1925 NFL Standings

[TanksAndSpartans]

Thanks @TodMaher. Looks like a glitch - nothing intentional. Probably they don't even care.

@Zero26, remember it wasn't about playing a college team. They played a Notre Dame All-Star team. I believe a lot of the players had been out of football for a season or more. The issue was both Pottsville and Frankford wrongfully assumed it would be a big gate - it wasn't. I believe there was an agreement that the winner of the 2nd Frankford/Pottsville game would get to play the ND team. Pottsville won and then Frankford complained about the game being held in Philadelphia. Carr said not to play it. Pottsville wanted the gate.

I don't think the '25 Cardinals were that good. IMO, it was a fluke good year from a team that was typically around .500. They opened with a loss to Hammond and didn't play Frankford.

I don't think the HOF has done a bad job here - they can't name a league winner. I don't even know how I'd feel if Pottsville somehow got it. I'd be more on the side of not having a '25 champion. There really wasn't one.

[Bryan]

Wait, are you seriously comparing the annual college All Star Game to the Pottsville situation? And did you say the HOF is "supposed to be independent" but "should be expected to go along with historical perspective"?

I'm not sure which is more confusing to me...the fact that players who no longer are in college and who signed pro contracts are still considered amateurs, or the idea that the PFHOF awards league titles even though it didn't exist until 1963. Are all the titles prior to 1963 still in a state of dispute? That would make a great Coffin Corner article.

[Zero26]

Pottsville clearly won the title but they have no voice whereas the Cardinals do. The Cardinals haven't won a championship since the Truman admin(though I guess the NFC title is the same as an NFL championship) even if Bidwill knows he's wrong he's not going to donate a championship to a defunct team on the behalf of the deceased players and followers. I do not expect the NFL to change. If the Cardinals become a dynasty some day I could see a future Bidwell relenting in the name of positive media attention or something but it's a long shot.

The focus should be on changing the opinion of the HOF which is supposed to be independent and should be expected to go along with the historical consensus on this. They are the NFL HOF in practice because the NFL just so happens to be the only serious football league not because they are controlled by the NFL. The NFL isn't going to change their stance for above reasons but I doubt they care enough to retaliate or anything. What are they going to do?

Good news is the centennial is 100 years away that'd probably be the moment to do something commenerating the 1925 team. 74_75_78_79_ brings up a good point. Even if the situation isn't fixed I imagine the people of Pottsville are going to do something.

But yeah the tide against amateurism is as strong as it's ever been everyone should agree on the merits of this case. If we really wanted to be consistant we could strip every NFL champion who participated in the college all star game from 34 to 76 for defiling themselves by playing a college team.

Another idea is a compromise solution with co champs or something so everyone can be happy and Pottsville and Chicago both get acknowledged. Those were both very good teams and it isn't a tragedy if the Cards have a banner for that season. In the title game era runner ups got banners so why not give a 20s runner up one? But yes if the Pottsville side says we shouldn't settle for that we won fair and square can't really argue with that. But it's an idea and maybe Bidwell would be more willing to "do the right thing" if he doesn't lose a banner in the process.

Wait, are you seriously comparing the annual college All Star Game to the Pottsville situation? And did you say the HOF is "supposed to be independent" but "should be expected to go along with historical perspective"?

Ah for some reason I thought it was an amateurism issue because I remember they played Notre Dame. My bad.

And yeah like Bryan said it is odd they name champions decades after they exist but they list champions and would be able to recognize Pottsvilles title(https://www.profootballhof.com/nfl-champions/). In terms of being expected to go along with historical accuracy they are a museum. I feel that's fair to expect of all museums.

[JeffreyMiller]

The Hall of Fame doesn't name champions

[Bryan]

And yeah like Bryan said it is odd they name champions decades after they exist but they list champions and would be able to recognize Pottsvilles title(https://www.profootballhof.com/nfl-champions/). In terms of being expected to go along with historical accuracy they are a museum. I feel that's fair to expect of all museums.

I have a book printed in 1984 called "The Super Bowl Book" produced by The Sporting News. It's a nice book. On the back page, it lists the year-by-year champions of the NFL. Even though I was only 9 years old when I first got this book, I never once thought "Wow, The Sporting News awards the NFL championship every year". What on earth are you talking about?

[TodMaher]

But yeah the tide against amateurism is as strong as it's ever been everyone should agree on the merits of this case. If we really wanted to be consistant we could strip every NFL champion who participated in the college all star game from 34 to 76 for defiling themselves by playing a college team.

The College All-Stars teams of 1934-76 were NOT "college teams." They consisted of players of who had used up all their college eligibility the previous season.

And the point of the Pottsville-Notre Dame All-Star game was not the college eligibility status of the Notre Dame players but where it was played - Philadelphia.

Teams have been stripped of draft picks for "technicalities."

[Zero26]

And yeah like Bryan said it is odd they name champions decades after they exist but they list champions and would be able to recognize Pottsvilles title(https://www.profootballhof.com/nfl-champions/). In terms of being expected to go along with historical accuracy they are a museum. I feel that's fair to expect of all museums.

I have a book printed in 1984 called "The Super Bowl Book" produced by The Sporting News. It's a nice book. On the back page, it lists the year-by-year champions of the NFL. Even though I was only 9 years old when I first got this book, I never once thought "Wow, The Sporting News awards the NFL championship every year". What on earth are you talking about?

I mean look at college football where there's all these different championships with varied levels of recognition. In sports with a playoff system you don't think about that because there's never really any disagreement with playoffs. But otherwise other bodies can label alternative champions there just really isn't a reason to so the concept is foreign.

[rhickok1109]

And yeah like Bryan said it is odd they name champions decades after they exist but they list champions and would be able to recognize Pottsvilles title(https://www.profootballhof.com/nfl-champions/). In terms of being expected to go along with historical accuracy they are a museum. I feel that's fair to expect of all museums.

I have a book printed in 1984 called "The Super Bowl Book" produced by The Sporting News. It's a nice book. On the back page, it lists the year-by-year champions of the NFL. Even though I was only 9 years old when I first got this book, I never once thought "Wow, The Sporting News awards the NFL championship every year". What on earth are you talking about?

I mean look at college football where there's all these different championships with varied levels of recognition. In sports with a playoff system you don't think about that because there's never really any disagreement with playoffs. But otherwise other bodies can label alternative champions there just really isn't a reason to so the concept is foreign.

So the Green Bay Packer Hall of Fame can label the Packers as alternate champions every year from 1921 through 2021?

[Zero26]

No it needs to be a viable claim in a disputed situation. Thinking 93 Auburn Tigers sort of thing. Think the Pottsville v Chicago situation qualifies.

Anyhow clearly no one is on board with this sort of thing. All hail the 25 Cardinals.

Didn't let me quote 3 posts.

[JeffreyMiller]

No it needs to be a viable claim in a disputed situation. Thinking 93 Auburn Tigers sort of thing. Think the Pottsville v Chicago situation qualifies.

Anyhow clearly no one is on board with this sort of thing. All hail the 25 Cardinals.

Didn't let me quote 3 posts.

Few of us dispute that Pottsville was the better team, Zero. But they disregarded Carrs order, and you cant just go back and reverse a championship. It's not that simple