1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

What is the pecking order for NFL franchises?

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by Flying Headbutt, Dec 28, 2010.

  1. Mizzougrad96

    Mizzougrad96 Active Member

    Yeah, but they still packed the place during that time. What would be really interesting to see if that would still be the case if they had five straight losing seasons.

    One player can turn around a franchise. Look at what Manning did in Indy.
     
  2. Mizzougrad96

    Mizzougrad96 Active Member

    I agree about the Cowboys and would put the Redskins right there as well, since they are the No. 2 most valuable franchise in the country.
     
  3. heyabbott

    heyabbott Well-Known Member

    Interesting about the Colts. More than Al Davis, the drunken fool Bob Irsay, in moving the Colts from Bawlmer in the middle of a snowy night, did more to cause angst in fans of many cities than any other owner. The Colts of recent vintage are also an intriguing franchise for their on field success/failure. They won one SB. But have only been in 2 Super Bowls and 3 AFC Championship games despite winning 10 games or more in 10 of the last 11 season seasons, and 12 games or more in the last 7 seasons.
    If Royalty is determined by a team dominating on the field, the Colts are regular season Royalty and Post Season commoners. Was the hiring of Dungy what pushed them over the top into Royalty or the move that kept them in the Upper Middle Class? Was moving Caldwell up that act of a weak Monarch or an insightful move?
    If only for the legacy of the drunken asshat Bob Irsay, I'd keep the COlts from NFL Royalty.
     
  4. Gutter

    Gutter Well-Known Member

    As much as we can credit that to Favre, without Harlan/Wolf/Holmgren none of that is even remotely possible. Especially Harlan, who capitalized on the Packers "experience" and turned it into a revenue generator. He doesn't get nearly enough credit for the current success of the franchise.

    This organization was spinning its wheels with Tom Braatz in control before Harlan took over.
     
  5. Mizzougrad96

    Mizzougrad96 Active Member

    True, but that was offset by making Mike Sherman the GM.
     
  6. Gutter

    Gutter Well-Known Member

    And frankly, most would agree that the turning point wasn't when Brett Favre became the starting QB. It was when Reggie White signed as a free agent, turning the "Siberia of the NFL" into an attractive place to be in the new era of free agency.
     
  7. Gutter

    Gutter Well-Known Member

    I'm referring to off-the-field viability, not the on-field performance.
     
  8. Mizzougrad96

    Mizzougrad96 Active Member

    And how many A-list free agents have the Packers signed since then? Woodson is A-list now, but the Packers were the only team that wanted him that would let him continue to play DB.

    White signing in Green Bay was a fluke. It was a great fluke, but it's not like it led to a ton of free agents lining up and wanting to play at Lambeau. They got a few guys during Favre's glory years, but those were guys who were more interested in getting a ring than they were playing the rest of their careers in Green Bay.
     
  9. Gutter

    Gutter Well-Known Member

    I believe that has more to do with the current GM's philosophy on free agents.

    Free agents wanting to go to a place where they can win? What a novel concept. :D Which all comes back to the point of the new environment installed by Harlan/Wolf/Holmgren.
     
  10. Flying Headbutt

    Flying Headbutt Moderator Staff Member

    The reason I left Dallas and Washington off the royalty list was because of the on-field successes (or lack there of) and the instability elsewhere.

    In terms of Dallas, their off-field success and hype puts it at the top, no question. But the team often proves to be overhyped and Jerry as GM is a constant loser. All the other strings attached make it more of a difficult place to win than it should be.

    For the Redskins, the off-field success is starting to show signs of waning around here. Dan Snyder is fucking up the franchise bad, and the constant shuffling of coaches, GMs, etc. hasn't worked.

    Among the owners those two may be royalty. But in totality, I'll disagree.
     
  11. Mizzougrad96

    Mizzougrad96 Active Member

    I would bet that 25 of the 32 coaches were flown home by private jet.
     
  12. nmmetsfan

    nmmetsfan Active Member

    Dallas is royalty if only because for a team that hasn't won dick in 15 years they continue to be a marquee name with networks and fans. Despite their lack of relevance on the field, there still isn't a more hated/loved team.

    As bad as he's been as a GM, Jerruh's been a terrific marketer.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page