Steeler fans know pre-Super Bowl era existed.....

For any valid points you have made, this is pure failure.  Baseball has been called America's pastime forever and was the most popular sport in this country, hands down, until the 1990's when a shift occurred.

I'm talking about right now my brother......1920s NFL couldn't compare to baseball. 

That's fair enough.  Also that's the point here, there has been a shift but it is never valid to discount championships at any point in time in any sport.  The NFL shouldn't be any different.  Again, it's the only sport where people try to seperate another era and act like it didn't count.  Well, except Eagles fans of course, who will be quick to remind anyone about their last NFL championship in 1960.  Good for them, because it counts damn it!!

^ What he said.

Agreed. I think some championships like the Browns AAFC ones where they beat the Dayton Triangles may not be worth as much but if it was so easy back then the Steelers would have won at least once.

Because Super Bowl is the biggest sporting event of them all. World Series and NBA Finals don't come close.......

The Super Bowl is NOT the biggest sporting event of them all.  In all fairness, soccer's World Cup draws many more rabid fans than the NFL and has many more television viewers.  The Super Bowl is big in the US.  The world cup is big...well...in a lot of places.  The Super Bowl takes a back seat to the World Cup.

Championships are big regardless of when they're played or what they're called.  It doesn't matter what some pinhead squeeler fan thinks.  Did they have teams in the 30s and 40s?  Did they compete?  Did fans pay to watch them play?  Did they play for a league title?  Then it meant something.  Especially to those who lived it.  Only an idiot would think those games meant any less.  Just beause you seem to lean in favor of the NFL doesn't mean the World Series, the Stanley Cup, the run for the roses or the Green Jacket is any less of a notable accomplishment.  To suggest otherwise only shows your ignorance.

As much as I hate to do it, I agree with ATKOOL's basic premise, because I agree with little of what he has to say... Basic logic tells you that it is more difficult to beat 31 teams than it is to beat 10.. Regardless of where you decide to draw the line, your argument will be arbitrary, because all things are not equal. I draw it at the merger, because that seems to be the most equalizing place to do so

I disagree and my reason is simple, talent pool!  Having to field 10 teams with the best players vs 32 teams, the talent pool is going to be diluted. 

Players that make the roster in a 32 team league probably do not even come close to making a team in a 10 team league.

Its just like fantasy football.  Ok, maybe not exactly, but you should get the premise.  The talent pool in an 8 team league is a lot better and deeper than the talent in a 16 team league.

Didn't read the whole thread (just page one) but I don't think you can discredit championships over superbowls, especially if you're using the number of teams argument.  The superbowl era started in 67 and there were 25 teams back then.  But in 1960, there were 21 teams.  So do those championships get discredited because of four less teams?  If you say yes, then you need to also discredit a LOT of superbowls and here's why.

The superbowl of 1994 was won in a year that featured 28 NFL teams.  But in 2002, there were 32 teams.  If you'll discredit the above mentioned championships because of a four team difference you definitely have to discredit superbowls with a four team difference right?  Unless you have an agenda like Aktool does, you have to acknowledge no less than 7 championships if you're using the number of teams argument.

I'll await the hypocrites' responses on this, starting with the OP.


    
    

As much as I hate to do it, I agree with ATKOOL's basic premise, because I agree with little of what he has to say... Basic logic tells you that it is more difficult to beat 31 teams than it is to beat 10.. Regardless of where you decide to draw the line, your argument will be arbitrary, because all things are not equal. I draw it at the merger, because that seems to be the most equalizing place to do so.

While I agree that it is certainly more difficult to beat 31 other teams than it is to beat the 13 other teams in the NFL in 1966, you connot diminsh the accomplishments of other teams simply because it doesn't fit into your personal agenda.

I've had Steelers fans on these boards tell me that it was easier to win before the Super Bowl era because there was no salary cap but teams like the Bears, Giants and Packers had more resources, yet if it was so easy, why couldn't they do it?

I've also had one Steeler fan tell me why the Squealers couldn't win a championship in the 44 years of the NFL before the Super Bowl era by blaming the lack of players during the 3 yrs 8 months of WWII.

I've seen one Steeler fan who said that NFL Championships prior to the Super Bowl era should noly be counted as 1/2 a championship.  When I responded that even doing it that way, the Packers had more than the Steelers, I never heard from him again.

The Steeler fans have an agenda and it doesn't include the pre Super Bowl era because that would mean they would have to acknowledge that there team was a mismanaged, moribound franchise with a penchant for hitting hard and losing.  The beloved Rooneys couldn't win a thing in Pittsburgh until they brought in a Baltimore assistant to show them how a franchise should be run.

Unfortuantely, NFL Championships ARE recognized by the NFL and are still listed in the official records of the NFL.  Therefore, whether they like it or not, the Steelers are 5th behind the Packers, Bears, Browns and Giants.

Actually, that's not the reason why they called it the Super Bowl. 
The game was created as part of a merger agreement between the NFL and its then-rival league, the American Football League (AFL). It was agreed that the two leagues' champion teams would play in an AFL–NFL World Championship Game until the merger was to officially begin in 1970. After the merger, each league was redesignated as a "conference", and the game was then played between the conference champions. Currently, the National Football Conference (NFC) leads the series with 25 wins to 22 wins for the American Football Conference (AFC).

You're Welcome!! 

Actually, the name Super Bowl was coined by Lamar Hunt, naming it after a toy his kids had, which was a "Super Ball"  For those of you who don't remember. a super ball was a red ball that was made of some kind of rubber that would bounce up to an ungodly height. 

The Super Bowl was officially used on the tickets for the first time in 1970 (Dallas-Baltimore)
Prior to that the official name was the AFL-NFL World Championship game.

The merger was officially announced in May of 1969, to take effect the following year. 

I can remember where I was when I heard that announcement.  I remember not liking the fact that my beloved BALTIMORE Colts were going to be in the AFC.  I also remember thinking how much easier it would be to win the championship in the AFC than it was in the NFC since the teams were, by and large, better.

The Super Bowl was officially used on the tickets for the first time in 1970 (Dallas-Baltimore)
Prior to that the official name was the AFL-NFL World Championship game.

Sorry, it was first used on the tickets for game 4 between the Chiefs and Vikings.
But it was still called the AFL-NFL World Championship game

I disagree and my reason is simple, talent pool!  Having to field 10 teams with the best players vs 32 teams, the talent pool is going to be diluted. 

Players that make the roster in a 32 team league probably do not even come close to making a team in a 10 team league.
-
This is retarded. It's like looking at things in some sort of retro retard rear view mirror. The talent pool isn't the same size as it was back in the before electricty football era, it is much bigger, and much better now with so many more feeder systems leading to the NFL than ever were before from more Pop Warner thru more college programs.
-
Not to see that is the height of idiocy.

Didn't read the whole thread (just page one) but I don't think you can discredit championships over superbowls, especially if you're using the number of teams argument.  The superbowl era started in 67 and there were 25 teams back then.  But in 1960, there were 21 teams.  So do those championships get discredited because of four less teams?  If you say yes, then you need to also discredit a LOT of superbowls and here's why.

The superbowl of 1994 was won in a year that featured 28 NFL teams.  But in 2002, there were 32 teams.  If you'll discredit the above mentioned championships because of a four team difference you definitely have to discredit superbowls with a four team difference right?  Unless you have an agenda like Aktool does, you have to acknowledge no less than 7 championships if you're using the number of teams argument.

I'll await the hypocrites' responses on this, starting with the OP.
-
I don't know of these hypocrites of which you speak, but I took that into consideration years ago.
-
What else you got?
-
(Author's note: this was originally posted as a NFL Main Board thread on 10/7/09, but is being reposted here with the update of SB44)

THE DEFINITIVE CHAMPIONSHIP LIST

This is the definitive championship list. It was put together to for once and for all silence the whining about ancient championships against the Trojans and the Spartans and the Hitites, etc. It shows the state of the NFL and the value of winning the championship in the years that they occured. This value is calculated from the level of competing teams in the league as compared to the 32 team league today. It does not count AAC, or AFL Championships. Why? Because they are not the NFL. It does not count NFL "championships" from 1920-1932 because there was no game deciding the outcome, so they don't count. They are worth zero, and although the Giants, Packers and Bears fans may complain, no fans of the Akron Pros, Cleveland Bulldogs, Canton Bulldogs, Frankford Yellow Jackets, or Providence Steam Rollers are going to object. Why? Because obviously those teams like the championships from those years are utterly unimportant as they have no real value. So those just flat out don't count.

From 1933-1965 championships count at the fraction of competition they faced in their league that year compared to the current 32 team league level of competition. For example, there were 10 teams in the NFL in 1933, so that championship counts for 10/32 (0.313) of 1 championship. There were only 9 teams in'35 and '36 and only 8 teams in '43, so those would count for 0.281, 0.281 and 0.250 value respectively.

Calculation Examples

Steelers 0.813 + 0.813 + 0.875 + 0.875 + 1 + 1 = 5.376
Cowboys  0.813 + 0.875 + 0.875 + 0.875 + 0.938 = 4.376
Packers  0.281 + 0.313 + 0.313 + 0.438 + 0.438 + 0.438 + 0.750 + 0.781 + 0.938 = 4.69

The Definitive Comprehensive Championship Equivalents List:

1  Steelers - 5.376
2  Packers  - 4.690
3  Cowboys  - 4.376
4  49ers    - 4.375
5  Giants   - 3.782
6  Redskins - 3.251
7  Patriots - 2.969
8  Bears    - 2.815
9  Raiders  - 2.625
10 Colts    - 2.563
11 Broncos  - 1.876
12 Rams     - 1.657
13 Dolphins - 1.626
14 Browns   - 1.594
15 Lions    - 1.406
16 Eagles   - 1.032
17 Saints  - 1.000
17 Bucs     - 1.000
19 Ravens   - 0.969
20 Chiefs   - 0.813 (tie)
20 Jets     - 0.813 (tie)
22 Cards    - 0.313

Tied at 23rd place: Bengals, Chargers, Jaguars, Texans, Bills, Titans, Vikings, Falcons, Seahawks, and Panthers.

There, you now have been given Wisdom.

 

While it is actually a personal criteria, opposed to an agenda, I can diminish whatever I please... As stated, opinions on this vary, and I do understand both sides of the argument..

Why didn't Sol just say: You're all dumb, Steelers rule!  I mean that effectively the same thing.  As someone who likes to throw out the homer label, that was a fine example right there.  Not educated at all really, unless that education requires wearing some rosey black and yellow glasses.

Why didn't Sol just say: You're all dumb, Steelers rule!  I mean that effectively the same thing.  As someone who likes to throw out the homer label, that was a fine example right there.  Not educated at all really, unless that education requires wearing some rosey black and yellow glasses.
-
NAVY, this list was objective, Steeler SB victories were devalued in the same manner as all other franchises, PLUS, this list is extremely out of date, it was from 2/12/2012, I copied and pasted it to show the demonstration to the other posters objection to SB that were less than the full 32 team competative field. Additionally, the Steelers are no longer at the top of this list, the Packers are.
-
Oh, and you are a knee jerk idiot. That is all.

No, I'm a non-credible short bus rider, get it right Sol.  Back somewhere I asked the question if all sports championships should be pro-rated and valued in the same fashion.  I'm quite certain there would be many Montreal Canadiens, Boston Celtics and New York Yankees fans who would be interested to know that their older championships were only valued at a fraction of a current day championship.  Count this knee jerk idiot as finding that concept, well stupid basically.  A championship is a championship is a championship.  So much easier.  It's so sad that the Pirates have been a baseball laughing stock forever, I'm sure you be one of the innovaters of the sabermetrics movement if you weren't ashamed of your local brand.

No, I'm a non-credible short bus rider, get it right Sol.
-
Don't sell yourself short NAVY, you aren't any old shortbus rider, you are a member of the 4 Shortbus Riders of the Idiotcalypse, the very heralds of EPIC Idiocy.
-
 Back somewhere I asked the question if all sports championships should be pro-rated and valued in the same fashion.
-
And?
-
 I'm quite certain there would be many Montreal Canadiens, Boston Celtics and New York Yankees fans who would be interested to know that their older championships were only valued at a fraction of a current day championship.  Count this knee jerk idiot as finding that concept, well stupid basically.
-
So, too bad for them. My team has devalued championships involved in this as well.
-
 A championship is a championship is a championship.
-
Yes, I agree, a championship is a championship, but they aren't all equal. A car is a car, but no one thinks a 76 Pacer (NFL Championship) is the same as the Bugatti Veyron Super Sport (Super Bowl Wins). Sure they are both cars, but the value is quite different.
-
 So much easier.
-
The last resort of the stupid. "oh, figuring it out is too hard" - NAVY
-
 It's so sad that the Pirates have been a baseball laughing stock forever, I'm sure you be one of the innovaters of the sabermetrics movement if you weren't ashamed of your local brand.
-
Immaterial, I stopped watching baseball in 1992 and I couldn't give a rats ass about it.

Packers  0.281 + 0.313 + 0.313 + 0.438 + 0.438 + 0.438 + 0.750 + 0.781 + 0.938 = 4.69

I know you are trying to block out a few years ago but if this formula is correct shouldn't the Packers get a +1 for beating the Steelers a few years ago which in turn would make them 5.69 which in turn changes

1  Steelers - 5.376
2  Packers  - 4.690

to this


1  Packers - 5.690
2  Steelers - 5.376

And Steelers fans have to find a new way, nice try I give you an A for effort. 

People that think they are worth the same are hilarious homeristic little fools, it's like saying being in charge of the USA is the same as being in charge of San MArino because they are both leaders of a country.
-
LOL!

Immaterial, I stopped watching baseball in 1992 and I couldn't give a rats ass about it.

That's too bad because I'm quite certain you could be another ubergeek that could explain to me in painstaking fashion why Mike Trout deserved the MVP over a guy who won the Triple Crown, possibly baseball's most unique accomplishment. 

I know you are trying to block out a few years ago but if this formula is correct shouldn't the Packers get a +1 for beating the Steelers a few years ago which in turn would make them 5.69 which in turn changes

1  Steelers - 5.376
2  Packers  - 4.690

to this

1  Packers - 5.690
2  Steelers - 5.376

And Steelers fans have to find a new way, nice try I give you an A for effort
-
And I give you an "F" for reading comprehension as I also said this:
-
NAVY, this list was objective, Steeler SB victories were devalued in the same manner as all other franchises, PLUS, this list is extremely out of date, it was from 2/12/2012, I copied and pasted it to show the demonstration to the other posters objection to SB that were less than the full 32 team competative field. Additionally, the Steelers are no longer at the top of this list, the Packers are.