$heriff Tom
Administrator 
Groom ba ya ya ya
Posts: 16,173
|
Post by $heriff Tom on Jan 27, 2009 19:20:58 GMT -5
Yes, this blurb headline in USA Today flat out asks, "Steelers : Better than Yankees?"
For the record, I say Yankees, surely. But here is their point, including a shot at the Yankee spending ways.
"Super Bowl XLIII marks the Steelers 7th Super Bowl (all in the last 34 years) which leaves them one behind the Cowboys for the record.
They're bidding Sunday for a record 6th Super Bowl title.
So is it fair to say they are the best franchise in sports?
Thats the question ESPNS David "Dit" Fleming posed, and he suggests their remarkable run elevates them past the Cowboys, NY Yankees, Boston Celtics, and any other franchises in North America. (SHERIFF TOM NOTE - wheres the Canadians?)
"The stats definatly favor the Yankees, I know. They've got a gazillion titles (26) in 109 years, but nothing since 2000. The Steelers could have 6 in the past 43, giving them 14% of their sports titles as compared to 24% for the Yanks.
You cant buy titles in football the way you can on the diamond. Parity in the NFL, plus the economic constraints of a hard salary cap, make it at least twice as hard to win the Lombardi trophies."
The Steelers have been to the playoffs 24 of the last 37 seasons, 12 of the last 17, and played in 7 AFC Champ games.
|
|
MSBNYY
Administrator
El Guapo
Posts: 15,545
|
Post by MSBNYY on Jan 27, 2009 21:58:46 GMT -5
Um, the NFL existed before the Super Bowl. The Yankees have 6 titles since 1977. That's 6 in 31 years.
|
|
|
|
Post by Chris on Jan 28, 2009 12:25:39 GMT -5
Yeah, no shit.
What a joke.
The Yankees have won 24% of all championship titles available to them, and that is spanning over a century. That stat is astounding to me.
|
|
|
|
Post by 9 on Jan 28, 2009 12:48:14 GMT -5
|
|
$heriff Tom
Administrator
Groom ba ya ya ya
Posts: 16,173
|
Post by $heriff Tom on Jan 28, 2009 12:48:20 GMT -5
Yes, but many of them were purchased, is the contention.
|
|
|
|
Post by Chris on Jan 28, 2009 13:02:24 GMT -5
Well, when they come up with a payroll-to-winning-percentage ratio and actually factor that in to putting a numeric value on the "quality" of a championship, we'll talk then.
But for now, this Steeler-honk who wrote this drivel needs to shut the fuck up.
|
|
MSBNYY
Administrator
El Guapo
Posts: 15,545
|
Post by MSBNYY on Jan 28, 2009 15:12:59 GMT -5
There's no such thing as buying a championship. You have to win one on the field. No matter what. Payroll does not guarantee anything other than a high payroll.
|
|
|
|
Post by thecaptain15 on Jan 28, 2009 19:18:48 GMT -5
That buying a championship arguement is crap the years they won they were at the top of the payroll but the difference was miniscule like a million or two not like the last couple years....And even so no one wanted to buy this team from CBS in the 70s either..they had their chance because there are many other business men and owners out there richer than Steinbreener (especially back then and Yankees aside)........
|
|
|
|
Post by grover on Jan 29, 2009 0:37:45 GMT -5
Rubbish. Prior to the Superbowl, the Steelers have no NFL titles.
The Giants have 7 titles, Bears 9 and Packers 12. If pre-Superbowl doesn't count then neither does WW2.
|
|
|
|
Post by grover on Jan 29, 2009 0:40:40 GMT -5
Rubbish. Prior to the Superbowl, the Steelers have no NFL titles.
The Giants have 7 titles, Bears 9 and Packers 12. If pre-Superbowl doesn't count then neither does WW2.
|
|
|
|
Post by Chris on Jan 30, 2009 13:33:48 GMT -5
And if this jackass is going off his championships vs payroll criteria, then the Montreal Canadiens should be AMERICA'S TEAM.
|
|
|
|
Post by IronHorse4 on Jan 30, 2009 13:57:22 GMT -5
Hey gang,
The Steelers have been around since 1933, and, as Grover mentioned, they didn't have a single championship before the merger. 30+ years with nothing. Also, the Steelers won their first 4 Super Bowls before the era of free agency. While it's true that the Yankees won their first 20 championships before the era of free agency, they still won it with different teams all the while. Lou Gehrig wasn't there for 60 years. Babe Ruth wasn't there for 60 years. Neither was Mickey Mantle or Joe DiMaggio. Meanwhile, the Steelers won the 4 Super Bowls with the same damn team, and then they went to a whopping 1 Super Bowl in the next 25 years.
The Steelers may compare to the Yankees in terms of national fan base, but so do the Cowboys. I don't know who has more fans nationwide, but I do know that there is no doubt that the Yankees are the most storied sports franchise nationwide, and they are in the running worldwide. Two football teams vying for that label, but only one baseball team.
|
|
|
|
Post by Chris on Jan 30, 2009 14:01:34 GMT -5
I would even question the idea that the Steelers compete with the Yankees, in sheer numbers of fans, on the national scene.
I bet the Steelers don't have as many national fans as the Yankees, the Cubs, the Red Sox, or even as suggested, The Cowboys.
Hell, the Raiders, as embarrassing as a franchise as that is, probably have more national fans.
|
|
|
|
Post by IronHorse4 on Jan 30, 2009 14:06:42 GMT -5
Yes, the Steelers do.
They'll show that on Sunday.
Every mid-major and above city in the U.S. has a Steeler bar. I don't mean like a place where a few Steeler fans watch the game. I mean a Steeler bar.
I can remember an example Laura gave years ago (Nettles can probably speak to it as well) where there was a Cowboy bar down the street from a Steeler bar in Hoboken, and that Steeler bar was so overcrowded that the Steeler fans took over the Cowboy bar, too.
But really, Steeler fans are allllll over the place. It's obscene, really.
|
|
|
|
Post by Chris on Jan 30, 2009 14:08:16 GMT -5
That surprises me.
Are there THAT many Pittsburgh transplants around the country, or do they just appeal to a lot of out of town fans?
|
|
|
|
Post by Chris on Jan 30, 2009 14:10:12 GMT -5
HAHAHA! Check it out.... The Steel Pit, off the 210 freeway in Tujunga (L.A. outskirts) www.steelpit.com/ |
|
|
|
Post by IronHorse4 on Jan 30, 2009 14:25:39 GMT -5
No, there aren't that many Pittsburgh transplants. There are, however, that many bandwagoners that jumped on in the 70s. You think all Cowboy fans are from Dallas?
|
|
|
|
Post by Chris on Jan 30, 2009 14:31:17 GMT -5
No, but I guess the Cowboys just seemed so much more high profile to me.
|
|
|
|
Post by IronHorse4 on Jan 30, 2009 14:37:11 GMT -5
That's because the Steelers didn't do shit in the 90s while the "Triplets" were winning titles. Steelers are just getting back to prominence for the casual fan with their title a few years ago. Plus, the Cowboys market better. But the Steeler fans are there. Most of them are assclowns, but they are there.
|
|
|
|
Post by Chris on Jan 30, 2009 14:55:02 GMT -5
"But the Steeler fans are there. Most of them are assclowns, but they are there."
Hmmm....see "Raider Fans"
|
|
|
|
Post by 9 on Jan 30, 2009 16:45:41 GMT -5
I will say one thing for Steelers fans, and it pains me to say this as a Cowboys fan, but it's the truth: Pittsburgh fans are FAR more loyal to their team than Dallas fans. I went to Eagles @ Cowboys on Thanksgiving the year the Cowboys were 1-15 (the Bounty Bowl), and regardless of what the box score says, there were no more than 30,000 people in Texas Stadium.
|
|
