I'll just leave this here...

[Old White Guy]

Yea we know you guys were good , but it is a new world now.

[Shake n Blake]

So 7 teams have accounted for 33 Superbowl wins (70% of all superbowls).

Meanwhile, 14 teams (nearly half the league) still haven't won one?

Parity my ***.

[gmdino]

Originally Posted by BengalYankee

Originally Posted by BengalYankee

Figures you would come with a graphic that was full of mistakes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1969_NFL_Championship_Game

The 1969 NFL Championship Game was the 37th and final championship game played prior to the AFL-NFL Merger. The winner of the game would go on to play in Super Bowl IV against the champion of the American Football League.

The Minnesota Vikings were making their first appearance in the NFL championship game, their opponent, the Cleveland Browns who were making their second straight appearance and fourth in the 1960s. The game was played January 4, 1970 at Metropolitan Stadium, Bloomington, Minnesota.

Although not as severe as the "Ice Bowl" ( NFL Championship Game, 1967) the weather conditions were bitterly cold with a temperature of 8 degrees F. Cleveland LB Jim Houston suffered frostbite during the game and was hospitalized.

Minnesota had gone 12-2 during the regular season, including a 51-3 defeat of the Browns, and had defeated the Los Angeles Rams in the Western Conference championship a week earlier at Met Stadium. The Vikings were coached by Bud Grant and led on offense by quarterback Joe Kapp and WR Gene Washington . The defense allowed only 133 points (9.50 per game) during the regular season and was led by the front four line known as the Purple People Eaters.

Cleveland had gone 10-3-1 during regular season and had defeated the Dallas Cowboys for the Eastern Conference title. The Browns were coach by Blanton Collier. Bill Nelsen was the starting quarterback and Gary Collins and Paul Warfield were star wide receivers for the team.

So the Vikings should have one too, In fact the last NFL/AFL Championship.

[gmdino]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...920%E2%80%9369)

[Nately120]

Originally Posted by Shake n Blake

So 7 teams have accounted for 33 Superbowl wins (70% of all superbowls).

Meanwhile, 14 teams (nearly half the league) still haven't won one?

Parity my ***.

What do you want the league to do, fire Mike Brown and stage a hostile takeover?

[Woodley]

Originally Posted by Shake n Blake

So 7 teams have accounted for 33 Superbowl wins (70% of all superbowls).

Meanwhile, 14 teams (nearly half the league) still haven't won one?

Parity my ***.

Oh, so you're one of those people, and now you want socialism in sports too.
So why must there be parity...in other words, the distribution of wealth equally?

[JS-Steelerfan]

Originally Posted by BengalYankee

I see I have to go gentle with you my friend. Detroit, Philadelphia, etc fans can't say much because it has been such a long time. The same as KC Chiefs and Jet fans. I live in NY and no one cares about their SB win. Years ago when I started watching football in the 70's, people still chirped about the 69 Mets and Jets. Now nada. People care about recent championships and that is understandable. If Miaim had not gone undefeated nobody would care about their championships either. The last 20 years the Steelers have been a great team, their is no denying that. But if you are going to bring those old relic trophys of the 70's, then why stop there? Which is my point. If you are going to talk about titles in the collective sense, NFL teams had championships, rings and parades in the 50's also. The Detroit fan back then knew that no other team on the planet was better then theirs when they won their championship. 50 years from now, a Ravens fan will remember no other team was better then his team this year. Similarly, fans of teams that won in the past knew for that year no other team was better then theirs. Many have died so they can't dispute you when you talk nonsense. A boxer of today is better trained and more fit today then of yesteryear. But nobody discounts champions like Rocky Marciano.Today's champion would kill Rocky in the ring. Same with the Olympics and almost every sport. We have different rules and athletes are far superior now then before. But those titles from every sport count, whether it be the 1928 Yankees and today's San Francisco Giants to the 1960's Celtics and the 2012 Miami Heat. They all count!!!!!!

The "first" SB game was not even sold out!! Bengal games[some] are sold out compared to that first SB game. The Packers were more happy beating the Dallas in the conference title game then beating KC.

Time has made many folks forget about the NFL titles, but mark my words if Green Bay wins another title their banner will be 14 titles.

You make some good points, particularly that they all count. But, as usual, your choice of examples ignores the significance of the merger.

One of the reasons people consider the Jets and Chiefs' Lombardis as less significant the the rest is not just that they occurred so many years ago, but because they were not technically NFL Championships. Yes, you can argue that they were more significant than the current NFL Championship, because they each defeated the NFL Champion to win the Suoer Bowl. But if you ask how many total NFL Championships each team has, the answer is still a big fat zero, in spite of their Lombardis.

Likewise, the Packers' first two Super Bowl wins do not count as NFL Championships either, because they had ALREADY won those years' NFL Championships to get INTO the Super Bowl. They are credited with NFL championships for those years, but not because they won the Super Bowl.

It is this four year period that established the Super Bowl as a distinct category. Certainly one must look beyond this category to discuss TOTAL NFL championships, but because the list of Super Bowl winners contains four championships that were won APART from the NFL (but are still a part of its history), it is often considered as a separate category. This is a far more legitimate reason to distinguish championships than your straw man argument of 'those others happened a long time ago.' Even the Packers recognize this by the way they list their championships on their official website: as total NFL Championships AND Super Bowl appearances. And yet, amusingly, you continue to lift them up as your example.

[Shake n Blake]

Originally Posted by Woodley

Oh, so you're one of those people, and now you want socialism in sports too.
So why must there be parity...in other words, the distribution of wealth equally?

Dude. I am pro-life, pro-2nd amendment, and I believe in God. I'm about as far from a liberal as it gets.

Only a Steelers fan would try to associate sports with politics.

But yes, I believe that a league that promises parity should follow through on that promise.

Implementing a cap floor and a wage scale for rookies was a good start.

[BengalYankee]

Originally Posted by JS-Steelerfan

You make some good points, particularly that they all count. But, as usual, your choice of examples ignores the significance of the merger.

One of the reasons people consider the Jets and Chiefs' Lombardis as less significant the the rest is not just that they occurred so many years ago, but because they were not technically NFL Championships. Yes, you can argue that they were more significant than the current NFL Championship, because they each defeated the NFL Champion to win the Suoer Bowl. But if you ask how many total NFL Championships each team has, the answer is still a big fat zero, in spite of their Lombardis.

Likewise, the Packers' first two Super Bowl wins do not count as NFL Championships either, because they had ALREADY won those years' NFL Championships to get INTO the Super Bowl. They are credited with NFL championships for those years, but not because they won the Super Bowl.

It is this four year period that established the Super Bowl as a distinct category. Certainly one must look beyond this category to discuss TOTAL NFL championships, but because the list of Super Bowl winners contains four championships that were won APART from the NFL (but are still a part of its history), it is often considered as a separate category. This is a far more legitimate reason to distinguish championships than your straw man argument of 'those others happened a long time ago.' Even the Packers recognize this by the way they list their championships on their official website: as total NFL Championships AND Super Bowl appearances. And yet, amusingly, you continue to lift them up as your example.

You are still lost, so sad.

The Jet fans I know all acknowledge that they have a SB win in their history. The media in New York acknowledges that the Jets are a SB winner. You are the ONLY one hung up with the 4 year span where the word SB was not mentioned. Get over it!!!!!

You are digging too much into the weeds for your own sake. Everone, since day 1 in the history of sports care about the terminal game. That is the last game of the season. Once, the AFL-NFL championship games were established the last game between NFL/NFC teams meant nothing, dada. Nobody cares who won the Big East, the ACC, or the SEC. People want to know who won the terminal game. The NCAA Championship is what people will remember. Similarly, nobody cares about the Vikings in 1969, but historians will remember the 1965 NFL Champion Packers as well as the 66 and 67 Packers. They won 3 NFL Championships in a row.

As I stated before when the Detroit Lions, Philadelphia Eagles and Cleveland Browns won their respected Championships, they were on top of the world. As well they should be, no team was better then them their respected years. Their fans had parades, got drunk and the teams had rings and called themselves World Champions. And the records pre Superbowl stand. As well as these players and coaches are in the Hall of Fame as well. There is no such individual record pre Superbowl AND since the Super Bowl era. I figured a disgruntled Steeler fan would try to belittle the Championships the teams I mentioned.

Your argument is weak. MLB, the NBA, NHL, Olympic and college teams all have teams that won before 1966 and each and every league is different now. The rules are different in each league and sport, the players are different[now we have blacks in sports], yet at one time blacks were not allowed in sports. Yet we still count a Yankee championship in 1923 with no DH as we count them in 2009 with DH. Yet you whine if I say the 1965 Green Bay Packers NFL Champions is the same as the 1966 Green Bay Packers NFL Champions.

Is the 1939 Oregon NCAA college basketball champion which had a tournament of only 8 teams the same with Kentucky's championship in 2012 which had 68 teams in the tournament??? When you tally it up Oregon and Indiana in 1940 championship counts as the same as Kentucky's. It is stupid and arrogant and I expect to hear that from a team that never won a NFL championship till 1974 to say the Packers Championship's in 65 and 66 are not the same, but Oregon's and Kentucky's championship are the same or the 1923 and 2009 Yankees Championships are the same.

No reasonable person with common sense will sit there and say the 65 and 66 Packers teams should be put in two different categories, but the 1923 and 2009 Yankee teams the same category or the 1939 Oregon and 2012 Kentucky team should be in the same category.

Again, nobody says the Packers have 9 NFL titles AND 4 SB titles. They do say the Packers have a league leading 13 NFL titles, which 4 of them are SB titles.

[JS-Steelerfan]

Originally Posted by BengalYankee

You are still lost, so sad.

The Jet fans I know all acknowledge that they have a SB win in their history. The media in New York acknowledges that the Jets are a SB winner. You are the ONLY one hung up with the 4 year span where the word SB was not mentioned. Get over it!!!!!

You are digging too much into the weeds for your own sake. Everone, since day 1 in the history of sports care about the terminal game. That is the last game of the season. Once, the AFL-NFL championship games were established the last game between NFL/NFC teams meant nothing, dada. Nobody cares who won the Big East, the ACC, or the SEC. People want to know who won the terminal game. The NCAA Championship is what people will remember. Similarly, nobody cares about the Vikings in 1969, but historians will remember the 1965 NFL Champion Packers as well as the 66 and 67 Packers. They won 3 NFL Championships in a row.

As I stated before when the Detroit Lions, Philadelphia Eagles and Cleveland Browns won their respected Championships, they were on top of the world. As well they should be, no team was better then them their respected years. Their fans had parades, got drunk and the teams had rings and called themselves World Champions. And the records pre Superbowl stand. As well as these players and coaches are in the Hall of Fame as well. There is no such individual record pre Superbowl AND since the Super Bowl era. I figured a disgruntled Steeler fan would try to belittle the Championships the teams I mentioned.

Your argument is weak. MLB, the NBA, NHL, Olympic and college teams all have teams that won before 1966 and each and every league is different now. The rules are different in each league and sport, the players are different[now we have blacks in sports], yet at one time blacks were not allowed in sports. Yet we still count a Yankee championship in 1923 with no DH as we count them in 2009 with DH. Yet you whine if I say the 1965 Green Bay Packers NFL Champions is the same as the 1966 Green Bay Packers NFL Champions.

Is the 1939 Oregon NCAA college basketball champion which had a tournament of only 8 teams the same with Kentucky's championship in 2012 which had 68 teams in the tournament??? When you tally it up Oregon and Indiana in 1940 championship counts as the same as Kentucky's. It is stupid and arrogant and I expect to hear that from a team that never won a NFL championship till 1974 to say the Packers Championship's in 65 and 66 are not the same, but Oregon's and Kentucky's championship are the same or the 1923 and 2009 Yankees Championships are the same.

No reasonable person with common sense will sit there and say the 65 and 66 Packers teams should be put in two different categories, but the 1923 and 2009 Yankee teams the same category or the 1939 Oregon and 2012 Kentucky team should be in the same category.

Again, nobody says the Packers have 9 NFL titles AND 4 SB titles. They do say the Packers have a league leading 13 NFL titles, which 4 of them are SB titles.

Some day I would like to meet the person who is writing the posts you read before responding to my posts. You keep responding to stuff I'm not saying!

The Jets DO have a Super Bowl Championship. They just don't have an NFL Championship.

By the way, the Packers technically have 11 pre-merger NFL titles and 4 Super Bowl titles. Their first two Super Bowls were IN ADDITION to their previously won NFL titles in the same year.

Your problem is that you have made up your mind as to why I'm saying what I'm saying, and you're wrong. But you won't allow yourself to see that.

[duke0476]

Originally Posted by JS-Steelerfan

Some day I would like to meet the person who is writing the posts you read before responding to my posts. You keep responding to stuff I'm not saying!

The Jets DO have a Super Bowl Championship. They just don't have an NFL Championship.

By the way, the Packers technically have 11 pre-merger NFL titles and 4 Super Bowl titles. Their first two Super Bowls were IN ADDITION to their previously won NFL titles in the same year.

Oh christ! I think you just divided by 0....

[JS-Steelerfan]

Originally Posted by duke0476

Oh christ! I think you just divided by 0....

Go to the Packers history page. Their list of 13 championship seasons includes 15 games. Count 'em:

http://www.packers.com/history/super...pionships.html

[duke0476]

Originally Posted by JS-Steelerfan

Go to the Packers history page. Their list of championships includes 15 games. Count 'em:

http://www.packers.com/history/super...pionships.html

Oh, I believe you. I also think there will be a lot of bandwidth eaten up soon too.

[Woodley]

Originally Posted by BengalYankee

Again, nobody says the Packers have 9 NFL titles AND 4 SB titles.

Thats right, they say the Packers have 4 SUPER BOWL TITLES and 13 NFL championships.




If they mention world championships at all. ...











Did you ever see a Lions fan with a "4 time NFL champions" jacket?

No, because their NFL championships are meaningless to them until they get a Super Bowl title to go with it.

Then they could get a jacket to say:

20XX SUPER BOWL CHAMPS
5 Time NFL World Champions



Super Bowls carry more weight, plain and simple.
Its the way of the world and you aren't gonna change it.

[BengalYankee]

Originally Posted by JS-Steelerfan

The Jets DO have a Super Bowl Championship. They just don't have an NFL Championship.

By the way, the Packers technically have 11 pre-merger NFL titles and 4 Super Bowl titles. Their first two Super Bowls were IN ADDITION to their previously won NFL titles in the same year.

This is what I am talking about, you are in the weeds digging too much. The Packers don't even claim what you stated. They have 13 titles in which 4 of them are Superbowl championships.

[JS-Steelerfan]

Originally Posted by duke0476

Oh, I believe you. I also think there will be a lot of bandwidth eaten up soon too.

Yeah, he really chews up a lot of bytes arguing against stuff no one's saying, doesn't he?

[JS-Steelerfan]

Originally Posted by BengalYankee

This is what I am talking about, you are in the weeds digging too much. The Packers don't even claim what you stated. They have 13 titles in which 4 of them are Superbowl championships.

Then why do the Packers list TWO games under their championship seasons of 1966 and 1967? It's because they won those NFL Championships against the Cowboys and their Super Bowls against the Chiefs and Raiders. Separately.

[BengalYankee]

Originally Posted by Woodley

Thats right, they say the Packers have 4 SUPER BOWL TITLES and 13 NFL championships.




If they mention world championships at all. ...











Did you ever see a Lions fan with a "4 time NFL champions" jacket?

No, because their NFL championships are meaningless to them until they have a Super Bowl title to go with it.


Super Bowls carry more weight, plain and simple.
Its the way of the world and you aren't gonna change it.

I have always said the Packers won the SB 4 times, but find me a Packer outfit that distinguishes the titles by saying 9 times NFL Champion and 4 times SB champion. Good luck, because you won't find it.

They are 13 times champions in which 4 of them are SB Championships.

[JS-Steelerfan]

Originally Posted by BengalYankee

I have always said the Packers won the SB 4 times, but find me a Packer outfit that distinguishes the titles by saying 9 times NFL Champion and 4 times SB champion. Good luck, because you won't find it.

They are 13 times champions in which 4 of them are SB Championships.

You're missing the point. No one's saying that. We're saying the second thing, except that in the Packers' case, two of those SBs came in the same season as NFL Championships instead of being actual NFL Championships.

Also, we're saying that NFL Championships that are Super Bowls carry more prestige for most fans and observers.

[BengalYankee]

Originally Posted by JS-Steelerfan

Then why do the Packers list TWO games under their championship seasons of 1966 and 1967? It's because they won those NFL Championships against the Cowboys and their Super Bowls against the Chiefs and Raiders. Separately.

You are slow. Nobody counts those games as separate. The Packers have 13 titles, not 15 titles!!!!! Deal with it!!!!

[JS-Steelerfan]

Originally Posted by BengalYankee

You are slow. Nobody counts those games as separate. The Packers have 13 titles, not 15 titles!!!!! Deal with it!!!!

So, if the games against the Cowboys in 66 and 67 weren't the NFL Championship, what were they and why are they listed on the Packers' list of championships?

By the way, I never said they had 15 NFL titles, just that two of their Super Bowl wins were IN ADDITION to the NFL Championship, which is true.

http://www.packers.com/history/super...pionships.html

[BengalYankee]

Originally Posted by JS-Steelerfan

You're missing the point. No one's saying that. We're saying the second thing, except that in the Packers' case, two of those SBs came in the same season as NFL Championships instead of being actual NFL Championships.

Also, we're saying that NFL Championships that are Super Bowls carry more prestige for most fans and observers.

Superbowls DO carry more prestige for most fans and observers, because the title has been renamed and marketed as the "Superbowl" and the Lombardi trophy looks alot better then the previous Championship trophy.




The can't compare that piece of crap with .....





The issue is a Detroit, Philadelphia, Cleveland fan who was alive when their team won champions knew that no other team was better then theirs and that people were never going to say except Woodley, that in a few years their accomplishments for their respected years won would be different then when the Yankees, Celtics, Kentucky, Canadiens, etc.

Again, you can't put into two categories the 65 and 66 Packers and put in the same category the 1923 and 2009 Yankees and the 1939 Oregon and 2012 Kentucky teams.

This is what you keep ducking!!!!!

[JS-Steelerfan]

Originally Posted by BengalYankee

Superbowls DO carry more prestige for most fans and observers, because the title has been renamed and marketed as the "Superbowl" and the Lombardi trophy looks alot better then the previous Championship trophy.




The can't compare that piece of crap with .....





The issue is a Detroit, Philadelphia, Cleveland fan who was alive when their team won champions knew that no other team was better then theirs and that people were never going to say except Woodley, that in a few years their accomplishments for their respected years won would be different then when the Yankees, Celtics, Kentucky, Canadiens, etc.

Again, you can't put into two categories the 65 and 66 Packers and put in the same category the 1923 and 2009 Yankees and the 1939 Oregon and 2012 Kentucky teams.

This is what you keep ducking!!!!!

I'm not ducking it because I'm not saying it.

I don't put the Packers' 65 and '66 NFL Championships in two categories.

But the Packers 66 Super Bowl IS in a separate category, because it was a separate game than either of them. In the 1966 season the Packers won the NFL against the Cowboys and the Super Bowl against the Chiefs. Do you deny this?

[JS-Steelerfan]

Oh Lord, I sense more pictures coming ...

[Beaker]

Originally Posted by JS-Steelerfan

Oh Lord, I sense more pictures coming ...

As long as they include boobies Im ok with that.