What a victory!

[GMU Steeler]

Originally Posted by wwhickok

Your entire opening post is idiotic outside of Reed being one of the greatest Safeties in NFL history and your Randy Moss comment.

So I guess we have something in common ;) Get back in your carseat, we still own you in the playoffs. ;)

Oh and I NEVER said anything about Ben being an upstanding role model.

Dude, the guy who made the Reed comment and this guy aren't the same guy.

[GMU Steeler]

Is there anything lamer than acting like your victory was divinely inspired? I mean shit. I hate the Ravens but they earned that Super Bowl and that's more than many Ravens fans could say after SBXL about the Steelers. Another thing, Ravens fans need to stop using 1996 as a starting point. Your team wasn't an expansion team. You were moved in to Baltimore from Cleveland. I know the Browns 2.0 have the history and records but please stop acting like 1996 is the starting point of this because it's just revisionist nonsense.

[wwhickok]

Originally Posted by GMU Steeler

Dude, the guy who made the Reed comment and this guy aren't the same guy.

Lol at me. That makes more sense.

[GMU Steeler]

Originally Posted by wwhickok

Lol at me. That makes more sense.

Heh. Shit happens.

[charlesk]

So by that definition the Ravens won 4 championships back before 1969. The superbowl era was not the start of the modern league championship. During the SB run there were three players that were still on the Ravens team that had played for the Browns. Three, one of them being the kicker (Stover). No coaches, no management. All different. Sounds like a total reboot. Other people claim the Ravens legacy should be that of the Baltimore Colts before they moved. If that was the case then they hold 4 championships as well. We are all comparing apples to oranges here. Even early Superbowls are in a different category than these are now. Back in the 70's when the Steelers and the Dolphins were dominating you stayed with the team you started with. There was no free agency. Into the 80's and even the early 90's you could expect problems if you wanted to switch teams. Some collusion between the owners is my thought on that, much like Baseball in the 80's. So a dynasty was much easier to build and keep together back then. And love or hate (don't care I wasn't alive yet) the 70's Steelers were a dynasty. However the NFL today is one of far greater parity and the era of free agency (and salary cap) has forever changed the game. In the current NFL it is far harder to win on a consistent basis than ever before. In the current era the number of SB's for the AFC North is 4; two for the Ravens and two for the Steelers.

Originally Posted by GMU Steeler

Is there anything lamer than acting like your victory was divinely inspired? I mean shit. I hate the Ravens but they earned that Super Bowl and that's more than many Ravens fans could say after SBXL about the Steelers. Another thing, Ravens fans need to stop using 1996 as a starting point. Your team wasn't an expansion team. You were moved in to Baltimore from Cleveland. I know the Browns 2.0 have the history and records but please stop acting like 1996 is the starting point of this because it's just revisionist nonsense.

[JeromeBetties63]

Originally Posted by charlesk

In the current era the number of SB's for the AFC North is 4; two for the Ravens and two for the Steelers.

Good, so you can quit acting like our annoying little brother.

[GMU Steeler]

[QUOTE=charlesk;1083332]So by that definition the Ravens won 4 championships back before 1969. The superbowl era was not the start of the modern league championship. During the SB run there were three players that were still on the Ravens team that had played for the Browns. Three, one of them being the kicker (Stover). No coaches, no management. All different. Sounds like a total reboot. Other people claim the Ravens legacy should be that of the Baltimore Colts before they moved. If that was the case then they hold 4 championships as well. We are all comparing apples to oranges here. Even early Superbowls are in a different category than these are now. Back in the 70's when the Steelers and the Dolphins were dominating you stayed with the team you started with. There was no free agency. Into the 80's and even the early 90's you could expect problems if you wanted to switch teams. Some collusion between the owners is my thought on that, much like Baseball in the 80's. So a dynasty was much easier to build and keep together back then. And love or hate (don't care I wasn't alive yet) the 70's Steelers were a dynasty. However the NFL today is one of far greater parity and the era of free agency (and salary cap) has forever changed the game. In the current NFL it is far harder to win on a consistent basis than ever before. In the current era the number of SB's for the AFC North is 4; two for the Ravens and two for the Steelers.[/QUOTE
I actually don't disagree with you on a lot of these points. It's complicated though because as you say, some will claim the old Browns records and some will claim the Baltimore Colts. I just feel you can't act like the Baltimore Ravens in 1996 were an expansion team and ignore that you were moved in from Cleveland. Yes the management and coaches were different when you won your first SB but then again, that's what happens when a team is built form the ground up from a rebuilding team which is what the Ravens did pretty much as soon as they started in B-more. That's all. SImple as that. The Ravens are a successful team and deserve credit for their win on Sunday night but I don't like the revising to suit an agenda. It would be like if Steelers fans wanted to wipe out or dismiss the team's shitty record from 1933-1971.

[Blackout]

Originally Posted by tony hipchest

Did he really just compare Ray Lewis to Joseph and the coat of many colors?

I guess that makes Big Ben Moses.

Troy Polamalu can be King Josiah.

[GMU Steeler]

Originally Posted by Blackout

Troy Polamalu can be King Josiah.

Keisel can be Samson?

[charlesk]

The free agency issue in the NFL now (pluses and minuses to it) has totally changed everything. This pains me to say but that is why I think the three in four years for the Pats nine years ago or so was incredible (I don't hate them like some people but I do think they run up the score on a lot of people and BB has a real nasty disposition and Brady is a whiner). Tough to see that happening again in the near future.

[QUOTE=GMU Steeler;1083336]

Originally Posted by charlesk

So by that definition the Ravens won 4 championships back before 1969. The superbowl era was not the start of the modern league championship. During the SB run there were three players that were still on the Ravens team that had played for the Browns. Three, one of them being the kicker (Stover). No coaches, no management. All different. Sounds like a total reboot. Other people claim the Ravens legacy should be that of the Baltimore Colts before they moved. If that was the case then they hold 4 championships as well. We are all comparing apples to oranges here. Even early Superbowls are in a different category than these are now. Back in the 70's when the Steelers and the Dolphins were dominating you stayed with the team you started with. There was no free agency. Into the 80's and even the early 90's you could expect problems if you wanted to switch teams. Some collusion between the owners is my thought on that, much like Baseball in the 80's. So a dynasty was much easier to build and keep together back then. And love or hate (don't care I wasn't alive yet) the 70's Steelers were a dynasty. However the NFL today is one of far greater parity and the era of free agency (and salary cap) has forever changed the game. In the current NFL it is far harder to win on a consistent basis than ever before. In the current era the number of SB's for the AFC North is 4; two for the Ravens and two for the Steelers.[/QUOTE
I actually don't disagree with you on a lot of these points. It's complicated though because as you say, some will claim the old Browns records and some will claim the Baltimore Colts. I just feel you can't act like the Baltimore Ravens in 1996 were an expansion team and ignore that you were moved in from Cleveland. Yes the management and coaches were different when you won your first SB but then again, that's what happens when a team is built form the ground up from a rebuilding team which is what the Ravens did pretty much as soon as they started in B-more. That's all. SImple as that. The Ravens are a successful team and deserve credit for their win on Sunday night but I don't like the revising to suit an agenda. It would be like if Steelers fans wanted to wipe out or dismiss the team's shitty record from 1933-1971.