Colts to announce new stadium deal

[CaptainHook]

Uh-Oh, Big Red, are you watching MNF?

 

It looks like the St. Louis Rams inducted Eric Dickerson into their Ring of Honor, even though he was a Los Angeles Ram. Interestingly enough, Dickerson is also on the Colts Ring of Honor as well.

[Gunther]

Uh-Oh, Big Red, are you watching MNF?

 

It looks like the St. Louis Rams inducted Eric Dickerson into their Ring of Honor, even though he was a Los Angeles Ram.  Interestingly enough, Dickerson is also on the Colts Ring of Honor as well.

 

633348[/snapback]

 

 

 

I was reminded of this thread as well when they talked about it and showed Dickerson on MNF.

[Big Red]

Look, whatever you guys say, whatever anyone does or whatever any team does with their ring of honor, I can't and will never relate any of the Baltimore Colts with Indy. It's just not going to happen.

 

All around Baltimore you see the business that the old Colts used to own, the places you remember seeing these guys and you read about the places these guys used to hang out and know exactly where they are. At any Ravens home game, you could always look over to the left of the Ravens bench and see Unitas as had his own spot on the sidelines and was at almost every Ravens game. I'll never understand why anyone in Indy would want to act as if Unitas was part of their history when they have Peyton Manning? I'll never understand that.

 

To me it's like the 9 year old who plays right field on a little league team. Sure, he gets a trophy at the end of the year, but does anyone really think he earned it? Any Indy celebration of Unitas is that 9 year old right fielder throwing grass in the air and saying, in his best 'special ed' voice "yeahhhhh, I got a trophy, yeahhhhh". Indy has a great team now and has had a great offense for year. Celebrate that, celebrate Harbaugh and the near trip to the Super Bowl, don't celebrate something that happened 40-50 years ago in a football town far, far away.

 

As far as Peyton Manning saying he thought Unitas would be proud, well I just don't know. I'm sure Unitas would appreciate what Manning has done, but given how much Unitas made a point to publicly 'hate' the Indy Colts and was a true Ravens fan, I'd bet he'd congradulate Peyton without giving any due to the Colts. Just my opinion, but Unitas' feelings towards the Indy Colts where no secret.

 

Call me a crybaby, try to come up with examples of other players, but I'll never believe any major tribute to Unitas belongs anywhere but Baltimore or Canton.

[Jrick35]

Your arguments are so full of contradictions it isn't even funny.

 

You say it is wrong for an Indy Fan to think of Johnny Unitas as a part of Colts History but then you say it is ok for a Ravens fan to think of Unitas as a part of Ravens History?

 

That's ludicrous. Johnny Unitas never played for the Baltimore Ravens. The Baltimore Ravens have no connection to the Colts at all. Unitas may not like the fact that the Colts moved to Indy, and that's his perogative (sp), but that does not change the fact that he is still a part of Colts history.

 

Then you say we're not supposed to be proud of something that happened in Colts history 40 or 50 years ago, as if it doesn't matter anymore, and yet here you are protecting the same history so doggedly for the Ravens? A history that doesn't even belong to the Ravens. Why is it ok for you to be proud of something that happened 40-50 years ago but not us?

 

I'm not going to discuss the Special Ed reference because that was wrong on a ot of levels but mostly to all special ed children in the world.

 

But the biggest contradiction of all is when you tell Colts fans to celebrate Manning and Harbaugh and the AFC Championship Games. Yet again here you are trying to lay claim to Unitas being a part of Ravens history rather than be satisfied with the current Ravens team and history. A history that includes a Super Bowl win. Why aren't you celebrating that instead of tryingt o claim Unitas as a Raven?

 

The point is Red, as I have said before, Johnny Unitas is a part of the History of the city of Baltimore, not the Ravens. He is also a part of the history of the Colts, not the city of Indy. But as a part of the history of the Colts, Colts fans can look back proudly at the time that Unitas was a Colt.

 

And the fact that you or the Great Mr. Unitas are unhappy with the fact that the Colts left Baltimore to go to Indy doesn't change any of that.

[Big Red]

Trick, Unitas is part of Baltimore Football History. As the Ravens are our current team, that is who he related to. Unitas went to Ravens games, owned businesses in Baltimore, lived in Baltimore and was always seen around Baltimore. Nothing whatsoever to do with Indy. If the Colts and Ravens had invited Unitas to do an event on the same day, I think everyone knows which one he'd do without a second thought and which one he'd laugh at. I'm just telling you the way it is.

 

As far as Unitas and history goes, there is zero connection to Indy. Again, that's just the way it is. If INDY Colts fans want to try to make Unitas part of their history, go ahead. The majority of the football world will look at you as if you where Timmayyyy!!!!! Living a lie!!!!!! Read this before saying it's a contradiction. INDY Colt fans have no connection to Unitas or anything of relevance done by the Colts prior to the move. Maybe you could make an arguement that they could relate to anything done in the few years before the move since the same players may have been invovled, but as that was an Robert Irsay team, it most likely bit ass and there was nothing to be proud of.

 

Just because other cities did not start new like Baltimore did with the Ravens doesn't mean I can't think of them as semi-retarded for not doing so. I just can't see any logic in a citizen of a proud city wanting to claim or 'honor' achievements that occured somewhere else. I'm sure Rams fans clapped when Dickerson was honored, but come one, do you really think any fan really thought it was a St. Louis honor? If the Ravens honored Jim Brown one day, I'd feel retarded for being there that day.

 

I wonder if I could take your arguement and say that Manning is part of our history since he is a Colt, they used to play here and we should share. Afterall, if I love the Baltimore Colts and they are the same 'team' and Manning has done great things for them, why not put a statue of him in downtown Baltimore?

 

 

This is going to be a never ending arguement. I think you are retarded (at least on this matter) and I'm sure you think I'm retarded.

[Jrick35]

I'm sure Rams fans clapped when Dickerson was honored, but come one, do you really think any fan really thought it was a St. Louis honor?  If the Ravens honored Jim Brown one day, I'd feel retarded for being there that day. 

 

633677[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

Here is the problem with your logic or the lack thereof.

 

Adding Dickerson to their ring of Honor was not a St. Louis Honor it was a RAMS Honor. Nobody thinks of St. Louis when you talk of Dickerson but they do think of the RAMS.

 

You are mis-construing the difference between the History of a City and the History of an organization.

 

Which of these statements are true and which is false.

 

1. Johnny Unitas is one of the greatest QB's in Colts History.

 

2. Johnny Unitas is one of the greatest QB's in Ravens history.

 

3. Johnny Unitas is one of the greatest QB's in the history of Football in Baltimore.

 

4. Johnny Unitas is one of the greatest QB's in the history of Football in Indy.

 

Obviously numbers 1 & 3 are true, while numbers 2 & 4 are false.

 

The fact that number 1 is true gives the Colts organization the right to honor or dishonor Unitas, regardless of where they are located. Because he is undeniably a part of Colts History.

 

The fact that number 3 is true gives the city of Baltimore the right to honor or dishonor Unitas in any way it see's fit.

 

The fact that numbers 2 & 4 are false means that the city of Indy and/or the Ravens organization would have no need to honor Unitas in any way as he is not a part of their respective histories.

[Big Red]

Get this through your head, I understand that 1 & 3 are true. However, the fact that #1 was established in Baltimore, DECADES before the move is my point. Sure, the Colts have a tie to Unitas, but again, Indy fans would (to me) look like retards going off about Unitas. To my knowledge, the Colts have not done anything regarding Unitas, which I agree with as Unitas made it clear that was his wish. How about we agree to start throwing sheet at each other should the Colts do anything for Unitas? My bet is that will never happen.

 

This thread will bring a nice smile to my face when I touch the feet of Unitas on the way into the stadium to watch my Ravens spank the Dolphins this Sunday. We already have a statue of Unitas in Unitas Plaza outsite of our stadium, and touching the statue for luck on the way in has become a new Baltimore tradition. I have no doubt that a Manning statue will someday hold the same place of honor outside of Indy's new statdium once Manning has retired.

[phenom]

I understand Big Red, I wouldn't want my team to be hanging onto the coattails of another franchises best players.

 

I never liked Jerry Rice and I hope the Raiders do nothing to honor him as a Raider. If he helped the Raiders win so be it, but I ain't about to go buy his jersey.

 

 

This poses some interesting questions,

 

Will Joe Montana be in the Chiefs Hall of Fame

 

Will Marcus Allen be in the Chief Hall of Fame

 

Will Emmitt Smith be in the Cardinals Hall of Fame

 

Will OJ Simpson be honored by the 49ers

 

Will Marshall Faulk go in as a Colt or a Ram

 

Will the Titans put up an Earl Campbell monument

 

Will Tampa Bay put up a Steve Young statue

 

When Favre retires the Falcons can do a promotional tour for giving him his start

 

 

 

That's why there is a Hall of Fame. If you want to appreciate a players accomplishments you go there.

 

Teams that try to promote their team with a player who played their best years with another franchise are pretty desperate. That's all it is is marketing. No real connection..............

[Jrick35]

I understand Big Red, I wouldn't want my team to be hanging onto the coattails of another franchises best players.

 

I never liked Jerry Rice and I hope the Raiders do nothing to honor him as a Raider.  If he helped the Raiders win so be it, but I ain't about to go buy his jersey. 

This poses some interesting questions,

 

Will Joe Montana be in the Chiefs Hall of Fame

 

Will Marcus Allen be in the Chief Hall of Fame

 

Will Emmitt Smith be in the Cardinals Hall of Fame

 

Will OJ Simpson be honored by the 49ers

 

Will Marshall Faulk go in as a Colt or a Ram

 

Will the Titans put up an Earl Campbell monument

 

Will Tampa Bay put up a Steve Young statue

 

When Favre retires the Falcons can do a promotional tour for giving him his start

That's why there is a Hall of Fame.  If you want to appreciate a players accomplishments you go there. 

 

Teams that try to promote their team with a player who played their best years with another franchise are pretty desperate.  That's all it is is marketing.  No real connection..............

 

633874[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

I actually agree with you Phenom but then again what you mention is different than what Red is saying. Plus he keeps contradicting himself.

 

Red is saying that Unitas is a part of Ravens History and that he is not a part of Colts history and that is simply absurd.

As the Ravens are our current team, that is who he related to. Unitas went to Ravens games,...

He then says,

Sure, the Colts have a tie to Unitas,...

So is he or is he not a part of Colts History.

 

Regardless of the city that the team is in, Unitas is a part of Colts history and he is not a part of Ravens history. How could he be? The Ravens history starts in 1995. but he is definitely a part of the History of the city of Baltimore. So any way that he is honored in Baltimore is acceptable and proper.

 

I have actually already agreed that putting up a statue of Unitas in Indy would be in bad form,

Ok Red, I agree with you & Hook that putting the Unitas Statue up in Indy might be bad form.

although I think a Statue somewhere inside the stadium would be awesome.

 

But for Red to say that Johnny Unitas is a part of Ravens History is simply wrong. Is he a part of Baltimore History? Yes. Does it make sense to have a statue of him in Baltimore close to the Football Stadium? Absolutely. Should he be honored for his football exploits in the city of Baltimore? Again, yes. Is he a part of Ravens Football History? NO.

 

Johnny Unitas is a part of Colts History. Much like all of the players you mentioned in your post are a part of the history of each of the teams they have played for?

 

Now should Indy erect a statue of Unitas? I'm on record as saying no. But the Colts organization has the right to do so if they so desire. So does the city of Baltimore. Much as they already have.

[Big Red]

But for Red to say that Johnny Unitas is a part of Ravens History is simply wrong. Is he a part of Baltimore History? Yes. Does it make sense to have a statue of him in Baltimore close to the Football Stadium? Absolutely. Should he be honored for his football exploits in the city of Baltimore? Again, yes. Is he a part of Ravens Football History? NO.

 

633901[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

Total moron.

 

Unitas went to every Raven game, had a blue jersey with a white 19 painted on his spot on the field upon his death, his number is one of only 4 flags paraded out for the National Anthem every game (US, MD, NFL) and has a statue of him at Ravens stadium. Unitas lived in Baltimore, the Ravens are Baltimore football and Unitas declared his love for the Ravens and hatred for the Irsay/Indy Colts. How in your mind is he not tied to the Ravens?

 

Get this through your head. Baltimore = Colts pre move and Ravens. Indy = Colts post move. Unitas = Baltimore NFL history. Indy football history != Unitas.

 

Yes the Colts have a tie to Unitas. Again, for the slow, Indy has no tie to Unitas. Yes, I get that the Colts play in Indy now and U was a Colt. That does not translate to Unitas having any tie to Indy.

 

Go ahead and think Unitas is related to Indy football. You probably think Elvis shot JFK.

[Jrick35]

Total moron.

 

Unitas went to every Raven game, had a blue jersey with a white 19 painted on his spot on the field upon his death, his number is one of only 4 flags paraded out for the National Anthem every game (US, MD, NFL) and has a statue of him at Ravens stadium.  Unitas lived in Baltimore, the Ravens are Baltimore football and Unitas declared his love for the Ravens and hatred for the Irsay/Indy Colts.  How in your mind is he not tied to the Ravens?

 

Get this through your head.  Baltimore = Colts pre move and Ravens.  Indy = Colts post move.  Unitas = Baltimore NFL history.  Indy football history != Unitas.

 

Yes the Colts have a tie to Unitas.  Again, for the slow, Indy has no tie to Unitas.  Yes, I get that the Colts play in Indy now and U was a Colt.  That does not translate to Unitas having any tie to Indy.

 

Go ahead and think Unitas is related to Indy football.  You probably think Elvis shot JFK.

 

635700[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

I don't understand why people have to resort to name calling whenever someone disagrees with them?

 

I especially don't understand it when the person they are calling names is right. Especially when the person doing the name calling proves them right in their posts.

 

I have said all along that the City of Indy has no ties to Unitas but that the Colts do. You say the same thing. So if the Colts have a tie to Unitas they can honor him if they wish.

 

I also said that the City of Baltimore has ties to Unitas. You say the same thing. So if the city of Baltimore wishes to honor Unitas they have that right.

 

The one sticking point we have is Unitas's association with the Ravens. All I have ever said is that Unitas is not a part of Ravens History. And he is not.

 

Now you have gone so far to point out that Unitas declared his love for the Ravens football team. And you have gone so far as to describe the ways that the Ravens have decided to market that association. You also say that Unitas declared his hatred of the Irsay/Indy Colts when he declared his love for Ravens/Baltimore football. You have also changed your argument from Unitas being a part of Ravens "History" to having "ties" to the Ravens.

 

Yes he was a Ravens Fan. But other than marketing purposes for the Baltimore area Unitas is not a part of Ravens History. If you research the history of the Ravens football team you won't find Unitas on any team rosters. He doesn't hold any team records. He didn't lead any Ravens teams to NFL Championships.

 

He is a Fan of the Ravens simply because he hated Irsay and loved the city of Baltimore.

 

You say it is "sad" that fans of the Indy Colts have decided to make a hero of someone that never played in Indy as a Colt. If that is true then how sad is it that you are clinging to Unitas as a Ravens Icon when the only reason he even associated his name with your team is because he didn't like the Irsay family.

 

No I am not a moron. I don't even think you are a moron. I just think you don't get it. Maybe if you actually read my posts you would see what I am saying.

 

Johnny Unitas was and always will be a Colt. No matter where the team is moved to ever again, he is a part of Colts History.

 

Johnny Unitas was and always will be a Historic Baltimore Figure. No matter who comes to Baltimore to play football or how many other teams start a Franchise there, he will always be a part of Baltimore History.

 

Johhny Unitas never was and never will be an Historical Indianapolis Figure.

 

Johhny Unitas never was and never will be a part of Ravens Football History as anything more than a fan or a disgruntled Colts player.

 

If you want to prove me wrong don't do it by calling me names. Do it by presenting me something that shows me when Unitas "played" for the Ravens.

Edited December 30, 2004 by Jrick35

[Jrick35]

Total moron.

 

Unitas went to every Raven game, had a blue jersey with a white 19 painted on his spot on the field upon his death, his number is one of only 4 flags paraded out for the National Anthem every game (US, MD, NFL) and has a statue of him at Ravens stadium.

635700[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

One more question for you in regard to Unitas being a part of Ravens Football History.

 

When did they have Blue & White spamshirts?

[Big Red]

Is Ozzie Newsome part of Ravens history? Although he never played for the Ravens, one could argue that he has been the most important man in the Ravens organization (bigger than Billick, Ray Lewis or anyone else, the man is God).

 

Now, that is an extreme case, but you do not have to play to be part of a team's history. The fact that the Ravens made special accomodations for Unitas, the fact that they showed him at almost every game and that he was always with the team makes him part of the Ravens tradition and history. You have to understand, this city loved the Colts. When we got the Ravens, it was huge. The Orioles became 2nd class citizens overnight. Having Unitas so closely associated with the Ravens was automatic. The NFL was back in Baltimore, all was right with the world. Not having Unitas closely associated with the new NFL team in Baltimore would have been wrong.

 

Now, having said that you do not have to play to be part of a teams history does not translate to Unitas being part of Indy history. Part of Colts history, sure, but not Indy.

 

This entire thread got out of had because someone suggested that there be a statue of Unitas outside of the new statdium in Indianapolis. Now I ask any NFL fan, should that happen? Regardless of what the Colts may technically be able to do, my opinion is that doing so would be moronic and anyone who would think that appropriate would, in my mind, be a ***.

 

I just cannot see where this merits any discussion, much less the pages and pages we've gone over. Nothing 'memorializing' Unitas belongs in Indy and I believe nothing outside of Baltimore (pro career), Pittsburgh (hometown), Louisville (college) and Canton just doesn't make any sense. San Diego, although in my mind not valid, has more of a valid arguement than Indy for a Unitas memorial. This is such an obvious discussion.

[Big Red]

Jebus, I forgot r-e-t-a-r-d is a bad word.

[Jrick35]

Is Ozzie Newsome part of Ravens history?

Yes he is. As a part of their Front Office since the inception of the Ravens franchise it is not extreme at all to think of Ozzie Newsome as a part of Ravens History. But he still remains a part of Browns History as well. The fact that he went on to work for another team in another city does not undo his Browns History. Just like the inception of a new Franchise in Baltimore does not undo Unitas's history with the Colts or the City of Baltimore.

 

Now, that is an extreme case, but you do not have to play to be part of a team's history. The fact that the Ravens made special accomodations for Unitas, the fact that they showed him at almost every game and that he was always with the team makes him part of the Ravens tradition and history. You have to understand, this city loved the Colts. When we got the Ravens, it was huge. The Orioles became 2nd class citizens overnight. Having Unitas so closely associated with the Ravens was automatic. The NFL was back in Baltimore, all was right with the world. Not having Unitas closely associated with the new NFL team in Baltimore would have been wrong.

This paragraph is typical of the contradictions in your argument. You say that "...you do not have to play to be part of a team's history..." and that the Ravens "made special accomodations for Unitas, the fact that they showed him at almost every game and that he was always with the team makes him part of the Ravens tradition and history..." by making these two statements you are admitting that Unitas never played for the Ravens and that his association with the team only exists due to "Special Accomodations by the Ravens" and yet you still think that this nothing-more-than Honorary association makes him a part of Ravens History.

 

And still you deny the right of the team for which he actually played, to honor him simply because they are no longer in Baltimore.

 

The Ravens have simply taken advantage of Unitas's dislike of the Irsay Family and his subsequent adoption of the Ravens Franchise as his new favorite team to market an association with Unitas that never went beyond the association of any fan to any team. The difference is the Ravens wouldn't gain much by marketing their association with fans of less stature than a Unitas. That's why Unitas's Colt Jersey & number was painted on the field instead of the High School Jersey & Number of the poor slob in section 302, Row 25, seat 12 that might have passed away. You know the real Ravens Fan.

 

How can it be ok for the Ravens to honor Unitas but wrong for the Colts to honor him in Indy?

 

And still I have refrained from lowering myself to calling you any names.

Edited December 30, 2004 by Jrick35

[Gunther]

This is one of those arguments where one will not be swayed by the other. While it is fine that the opinions are posted, just found an interesting thing with Unitas.

 

The NFL seems to have given the Ravens credit for statistics, if you look here you will see that. I find that just odd, why didn't they just say Baltimore Colts instead of Baltimore Ravens?

 

Also, when Unitas passed away, Peyton Manning was not allowed to honor Unitas by wearing high top shoes (or whatever), the NFL said doing something like that to honor Unitas would only be allowed by the Baltimore Ravens.

 

So I have not added anything much to this debate, but I found it interesting.

 

Now in the excerpt for one of the books by Unitas, Peyton Manning has a foreword for the book (can't remember the name of it right now) and Manning said that while Unitas was no fan of the Indianapolis Colts, Unitas would take time to talk to him a little bit when the Indianapolis Colts were at Baltimore for a game and Unitas even gave him some praise for his playing style. So we can all agree that Johnny Unitas was a kind man.

 

The NFL has never come out and specifically said that Indianapolis has no claims on the Baltimore Colts history (as evident by looking at Indianapolis' ring of honor).

 

If you want to know my opinion, it is that the Colts history is just that, Colts history. Unitas favored the Ravens because of his dislike for Irsay and maybe many other reasons. This is not going to change what the Ravens or Indianapolis Colts do for honoring the Colts history and the debate will rage on for ages.

 

My worthless 2c on the matter.

[Big Red]

Yes he is. As a part of their Front Office since the inception of the Ravens franchise it is not extreme at all to think of Ozzie Newsome as a part of Ravens History. But he still remains a part of Browns History as well. The fact that he went on to work for another team in another city does not undo his Browns History. Just like the inception of a new Franchise in Baltimore does not undo Unitas's history with the Colts or the City of Baltimore.

 

636408[/snapback]

 

 

 

With you so far

 

This paragraph is typical of the contradictions in your argument. You say that "...you do not have to play to be part of a team's history..." and that the Ravens "made special accomodations for Unitas, the fact that they showed him at almost every game and that he was always with the team makes him part of the Ravens tradition and history..." by making these two statements you are admitting that Unitas never played for the Ravens and that his association with the team only exists due to "Special Accomodations by the Ravens" and yet you still think that this nothing-more-than Honorary association makes him a part of Ravens History.

 

636408[/snapback]

 

 

 

Wrong. We just disagree on this point. Unitas is part of the Ravens history because he is part of Baltimore football history. The Ravens and the fans consider the Baltimore Colts, Baltimore Ravens and Baltimore NFL history one and the same. Different team name, different colors, same history. This is just how it is in Baltimore. Having played for the Baltimore Colts, Unitas is welcome as part of the Baltimore Ravens family. Again, that is just how it is in Baltimore.

 

And still you deny the right of the team for which he actually played, to honor him simply because they are no longer in Baltimore.

 

636408[/snapback]

 

 

 

No, I disagree again. The Indy Colts are not the Baltmore Colts in my opinion. Same nickname, same colors, same owner, totally different tradition. While they can technically do it, in my mind the Indy Colts have zero ties to Unitas. I understand those outside of Baltimore may not see this, but that is just how it is here. The Indy Colts belong to Indy, but the Baltimore Colts legacy belongs to Baltimore. Again, Unitas wanted nothing to do with the Indy Colts.

 

The Ravens have simply taken advantage of Unitas's dislike of the Irsay Family and his subsequent adoption of the Ravens Franchise as his new favorite team to market an association with Unitas that never went beyond the association of any fan to any team. The difference is the Ravens wouldn't gain much by marketing their association with fans of less stature than a Unitas. That's why Unitas's Colt Jersey & number was painted on the field instead of the High School Jersey & Number of the poor slob in section 302, Row 25, seat 12 that might have passed away. You know the real Ravens Fan.

 

636408[/snapback]

 

 

 

I guess I am 'lower' than you because I think this statement makes you a moron. Again, the Baltimore Colts, Baltimore Ravens and Baltimore NFL history are one and the same. That's how it is here in Baltimore. Unitas is as great a Baltimore player as Ray Lewis is. As the Ravens are current Baltimore NFL Football, Unitas was always welcome and a part of that on going history. Unless you've lost a team and had it replaced with an other, you may not be able to understand this.

 

How can it be ok for the Ravens to honor Unitas but wrong for the Colts to honor him in Indy?

 

636408[/snapback]

 

 

 

It's just a question of common sense. Unitas made it very obvious that he hated the Indy Colts. To consider putting a statue of him in Indy doesn't make sense. He never played there.

 

And still I have refrained from lowering myself to calling you any names.

 

636408[/snapback]

 

 

 

:pat-on-head: Good for you, have a cookie.

 

 

Answer me this, had the Ravens not changed their name and remained the Browns, would you think it ok to put a statue of Jim Brown in downtown Baltimore?

[CaptainHook]

The NFL seems to have given the Ravens credit for statistics, if you look here you will see that. I find that just odd, why didn't they just say Baltimore Colts instead of Baltimore Ravens?

 

636453[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

That is a misprint. All of Unitas records are in the Colts record book, I have it right in front of me. NFL.com is probably not set up to recognize a Baltimore franchise not called the Ravens.

 

Also, when Unitas passed away, Peyton Manning was not allowed to honor Unitas by wearing high top shoes (or whatever), the NFL said doing something like that to honor Unitas would only be allowed by the Baltimore Ravens.

 

636453[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

Manning was not allowed to wear black shoes because the Colts had already submitted their color scheme for their uniforms. You must submit them a year in advance, and they cannot be changed. All players must wear the same color shoes. The Colts were wearing white shoes that year. Manning was denied because he wanted to wear black shoes to honor Unitas, but that would go against the color scheme. Can you believe that? Is this the NFL or a fashion show?

Edited December 30, 2004 by CaptainHook

[Gunther]

That is a misprint.  All of Unitas records are in the Colts record book, I have it right in front of me.  NFL.com is probably not set up to recognize a Baltimore franchise not called the Ravens.

Manning was not allowed to wear black shoes because the Colts had already submitted their color scheme for their uniforms.  You must submit them a year in advance, and they cannot be changed.  All players must wear the same color shoes.  The Colts were wearing white shoes that year.  Manning was denied because he wanted to wear black shoes to honor Unitas, but that would go against the color scheme.  Can you believe that?  Is this the NFL or a fashion show?

 

636481[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

I thought the Baltimore Ravens had to be a misprint as well, but it was curious because I noticed that they had Eric Dickerson's stats correctly listed as far as teams.

 

Thank you for clearing up the "NFL's denial to Manning wanting to honor Unitas issue" (I had a feeling you would step up and offer your input).

[Jrick35]

Answer me this, had the Ravens not changed their name and remained the Browns, would you think it ok to put a statue of Jim Brown in downtown Baltimore?

 

As a part of Browns History, as associated with the stadium the Baltimore browns would be playing in yes.

 

Away from the stadium and just in the middle of downtown, no.

[Big Red]

As a part of Browns History, as associated with the stadium the Baltimore browns would be playing in yes.

 

Away from the stadium and just in the middle of downtown, no.

 

636549[/snapback]

 

 

 

 

We disagree, and I am willing to bet any Browns fan that reads this will not only disagree with you, but also call you names, blow their nose at you and fart in your general direction.

[WaterMan]

We disagree, and I am willing to bet any Browns fan that reads this will not only disagree with you, but also call you names, blow their nose at you and fart in your general direction.

 

636581[/snapback]

 

 

 

People are Browns fans? :ducks:

[Jrick35]

I think I may have discovered the reason this argument will never end. You consider your own opinion to be of more importance, more valid and of higher integrity than that of the NFL's and actual fact, at least in regard to this situation.

 

As a Ravens fan, I'm happy that we started our history from scratch in 96.

As a Baltimore NFL fan, I'm always going to consider the Colts history prior to 84 an exclusive Baltimore thing.

You're always going to consider pre-1984 Colts History as an exclusive Baltimore thing even though the NFL doesn't.

 

Unitas is part of the Ravens history because he is part of Baltimore football history. The Ravens and the fans consider the Baltimore Colts, Baltimore Ravens and Baltimore NFL history one and the same.

You feel this way but again the NFL doesn't.

 

You are arguing off of your emotional reaction to the Irsay family moving the Colts from Baltimore to Indy. I am arguing off of the information I found in the Historical Section of each teams Official Team Website.

 

I guess I wasn't aware that an emotional opinion carried more weight in an argument than fact, my bad.

 

The fact of the matter is, according to the NFL, the Colts and the Ravens the history of the Indianapolis Colts includes the time that the team spent in Baltimore. Of course the fact that your opinion doesn't support that and the fact that Johnny Unitas didn't like Irsay means the NFL, The Colts and The Ravens are all wrong because Big Red says so.

 

And despite an overwhelming urge to do so, still no name calling on my part. I'm so proud of me. And even your opinion to the contrary can't change that.

Edited December 30, 2004 by Jrick35