Negro League stats

[RyanChristiansen]

Wasn't giving the "new" Browns the old Browns' name/uniform/history a condition of Cleveland ponying up for an expansion club? Sort of a "we're sorry" gift from the league to the city?

Whatever the reason, I agree it was nonsensical. The new Washington Senators began play the same season the old Senators began playing in Minnesota. The new team (now the Rangers) just started from scratch, as it probably should be.

The Twins now fly the Washington Nationals/Senators championship banners in their stadium, because that is part of their history. I know that the new Washington Nationals have tried to co-opt the Twins franchise's history, but the Twins are starting to do more now with regards to the Senators.

[Bryan]

Although the NFL and some people in this forum pretend otherwise, the 1946-1995 Browns and Ravens are the same franchise. The 1999 to current Browns is a different franchise. That is reality.

Wasn't giving the "new" Browns the old Browns' name/uniform/history a condition of Cleveland ponying up for an expansion club? Sort of a "we're sorry" gift from the league to the city?

Yes, and then in actuality Matt Stover had to be traded from the new Browns to the Ravens (or something like that).

[JohnTurney]

Wasn't giving the "new" Browns the old Browns' name/uniform/history a condition of Cleveland ponying up for an expansion club? Sort of a "we're sorry" gift from the league to the city?

Yes ... actually it was part of the Ravens' "moving away" agreement. Browns records and everything remained in Cleveland. They had a bunch of stuff shipped to the HOF for safe-keeping. The Browns history stayed, Ravens got to go in anticipation that the Browns would get the next expansion team.

No one could no through all that stuff, either, at leat at first.

Oddly, if you get a 1996 Ravens media guide ... look at the records section ... they used Colts stuff ... Passing leader? Unitas, receiving? Raymon Berry.

I always wondered who gave the direction to do that. "Sine Cleveland kep our stuff, we'll use Colts' stuff" kind of thinking. So two teams had the same
career stats --- Colts and Ravens.

I cannot remember how long Colts records were in Ravens media guides, maybe a year or two of three ... too lazy to look it up. Colts PR guy didn't like it ... I talked to him about it.

[NWebster]

No issue with them being included in the aggregate counting stats but it's the rate stats that are the problem. Currently the leader in single season batting averages has that on 136 plate appearances. That's basically a month of MLB play, I believe he played in 30 games.

Not putting words on people's mouths but I can see objecting to their inclusion without wanting to whitewash what happened in history. Sample size matters in statistics, take two different presidential polls one samples 136 people another 502 (which I believe is the current MLB minimum) which do you believe?