Bottom 3 NFL franchises of all time?

SU Nittany Tide said:
Dolphins? They have two super bowls, the only undefeated team in the super bowl era, and one of the best quarterbacks of all time.
Click to expand...
Yes, but they done anything outside of the three years they haven’t been relevant, which is why he puts the Cardinals on there. I am not saying they are the same at all. Just trying to find the parameters when the Cards are the worst organization ever by a mile.
 
Bengals
Browns
Lions

Even when the Bengals had good teams in the last 30 years their own ineptitude with stockpiling headcases blew it all up for them.

Toss up with the Browns and Cardinals but the Cardinals have at least done SOMETHING since the turn of the century, but the Browns could be on the way to getting out of that.
 
Jets
Lions
Bengals
 
ojb81 said:
right, and the browns used to be a perennial powerhouse in the 50's and early 60's. really, the browns didn't really become the joke that we've known them to be, until they came back to the NFL in 1999. those early 90's browns teams weren't really all that bad, and they were pretty good in the 80's, and not too awful in the 70's. they don't really deserve to be on your list if we're talking "all-time worst"
Click to expand...
Really, the Browns don't even belong in this list because they are a newer expansion team than the Jaguars and Panthers. Those Browns you are talking about are now known as the Baltimore Ravens.
 
1) Bengals - Have never won any NFL titles
2) Cardinals - Been playing for 100 seasons, but only have 2 league titles and haven't won in 70 years.
3) Lions - Have arguably been worse than the Cardinals recently (Cards have won their division 3 times and reached the Super Bowl since the Lions last won their division in 1993), but they have four NFL titles and more trips to the postseason all-time (17 to 10) over Arizona.
 
Bill O'Brien's Chin said:
Really, the Browns don't even belong in this list because they are a newer expansion team than the Jaguars and Panthers. Those Browns you are talking about are now known as the Baltimore Ravens.
Click to expand...
Good point
 
Lions are by the most inferior NFL team too date.....

Last time they won a Championship was back in 1957 and since then have won ONE
playoff gsme since......

Side note (dumb question):

If posters here can talk about the Browns being more succesful than a few other teams cause they have won a Championship back in t7,then does this mean the Bears are the 2nd best franchise ever because Bears have won 9.....?

I think its a fair question.....
 
Bill O'Brien's Chin said:
Really, the Browns don't even belong in this list because they are a newer expansion team than the Jaguars and Panthers. Those Browns you are talking about are now known as the Baltimore Ravens.
Click to expand...
Technically true but the Browns use both separate franchises in their franchise records, etc.
 
Wood20ks said:
Lions are by the most inferior NFL team too date.....

Last time they won a Championship was back in 1957 and since then have won ONE
playoff gsme since......

Side note (dumb question):

If posters here can talk about the Browns being more succesful than a few other teams cause they have won a Championship back in t7,then does this mean the Bears are the 2nd best franchise ever because Bears have won 9.....?

I think its a fair question.....
Click to expand...
This can’t be accurate. 1 playoff win in the last 63 years?
 
I think, to me, we are at a point in NFL history where there is absolutely no team older than 25 years that has absolutely nothing to show for it.

It then just becomes opinions on whose achievements weigh less due to overall weight of what success they had, how long ago it was, etc.

I prefer to weight most for time since the last even decent success. When the losing goes on and on, especially when it is only punctuated by brief success is what stings the most to me.

Lions- it has to be this to me. Yeah, they won championships 60+ years ago. But that just really doesn’t matter now. With the exception of a lot of hope never fully fulfilled in the 90s it has been pretty abysmal season to season.

Chargers- no one is remembering that sole championship in 1963 (probably not an exact moment in time most people were fully absorbing sports championships, anyways). The few highs they’ve had since (early 80s, 90s, LT years) have been short lived and ultimately not fulfilling.

Browns- Yes, initially on coming into the league, and again in the 60s they were dynastic. But, since then the few highs ended in crushing blows. Then, for the fans to lose the team, and get back something that looks, but maybe doesn’t feel the same. Then....the last 25 years. Painful

(Honorable mention)....Bills- I have to. Yeah...the late 80s/early 90s teams were scary fucking good. But, the four straight crushers in the SB still merits pain. And what followed the next 25 years increases the pain more. They are doing well right now, and they deserve some vindicating success ASAP.
 
ojb81 said:
right, and the browns used to be a perennial powerhouse in the 50's and early 60's. really, the browns didn't really become the joke that we've known them to be, until they came back to the NFL in 1999. those early 90's browns teams weren't really all that bad, and they were pretty good in the 80's, and not too awful in the 70's. they don't really deserve to be on your list if we're talking "all-time worst"
Click to expand...
Yeah, there are only 9 franchises with as many championships as tBrowns. Lions are tied with em at 4.

But a lot of people don’t appreciate anything before they had cable.
 
Guy Incognito said:
You guys should have won that 2014 game, too. Can't believe they picked up that pass interference flag.
Click to expand...
Motherfuckers....

Dez caught that pass the next week too. But like me, tNFL was like Suck It Dallas!
 
Orlando_Eagles said:
I think, to me, we are at a point in NFL history where there is absolutely no team older than 25 years that has absolutely nothing to show for it.

It then just becomes opinions on whose achievements weigh less due to overall weight of what success they had, how long ago it was, etc.

I prefer to weight most for time since the last even decent success. When the losing goes on and on, especially when it is only punctuated by brief success is what stings the most to me.

Lions- it has to be this to me. Yeah, they won championships 60+ years ago. But that just really doesn’t matter now. With the exception of a lot of hope never fully fulfilled in the 90s it has been pretty abysmal season to season.

Chargers- no one is remembering that sole championship in 1963 (probably not an exact moment in time most people were fully absorbing sports championships, anyways). The few highs they’ve had since (early 80s, 90s, LT years) have been short lived and ultimately not fulfilling.

Browns- Yes, initially on coming into the league, and again in the 60s they were dynastic. But, since then the few highs ended in crushing blows. Then, for the fans to lose the team, and get back something that looks, but maybe doesn’t feel the same. Then....the last 25 years. Painful

(Honorable mention)....Bills- I have to. Yeah...the late 80s/early 90s teams were scary fucking good. But, the four straight crushers in the SB still merits pain. And what followed the next 25 years increases the pain more. They are doing well right now, and they deserve some vindicating success ASAP.
Click to expand...
if you only go back 25 years. Then you shouldnt use the words in NFL history.
To me when someone brings up history.
it is either in all of the NFL history. Which means they are talking of teams some of us have never even heard of. (all of the NFL's History)
& then there is Superbowl history.

Anything shorter than Superbowl history IMHO, then the word "in NFL History" shouldnt be used, but whatever time frame the individual actually means.
 
Schmoopy1000 said:
if you only go back 25 years. Then you shouldnt use the words in NFL history.
To me when someone brings up history.
it is either in all of the NFL history. Which means they are talking of teams some of us have never even heard of. (all of the NFL's History)
& then there is Superbowl history.

Anything shorter than Superbowl history IMHO, then the word "in NFL History" shouldnt be used, but whatever time frame the individual actually means.
Click to expand...
Maybe somebody else draws the line at 1960.

In which case, your team photos are like the McFly family. When Marty makes out with his mom.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top