lambdo Posted January 4, 2013 Report Share Posted January 4, 2013 Cannot believe so many people are hating on this potential gold mine of a hire. Do you want to keep perma losing??? This guy plays to win! YOu won't see us punting 4th and inches from their 35 anymore. Creative Innovator on Offense which we so need so badly to go with Jaurons rock solid defence. Open the chequebook and make an offer he can't refuse Haslem. Get these Brownies instantly into contention. This is perfect fit for him. We have the youngest team in ball to implement his system and an absolute great RB in Richardson who is such a good interior runner. This is such a fit. Runs the most efficient practices which also fits so perfect for our young team. Ya'll are crazy. Hire this guy. LAMBDO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gipper Posted January 4, 2013 Report Share Posted January 4, 2013 Cannot believe so many people are hating on this potential gold mine of a hire. Do you want to keep perma losing??? This guy plays to win! YOu won't see us punting 4th and inches from their 35 anymore. Creative Innovator on Offense which we so need so badly to go with Jaurons rock solid defence. Open the chequebook and make an offer he can't refuse Haslem. Get these Brownies instantly into contention. This is perfect fit for him. We have the youngest team in ball to implement his system and an absolute great RB in Richardson who is such a good interior runner. This is such a fit. Runs the most efficient practices which also fits so perfect for our young team. Ya'll are crazy. Hire this guy. LAMBDO Where are you from that you would spell it "chequebook"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kosarfan Posted January 4, 2013 Report Share Posted January 4, 2013 Who uses Checquebooks anymore anyway ? Just hit the ATM, pay that puppy cash or go paperless and do the deed ! Sheesh !! BTW - Is this move REALLY something you feel strong about ??? Just curious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gipper Posted January 4, 2013 Report Share Posted January 4, 2013 You hear about the top rivalries in the NFL, and the usual suspects include the likes of Bears/Packers, Browns/Steelers, Redskins/Cowboys, Chiefs/Raiders, Falcons/Saints, Packers/Vikings, Eagles/Giants and rightfully so with many of them. They are storied rivalries that somewhat still maintain today. But what about the 'Lost Rivalries" or in some cases the "Rivalries that never were". I here list a few from these categories: Lost: 1. Start with the Browns vs. the Lions. Played 4 times for the NFL title in the 1950s. Detroit and Cleveland as the crow flies is actually closer than Pittsburgh/Cleveland. A remnant remains with the GLC..but a preseason game is meaningless. 2. Rams vs. 49ers. Yes, it is still an interdivision game...but since the Rams moved from LA to St. Louis it seems like an intercontinental game. It has lost the intensity since the Rams moved. 3. Steelers vs. Eagles. Hell, at one time these two teams were one and the same when they were the Steagles. this intrastate clash isn't nearly as intense as it could be. 4. Browns/Bengals. This is still a rivalry...but nothing like it was when both owners hated each other, i.e. Paul Brown and Art Modell. Though it has created some crazy games like 58-48, it would help if both teams had a better performance record than they have of late. Can you think of any other "Lost Rivalries"? Now here are some in the "Never Were but should Be" category: A. Jets vs. Giants. Hell, what a natural. Same city, same stadium. How can that not promote animosity and rivalry...but it doesn't. B. 49ers vs. Raiders. With a good binocular and up on the roof you might be able to see both stadiums across the bay from each other. They have banned this game from the preseason because of fights that have been brought out. Too bad they don't play twice a year instead of once every 4 years. C. Ravens vs. Redskins. Happened this year. 35 miles apart. They share an airport....why not a rivalry? D. Dallas vs. Houston. When the Oilers were in Houston they use to say that "the Cowboys may be America's team, but the Oilers are Texas's team." Too bad that sentiment doesn't prevail. It would be nice to see those Texas shitkickers kicking the shit out of each other more often. E. Rams vs. Chiefs. St. Louis vs. Kansas City. An intrastate rivalry that doesn't do much for anyone? Why so? F. Florida Trifecta. When Florida/Florida St./Miami U used to play a round robin it was college football at is finest..for awhile...until the SEC team chickened out of playing Miami. Wouldn't a Miami/Tampa/Jacksonville round robin be entertaining? G. Ravens vs. Eagles. Only 101 miles separate the two cities. Seems like a natural to me. H. Cincinnati vs. Indianapolis. Only 112 miles separate these two towns. They are closer to each other than they are to any of their division rivals. I. I am not sure if the Atlanta/Carolina/Tennessee connections hold any significance to those towns other than to say that they are all in the South. Is that enough to make a rivalry? Any others? Thoughts on all this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gipper Posted January 4, 2013 Report Share Posted January 4, 2013 Of course the one main factors that keeps some of these potential rivalries apart is because these teams are in different conferences. Now, I have never been in favor of the "East/West" Divide that the likes of the NBA and NHL use to decide championships. I have always preferred the NFL/MLB way. However I recognize that doing it the NFL/MLB way does mute what could be some serious rivalries...like the intercity New York or Bay Area. Same with some intrastate ones (KC/St.L...Pitt/Philly...Ravens?Redskins) etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
b86b Posted January 5, 2013 Report Share Posted January 5, 2013 Rock Solid Defense?? Not sure we watched the same team this season.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Browns149 Posted January 5, 2013 Report Share Posted January 5, 2013 Why is everybody so enamored with these so called rivalries? I get the stoolers, and cincy rivalries, but we had better "rivalries" against the Broncos in the 80's, or the Lions, in the 50's.............. Those games "MEANT" the world. A game aginst the ravens in Dec when we are playing fo a draft pick.............means nothing Rivalies only mean something when there is something worth playing for. The Cowboys vs 49ers was great in the 80's and 90's, but now who wants to see Romo lose another game he NEEDS to win? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richiswhere Posted January 5, 2013 Report Share Posted January 5, 2013 Wasn't the Browns and Giants a real big rivalry back when they were in the same conference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Browns149 Posted January 5, 2013 Report Share Posted January 5, 2013 Wasn't the Browns and Giants a real big rivalry back when they were in the same conference. EXACTLY. To me, we have 2 maybe 3 "RIVALS" We have 2 rivals for sure. stoolers and bungles. The ratbirds are only a rival because we were them, and Modell screwed us. Granted I LOVE IT when we beat the ratbirds, but it is the ULTIMATE beating the stoolers, and it is right up there beating the bungles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VaporTrail Posted January 5, 2013 Report Share Posted January 5, 2013 The Browns don't have any rivals outside of the Bengals. Sorry to state facts, but the Ravens and Steelers still look past us. I look forward to a competitive team getting us out of this status quo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Browns149 Posted January 5, 2013 Report Share Posted January 5, 2013 The Browns don't have any rivals outside of the Bengals. Sorry to state facts, but the Ravens and Steelers still look past us. I look forward to a competitive team getting us out of this status quo. as a season ticket holder. I always look forward to the stoolers and bungles games. Then I look for the ratbirds ............... and anyone else. I would love to see a bungles @ BROWNS game this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slowburn Posted January 5, 2013 Report Share Posted January 5, 2013 i always considered the Oilers big rivals of the Browns back in the old AFC Central of the 1980's. Earl Campbell was a beast in the early 80's before Rozier took over to a degree. Warren Moon was a gamer and infused a significant evolution of QB play after his migration from the CFL. Coach Bum Phillips added a lot of color to the game as he wore his "kiss-my-ass" cowboy hat. He took shit from nobody. The pinnacle was the 1988 Wild Card game at the snowy muni on Christmas Eve where the Oilers edged the Browns by a point. HOF'er Bruce Mathews dominated for years and it was great watching him playing against his bro Clay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted January 5, 2013 Report Share Posted January 5, 2013 Fender versus Gibson WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FairHooker11 Posted January 5, 2013 Report Share Posted January 5, 2013 Fisher Fazio vs Pick n Pay? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gipper Posted January 5, 2013 Report Share Posted January 5, 2013 Several of you have implied that a rivalry only exists if it means something. I whole heartedly disagree to a point. Obviously a game against any opponent that is very important....say the AFC Conference title games the Browns played vs. the Broncos...mean something. But that does NOT mean that just because a couple of teams happen to be good at the same time that a rivalry is created. Browns vs. Broncos is NOT a natural rivalry. It was only made so by the importance of the event at hand and the presence of the good QBs facing off in Elway and Kosar. Patriots vs. Colts is not a natural rivalry. It was only made so by the importance of the events at hand and the presence of the good QBs facing off in Brady and Manning. Every time a couple of teams meet in the playoffs doesn't make it a rivalry. This afternoon the Bengals and the Texans are going to meet in the postseason for the second year in a row. Are you all going to try to maintain that the Texans/Bangles rivalry is all that? Poppycock. Rivalries are created by natural forces....by proximity and familiarity. Yes, divisional matchups are important. Someone mentioned a Browns/Oilers rivalry. Manufactured in my opinion. Yes, important matchups were contested because both teams were in the same division and had to fight for supremacy. But really, there is no Cleveland/Houston rivalry. There is a Cleveland/Pittsburgh rivalry....because of proximity and history. There is a Cleveland/Cincinnati rivalry because of the sharing of the same state and an intertwined history. There is somewhat of a Cleveland/Baltimore rivalry because of both being in the same division and intertwined history. Certainly history has shown that the father can often have a rivalry with his bastard sons.....going back to King Arthur and Mordred. The Bengals and Ravens are bastards of the Browns, so sure, a somewhat natural rivalry exists there. But not with the Broncos simply because once upon a time they were both good at the same time. The Cleveland/Detroit rivalry is lost because there IS proximity AND a history there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gipper Posted January 5, 2013 Report Share Posted January 5, 2013 Someone mentioned a Giants/Browns rivalry. Yes, there were important games at stake between those two teams during some times of the 50s/60s...though I don't think it was a true rivalry...other than that they bumped heads to win their conference. The one thing that added to that rivalry was the mano a mano match between Jim Brown and Sam Huff. The clash of those two titans meeting on the field of battle did add "spice" if you will to the games. Unlike the quarterback rivalries, a RB/LB matchup involved true grit...against each other. Huff and JB had a clash of pads on many occasions. I am not sure I have seen anything quite like that. Did Mike Singletary and Barry Sanders go head to head? Maybe you can come up with some other good mano a mano matchups. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slowburn Posted January 5, 2013 Report Share Posted January 5, 2013 Several of you have implied that a rivalry only exists if it means something. I whole heartedly disagree to a point. Obviously a game against any opponent that is very important....say the AFC Conference title games the Browns played vs. the Broncos...mean something. But that does NOT mean that just because a couple of teams happen to be good at the same time that a rivalry is created. Browns vs. Broncos is NOT a natural rivalry. It was only made so by the importance of the event at hand and the presence of the good QBs facing off in Elway and Kosar. Patriots vs. Colts is not a natural rivalry. It was only made so by the importance of the events at hand and the presence of the good QBs facing off in Brady and Manning. A rivalry is nothing more than a competition betweren two teams. Now, if two teams are in the same division and play twice per year then the intensity of that rivalry increases. A rivalry can't be quantified merely based on geographic proximity and/or history The intensity of the rivalry is solely determined by the efforts put forth by those involved in the competition. Fans and media love to discuss why a rivalry has increased or decreased, exists or doesn't exist, by factors totally removed from the fundamental definition of a rivalry. I see nothing wrong with that. It allows the media to bring in revenue; fans to have something to talk about at the bar and internet posters to exert opinions that are sometimes on point and often complete twaddle. Your viewpoints, counselor, favor the latter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VaporTrail Posted January 5, 2013 Report Share Posted January 5, 2013 Okay, so then let's pose the questions to some of our resident Steelers fans. Would you consider the Browns to still be a rival of the steelers since 1999? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob806 Posted January 5, 2013 Report Share Posted January 5, 2013 Gipper, I disagree with your opinion about the Browns-Oilers. Granted, the Oliers weren't much of a threat to any AFC Central foes for a long time, but around 1978-1995 those were some great games- usually low scoring slugfests. I was a kid when Robert L. Jackson knocked Earl Campbell's teeth out. Other rivalries I remember as a kid were the Vikings-Cowboys, Steelers-Raiders, Raiders-Dolphins. One of the greatest games I ever saw was when Stabler was falling down & heaved a pass to Clarence Davis to beat the Dolphins in the playoffs- it was huge, as Miami was so dominant (I think it was the 1974 playoffs, 28-26 Raiders won, and spelled the end of Miami's dynasty/great run of the early 70s). Atlanta-New Orleans is one of the league's best rivalries, but not talked about a lot. Personally, I love the Browns-Steelers & Browns-Bengals games the best. I also like the NFC North rivalries, although the Vikings & Lions moving indoors kind of ruined it a bit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richiswhere Posted January 5, 2013 Report Share Posted January 5, 2013 Several of you have implied that a rivalry only exists if it means something. I whole heartedly disagree to a point. Obviously a game against any opponent that is very important....say the AFC Conference title games the Browns played vs. the Broncos...mean something. But that does NOT mean that just because a couple of teams happen to be good at the same time that a rivalry is created. Browns vs. Broncos is NOT a natural rivalry. It was only made so by the importance of the event at hand and the presence of the good QBs facing off in Elway and Kosar. Patriots vs. Colts is not a natural rivalry. It was only made so by the importance of the events at hand and the presence of the good QBs facing off in Brady and Manning. Every time a couple of teams meet in the playoffs doesn't make it a rivalry. This afternoon the Bengals and the Texans are going to meet in the postseason for the second year in a row. Are you all going to try to maintain that the Texans/Bangles rivalry is all that? Poppycock. Rivalries are created by natural forces....by proximity and familiarity. Yes, divisional matchups are important. Someone mentioned a Browns/Oilers rivalry. Manufactured in my opinion. Yes, important matchups were contested because both teams were in the same division and had to fight for supremacy. But really, there is no Cleveland/Houston rivalry. There is a Cleveland/Pittsburgh rivalry....because of proximity and history. There is a Cleveland/Cincinnati rivalry because of the sharing of the same state and an intertwined history. There is somewhat of a Cleveland/Baltimore rivalry because of both being in the same division and intertwined history. Certainly history has shown that the father can often have a rivalry with his bastard sons.....going back to King Arthur and Mordred. The Bengals and Ravens are bastards of the Browns, so sure, a somewhat natural rivalry exists there. But not with the Broncos simply because once upon a time they were both good at the same time. The Cleveland/Detroit rivalry is lost because there IS proximity AND a history there. So if we go by your criteria the Denver can't have a rivalry, Seattle can't have a rivalry, Kansas City only rivalry could be St. Louis, Dallas only rivalry could be Houston, Miami only rivalry could be Tampa Bay and Jacksonville. Its not just proximity and familiarity you need to add importance as well and you only need 2 of the 3 for a rivalry. If Proximity was the number 1 thing you needed for a rivalry then Denver, Seattle, Kansas City, Dallas and Miami have no division rivalries. How about the Raiders and Steelers in the 70's Vikings and Rams in the 70's As mentioned before the Cowboys and 49ers Giants and Browns 15 times in 16 years one of them was representing the East conference in the NFL Championship game Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tampadawgs Posted January 6, 2013 Report Share Posted January 6, 2013 Two hot rumors just hit the Cleveland Twitter-sphere. First, SportsRadio 94 WIP’s Brain Startare out in Philadelphia has a potentially dynamite rumor for Cleveland Browns fans: Brian Startare@brianstartare Sources tell me Chip Kelly and the eagles are close to an agreement on a 5 year deal. If I'm right I'm golden. If wrong my source is fired 5 Jan 13 Reply Retweet Favorite The Plain Dealer’s Mary Kay Cabot just retweeted his rumor about Oregon head coach Chip Kelly closing in on a five-year deal with the Philadelphia Eagles. As Cabot had just pointed out, the Eagles and Kelly were running late on their scheduled lunch — he had not yet began his dinner appointment out in Arizona with the Browns. Mary Kay Cabot@MaryKayCabot #Browns not meeting with #Oregon's Chip Kelly yet because he's still with the #Eagles. 5 Jan 13 Reply Retweet Favorite Meanwhile, Ian Rapoport of the NFL Network remains a must-follow on the case, as he added these new details about the Browns’ continued pursuit of Syracuse coach Doug Marrone: Ian Rapoport✔ @RapSheet Source: #Browns met with #Cuse's Doug Marrone again. Yesterday, looked like job was Kelly's. Today Browns trying to figure out their choice 5 Jan 13 Reply Retweet Favorite Ian Rapoport✔ @RapSheet Asked two sources whether the #Browns like Chip Kelly or Doug Marrone more: "They are deciding." Was told neck-&-neck. #Staytuned 5 Jan 13 Reply Retweet Favorite Rapoport appeared to be very careful to clarify that the Browns are still deciding who their favorite candidate is. We’ll keep you updated with the latest. But if Startare’s report is true, it could be a heartbreaker for many Cleveland fans. But regardless, Rapoport’s rumor indicates the Browns still aren’t as set on either one of the candidates just yet. I called this last month!!!! look it up, just saying Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tampadawgs Posted January 6, 2013 Report Share Posted January 6, 2013 Everyone should be happ y we wont have 16 helmets and 16 jerseys and 16 pants and shoes and socks... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Buffalo Posted January 6, 2013 Report Share Posted January 6, 2013 Your all a bunch a idiots. Would you rather have Kelly or a guy who went .500 in the Big East on his career. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tampadawgs Posted January 6, 2013 Report Share Posted January 6, 2013 I called Kelly to the Esagles over a month ago, because he is REALLY good friends with the GM. I had no Idea who Monroe was until 2 weeks agao Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Couch Pulls Out Posted January 6, 2013 Report Share Posted January 6, 2013 Fuck the Browns. They literally cannot do a single fucking thing right. It is statistically impossible for them to fail this hard, yet they always do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tampadawgs Posted January 6, 2013 Report Share Posted January 6, 2013 We might have been a 500 coach with The Orangemen, but he was the OC with the Saints 2006-08 where he was 5th in tital Offense in 06, 12th in 07, and 1st in 08.... Just saying, we also won 2 bowl games as well Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BadNewsBrowns Posted January 6, 2013 Report Share Posted January 6, 2013 He didn't call plays in NO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tampadawgs Posted January 6, 2013 Report Share Posted January 6, 2013 Dont know the answer, but how do you know that. Because Sean Peyton called the plays??? I have no idea Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DawgEatSteel Posted January 6, 2013 Report Share Posted January 6, 2013 Fuck the Browns. They literally cannot do a single fucking thing right. It is statistically impossible for them to fail this hard, yet they always do. yeah im like in shock right now.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hunt Daddy Posted January 6, 2013 Report Share Posted January 6, 2013 Fucking pissed. That being said we've seen a ton of fake rumors today already, so who knows. It was reported that Kelly and Haslam/Banner were at dinner and lawyers would be present. Now it never happened and he's close to a deal with the eagles. Who fucking knows what's happening. All I know is we're going to get the short end of the stick again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.