Posts
The Green Bay Packers:
- 1919 - Present
- 11 NFL Championships (most ever)
- 3 Super Bowl Championships
-26 Post-Season Appearances (1919-Present)
- Vince Lombardi
-Lambeau Field
-The Ice Bowl
The Pittsburgh Steelers:
- 1933 - Present
-6 Super Bowl Championships (most ever)
-8 AFC Championships (most ever)
-26 Post-Season Appearances (1933-Present)
-The Steel Curtain
-The Immaculate Reception
-Chuck Noll
If the Packers win Super Bowl XLV, it will put them in an exclusive group of 4 teams to ever win at least 4 Super Bowls. The Steelers are already one of those teams with 6 Lombardi Trophies, the most ever. Although, you cannot discard the Packers pre-Super Bowl history, and the only team to ever win 3 straight NFL championships of any type.
If the Steelers are victorious, they will rise to a Yankee or God (those words are interchangeable) like status of 7 Super Bowl championships, and 3 in the last 6 years.
So will this Super Bowl decide the NFL's flagship franchise? Or is it already deciced no matter the outcome?
Standings
Flix66.com
I Want That!
Jason's Examiner
-
▼
2011
(158)
-
▼
February
(17)
- First Single from "DETOX"
- And The Oscar Goes To . . .
- Hershel to the Knicks.
- Article Update - Review: I Am Number Four
- My National Lampoon's Venezuelan Vacation
- Great Scott?!
- Freedom Of Speech?
- Would Have Won SuperBowl Best Commercial.
- Article Update! - Big Fish Recap
- X-MEN: First Class (Trailer)
- Football trick shots
- Chick-Fil-Anti-Gay
- Hit Em with the Kenny G!
- Lil Wayne Is On Board
- THE Decision?
- The Most Ilegal Move in Wrestling....Ever!
- Super Bowl Supremacy
-
▼
February
(17)
Next Game
'10 Sumr Champs
Featured Trailer
KaiTunes
Blog Archive
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
19 comments:
Wow....Did Koko really write this or did somebody hack his account? Because it actually seemed like an intelligent discussion spot and one where he didn't let his blind emotion rule the whole point.....
Great Take Koko.
I will say that the Steelers are the Most dominant team of the Current Era...and if they win...they hold the title of League Flagship franchise.
However, The Pack are undisputably the All Time NFL Great Franchise. When you hold the Most titles...that gives you a major edge. When the Title is named after your Legendary Head Coach....That pretty much sums it up.
Plus, The Packers have contributed so much to the NFL.....they are community owned and have one of the Most Famous Stadiums in ALL of Sports. Plus....The Packers do have an undefeated Season on their resume.....look it up. 12-0-1 Baby!!!!
But....The Steelers are a Great Franchise as well and deserve much respect and are valid in the discussion.
Ah, you see Keith. You've discovered you're own achilles heel by delecting it upon me.
These are how all of my discussions and arguments are. It's just that this particular article involved your beloved Packers and no opportunity to unleesh your New York bias.
Although you still have a major problem with passive agressive comments and back-handed compliments.
You see what happens when put down the Hatorade!?
Also, do you see what happens when you FUCK A STRANGER IN THE ASS!
Or even better,
When you FIND A STRANGER IN THE ALPS!
Also, right now I feel the Steelers are the #1 franchise in NFL history and will cement that place even more with a victory.
If the Pack wins, I still don't feel they take the #1 spot, but would be only one more Super Bowl away from doing so.
The Steelers as the flagship franchise? puleeese!!! Not only do they have half of the titles that the Packers have had, but in their hey day of the 1970's, steroids were running rampant in Pittsburgh, at a time when everybody else didn't know what they were.
The Lombardi Packers were the embodiment of what football was and still should be. Hard work and execution. Teamwork and belief in each other having a common goal. Not a needle in your ass.
There isn't a play on broadway called Noll. You don't play for the Noll or Cowher trophy. You play for the Lombardi trophy.
I give them the edge in recent history over the last 10 years, but give me a break. The same arguments that you apply to your beloved Yankees in baseball, apply to the Packers in football.
Well Regs I would be very weary of taking such a hard stance on the steroids issue.
Please do not tell me you are so naive that you don't think 95% of the players in the NFL are on some kind of steroid or growth hormone that makes the steroids of the 70's look like PEZ.
That issue is a wash, they were all doing it then and are all doing it now. People just don't care if football players take steroids because of the nature of the game. Baseball is very individual and the stats and HOF mean the most of all the major sports.
Also the Steelers don't have just and "edge," as you put it, over the Pack in the last 10 years. They have a Grand Canyon sized separation. This is Pitt's 3rd Super Bowl in 6 years and won both of their previous 2 appearances. Meanwhile this is the Packs first SB since '98.
Also as I said you cannot completely dicount the Pack's pre-Super Bowl history but of all sports, football is the one where the game's golden age means the least in terms of a competative comparison to today's game. Super Bowls hold much more weight than an old NFL Championship.
I'm not talking about steroids now. I am talking about essentially the dawn of the abuse. The Steelers were not the first team to abuse steroids (1963 Chargers), but there has been testimonials and evidence to suggest that they went above and beyond any other team in the 70's giving them a competitive edge.
To illustrate, upon doing a little research I came upon an interesting statistic. Of all NFL football players from the 1970's, 77 had died as of 2005. Of those 77, 18 were Pittsburgh Steelers. That is almost 1/4 of all NFL players. Most of these premature deaths were the result of heart attacks. Facts don't lie.
There are plenty of stories of former Steelers (steve Courson, Mike Webster amongst others) taking abuse to unheard of levels.
I'm not saying completely rule out all of their accomplishments, but to put a franchise with such a questionable past as the flagship team is absurd.
Also, in the last 10 years the Packers HAVE A BETTER RECORD than the Steelers
Packers- 97-63
Steelers- 95-64-1
I have acknowledged the Steelers as having an edge over the Pack because of the 2 Super Bowls, but it is certainly not the gap that you had described. We also have more playoff appearances than the Steelers over the last 10 years.
Good luck getting anyone with a flicker of brain activity to accept a 2-game edge in record over 2 Super Bowl wins.
2 championnships to 0 championships is not edging out someone. It doesn't matter how you spin it. If you're discussing the most successfull teams of the past 10 years, the Packers are not even in the discussion unless they win on Sunday.
And the steroids thing is still all hearsay, you have NO proof of anything. No one knows how extensive steriods is or was in football. You can't say that other teams did not have the same amount or more players on steroids than the Steelers. I could spin the argument that the reason those Steelers died is that they were using the steroids in a more harmful than helpful manner. It's all hyperbole and changes nothing.
Those Steeler teams had some of the best players in NFL history and they still won the Super Bowls they won. Those championships are not looked at as tainted by the sports world.
2 more things to point out.
-1st- your stats are wrong. The Packers have 12 championships, not 11.
-2nd- between the years of 1933 and 1972, the Steelers played in a total of 1 playoff game and lost it. That's a 39 year run with ZERO playoff wins.
You can say all you want about the historical significance of different eras, but you can't completely ignore it.
Come on Man
Oh Reger…you are at least entertaining in you own silly manner. You remind me of a certain news outlet. They too like to spin in rhetoric and hearsay; using it as substantiated facts. I must admit, your post is as entertaining as a Glenn Beck chalkboard presentation. I do like how Keith and you bring up the fact that the trophy is called the Lombardi Trophy, homage to the first coach that one the first two Super Bowls. And make no mistake that Lombardi was an incredible coach. But don’t sit there and downplay Chuck Noll because he doesn’t have a play or trophy named after him. So Dick LeBeau is not a walking legend because they didn’t make a Broadway play about him. You would think that the Packers would be the ones that would have the most “Lombardis”. Those 10 other “NFL Championships” had a nice named trophy too, right? What was it again? And the Steelers had their “hey day” in the 1970’s, and the Packers’ was in the 1960’s. Good thing that Wisconsin is so far north that steroids never made it up there (sarcasm too thick on that one?). Koko is right; you can’t cover up your 20 year gap in Super Bowl victories with Google searches on steroid use. Bad form sir. Next you will hit me up with some small market argument. And to bring up the Packers have a better record argument, my only retort is the Steelers win when they have to. And I will take the edge that you are giving the Steelers for the last 10 years, and the ‘70’s. And Green Bay can have the edge for the ‘30’s, ‘40’s, ‘50’s, and ‘60’s, so you win that argument. Flagship franchise is the right tag…..it is called STEELER NATION!
We will see on Sunday who is the best team now. I will focus my energy there.
My bold prediction
Packers- 31
Steelers- 13
MVP- C-Wood
Oh....and just a quick point......The Steelers are so weak they have to "HiJack" a Nickname and go with Steeler Nation. Come on......Even the Yankees didn't fall for that one.
Al Davis wants his nickname back.....and that's sad when you are copycatting Al Davis.
And for the Record.....Packer fans are "Packer Fans" don't need to hijack a lame nickname.
Also.....Any Further Thoughts on this Epic SuperBowl Viewing???
If not.....I am going to prepare to host at my house. All are welcome but limited seating and no complaining. I will try to situate a another TV in the Dining Room but no guarantees on this.
I thought you were getting the clubhouse? Is that not happening? Let figure this thing out. I will open my doors if your house is too cramped. I can clear out the living room and that should hold enough people. But we have to act now...pregnant lady can only be tricked once!
My stats are not wrong Regs, it's your comprehension that needs a strong dose of Sesame Street.
The Packers have 11 NFL Championships as I listed. The Super Bowls are a separate category as listed.
So I decided to look up the regular season records for myself for both Green Bay and Pittsburgh...and they differ from Fox News Reger report....
From 2000-2010:
Packers - 105-71
Steelers - 115-60-1
Anybody know what the "G" means in the Packers logo?
Duhhh, Georgia.
Now, I'm not a mathematician what so ever, but I am pretty sure that over the last 10 years NFL teams have played 160 regular season games. That is 10 x 16 (games per season)= 160.
I'm not sure where you got you AL Gore fuzzy math from, but you should probably check it again.
The big question for this weekend is whether or not Rapistberger will end up with more super bowl rings or more chicks raped, because right now it is a tie.
Well I can definitely tell you are not a mathematician. 2000-2010 regular season means 11 seasons. So to put out your own remedial math you insist on, that would be…
Green Bay record, 105-71 means 105(wins) +71(losses) =176(total regular season games), and 176 (regular season games)/11(regular seasons) =16(regular season games per season).
Pittsburgh record, 115-60-1 means 115(wins) +60(losses) +1(tie) =176(total regular season games), and 176 (regular season games)/11(regular seasons) =16(regular season games per season).
But if you did want the last 10 regular seasons, I do apologize; wash out the 2000 regular season because both teams were 9-7.
“Al Gore fuzzy math” did make me laugh. Maybe if mathematicians were included in a 2000 recount things would have been different Rob McCain.
Post a Comment