Good laughs and smacking from Packer and Steeler fans.

[JS-Steelerfan]

Originally Posted by rfaulk34

The two teams that come to mind when i think of consistency in the Super Bowl era are the Steelers and the Cowboys. I'd put them on the top tier with a pretty decent gap between them and everyone else. Since the Steelers have one more trophy, you have to give them the nod at #1. I agree that, overall, it's Green Bay.

Stop falling for red herrings!!!!!!11!1!1!

Seriously, though, it's nice to see that some Bengal fans do understand this. Maybe you can get BY to see reason, since he won't automatically think of you as biased. I've given Luvnit up as an impossibility, though.

[JS-Steelerfan]

Just for good measure, let me point out that this sort of distinction has happened in other sports too. Tthe Stanley Cup can be divided into eras based on what the Cup represented at the time (it wasn't always the NHL Championship).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of..._Cup_champions

[Blitzberg06]

Originally Posted by JS-Steelerfan

Just for good measure, let me point out that this sort of distinction has happened in other sports too. Tthe Stanley Cup can be divided into eras based on what the Cup represented at the time (it wasn't always the NHL Championship).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of..._Cup_champions

I think for good measure you're all wasting your time lol

[JS-Steelerfan]

Originally Posted by Blitzberg06

I think for good measure you're all wasting your time lol

Fair enough, but I just happen to be one of those people who enjoys arguing, so ...

[Blitzberg06]

Originally Posted by JS-Steelerfan

Fair enough, but I just happen to be one of those people who enjoys arguing, so ...

Touche! I was reading the 'debate' but it was like a rerun over and over and over so I had to stop

[JS-Steelerfan]

Originally Posted by Blitzberg06

Touche! I was reading the 'debate' but it was like a rerun over and over and over so I had to stop

When someone thinks they know what I'm saying but they DON'T, I can't resist the temptation of trying to get them to understand, even if the effort is like continually ramming into a brick wall.

[Blitzberg06]

Originally Posted by JS-Steelerfan

When someone thinks they know what I'm saying but they DON'T, I can't resist the temptation of trying to get them to understand, even if the effort is like continually ramming into a brick wall.

You must know what it feels like to be a teacher then

[JS-Steelerfan]

Originally Posted by Blitzberg06

You must know what it feels like to be a teacher then

I used to be one! And while I'm not now officially a 'teacher', I still work in higher education.

[Blitzberg06]

Originally Posted by js-steelerfan

i used to be one! And while i'm not now officially a 'teacher', i still work in higher education.

fyl

[BengalYankee]

Originally Posted by JS-Steelerfan

I used to be one! And while I'm not now officially a 'teacher', I still work in higher education.

If you worked as a teacher, I feel sorry for your former students.

You are one of the most ignorant persons on this website. I have repeatedly said that the Steelers have 6 titles and that is nothing to sneeze at. Maybe if you can get it throught your brick head is that overall titles as with the Packer's 13 is more prestigious than 6 titles over the last 40+ years.

Again, stupid it is the team that has the most titles from every sport that counts. Not some made up crap of a new era and a renamed title.

You fail as a teacher and a debater.

[Blitzberg06]

Originally Posted by BengalYankee

If you worked as a teacher, I feel sorry for your former students.

You are one of the most ignorant persons on this website. I have repeatedly said that the Steelers have 6 titles and that is nothing to sneeze at. Maybe if you can get it throught your brick head is that overall titles as with the Packer's 13 is more prestigious than 6 titles over the last 40+ years.

Again, stupid it is the team that has the most titles from every sport that counts. Not some made up crap of a new era and a renamed title.

You fail as a teacher and a debater.

The Greenbay Packers historically in regards to success are a better overall franchise then the Steelers if you combined every Pre-Merger Championships. However while they are acknowledged in history books they aren't really relevant to todays game since the merger.

Post Merger the Steelers are more successful. Regardless both are 2 of the most successful Franchises in Professional Sports.

[JS-Steelerfan]

Originally Posted by BengalYankee

If you worked as a teacher, I feel sorry for your former students.

You are one of the most ignorant persons on this website. I have repeatedly said that the Steelers have 6 titles and that is nothing to sneeze at. Maybe if you can get it throught your brick head is that overall titles as with the Packer's 13 is more prestigious than 6 titles over the last 40+ years.

Again, stupid it is the team that has the most titles from every sport that counts. Not some made up crap of a new era and a renamed title.

You fail as a teacher and a debater.

I never said any of the things you are implying that I said.

The Packers have won the most NFL Championships at 13, which is superior to the Steelers six.

The Super Bowl, with the exception of the first four, does not differ in significance from those NFL Championships won before the merger. They are all NFL Championships, and they all count in the record books.

None of these statemets, which I agree with 100%, contradicts anything I have said previously.

You simply fail to understand what AM saying because you assume that I want to put the Super Bowl on a higher level and discount other championships. You're so intent on believing this about me that you have started to revert to personal insult. You won't allow yourself to even listen to what I'm saying, because you dismiss it before even reading it thoroughly.

[BengalYankee]

Originally Posted by Blitzberg06

The Greenbay Packers historically in regards to success are a better overall franchise then the Steelers if you combined every Pre-Merger Championships. However while they are acknowledged in history books they aren't really relevant to todays game since the merger.

Post Merger the Steelers are more successful. Regardless both are 2 of the most successful Franchises in Professional Sports.

I never ever said the Steelers were not a successful franchise. They are a successful franchise. They were not a successful franchise until 1974.

Would it be fair to say that in 1973 the Steelers were more successful than the Browns? Would it be fair to say after winning their first Superbowl in 1974 that the Steelers was more successful than the Browns?

When the Jets won their first and only Championsip in 68' were they more successful than the Giants?????

[JS-Steelerfan]

Originally Posted by BengalYankee

I never ever said the Steelers were not a successful franchise. They are a successful franchise. They were not a successful franchise until 1974.

Would it be fair to say that in 1973 the Steelers were more successful than the Browns? Would it be fair to say after winning their first Superbowl in 1974 that the Steelers was more successful than the Browns?

When the Jets won their first and only Championsip in 68' were they more successful than the Giants?????

Okay have your conversation with him, but when you respond to one of my posts, leave his thoughts out of it because I don't necessarily agree with everything he said, specifically with the question of relevance. That's extremely subjective and a discussion I choose not to have.


I say this because you seem to have trouble distinguishing my arguments from those of others.

[Blitzberg06]

Originally Posted by BengalYankee

I never ever said the Steelers were not a successful franchise. They are a successful franchise. They were not a successful franchise until 1974.

Would it be fair to say that in 1973 the Steelers were more successful than the Browns? Would it be fair to say after winning their first Superbowl in 1974 that the Steelers was more successful than the Browns?

When the Jets won their first and only Championsip in 68' were they more successful than the Giants?????

No. The Browns are more successful than the Steelers overall but Post Merger Steelers are more successful. I see what you're saying and I understand your point it makes sense. I just never really hear anyone mention championships Pre-Merger so while they count in the record books I don't find them relevant to today.

[Blitzberg06]

Originally Posted by JS-Steelerfan

Okay have your conversation with him, but when you respond to one of my posts, leave his thoughts out of it because I don't necessarily agree with everything he said, specifically with the question of relevance. That's extremely subjective and a discussion I choose not to have.


I say this because you seem to have trouble distinguishing my arguments from those of others.

YOU DONT AGREE WITH ME **** you! lol no I kid.

[JS-Steelerfan]

Originally Posted by Blitzberg06

YOU DONT AGREE WITH ME **** you! lol no I kid.

I just think it's fruitless to try to compare championships from very different eras. They are what they are, and they each hold equal significance in their own times. It's better to count them all equally and use the era stuff to talk about historical and rule change developments define specific eras.

[Blitzberg06]

Originally Posted by JS-Steelerfan

I just think it's fruitless to try to compare championships from very different eras. They are what they are, and they each hold equal significance in their own times.

I think that's what I was trying to say.

[JS-Steelerfan]

Originally Posted by Blitzberg06

I think that's what I was trying to say.

It sounded like you were implying that Super Bowls carry more significance, but if you're using the terms significance and relevance differently, I'd be open to listening to that.

(See how this works, BY? I'm not holding him prisoner to my own preconceived assumptions of him. I'm allowing him to clarify my assumptions. It's a technique called 'listening' that is used in a practice called 'conversation').

[Blitzberg06]

Originally Posted by JS-Steelerfan

It sounded like you were implying that Super Bowls carry more significance, but if you're using the terms significance and relevance differently, I'd be open to listening to that.

(See how this works, BY? I'm not holding him prisoner to my own preconceived assumptions of him. I'm allowing him to clarify my assumptions. It's a technique called 'listening' that is used in a practice called 'conversation').

I've had 2 hours of sleep so let me give this a go.


What I meant was this. Champsions before the Superbowl are still important and should be acknowledged when talking about that era or a total history of a franchise. They are important but not relevant to TODAYS game. Today is the Superbowl Lombardi Trophy era. That's how franchises are measured TODAY and not by Pre-Superbowl Championships. I count them as important but not relevant to today. (Hopefully that makes sense if not I'll give it a go when I'm more awake and not so hungry) GOD noon come on..I need Bdubs

[BengalYankee]

Originally Posted by JS-Steelerfan

I never said any of the things you are implying that I said.

The Packers have won the most NFL Championships, which is superior to the Steelers six.

The Super Bowl, with the exception of the first four, does not differ in significance from those NFL Championships won before the merger. They are all NFL Championships, and they all count in the record books.

None of these statemets, which I agree with 100%, contradicts anything I have said previously.

You simply fail to understand what AM saying because you assume that I want to put the Super Bowl on a higher level and discount other championships. You're so intent on believing this about me that you have started to revert to personal insult. You won't allow yourself to even listen to what I'm saying, because you dismiss it before even reading it thoroughly.

Originally Posted by JS-Steelerfan

So .... Just to be clear, did you just accuse me of discounting championships or were you talking to banned posters again?

That's the only possible objection you could have to all that I've said.

By the way, you have it wrong. The Steelers have 6 NFL Championships, not zero. It just so happens that they won them in the Super Bowl era. When I say that they are a sub-category, I simply mean that they are a TYPE of NFL Champion (an era, if you will), not a separate category altogether.

Most Super Bowls are NFL Championships (those from 1970 on). But the overall category of NFL Champions contains some that are not Super Bowls (pre-merger). Just as a few Super Bowls are not NFL championships many NFL Championships are not Super Bowls. Seriously, do you want me to draw a Venn diagram?

Are you really this dumb or are you just messing with me?

I gave you positive rep and then I read this gem. Thank you.

Meanwhile this is what I earlier sent to you before my positive reps.

Originally Posted by BengalYankee
Good point.

Too bad most NHL fans disregard that designation.

[BengalYankee]

Originally Posted by Blitzberg06

No. The Browns are more successful than the Steelers overall but Post Merger Steelers are more successful. I see what you're saying and I understand your point it makes sense. I just never really hear anyone mention championships Pre-Merger so while they count in the record books I don't find them relevant to today.

Agreed.

[JS-Steelerfan]

Originally Posted by Blitzberg06

I've had 2 hours of sleep so let me give this a go.


What I meant was this. Champsions before the Superbowl are still important and should be acknowledged when talking about that era or a total history of a franchise. They are important but not relevant to TODAYS game. Today is the Superbowl Lombardi Trophy era. That's how franchises are measured TODAY and not by Pre-Superbowl Championships. I count them as important but not relevant to today. (Hopefully that makes sense if not I'll give it a go when I'm more awake and not so hungry) GOD noon come on..I need Bdubs

Okay, I get that. I probably would still put a little less emphasis on the current era, because I think all eras have equal weight with respect to counting total championships. For me, eras are for the purpose of understanding the evolution of the game, not judging comparative relevance.

Let's agree to disagree on that Point.

[Blitzberg06]

Originally Posted by JS-Steelerfan

Okay, I get that. I probably would still put a little less emphasis on the current era, because I think all eras have equal weight with respect to counting total championships. For me, eras are for the purpose of understanding the evolution of the game, not judging comparative relevance.

Let's agree to disagree on that Point.

Fair Enough I can do that.

[BengalYankee]

Addressed to no one in particular.

Does anyone think that Tampa Bay Bucs are more successful than the Browns?