Greatest Franchise in Football History

[Gutter]

I'm thinking Dallas Cowboys :unsure:

[Autumn Wind]

Packers

[Steebo]

Dolphins.

[Bill Swerski]

I'm thinking Dallas Cowboys :unsure:

:twak:


Da Bearsssssss

[CMT]

I'm biased of course, but I agree.


A record 5 Super Bowl titles.
A record 8 Super Bowl appearances.
"America's Team"
2nd overall with 19 regular season 1st place finishes (not bad considering that the teams tied for 1st, with 20, GB and NYG have been around for about 50 years longer).
2nd overall for most consecutive times finishing 1st in the regular season (6, from 66-71).
A record 20 consecutive winning seasons (66-85)
A record 24 season with at least 10 wins (that's over 50% of the life of the franchise)
19 Divisional Championships (over 40% of their franchise lifetime)
A record 7 Super Bowl MVPs (not bad for only 5 wins).
Tom Landry, the 3rd all time winningest coach in NFL history.
Not a single losing season from 1965-85 (in fact, only 10 losing season since 1965).


There's more. :yes:

[Gutter]

I don't know much before the formation of the NFL, but 5 super bowl wins, 8 NFC championships, dominating the 70s and 90s, 32-22 in the post season, ~.570 overall record.


OK, maybe greatest franchise in NFL history.:unsure:

[torridjoe]

Cowboys--please. They sucked ASS for a long time, and that was still decades after the league began.

Here are your only choices:

Bears
Packers
Browns
Redskins

It's between the Bears and the Pack, IMO. Edge to Chicago.

[CMT]

Cowboys--please. They sucked ASS for a long time, and that was still decades after the league began.

Here are your only choices:

Bears
Packers
Browns
Redskins

It's between the Bears and the Pack, IMO. Edge to Chicago.

Define a long time? 1st year 1960 - good by 66 - dominant by 70 and continued to be through the mid 90s with only a brief suctastic lull during the late 80s.

Redskins. What a focking homer.

[Thin Spirit]

Browns? What the hell have they ever done to warrant being called the greatest franchise ever? :rolleyes:

Greatest franchise - New England
Greatest QB - Tom Brady

:hyper:

[Steebo]

Browns? What the hell have they ever done to warrant being called the greatest franchise ever? :rolleyes:

Greatest franchise - New England
Greatest QB - Tom Brady

:hyper:

Shouldnt you be posting this crap at TheDanzone?

[torridjoe]

Define a long time? 1st year 1960 - good by 66 - dominant by 70 and continued to be through the mid 90s with only a brief suctastic lull during the late 80s.

Redskins. What a focking homer.

I count as many league championships for Washington as for Dallas, and as many championship appearances.

Strange how you glom onto the Redskins and call me a homer, when I said it was between the Pack and Bears. And now that I look more closely, I think it's actually Green Bay. TWELVE titles! Threepeaters, twice!

[kraziness]

Ok, I'm a Browns homer but even I wouldn't put them in this discussion. Their fans deserve consideration among the top, but not the franchise. True they won a bunch of championships just before they went to the Super Bowl format, but that's a long time ago. True their owners/players/coaches have had a tremendous impact on the league in general (Bengals came from Paul Brown, MNF came from Modell, etc.), but a lot of that pails in comparison to the consistant winning that the 'Boys and Steelers can boast of.

I tell you what, this Noll/Cowher era really speaks a lot for the consistancy/class of the Steeler's organization. That being said, I'd probably go with the Cowboys. Just as much mystique as any other org, just as much winning, just as much "history", but in less time.

[TK]

Ok, I'm a Browns homer but even I wouldn't put them in this discussion.

That's probably because this thread is entitled "Greatest Franchise in Football History".

hth.

[torridjoe]

Ok, I'm a Browns homer but even I wouldn't put them in this discussion. Their fans deserve consideration among the top, but not the franchise. True they won a bunch of championships just before they went to the Super Bowl format, but that's a long time ago. True their owners/players/coaches have had a tremendous impact on the league in general (Bengals came from Paul Brown, MNF came from Modell, etc.), but a lot of that pails in comparison to the consistant winning that the 'Boys and Steelers can boast of.

I tell you what, this Noll/Cowher era really speaks a lot for the consistancy/class of the Steeler's organization. That being said, I'd probably go with the Cowboys. Just as much mystique as any other org, just as much winning, just as much "history", but in less time.

The Cowboys aren't even close.

And didn't the Browns win a Super Bowl from their new location just a couple of years ago?

[CMT]

I count as many league championships for Washington as for Dallas, and as many championship appearances.

Strange how you glom onto the Redskins and call me a homer, when I said it was between the Pack and Bears. And now that I look more closely, I think it's actually Green Bay. TWELVE titles! Threepeaters, twice!


I think GB and NY are really the only ones who can argue above Dallas. Admittedly, I don't think its appropriate to count stats from much before the merger - if that's the case, then only teams that have been around for 70 years have any claim.

But, you did mention the redskins which is patently ridiculous when comparing to the Cowboys because since the birth of the Cowboys, the Redskins are :owned: on a host of statistical comparisons.

[TK]

The Cowboys aren't even close.

And didn't the Browns win a Super Bowl from their new location just a couple of years ago?

ouchburn

[CMT]

The Cowboys aren't even close.




and yet the Redkins are? I'm still waiting of your definition of "sucked ASS for a long time" because no matter how you slice it, you will be indicting the Redskins, the team YOU included in the debate.

[torridjoe]

and yet the Redkins are? I'm still waiting of your definition of "sucked ASS for a long time" because no matter how you slice it, you will be indicting the Redskins, the team YOU included in the debate.

Whether they're close to the Pack and Bears is one thing, but no matter how far apart you want to place them, the Cowboys are that much further down the list.

[torridjoe]

I think GB and NY are really the only ones who can argue above Dallas. Admittedly, I don't think its appropriate to count stats from much before the merger - if that's the case, then only teams that have been around for 70 years have any claim.

But, you did mention the redskins which is patently ridiculous when comparing to the Cowboys because since the birth of the Cowboys, the Redskins are :owned: on a host of statistical comparisons.

That's where we differ. It's a little silly to consider who the greatest franchise in HISTORY might be, when your version of history accounts for less than half of the actual lifespan of the league.

[CMT]

Whether they're close to the Pack and Bears is one thing, but no matter how far apart you want to place them, the Cowboys are that much further down the list.


You can say it all you want, but until you explain your post - especially your comment that it can't be the Cowboys because they "sucked ASS for a long time" - I'll just assume you don't know what your talking about.

[CMT]

That's where we differ. It's a little silly to consider who the greatest franchise in HISTORY might be, when your version of history accounts for less than half of the actual lifespan of the league.


Its a tip that different league. The "NFL" of 1930 is hardly the "NFL" of the merger forward.

[torridjoe]

Its a tip that different league. The "NFL" of 1930 is hardly the "NFL" of the merger forward.


are you now trying to argue that 1921-1969 doesn't represent "football history?"

[CMT]

are you now trying to argue that 1921-1969 doesn't represent "football history?"


Actually, I'm not discussing anything with you until you either retract or explain your "sucked ASS for a long time" statement. :nono:

[EMoney]

I'm with Thin Spirit. The Pats absolutely should be in this discussion. :yes:

[torridjoe]

Actually, I'm not discussing anything with you until you either retract or explain your "sucked ASS for a long time" statement. :nono:


starting......NOW?
:D :|

[CMT]

starting......NOW?
:D :|


No!@##@





alsonow.

[kraziness]

And didn't the Browns win a Super Bowl from their new location just a couple of years ago?

The sight of Art Modell, doing the old white man dance, with Ray Lewis next to him collecting the MVP trophy induces rage that (I think) only this man can understand.

http://www.safetycenter.navy.mil/media/images/rage_pg_34.jpg

[Autumn Wind]

are you now trying to argue that 1921-1969 doesn't represent "football history?"

He's argued that to me before, so the answer is yes. There was on old discussion where I said that it's bullshit that NFL championships from before the Super Bowl era get glossed over, and CMT seems to be fine with that. :no:

[futboljugador]

The Lions!!!! :hyper: