It helps if my two cents are in as well…(in no particular order)
NFL
Packers
Cowboys
Giants
Chiefs
Steelers
49ers
MLB
Red Sox
Cubs
Cardinals
Dodgers (in every incarnation)
Giants (in every incarnation)
Yankees
Tigers?
NHL
The Original Six plus the Oilers
NBA
Celtics
Lakers
Bulls (ONLY because of Jordan)
Pistons
Knicks (Commissioner Stern should just replace the NBA Jerry West logo with the Knicks logo…It’d be easier)
I agree that most of these lists are too long, but we disagree a bit on the specifics.
MLB - Agreed, nobody can touch the Yankees (as much as it pains me to say it). Next would come the Cubs, Red Sox, Giants, and Dodgers, but there is a Grand Canyon sized gap between those teams and the Yanks.
NBA - Same as above: replacing “Yankees” with “Celtics”. Add the Lakers and … well, really just the Lakers, to the B-list.
NFL - Steelers and Browns. The Rooney family in Pittsburgh is truly a “Pillar” of the NFL, as was Paul Brown in Cleveland. Honorable mention to the Packers and Giants.
NHL - Not being a hockey fan, I can only go by which teams have the most appeal to the non-fan (me). Those would be the Rangers and the Canadiens.
NCAA Football - Notre Dame is in a class by itself. USC and Alabama can battle it out for a distant second place.
NCAA Basketball - North Carolina (Dean Smith) and UCLA (John Wooden): one pillar for each end of the country.
NCAA Basketball: I don’t know that Duke really deserves to be on that list. They didn’t win a national title until 1991, and prior to The Lizar… I mean Coach K taking over, they weren’t in quite the same league as Kentucky, Michigan State, UCLA, UNC and Kansas.
Any MLB list that doesn’t include the Cardinals is insane.
I’m with you on the Steelers, it’s tough to set them apart from the Cowboys, but Rooney was huge. Paul Brown was a hell of a guy, but he also started the Bengals and the Browns left Cleveland to be replaced by a dismal expansion team. The Browns are out without any debate.
Any discussion of the pillars of the NFL start and end with George Halas and the Chicago Bears. They were everything the Steelers and Browns were except for more. The Giants are in the hunt because of Mara, but his career pales next to Halas’, and the team didn’t have the prolonged greatness of the Bears.
As much as it pains me to defend Duke (having gone to NC State), they certainly deserve to be on that list (and definitely over Michigan State). Look at the all-time “winningest” teams. There’s Duke at #4, behind just Kentucky, UNC and Kansas. Final Four appearances? 3rd with 14, only two behind UNC and UCLA (and 5 of which came before K arrived in Durham). Championships? 5th, with 3 (and more than Kansas). If I had to make the list for college basketball, it would probably be:
Judging from my handle, I’m sure you can guess where my sympathies lie, but this list looks right to me. That said, if UNC wins the title this season - and considering how loaded we’re gonna be, it’s a distinct possibility - I might elevate the Heels to No. 2 alone. Though I loathe UK, its overall excellence through all eras of college basketball, and the fact that it leads in total NCAA wins gives the Cats the No. 1 spot.
I respect UCLA’s dominance from 1964-1975, but to me, the Bruins are tainted by a) Sam Gilbert’s chicanery during their reign of terror and b) the fact they did little from 1975-1995 (one title in 95, a title appearance in 80, a Final Four in 76). Yes, UCLA made it to the title game this past season (in a season in which the talent pool in NCAA bball was as paltry as any season I remember), but got punked in the title game. From 1995-2006, that makes UCLA’s resume about as good as Georgia Tech’s.
There’s no denying UCLA’s program is amazing, and what it did from 64-75 will never be equalled. John Wooden was the greatest college basketball coach ever, and I say that as someone who thinks Dean Smith ought to be beatified. But I take Wooden’s quaint homilies about virtues and Pyramids of Success with more than a little grain of salt.
Perhaps you don’t remember the national shit storm that hit in 1995 when the Browns moved to Baltimore. The 1999 incarnation hasn’t been good yet, however, as I recall the NY Football Giants, Pittsburgh Steelers, SF 49ers, Chicago Bears et al, have all had lenghty periods of suckiness too.
And that makes them a pillar how?
Paul Brown split time between two franchises and was fired from the Browns. The Browns had a very short period of success. The simple fact of the matter is that the team left the city and the team there now is not the team that has any of those championships. You simply are not a pillar if the team is moved and replaced. Any argument otherwise is insane. The Dodgers are at least the same franchise, not a replacement franchise, and have been established in LA for an extended period of time. I’m still not sure they count, but their case is a hell of a lot more solid than the Browns. Public outcry or not.
Neglecting the whole relocation storyline, everything about the Browns pales in comparison to the Bears, Packers and Giants. They are even below the second tier with the Cowboys, Redskins, Steelers and Raiders. The Browns would fall into a third tier with the 49ers and Dolphins. I’m sorry, pimping the Browns here smacks or blatant homerism, Clevelanders care but the rest of the nation doesn’t.
Are we counting franchises that have moved stadiums as well? You could see Al Davis as moving stadiums, not necessarily cities becaose of their proximity.
I don’t think that relocation is the kiss of death for this discussion. If it is, we can start looking at the Lions as a pillar of the NFL.
Also, this is going to end up as a list of team Q’s hall of famers versus a list of team F’s hall of famers.
The Browns had great success from 1950 through 1969, a period of twenty years, winning 4 NFL championships during that period, and that excludes the 4 championships they won before in 1946-49 immediately before they joined the NFL and proceeded to trample the defending NFL champion in their first game. From 1964-72 they made the playoffs 7 out of 8 years, and that excludes 1963 when they went 10-3-1. True, from 1973-95 they were mediocre, and since 1999 they’ve been lousy, but that doesn’t mean they aren’t as much of a pillar as the Bears, Packers or Giants.
Are we arguing history or mystique?
Lambeau used to have mystique, especially in the playoffs, but that’s worn off. Would that mean that Lambeau is out?
You’re not even talking about the same team. Some pillar.
Sorry, but they’re simply not a pillar franchise. Nobody outside of Cleveland cares about the Browns.
If you don’t believe me, ask yourself; what happened to the NFL when the first Browns team moved to Baltimore? Cleveland fans cursed them and got all upset… and the NFL just carried on as it always had, making more and more money every year, just as it had when Baltimore had lost ITS team to Indianapolis. The loss of Cleveland as an NFL city didn’t bother the NFL one bit outside of Cleveland.
As I said before, I am unconvinced the NFL has pillar franchises at all - this is a league that doesn’t even need a team in Los Angeles. But if it does have pillar franchises, the Cleveland Browns 2.0 are sure as hell not it. They’re about as important as Jacksonville.
For NCAA football, it’s hard to narrow down to five, because you can easily justify any of the teams that are tops in historical winning percentage:
Michigan
Notre Dame
Texas
Alabama
Oklahoma
Ohio State
Nebraska
USC
Tennessee
Penn State
NCAA Baseball is probably easier. If I had to pick 5:
Texas
USC
LSU
Miami
Stanford