Three in a Row

[rmontro]

I heard someone discussing how, if the Chiefs win the Super Bowl this year, they will have won three in a row. Up until now, no team has won three Super Bowls in a row. And now team has won three NFL championships in a row, except the Packers, who have done it twice.

I like the Chiefs, certainly more than a lot of teams out there, but I've always rooted against teams getting their third consecutive NFL championship, because I want the Packers to be the only team to have achieved that. So I guess I'll be rooting against the Chiefs this year.

 

[OldSchool101]

I heard someone discussing how, if the Chiefs win the Super Bowl this year, they will have won three in a row. Up until now, no team has won three Super Bowls in a row. And now team has won three NFL championships in a row, except the Packers, who have done it twice.

I like the Chiefs, certainly more than a lot of teams out there, but I've always rooted against teams getting their third consecutive NFL championship, because I want the Packers to be the only team to have achieved that. So I guess I'll be rooting against the Chiefs this year.

Interesting.
Especially if it’s a repeat of SB I

 

[sschind]

Interesting.
Especially if it’s a repeat of SB I

Now thats a storyline I could get behind.

 

[weeds]

I like the Chiefs, certainly more than a lot of teams out there, but I've always rooted against teams getting their third consecutive NFL championship, because I want the Packers to be the only team to have achieved that. So I guess I'll be rooting against the Chiefs this year.

Yeah, I'm with you even though it puts us Packers fans on the same plain as Dolphins fans and their undefeated season schtick but, frankly I don't care. The NFL keeps records for a reason.

You listen to a lot of talking heads playing up that "Super Bowl era" angle when talking about the Pack's 3-in-a-row record and 13 World Championship record saying that the NFL only had X-number of teams when the Pack won the majority of their titles, to which I respond -- "It's not the Packers' fault that most of the other teams are expansion franchises and weren't around. Tell that to the East Coast market Yankees and the Celtics and see what kind of response you get....so, shut the f*ck up."

They use this "Super Bowl era" as a line of delineation as if the '65 Packers were less of a Championship team than the '66 and '67 Packers' teams. Pretzel logic at best, simple dumb-*ss ignorant logic to support their narrative at worst.

So...yeah...down with the Chiefs.

 

[El Guapo]

And now team has won three NFL championships in a row, except the Packers, who have done it twice.

I hate when I see this style of stat on ESPN and elsewhere. This is the first time that "X" has ever happened.....since 2016. Hyperbole.

They should have said that only one team has ever won three championships in a row, not that nobody has done it except for....

 

[El Guapo]

They use this "Super Bowl era" as a line of delineation as if the '65 Packers were less of a Championship team than the '66 and '67 Packers' teams. Pretzel logic at best, simple dumb-*ss ignorant logic to support their narrative at worst.

I agree with you, but there is a fair argument the other way. The NFL was more of the stoic ground & pound game until the 1960s. That's when the AFL started and began chucking the ball everywhere. The prolific air attacks of the Chargers, Raiders, and others influenced the NFL even if they were rivals and not yet unified. I found this website below where someone put the stats together. He draws the conclusion that passing yards were similar, but that's because he was lumping all of those years together:

1960s AFL & NFL Team Offensive Statistics

Several years ago I put together a chart showing year-by-year team offensive numbers for each team (AFL & NFL) and totals for the decade. I found it to be pretty interesting. The most illuminating bit for me was how it dispelled the notion that the AFL was a pass-only league, while the NFL was all

talesfromtheamericanfootballleague.com

He provided lots of great data. I looked at the median (instead of the average) because I it mellows out the outliers. When you look at the differences between the leagues in 1960 just after the AFL began and then again in 1969 just before the merger, you see a different story. Highlighted in yellow before you can see how much more the AFL was passing in 1960 versus the NFL. By 1969 the NFL "updated" its game to include more passing (highlighted in green). It did result in more scoring for the NFL but not by much.

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

So there is a reason to argue that the NFL looked different around the time we played the Chiefs in early 1967. It shouldn't diminish any of the accomplishments before or since though, which is where we agree.

 

[weeds]

I agree with you, but there is a fair argument the other way. The NFL was more of the stoic ground & pound game until the 1960s. That's when the AFL started and began chucking the ball everywhere. The prolific air attacks of the Chargers, Raiders, and others influenced the NFL even if they were rivals and not yet unified. I found this website below where someone put the stats together. He draws the conclusion that passing yards were similar, but that's because he was lumping all of those years together:

1960s AFL & NFL Team Offensive Statistics

Several years ago I put together a chart showing year-by-year team offensive numbers for each team (AFL & NFL) and totals for the decade. I found it to be pretty interesting. The most illuminating bit for me was how it dispelled the notion that the AFL was a pass-only league, while the NFL was all

talesfromtheamericanfootballleague.com

He provided lots of great data. I looked at the median (instead of the average) because I it mellows out the outliers. When you look at the differences between the leagues in 1960 just after the AFL began and then again in 1969 just before the merger, you see a different story. Highlighted in yellow before you can see how much more the AFL was passing in 1960 versus the NFL. By 1969 the NFL "updated" its game to include more passing (highlighted in green). It did result in more scoring for the NFL but not by much.

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

So there is a reason to argue that the NFL looked different around the time we played the Chiefs in early 1967. It shouldn't diminish any of the accomplishments before or since though, which is where we agree.

Did the NFL acknowledge that the Green Bay Packers have 3 NFL Championships in a row ... not once but twice? They did? Easy as that.

The NCAA looked different when UCLA strung their Championships together.

The NBA when the Celtics strung theirs together CERTAINLY looked different.

Yeah ... pencil necked number crunches can make numbers dance like an Arthur Murray dance class ...

Still, only one team has 3 in a row -- twice. All the dancing numbers in the world can't change that. I have half a notion that if today's NFL hadn't been so pu**yfied, and these prima ballerinas had to play under the same rules as their predecessors, that this wouldn't even be a topic of conversation.

 

[rmontro]

Shoot, the NFL doesn't even look like when Favre was playing.

 

[Poppa San]

Shoot, the NFL doesn't even look like when Favre was playing.

I've gotten in to watching NFL game highlights on youtube. Sometimes this era games pop up. Watched the Carolina playoff game highlights earlier this week.

 

[Thirteen Below]

I've gotten in to watching NFL game highlights on youtube. Sometimes this era games pop up. Watched the Carolina playoff game highlights earlier this week.

Yeah, I do that sometimes too! It's really a shock to see how completely different the game looked in the Favre era, and during the Cowboys glory days in the 70s and again in the 90s, and Pittsburgh dynasty in the 70s and 80s. The improved athleticism in these 30-40 years is like almost a whole new species of human beings.

The players back then even look small - not just "not as big", but actually small. They practically look like soccer players.

And then when I go back and watch Packer games from the Lombardi dynasty, and remember how massive those men looked to me in the 60s when I was out in the parking lot getting their autographs, it's just like a whole different world.

 

[rmontro]

I've gotten in to watching NFL game highlights on youtube. Sometimes this era games pop up. Watched the Carolina playoff game highlights earlier this week.

Does the NFL even recognize championships from that era?

And then when I go back and watch Packer games from the Lombardi dynasty, and remember how massive those men looked to me in the 60s when I was out in the parking lot getting their autographs, it's just like a whole different world.

A lot of those guys still look big to me, like Nitschke.

 

[OldSchool101]

So from what I can see KC really retooled their Offense. Getting WR,Marquise Brown then WR, Xavier Worthy and TE, Jared Wiley should give Mahomes plenty of ammunition to work with. They did lose an OG to Washington, but selected a good Tackle Suamataia in RD3 plus a 7th Rd OG to balance that.
Resigned DT Chris Jones and kept the majority of their D except I think I LB left.

You can’t ignore just how good KC has been lately. However I can actually say that I believe the Packers as a whole, brought in more help. I think we can give them some trouble. We seem to match up good against them.

 

[Calebs Revenge]

Haha. Y’all aren’t even the second best team in our division let alone playing for a Super Bowl this year.

 

[sschind]

Haha. Y’all aren’t even the second best team in our division let alone playing for a Super Bowl this year.

you have the vikings ahead of us?

 

[rmontro]

Haha. Y’all aren’t even the second best team in our division let alone playing for a Super Bowl this year.

Is this trollishness really necessary?

 

[OldSchool101]

Is this trollishness really necessary?

Yes. There’s a certain amount of naïveté and bravado that comes with the practiced desperation of being a Bears fan. If you hadn’t had a date in 40 years you’d be doing it too!

 

[Calebs Revenge]

Is this trollishness really necessary?

I absolutely am not being a troll.
I 100%, in my soul, believe we are the best team in da NFC North.
I think Detroit is number two. Y’all are number three and the Vikings are number four.

 

[Calebs Revenge]

Yes. There’s a certain amount of naïveté and bravado that comes with the practiced desperation of being a Bears fan. If you hadn’t had a date in 40 years you’d be doing it too!

Like I said, I’ve been quiet over the past couple weeks because there’s really nothing left to say and we’re gonna find out in a few days.

 

[Calebs Revenge]

The thing is a couple of you maybe three have said the Bears could be kind of good.

The problem is if you objectively look at what’s happened over the last three years to off-season you should be scared.

I just saw an old video where at a party Brian Urlacher was stupid enough to challenge Bas Rutten to a fight for an accidental toe step.

Bas apologized and tried to keep it moving, but Brian, being 25 and invincible, and the heralded MLB of the most storied franchise in the existence of the NFL (which we created for your enjoyment) said “eff that…let’s take it outside if you want some?”

Bas responded “Yes….absolutely let’s go right now big boy!!!”
At that point 2 bouncers ran up and grabbed B and told him who he’d challenged……a minute later he(Urlacher) apologized and Bas laughed and said “ok ok” and kept it moving. All class.

The thing is……there are two morals to the story when people think there is only one.

Imagine being Brian Urlacher……Middle Linebacker of the Chicago Bears…. The crown prince of a line that goes back to Singletary, Butkus, Bill George and George Connor (the OG of MLBer’s) too.
You’re in your mid-20s, invincible, dating Paris Hilton and you are constantly tested by idiots in public who just want to see if they can hang with the big grizzly bear.

Brian was 100% in the wrong and apologized but, in his shoes and trying to impress a billionaire…., I couldnt fault the guy.
A very big thank you to Bas Rutten, for not wrecking my guy in 4.6 seconds.

Lessons learned…. don’t judge a book by its cover, and, the pendulum always swings back and y’all have been riding high for 40 years and we got a quarterback now and that thing is gonna start swinging the other way.

Good luck on Friday cause nothing would make me happier if we both were undefeated when we meet later on Nov. 17th IIRC.

 

[rmontro]

The problem is if you objectively look at what’s happened over the last three years to off-season you should be scared.

You know, if you feel good about your team and new quarterback, that's great. But I see no reason why we should be feeling bad about the Packers, much less "be scared".

 

[Calebs Revenge]

Yep. Bc there 40 year nightmare will never end….
I bet Buffalo felt that way for 20+ years looking at Tom Brady over there in New England.
Guess what? Nobody scared of New England anymore.
Don’t get me wrong Jordan Love is a fine quarterback but……well I’ll just let my guy do the talking come Sunday.

 

[El Guapo]

Your guy still has to overcome Matt Eberflus. I'll be happy to be proved wrong, but Eberflus is not the answer to your wild dreams.

 

[Calebs Revenge]

I didn’t think so at first either, but after watching hard knocks, I’m all in on the guy.
Remember, this is a team that lost 14 in a row over two seasons and the good veteran players whose opinion matters never lost faith in Eberflus.

It’s very similar to how in Detroit a few years back everyone said Dan Campbell was an idiot Neanderthal, who wanted to bite kneecaps off…….now he’s the toast of the NFL.

 

[sschind]

You know, if you feel good about your team and new quarterback, that's great. But I see no reason why we should be feeling bad about the Packers, much less "be scared".

That's the whole thing. It's one thing to be excited about your team but to discount another team fans who are excited for many of the the same reasons makes no sense. Moore is great Allen is very good and I think Odunze will be very good but I also think our all four of our top guys have the potential to be just as good or better than any of them. I think the Bears are going to be okay. I think within a couple of years they probably could contend for the division. If Williams and Odunze develop sooner rather than later they could contend sooner rather than later but to come on and say that there's a best team in the division to me is just foolish. On top of that CR is simply ignoring what Love and the Packers did the last half of the season. I suppose if you're not a fan it's easy to just say it was luck but I don't think that's being realistic or objective.

 

[Poppa San]

…well I’ll just let my guy do the talking come Sunday.

TBH, the only Sunday's that will really answer anything are if the ones from Thanksgiving Day into February are relevant to the team. Else they are playing out the string.