should pre-superbowl NFL championships count

[dawgman]

the same as superbowl championships? I think so... but for some reason it doesn't garner the same kind of recognition as a superbowl championship. Any thoughts?

[Lefty48197]

1. Absolutely!

That way, the Packers' 12 NFL championships sounds much more impressive than their measley 3 Super Bowl Victories. In fact, their first two super bowl victories weren't even called super bowls, because the term wasn't used until SB #3.

[dawgman]

2. I agree just because there wasn't an AFL around

for the NFL champ to play doesn't take any legitemacy from the NFL champ. It was still the best team in the world.

[Awsi Dooger]

3. The 49er fans are too petrified to count them

Their 5 Super Bowls become comparatively insignificant, if the '20s through mid-'60s are deemed to have actually taken place.

The AFL did not even exist until 1960. No one took it seriously for years beyond that.

Of course they count. Lombardi's best Packer team was '62, long before the merger or Super Bowls. Lombardi would not be a legend, and his name not emblazoned on the Super Bowl trophy, if his career was judged solely by the wins over Kansas City and Oakland. Those were upstart teams and primarily a relief to get past.

Who could possibly suggest that the Ice Bowl win would not be memorable, or treated as a championship, if it had taken place a couple of years earlier, prior to the first NFL/AFL Championship Game? And I suppose George Halas or Sammy Baugh or the Colts/Giants '58 OT classic didn't even exist.