Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

Colts Use To Be The Seahawks?


Recommended Posts

MIAMI 150px-Miami_Seahawks_logo.png           

 

Today's Colts info search, has taken me from Colts.com, to NFL.com, taking me to the land of wikipedia. It's so interesting to see how the NFL has grown over the years, and how it's culture has changed from the years of the AAFC (All-American Football Conference) to the National Football League.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miami_Seahawks

 

http://www.colts.com/team/history/history-highlights.html

Link to post
Share on other sites
The Dayton Parallelograms had a couple of cheerleaders that played on the team.  The Triangles only had three ways to beat ya!   :)

 

Here are the former cheerleaders...boy could they hit....

 

  1950_cheerleaders.jpg

I also heard Dayton led the league in delay of game penalties as the cheerleaders had a difficult time leaving the huddle. Dayton then became the first to run the no-huddle offense!
Link to post
Share on other sites
that's true, but the nfl doesn't recognize the ties, similar to how they claim the ravens aren't actually the browns

yet they still claim indianapolis " stole " the colts and refuse to put " Indianapolis " on their score board when they play home games against the Colts. Maybe cleveland should put up just " Ravens " on their score board when the ravens show up to their home field lol. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
that's true, but the nfl doesn't recognize the ties, similar to how they claim the ravens aren't actually the browns

Which is ironic on a fan level. Baltimore hates Indy for taking their franchise, but turned around and did the same thing to Cleavland

Link to post
Share on other sites

They weren't legally the same team that we have now by any stretch of the imagination (and of course those Seahawks have no connection to the current Seahawks) but spiritually they were probably related in the minds of the Baltimore fans.

 

I've looked into this many times dating back to about 1972 when the only scraps of information one could get was random notes in the back of an annual NFL guide. My interest in it lies in the fact the Colts are actually much closer to being related to the old Brooklyn Dodgers. Matters to me because my Dad was born in Brooklyn and raised a (baseball) Dodgers fan. I'm a Colts fan partially because he used to sing the praises of Johnny U (despite not being a particularly vocal sports fan). One day I stumbled on the connection, asked him if he liked the Colts because they had originally played in Brooklyn, and he said yes. To this day (he's been gone a long time) I have NO idea if he was just telling me what I wanted to hear, or perhaps not really listening in the first place. But it very much was what I wanted to hear. Allows me think think that I wasn't really rooting for a random out of town team in the first place.

 

I try not to think about the Dallas part of it, nor the green uniforms. :barf:

Link to post
Share on other sites
yet they still claim indianapolis " stole " the colts and refuse to put " Indianapolis " on their score board when they play home games against the Colts. Maybe cleveland should put up just " Ravens " on their score board when the ravens show up to their home field lol. 
Which is ironic on a fan level. Baltimore hates Indy for taking their franchise, but turned around and did the same thing to Cleavland

Come on guys, haven't there been enough recent threads about this?  :deadhorse: That's not what the thread is about.

Link to post
Share on other sites

They weren't legally the same team that we have now by any stretch of the imagination (and of course those Seahawks have no connection to the current Seahawks) but spiritually they were probably related in the minds of the Baltimore fans.

 

I've looked into this many times dating back to about 1972 when the only scraps of information one could get was random notes in the back of an annual NFL guide. My interest in it lies in the fact the Colts are actually much closer to being related to the old Brooklyn Dodgers. Matters to me because my Dad was born in Brooklyn and raised a (baseball) Dodgers fan. I'm a Colts fan partially because he used to sing the praises of Johnny U (despite not being a particularly vocal sports fan). One day I stumbled on the connection, asked him if he liked the Colts because they had originally played in Brooklyn, and he said yes. To this day (he's been gone a long time) I have NO idea if he was just telling me what I wanted to hear, or perhaps not really listening in the first place. But it very much was what I wanted to hear. Allows me think think that I wasn't really rooting for a random out of town team in the first place.

 

I try not to think about the Dallas part of it, nor the green uniforms. :barf:

 

What about the Texans part? :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

What about the Texans part? :D

  :lol: The Dallas part, the Dallas part. The Texan's don't bother me, the Cowboys have long been an irritation.

 

And by the way, my brother has lived outside Dallas for 30+ years. I'm not sure if that helps or hinders my perception actually. Perhaps it depends on whether he's in a nice mood or not.

Link to post
Share on other sites

When a group in Baltimore was awarded an NFL franchise they took over the remains of the Dallas Texans.

Really? I always thought the texans became the KC Chiefs...then again I forget my name half the time.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually this post is false. The original Baltimore Colts went out of business in 1950. However the city of Baltimore was so upset that they Petitioned for another team and they kept the name. For those who wonder where I learned it was on my visit to the Hall of Fame. They have a class and the day I went they shared with me that info.

Link to post
Share on other sites

MIAMI 150px-Miami_Seahawks_logo.png           

 

Today's Colts info search, has taken me from Colts.com, to NFL.com, taking me to the land of wikipedia. It's so interesting to see how the NFL has grown over the years, and how it's culture has changed from the years of the AAFC (All-American Football Conference) to the National Football League.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miami_Seahawks

 

http://www.colts.com/team/history/history-highlights.html

This is false.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Officially this franchise started in 1953 as we all know.

 

However you can tie them back to 1913. They were part of the Ohio League as Saint Mary's Cadets. The Saint Mary's Cadets then transformed into the Dayton Gym-Cadets in 1915. Then a year later into the Dayton Triangles. In 1920 the Triangles joined the NFL.

 

Then the franchise was sold in the beginning of the 30s, and moved to Brooklyn and became the Dodgers. During the second World War a player shortage caused the Dodgers and the Boston Yanks to merge. Here is where it gets tricky. After the war the owner of the Brooklyn Dodgers/Tigers wanted to join the AAFC, but the NFL terminated his franchise and his players continued to play for the Yanks.

 

After a few years the Yanks moved to New York and started playing under the Bulldogs. When the AAFC ceased to exist the AAFC's New York Yankees were split between the Giants and Bulldogs. This AAFC New York Yankees team was the same team formed by the owner of the Brooklyn Dodgers that the Yanks merged with during the war. When the Bulldogs inherited half of the Yankees they were renamed to the New York Yanks. Once again playing as the Yanks. They played as the Yanks for two seasons, but due to poor performance they no longer could find support, and were purchased by the NFL.

 

The NFL then sold the rights to a group of men in Dallas Texas. They only played one season however in Dallas due to poor performance.

 

This is where your Miami Seahawks come in. The Seahawks were an AAFC team that was initially intended to play in Baltimore. The lack of support forced the AAFC to put this team in Miami. They only lasted one season, and had huge debts at the end of the year. The team folded, and was purchased by the AAFC. A new group in the DC area purchased this team, and placed them in Baltimore which was the AAFC's original plan. They then became the green and silver Baltimore Colts, and continued to play there until 1950. The citizens of Baltimore were hurt they no longer had a professional team.

 

Back to the Texans, they played for one season in 1952. The owner was forced to sell the team back to the league in the middle of the season because he was unable to gain finacial support. At the end of the season the NFL was unable to find a buyer in the Texas area, and was forced to fold the team.

 

Baltimore was still searching for their professional team since their former team folded. A group headed by Carrol Rosenbloom purchase the former Dallas Texans. The people of Baltimore liked the name of the Colts so the Texans were renamed the Baltimore Colts, but kept the colors of blue and white the Texans used.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Popular Now

  • Thread of the Week

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • I think we're in good shape either way, it just adjusts our strategy with some extensions, and maybe we can't add another FA.    For a team like the Eagles, it completely changes their approach. If the cap is $175m, they can't keep Wentz without completely gutting the rest of their roster.
    • The trend is for the best offenses to be the teams contending for the Superbowl.  Are you aware of the basic Defense wins championships mantra?  You know Offense scores points?   I assume you are   Interstingly, the last really good D to win Superbowl was PHI and they had to score 44 points to do it v. No. 1 yanked Offense NE. And the Foles led offense carried them through the playoffs.  Before that it was Mannings Broncos.   Also intersesting is the 13-3 NE over LAR SB, featured the 25th and 27th ranked Ds in football.       The way to win in today's NFL is with high powered NFL passing offenses.  The rules are and have been set up that way increasingly over the last 20 years.   It's a lot different than when we were kids.   So like I said, it's usually Offense wins championships, Defense tries to hold teams to FGs.  There are occasionally anomalies but this is bascially accurate in todays' NFL.
    • There’s a good reason why defense everywhere suffered badly.   I can explain it in one word.  And you know the word.  Come on EVERYBODY say it with me!!!!   COVID!!   C-O-V-I-D!!   Defenses were poorer in the NFL and the college level as well.   Much less practice.  Much less contact.  Much less close up coaching.  Far more walk throughs.      When the world returns to normal, defenses will get better.  So will football. 
    • Not surprising at all. Here is how he ranked in other categories:   Intended Air Yards/PA - 26 Completed Air Yards/PA - 28 Completed Air Yards/Completion - 29 YAC/Completion - 2   First...it cannot be ignored that the Colts played (by far) the easiest schedule on offense. The average defense they played would have ranked ~23rd in DVOA. And that average was "deflated" somewhat by playing #1 defense PIT...when they clearly weren't the #1 defense anymore (after losing players to injury). That definitely played a factor.   Second...these numbers are as much Reich as it is anything. Reich uses the mesh concept (like he did with JB last year)...which creates open players in space and allows for YAC.    In fact, River's numbers (in the above categories) were very similar to JB's numbers last season. But Rivers is just a much better QB...and throws with better anticipation and accuracy. Throw in a HR hitter like Taylor and a young talented WR like Pittman...and you (naturally) have much better QB production with these concepts.   With the Colts offensive system, I think they could have immediate success with just about any talented QB they brought in...including a rookie. And if that QB is mobile...it will open up the playbook even more and raise the ceiling.   So I am in the minority here...but Rivers coming back doesn't move the needle for me. It's a lateral and stagnant move. I was all for the signing Rivers last off season...because it was the best of not-so-ideal situation. But if anything, it just proved that this team is ready to take the next step forward...and that means getting the right QB. Now is the time to make that move. So the only way I want Rivers back is if they get aggressive and move up to draft a QB who might need to sit for a part or all of a season.    TBH...I would rather roll the dice on Darnold and accept the risk of a reset year. I think he make a  good transition to this offense. And either he breaks out and suddenly you have a 24 year-old franchise QB...or he doesn't...and you have a reset year with the Colts in a much better position to draft a QB. Bringing back Rivers does nothing for the position long-term...and likely means another pick in the 20s.       
    • I'm not sure which part of my comment suggests I don't think execution was a major factor in defensive breakdowns. But if we're expecting Rock Ya Sin to stop making mistakes so our defense can cover better on the back end, I think that's a mistake.   Also, a major factor in the defensive breakdowns, especially late in plays, was a lack of dynamic pass rush.    Lastly, people blame "soft zone" a lot, and I think that's become a mistaken conclusion that is widely accepted. The truth is, all of our coverages had success, and all of our coverages had failures. In fact, early in the season (aside from the opener), the major failures were just blown coverages in man and zone, not QBs beating soft zone coverage.   My inclination is to think we need better corner play and more pass rush. And I don't think we have the players on the roster to provide the boost we need.
  • Members

×
×
  • Create New...