Getting very frustrated!

[Zeck180]

Facebook

Dude, why do the packers hang on to their 12 championships? like most of them were won like half a century ago.. that doesnt say much now does it? they haavent won a superbowl in like 15 years. and thats probably the last one they have been to (if im not mistakened). we have won 2 in the past 6 years. now that says something. just thought i would clarify that..

FACT: In the pre-Super Bowl era the Packers won 9 plus 3 Super Bowls, those previous 9 STILL count! Thus 12 > 6!

Nope, it's all about the rings!!!!!

Impossible!

 

[Black and Gold]

It brings back memories of some of the college football debates, counting championships from the early 1900s and so on.

Bottom line, both teams are 0-fer this year when it comes to wins. You're hanging out with the wrong crowd if the debate has sunk to such a low level.

Both teams have a storied history--hell, Green Bay has Lambeau stadium (+ fan owned team), Lombardi, the Ice Bowl etc.

It's like comparing the carat weight of gold in a two rings and ignoring the three carat, flawless diamonds set in each. Packers are great. Steelers are great. Both are playing in Dallas' shiny new stadium.

 

[JJP41]

Facebook





Impossible!

Dude, don't waste your time. The feeble-minded believe the league didn't exist before the Super Bowl.


:banging::banging::banging::banging::banging:

 

[fettpett]

It's here: Your guide to dealing with that obnoxious Steelers fan (or confronting lies with basic stats) « Ol' Bag of Donuts

 

[fettpett]

It's because the Steelers and pretty much every other team except the Bears, Giants, Browns all sucked *** before the Super Bowl era

 

[LombardiChick]

It's because the Steelers and pretty much every other team except the Bears, Giants, Browns all sucked *** before the Super Bowl era

On their Wiki, the Steelers' seasons between 1933 and 1970 are referred to as "Decades of Futility". No wonder they want to forget it. LOL

(And with a nod to the decent Steelers fan on this thread, allow me to also point out that some of us can very much relate. We've had long a dry spell, too.)

I have to throw this question out: Is this a typical argument you see from NFL fans in general, or primarily from Steelers fans? I believe I've heard it from fans of younger teams, and I understand why the Steelers fans are eager to disregard our titles (since we have a lot more :grin - just wondering how often this crazy thing comes up, because I've never had to defend the Packers in this regard as much as I have this week.

 

[Incubes12]

Didn't you know??? The US didn't exist before the Civil War!

 

[Cheesehead Brittany]

america didnt start until we had alaska and hawaii become official states

 

[longtimefan]

they haavent won a superbowl in like 15 years. and thats probably the last one they have been to (if im not mistakened).

He didnt even know they went back to back

Either doesnt know the Pack SB history

Or Never bothered to look into it

Which could be mistaken for... he doesnt care about history, which then explains why he doesnt care about ENTIRE history of the Pack


His argument was the one in 97 was so long ago, then dont include the ones in the 70's ( or dismiss them like he did the Pack)

 

[bradwillrockyou]

People didn't exist before computers!

 

[armand34]

Dude, why do the packers hang on to their 12 championships? like most of them were won like half a century ago.. that doesnt say much now does it? they haavent won a superbowl in like 15 years. and thats probably the last one they have been to (if im not mistakened). we have won 2 in the past 6 years. now that says something. just thought i would clarify that..

the only wars in history are world war 1 & world war 2, right? none of the others didn't count b/c the other countries sucked? the united states revolutionary war doesn't count b/c the US wasn't "called" the US then? this would be the same kind of thinking and mentality that is displayed above

 

[Powarun]

Steelers had a bad start. They were at one point the Steagles and the Card - Pitts. At one point in their history they said they didn't want to follow the Packer's stripes patterns like every other team in the league and so made a jersey similar to the Packer's 40's jerseys. So they ditch one look to avoid looking like the Packers and choose a different one from the Pack's past just making it have triangles.

 

[JBlood]

Steelers' fans should be careful. If 50 years of NFL history can be ignored, there's nothing stopping the league from declaring the next 40 years nonhistory as well.

 

[Black and Gold]

Steelers' fans should be careful. If 50 years of NFL history can be ignored, there's nothing stopping the league from declaring the next 40 years nonhistory as well.

If I take your meaning correctly--success is transient--then I agree completely. The Steelers are enjoying a good run and you're going to see some arrogant bandwagoners that act like they're entitled to more--and of course, history for them begins at the first Superbowl win (maybe the Immaculate Reception.) Where will they be when, inevitably, the Steelers have a down season or a long run of them? Pundits and bloggers were calling for Mike Tomlin to be fired the year following the last Superbowl win. Idiots!

Contrast that with teams that haven't won a single Superbowl but remain loyal to their team--who's better?

 

[Murgen]

The internet is filled with teenagers and people who haven't given thought to anything much older than their short lifespans. Why let it bother you that they want to ignore history? It's their loss, not the Packers or Packer fans. When they do it, it detracts from them not us.

 

[JBlood]

If I take your meaning correctly--success is transient--then I agree completely. The Steelers are enjoying a good run and you're going to see some arrogant bandwagoners that act like they're entitled to more--and of course, history for them begins at the first Superbowl win (maybe the Immaculate Reception.) Where will they be when, inevitably, the Steelers have a down season or a long run of them? Pundits and bloggers were calling for Mike Tomlin to be fired the year following the last Superbowl win. Idiots!

Contrast that with teams that haven't won a single Superbowl but remain loyal to their team--who's better?

No, I meant that one era is no more important than another and it hurts the league to minimize Championships won in the 30s, 40s, and 60s. And it will hurt the league if someday the Steelers' accomplishments since the 70s are ignored.

12 Championships are the target of all the rest of the teams in the NFL. The fact that you've won 6 since the merger of the leagues, and 2 recently is impressive, but no record.

 

[LombardiChick]

Okay, for argument's sake - let's back that merger up to 1960, and let's see Lombardi's Packers compete for their titles against an expanded league. What do you think happens?

 

[TheSnowPlow]

Okay, for argument's sake - let's back that merger up to 1960, and let's see Lombardi's Packers compete for their titles against an expanded league. What do you think happens?

Well, the Boston Patriots wouldn't have lost the AFL Championship game to the highly-roided up Chargers, that's for sure.

:happy0005:

 

[Murgen]

Okay, for argument's sake - let's back that merger up to 1960, and let's see Lombardi's Packers compete for their titles against an expanded league. What do you think happens?

Since the AFL teams were just not on the level of NFL teams at the time of Lombardi's first championship teams, I don't think much would have changed (but I am biased).

 

[TheSnowPlow]

Since the AFL teams were just not on the level of NFL teams at the time of Lombardi's first championship teams, I don't think much would have changed (but I am biased).

Compared to the Packers, probably not.

I think some of the AFL teams would have been competitive with other NFL teams of the era, though.

 

[Murgen]

Compared to the Packers, probably not.

I think some of the AFL teams would have been competitive with other NFL teams of the era, though.

True, I should have said Lombardi's Packers at the time. Not all NFL teams.

 

[JJP41]

Okay, for argument's sake - let's back that merger up to 1960, and let's see Lombardi's Packers compete for their titles against an expanded league. What do you think happens?

The Packers embarrass whoever they play.

 

[LombardiChick]

Since the AFL teams were just not on the level of NFL teams at the time of Lombardi's first championship teams, I don't think much would have changed (but I am biased).

Well, I'm sure you'll be shocked to know I agree. :wink:

You know this, but I want to say it anyway: The 1960s Packers were a serious powerhouse. That's why it drives me crazy to see people trying to write off the Lombardi Era - the result would almost certainly have been the same had the merger come earlier, so why not just acknowledge Lombardi's greatness? If we have to acknowledge the greatness of newer NFL dynasties - and we do - they ought to damn well acknowledge Lombardi's, at a minimum.

 

[JJP41]

Well, I'm sure you'll be shocked to know I agree. :wink:

You know this, but I want to say it anyway: The 1960s Packers were a serious powerhouse. That's why it drives me crazy to see people trying to write off the Lombardi Era - the result would almost certainly have been the same had the merger come earlier, so why not just acknowledge Lombardi's greatness? If we have to acknowledge the greatness of newer NFL dynasties - and we do - they ought to damn well acknowledge Lombardi's, at a minimum.

The problem is simple. Many and maybe even most fans do not even bother to educate themselves on the history of the game. As someone else said, many only look at how their favorite team has fared since (A) They were born (B) Since their favorite team started having success or (C) Since the birth of the Super Bowl.

A perfect example is how the media even adds to that. If not for the Dolphins once going undefeated, how much would you really hear about them? Right now we are basically bombarded with how great the Pats are.

No doubt they rank up there with some of the better teams but are they more dominant than the Steelers or even the Cowboys in their glory days? Granted, they won 3 Super Bowls in 4 years but so did the 90's Cowboys. The old Steelers won 4 in 6 years. And very much overlooked are the 60's Packers who won 5 titles in 7 years.

And this also brings up a subject that got my attention in a video made by a Bears fan who felt the Super Bowl Trophy should not be named after one Vincent Lombardi but rather have the name of Papa Bear Halas on it (No suprise there). But I have heard that question asked before from non Bears fans. They know the name Lombardi but apparently have no idea what he accomplished or how dominating his Packer teams were.

People once called Bill Walsh a genius and nowadays they rank Bill Belichick among the greatest of all time. No doubt he and some others are among the best but the facts speak for themselves.

Vince Lombardi coached the Packers for 9 years. In those 9 years his Packer teams won 5 titles. Not one of his teams ever had a losing record.

Not Walsh, Halas, Chuck Noll, Tom Landry, Don Shula or even the almighty Belichick can say the same thing.

So I think when people want to speak on dominant teams and coaches. they really to need to look back in history to get an idea of what a prime example of what that is and not just look at what is comfortable for them to deal with or brag about.

 

[43Hitman]

It brings back memories of some of the college football debates, counting championships from the early 1900s and so on.

Bottom line, both teams are 0-fer this year when it comes to wins. You're hanging out with the wrong crowd if the debate has sunk to such a low level.

Both teams have a storied history--hell, Green Bay has Lambeau stadium (+ fan owned team), Lombardi, the Ice Bowl etc.

It's like comparing the carat weight of gold in a two rings and ignoring the three carat, flawless diamonds set in each. Packers are great. Steelers are great. Both are playing in Dallas' shiny new stadium.

Hell yeah, good post my Steeler brother. Championships are championships. Its like people use them to make up for a lack of....ahem....Both teams are great, have great history and have both contributed to the NFL like no other teams have. Both fan bases have lots to be proud of.