Steeler fans know pre-Super Bowl era existed.....

NAVY, it's not really an issue for anybody except for the Steeler fan who has no interest in acknowledging the part of the past in which Pittsburgh was hopeless, therefore that period of football is less important. While I understand your point FEAR, I believe it's not relevant to this particular thread. Clearly it's more difficult to win with more teams, but the Steelers HAD a franchise competing during the "small pond" era. I can assure you had the Pittsburgh Steelers won multiple titles prior to the SB era this thread would be non-existent. For teams originating in the 60s and 70s your argument holds plenty of merit FEAR. But the Steelers had equal opportunity to pad those championship totals.

NAVY, it's not really an issue for anybody except for the Steeler fan who has no interest in acknowledging the part of the past in which Pittsburgh was hopeless, therefore that period of football is less important. While I understand your point FEAR, I believe it's not relevant to this particular thread. Clearly it's more difficult to win with more teams, but the Steelers HAD a franchise competing during the "small pond" era.  I can assure you had the Pittsburgh Steelers won multiple titles prior to the SB era this thread would be non-existent.  For teams originating in the 60s and 70s your argument holds plenty of merit FEAR. But the Steelers had equal opportunity to pad those championship totals.

They had equal oppurtunity? Best players went to the best teams because they won championships. Where would you go: To the Giants or the Panthers if they were giving the same amount of money? 

Why is football special to this concept?  I mean seriously, should they discount some of the Yankees championships due to the league being smaller then?  Should they get rid of the 60's Celtics championships due to the dearth of what we now consider NBA level talent?  I'm assuming the answer to those is no, so why is the NFL different because they came up with a new way to determine the league champion?  I feel this is a fair question.

Because Super Bowl is the biggest sporting event of them all. World Series and NBA Finals don't come close....... 

Because Super Bowl is the biggest sporting event of them all. World Series and NBA Finals don't come close...

For any valid points you have made, this is pure failure.  Baseball has been called America's pastime forever and was the most popular sport in this country, hands down, until the 1990's when a shift occurred.  In the 80's and 90's when Magic, Bird and Jordan played, the NBA was also more popular than the NFL.  This is the NFL's time, but don't take it as a given that it will remain that way.  Especially with the continued sissification of the game.  Pretty soon in will be a penalty to hit a player anywhere outside of this imbecilic "strike zone".  People wanted to dismiss Pollard's comments during the 2 weeks leading up to the SB, but I think he was probably on to something.

For any valid points you have made, this is pure failure.  Baseball has been called America's pastime forever and was the most popular sport in this country, hands down, until the 1990's when a shift occurred.

I'm talking about right now my brother......1920s NFL couldn't compare to baseball. 

That's fair enough.  Also that's the point here, there has been a shift but it is never valid to discount championships at any point in time in any sport.  The NFL shouldn't be any different.  Again, it's the only sport where people try to seperate another era and act like it didn't count.  Well, except Eagles fans of course, who will be quick to remind anyone about their last NFL championship in 1960.  Good for them, because it counts damn it!!

Because Super Bowl is the biggest sporting event of them all. World Series and NBA Finals don't come close.......

The Super Bowl is NOT the biggest sporting event of them all.  In all fairness, soccer's World Cup draws many more rabid fans than the NFL and has many more television viewers.  The Super Bowl is big in the US.  The world cup is big...well...in a lot of places.  The Super Bowl takes a back seat to the World Cup.

Championships are big regardless of when they're played or what they're called.  It doesn't matter what some pinhead squeeler fan thinks.  Did they have teams in the 30s and 40s?  Did they compete?  Did fans pay to watch them play?  Did they play for a league title?  Then it meant something.  Especially to those who lived it.  Only an idiot would think those games meant any less.  Just beause you seem to lean in favor of the NFL doesn't mean the World Series, the Stanley Cup, the run for the roses or the Green Jacket is any less of a notable accomplishment.  To suggest otherwise only shows your ignorance.