The Top 100 Greatest NFL Players.

[KINGOFOOTBALL]

Hell, you could throw Leslie O'Neal on that list as well. Kevin Greene as well.

I loved Leslie Oneal....mostly because in madden 93 you could put him and Seau in the neutral zone and nano blitz the holy hell out of the QB all day.

That and a cool visor.

 

[Bmore]

I don't like that they keep the history in Cleveland. It bothers me and to me makes no sense. The Ravens from 96 to present are the same team as the Browns from 95 and before. Why would their history be separated?

Cuz that is just it, they aren't the same team.


Technically they had the same owner at one time and up until last year at least 1 player. But they are two different entities.

I believe the city/fans are what make the team. Hence I also believe Indy Colts aren't the Balt Colts. They are all there OWN team. The only similarity is the name.

Johnny Unitas wanted to be in the HOF as a Baltimore Colt, not a Indianapolis Colt or Baltimore Raven.

 

[StealthShot]

Part 80-71 is up.

 

[Aso]

Cuz that is just it, they aren't the same team.


Technically they had the same owner at one time and up until last year at least 1 player. But they are two different entities.

I believe the city/fans are what make the team. Hence I also believe Indy Colts aren't the Balt Colts. They are all there OWN team. The only similarity is the name.

Johnny Unitas wanted to be in the HOF as a Baltimore Colt, not a Indianapolis Colt or Baltimore Raven.

A very small percentage of fans actually attend games. The city has nothing to do with if the team is the same or not. So if you talk about fans if such a small amount of fans actually attend games only a small percentage of the fan base would actually have a problem with this.

All the contracts of all the players and coaches transfered over therefore that part of the team did stay the same. Now cities owners change all the time. Doesn't mean their history should be discontinued and they should start it over.

It pretty much was the same team trying to create a new identity for themselves just by giving themselves a new logo and starting their history over. Because they play in a different stadium and different fans are cheering them on I don't think means the history should be stopped and then given to a brand new team who has absolutely no connection to the old team besides name and give them the history. Makes no sense AT ALL.

What connection do the Browns from 99-Present have in common with the Browns from 95-prior. The fans the city and thats it.

If I was an Oilers fan I would be a Titans fan after they moved.
If I was an Oakland Raiders fan I would be an LA Raiders fan after the move.
If I was a Browns fan I would be a Ravens fan after the move.

Isn't this the definition of loyalty to your team?

 

[SuperKevin]

A very small percentage of fans actually attend games. The city has nothing to do with if the team is the same or not. So if you talk about fans if such a small amount of fans actually attend games only a small percentage of the fan base would actually have a problem with this.

All the contracts of all the players and coaches transfered over therefore that part of the team did stay the same. Now cities owners change all the time. Doesn't mean their history should be discontinued and they should start it over.

It pretty much was the same team trying to create a new identity for themselves just by giving themselves a new logo and starting their history over. Because they play in a different stadium and different fans are cheering them on I don't think means the history should be stopped and then given to a brand new team who has absolutely no connection to the old team besides name and give them the history. Makes no sense AT ALL.

What connection do the Browns from 99-Present have in common with the Browns from 95-prior. The fans the city and thats it.

If I was an Oilers fan I would be a Titans fan after they moved.
If I was an Oakland Raiders fan I would be an LA Raiders fan after the move.
If I was a Browns fan I would be a Ravens fan after the move.

Isn't this the definition of loyalty to your team?

Why show loyalty to a team if they won't show loyalty to their fans?

 

[citizenerased]

A very small percentage of fans actually attend games. The city has nothing to do with if the team is the same or not. So if you talk about fans if such a small amount of fans actually attend games only a small percentage of the fan base would actually have a problem with this.

All the contracts of all the players and coaches transfered over therefore that part of the team did stay the same. Now cities owners change all the time. Doesn't mean their history should be discontinued and they should start it over.

It pretty much was the same team trying to create a new identity for themselves just by giving themselves a new logo and starting their history over. Because they play in a different stadium and different fans are cheering them on I don't think means the history should be stopped and then given to a brand new team who has absolutely no connection to the old team besides name and give them the history. Makes no sense AT ALL.

What connection do the Browns from 99-Present have in common with the Browns from 95-prior. The fans the city and thats it.

If I was an Oilers fan I would be a Titans fan after they moved.
If I was an Oakland Raiders fan I would be an LA Raiders fan after the move.
If I was a Browns fan I would be a Ravens fan after the move.

Isn't this the definition of loyalty to your team?

Your joking right? Especially with the Browns comment? If you said that during that final season in Cleveland where the fans were trashing the stadium and tossing the bleachers the onto the field you probably would've been murdered... and rightfully so

 

[SuperKevin]

Personally I'll burn all my Bills jerseys if they end up moving to LA. Even the Bruce Smith and Jim Kelly throwbacks.

 

[citizenerased]

Personally I'll burn all my Bills jerseys if they end up moving to LA. Even the Bruce Smith and Jim Kelly throwbacks.

Pfft... your not a loyal fan. What kind of fan would not continue to support the team that was the heart of your cities sporting culture and moved 5000 miles to the west?

 

[Aso]

Do either of you attend games?

And I did say teams moving only affects the people that attend games so season ticket holders would have a reason to be angry.

 

[Aso]

Personally I'll burn all my Bills jerseys if they end up moving to LA. Even the Bruce Smith and Jim Kelly throwbacks.

Same reaction if they move to toronto? If they did move who would you root for now?

 

[SuperKevin]

Do either of you attend games?

And I did say teams moving only affects the people that attend games so season ticket holders would have a reason to be angry.

Same reaction if they move to toronto? If they did move who would you root for now?

No I don't attend games because I live 1000 miles away from Buffalo.

I'd have the same reaction if they moved to Toronto. The Bills belong in Buffalo and Buffalo only. Anywhere else and it's a travesty.

 

[Aso]

Still don't understand why you would be angry. You wouldn't be affected at all.

 

[SuperKevin]

Still don't understand why you would be angry. You wouldn't be affected at all.

Loyalty to Ralph Wilson and everything he's done for that franchise. If the team moves it means someone completely disregarded Ralph Wilson's wishes to keep the team in Buffalo.

 

[Aso]

Loyalty to Ralph Wilson and everything he's done for that franchise. If the team moves it means someone completely disregarded Ralph Wilson's wishes to keep the team in Buffalo.

Ralph Wilson isn't dead yet...

Did he say he didn't want to though? I heard that he doesn't plan to keep the Bills in his family upon death so how do you know he doesn't want to keep them in Buffalo. Who's gonna respect your wishes more than your own blood? I also just read that Jim Kelly and a group of people would put in a bid to buy the Bills and keep them in Buffalo though.

But to say you would burn Jim Kelly's jersey because someone went against Ralph Wilson's wishes to not move the team seems like a strange thing to do.

 

[SuperKevin]

Ralph Wilson has 2 remaining daughters (one died of cancer) and both have said they don't want to own the Bills. That is why he's not keeping it in the family. He has also made it clear he won't sell to someone who intends on moving the team.

If the new owners whenever they take over move the team then i will no longer show any loyalty to the franchise. They'll be dead to me and I will refuse to keep anything associated with the team.

 

[killgod]

I thought there was a huge tax reason why they weren't keeping it in the family. Or so I think I read something about that once.

 

[SuperKevin]

I thought there was a huge tax reason why they weren't keeping it in the family. Or so I think I read something about that once.

That is also an issue but even without it, his daughters have denied any interest in owning the team

 

[Aso]

Alright, I understand now.

Any chance it could be given to his granddaughter? Hell, even great granddaughters? This guy is fucking old as dirt.

 

[Senser81]

If I was an Oilers fan I would be a Titans fan after they moved.
If I was an Oakland Raiders fan I would be an LA Raiders fan after the move.
If I was a Browns fan I would be a Ravens fan after the move.

Isn't this the definition of loyalty to your team?

But thats not the situation. The better hypothetical is if you were an Oilers fan, and the team moved to Tennessee and became the Titans, then a few years later the Houston Texans were formed....would you still root for the Titans and ignore the Texans?

I would guess Clevelanders followed the Ravens when they had no other team, but once the "new" Browns were formed, they dismissed the Ravens as quickly as a VSNer dismisses a ram29jackson posting.

 

[Senser81]

I know I've asked you this before but what do you think of Richard Dent in terms of HOF worthiness? He was maybe the most important player of those Bears defenses but was overshadowed by LT and Reggie White...but he was a great player in his own right. I'm a little surprised he hasnt snuck in yet but I'm not to up in arms about it.

This is just my opinion.

Dent was not the most important player on the 85 Bears. Ryan designed the 46 for Dan Hampton. Hampton was the most important player, and Ryan wanted his best player (Hampton) head-up on the offense's weakest blocker (center). Dent was a very good player, but he was not a "motor" guy and would take plays off. I think Steve McMichael was a better all-around player than Dent, because of the pass-rush he gave from a DT position. I don't think Hampton or McMichael could have been replaced in the Bears defense, but I do think that Dent could have been replaced with a guy like Mike Hartenstine or Al Harris.

Dent is a Hall of Very Good, not a Hall of Famer, IMO.