- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
The Cleveland Browns Listed As Never Having Been To A Super ...
Posted on 2/10/10 at 10:46 am
Posted on 2/10/10 at 10:46 am
... Bowl ... always wondered about the technicality of that ... when the baltimore ravens went in 2000 and won it, i always considered that a browns thing and that the current cleveland browns are an expansion franchise that just retained the rights to the nickname ... oh well ..
7
Posted on 2/10/10 at 10:47 am to TigahRag
it's a totally different franchise since cleveland kept the rights to the Browns name and it's history
Posted on 2/10/10 at 10:49 am to TigahRag
quote:
... Bowl ... always wondered about the technicality of that ... when the baltimore ravens went in 2000 and won it, i always considered that a browns thing and that the current cleveland browns are an expansion franchise that just retained the rights to the nickname ... oh well
Browns fans have and had zero connection with the Rat Birds. The current Browns is alot more than a "nickname" The only franchise in history to retain all records etc from the original franchise. Go Browns!
Posted on 2/10/10 at 10:49 am to TigahRag
The Baltimore Ravens came into existence in 1996 when Art Modell, then owner of the Cleveland Browns, announced his intention to relocate his team from Cleveland to Baltimore. The controversy ended when representatives of Cleveland and the NFL reached a settlement on February 8, 1996. The agreement stipulated that the Browns' name, colors, uniform design and franchise records would remain in Cleveland. The franchise history included Browns club records and connections with Pro Football Hall of Fame players. A new team to begin play in 1999 would be regarded as the "reactivated" Cleveland Browns. Modell's Baltimore team, while retaining all current player contracts, would officially be the expansion team, a "new franchise."
Posted on 2/10/10 at 10:51 am to TigahRag
quote:
always wondered about the technicality of that ... when the baltimore ravens went in 2000 and won it, i always considered that a browns thing
lets see...........the baltimore ravens won it right? I don't see the name cleveland or browns in your statement.
I think the browns still haven't been to a superbowl....I think technically it's a fact.
This post was edited on 2/10/10 at 10:53 am
Posted on 2/10/10 at 10:56 am to LSUintheNW
quote:
think the browns still haven't been to a superbowl....I think technically it's a fact.
It's an interesting point in how we typically view the progeny/evolution of a professional sports franchise, though.
Posted on 2/10/10 at 10:58 am to LSUintheNW
The Minneaoplis Lakers won the NBA title last year.
Posted on 2/10/10 at 11:09 am to TigahRag
they still have NFL championships
Posted on 2/10/10 at 11:14 am to StraightCashHomey21
plus 4 AAFC titles
Posted on 2/10/10 at 11:19 am to StraightCashHomey21
quote:
they still have NFL championships
Many. I think they still might have the most NFL football championships of any team.
Posted on 2/10/10 at 12:13 pm to bomber77
quote:
I think they still might have the most NFL football championships of any team.
counting AAFC.
GB has 11 or 12 NFL Titles, including 3 Super Bowls.
Posted on 2/10/10 at 12:21 pm to Y.A. Tittle
quote:
think the browns still haven't been to a superbowl....I think technically it's a fact.
It's an interesting point in how we typically view the progeny/evolution of a professional sports franchise, though.
which is exactly my point .. you have the original browns and their history built up for decades, then the team, along with all of its current players, front office staff, coaches, etc. just pack up and move ... but, POOF, voila .. here is an entirely new expansion-esque franchise that has to start over from scratch .. but, you are to associate jim brown, brian sipe, ernest byner, michael jackson, lou groza, paul brown, etc. with these new guys, not those ...
Posted on 2/10/10 at 12:23 pm to BBATiger
quote:
The Minneaoplis Lakers won the NBA title last year.
buuuuuuuut .. if you crack open a los angeles lakers media guide .. all accumulated records date back to the george mikan, minneapolis lakers days ..
Posted on 2/10/10 at 12:27 pm to TigahRag
quote:
if you crack open a los angeles lakers media guide .. all accumulated records date back to the george mikan, minneapolis lakers days ..
right, its not that hard of concept to grasp, all teams that have moved, except for the Cleveland Browns have retainted the history of the franchise.
The Ravens started in 96, won the SB in 2000, while I'm sure there are guys on that SB team that were on the last Browns team, its not like they won the next year. Ray Lewis never played in Cleveland.
Posted on 2/10/10 at 12:29 pm to TigahRag
So do you think Browns fans were cheering when the Ravens were in the super bowl?
Posted on 2/10/10 at 12:32 pm to H-Town Tiger
it is a matter of perception i guess .. sure, the agreement severed ties on paper with the name, history, etc. ... but it is hard to look at the current cleveland browns as the original browns to me ... just like the tennessee titans' history dating back to the beginning of the houston oilers franchise, while the houston texans are a straight up expansion franchise ... just different circumstances .. but rare in sports ...
Posted on 2/10/10 at 12:34 pm to SprintFun
quote:
So do you think Browns fans were cheering when the Ravens were in the super bowl?
well, of course, out of sheer hatred for art modell they didn't ... but emotionally, you know most considered that to be their team ... just like if the saints packed up next season and suddenly moved, but the city retained the rights to the name, history, etc ... and as los angeles .. they win the super bowl 3 years later ... obviously .. that would still be the saints to a lot of fans ..
Posted on 2/10/10 at 12:36 pm to TigahRag
quote:
sure, the agreement severed ties on paper with the name, history, etc. ... but it is hard to look at the current cleveland browns as the original browns to me ...
why?
They play in Cleveland, they are called the Browns. Why would their ties to Jim Brown be stronger if they were not out of the league for 3 years? He still played in cleveland, for the Brows, in the 60's.
The Browns have more claim to being the original Browns, than the Indianaoplis colts do to the Baltimore Colts. No one in Indy cares about Johnny Unitas, Raymond Berry etc In Nashville they don't care about Earl Campbell, Bum Phillips etc. The Browns are the only ones to get it right.
Posted on 2/10/10 at 12:38 pm to TigahRag
quote:
but emotionally, you know most considered that to be their team
nope, a handful maybe. Just like in Houston when the titans went, some cheered, some hated it, others didn't care. It was nothing like it would have been if the Oilers had gone or if the Texans went.
Posted on 2/10/10 at 12:39 pm to TigahRag
quote:
well, of course, out of sheer hatred for art modell they didn't ... but emotionally, you know most considered that to be their team ... just like if the saints packed up next season and suddenly moved, but the city retained the rights to the name, history, etc ... and as los angeles .. they win the super bowl 3 years later ... obviously .. that would still be the saints to a lot of fans ..
NOT like this at all. I dont know of a Browns fan that ever cheered for the Ravens at any time.
Page 1 of 4
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News