when they were in Minneapolis, MN shouldn't count too??


    Just because some of us were not born when these championships were won by other teams does not mean they don't count. Grow up.
    You talk like the new Nba and old one like they were actually drastically different. They weren't. The nfl was

  7. #7
    Starter Raleigh Steel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Posts
    1,340
    My Mood
    Mellow
    Comparing music and football is like comparing...well...music and football.

    Are Indy colts fans bragging about all of their teams nfl and Super Bowl championships when they were in Baltimore? I highly doubt it. If they are then they are extremely stupid.

    So how far back are you allowed to go? Cubs fans are really bragging about that World Series ring they got over 100 years ago, right? How bout the Red Sox, in 86 years they weren't thumping their chest about the 1918 World Series championship were they?

    are the buffalo bills hanging on to those 2 AFL championships? how bout the houston oilers/titans? the dallas texans/kc cheifs won 3 AFL championships...why aren't those ever mentioned. did the AFL not count?

    so the packers are allowed to claim the 1930 nfl championship? here were the teams in the league:

    ny giants
    chicago bears
    brooklyn dodgers
    providence steam roller
    staten island stapeltons
    chicago cardinals
    portsmith spartans
    frankford yellow jackets
    minneapolis red jackets
    newark tornados!

    yup, lets tout that accomplishment!!!

    bottom line, the only era that counts is the super bowl era! i'm not saying that because the steelers have the most championships, i'm saying that because we are so far removed from 1929, 1930, 31, 36, 39, 44, etc...

    its nice to have the history, but come on...

    and btw, if you want to make an argument, just make the argument. we're all adults here. but to finish your post with "grow up"? look in the mirror buddy!!!!
    "Today, I'm officially retiring a Pittsburgh Steeler. And as much as I will miss football, my teammates, coaches and everything about the game, I don't want to play it in any other uniform. The black and gold runs deep in me, and I will remain a Steeler for life."--Hines Ward

  8. #8
    Waterboy
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Philipsburg, PA
    Posts
    19
    My Mood
    Addicted
    Quote Originally Posted by Raleigh Steel View Post
    Comparing music and football is like comparing...well...music and football.

    Are Indy colts fans bragging about all of their teams nfl and Super Bowl championships when they were in Baltimore? I highly doubt it. If they are then they are extremely stupid.

    So how far back are you allowed to go? Cubs fans are really bragging about that World Series ring they got over 100 years ago, right? How bout the Red Sox, in 86 years they weren't thumping their chest about the 1918 World Series championship were they?

    are the buffalo bills hanging on to those 2 AFL championships? how bout the houston oilers/titans? the dallas texans/kc cheifs won 3 AFL championships...why aren't those ever mentioned. did the AFL not count?

    so the packers are allowed to claim the 1930 nfl championship? here were the teams in the league:

    ny giants
    chicago bears
    brooklyn dodgers
    providence steam roller
    staten island stapeltons
    chicago cardinals
    portsmith spartans
    frankford yellow jackets
    minneapolis red jackets
    newark tornados!

    yup, lets tout that accomplishment!!!

    bottom line, the only era that counts is the super bowl era! i'm not saying that because the steelers have the most championships, i'm saying that because we are so far removed from 1929, 1930, 31, 36, 39, 44, etc...

    its nice to have the history, but come on...

    and btw, if you want to make an argument, just make the argument. we're all adults here. but to finish your post with "grow up"? look in the mirror buddy!!!!
    I still think the old ones matter as long as you have a lot of them AND you have SBs to back them up. This I feel is what separates the packers and bears from the bills and oilers. The fact that unlike the cubs the packers are still winning I think makes them our equals. They are just not the best ever. It's more like a tie between the steelers and packers.

  9. #9
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    1,447
    All titles count. Just because we didn't win **** for 40 years doesn't mean the teams that did shouldn't matter.

  10. #10
    Waterboy
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Philipsburg, PA
    Posts
    19
    My Mood
    Addicted
    Quote Originally Posted by Crash View Post
    All titles count. Just because we didn't win **** for 40 years doesn't mean the teams that did shouldn't matter.
    It has nothing to do with us. It has to do with whether or not their wins are the equivalent of SBs. You have nooooooooooo idea how easy it was back then compared to now. Of course they should count. But by how much? Are we really gonna say the packers have 13 SBs or the FREAKING BROWNS have 8?

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Dennis Dixon a "no show" at Steelers camp, wants to play elsewhere
    By BlitzburghRockCity in forum Steelers Talk
    Replies: 61
    Last Post: 08-09-2011, 12:59 PM
  2. Chad "Mucho Stinko" Johnson - Opinion
    By Steelers70 in forum Steelers Talk
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 12-11-2008, 02:21 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •