Interesting streak in the Packers/Bears series

[Patler]

The Bears have not scored in the first quarter against the Packers in the last 10 games.

Sunday, the Packers equaled an accomplishment last seen during the days of George Trafton, Laurie Walquist, Verne Lewellen and Lavvie Dilweg (1928-31). They shut out the Bears in the first quarter for a 10th straight time.

[pbmax]

Now that is old school. I don't even recognize the names. Except the ancestor of Anthony Dilweg.

[RashanGary]

High scoring era too.


Packers are 4 wins away from evening the all-time series. Which is nuts since we've made up something like 25 games in the Favre-AR era already. You know the Bears hold that as a proud accomplishment. They're the only team left from the first teams in the NFL. The Packers joined in year two. The Bears bounced around and changed names. The Packers have been the GB Packers from day one.

Either way, they're the two most historic franchises in NFL history and I'm sure both teams consider that series a meaningful part of their history. For us to overtake them would be a huge punch in the nuts for those annoying-ass Bears fans and their organization. Would be nice to have a little longest series in NFL history plaque in the HOF with us holding the advantage.

Remember when they made us accept the George Halas trophy in the lockerroom instead of on the field? Well, it would be great to walk on their field and take this from them too.

[George Cumby]

High scoring era too.


Packers are 4 wins away from evening the all-time series. Which is nuts since we've made up something like 25 games in the Favre-AR era already.

That is astounding. I remember comparing the two and thinking that would always be out of reach. All I can say is RESIGN LOVIE!

[Pugger]

Now that is old school. I don't even recognize the names. Except the ancestor of Anthony Dilweg.

I've heard of Verne Lewellen.

[Pugger]

High scoring era too.


Packers are 4 wins away from evening the all-time series. Which is nuts since we've made up something like 25 games in the Favre-AR era already. You know the Bears hold that as a proud accomplishment. They're the only team left from the first teams in the NFL. The Packers joined in year two. The Bears bounced around and changed names. The Packers have been the GB Packers from day one.

Either way, they're the two most historic franchises in NFL history and I'm sure both teams consider that series a meaningful part of their history. For us to overtake them would be a huge punch in the nuts for those annoying-ass Bears fans and their organization. Would be nice to have a little longest series in NFL history plaque in the HOF with us holding the advantage.

Remember when they made us accept the George Halas trophy in the lockerroom instead of on the field? Well, it would be great to walk on their field and take this from them too.

Aren't the Cardinals another one of the original franchises? I read somewhere that the Cards are the oldest continuous franchise in the league.

[RashanGary]

Aren't the Cardinals another one of the original franchises? I read somewhere that the Cards are the oldest continuous franchise in the league.

You know what, I read up on the history of NFL teams last year. As soon as I wrote that, they crossed my mind. Should have looked back.

[Patler]

Aren't the Cardinals another one of the original franchises? I read somewhere that the Cards are the oldest continuous franchise in the league.

These things all depend on what you look at. The Chicago Bears today were the Decatur Staleys then, and the then Chicago Bears are the present day Cardinals. The Packers franchise is just as old, formed in 1919 when the league was born, but the Packers didn't actually start playing until two years later, in 1921. The Bears and Staleys started playing in the league in 1920.

So are the Chicago Bears, oops, I mean the Cardinals, really older than the Packers? Are the Staleys, oops, I mean Bears (but aren't they the Cardinals???) really older than the Packers?

Are the Bears/Cardinals and Staleys/Bears older just because they began playing a year earlier, although they and the Packers were all formed the same year?

[pbmax]

These things all depend on what you look at. The Chicago Bears today were the Decatur Staleys then, and the then Chicago Bears are the present day Cardinals. The Packers franchise is just as old, formed in 1919 when the league was born, but the Packers didn't actually start playing until two years later, in 1921. The Bears and Staleys started playing in the league in 1920.

So are the Chicago Bears, oops, I mean the Cardinals, really older than the Packers? Are the Staleys, oops, I mean Bears (but aren't they the Cardinals???) really older than the Packers?

Are the Bears/Cardinals and Staleys/Bears older just because they began playing a year earlier, although they and the Packers were all formed the same year?

Did Halas have a hand in kicking them out of the original League for a year after the 1919 season?

[Smidgeon]

High scoring era too.


Packers are 4 wins away from evening the all-time series. Which is nuts since we've made up something like 25 games in the Favre-AR era already. You know the Bears hold that as a proud accomplishment. They're the only team left from the first teams in the NFL. The Packers joined in year two. The Bears bounced around and changed names. The Packers have been the GB Packers from day one.

Either way, they're the two most historic franchises in NFL history and I'm sure both teams consider that series a meaningful part of their history. For us to overtake them would be a huge punch in the nuts for those annoying-ass Bears fans and their organization. Would be nice to have a little longest series in NFL history plaque in the HOF with us holding the advantage.

Remember when they made us accept the George Halas trophy in the lockerroom instead of on the field? Well, it would be great to walk on their field and take this from them too.

I remembered that as the Packers' decision. Am I misremembering?

[Patler]

Did Halas have a hand in kicking them out of the original League for a year after the 1919 season?

I think that came later, didn't it?

[denverYooper]

PackerRats seems to be the best Packers Board in terms of drifting off into these little history lessons. Not that I pay much mind to other sites, but in occasional dalliances with other boards I just don't see it occurring as often if ever.

I like it, especially given that the team has such a rich legacy.

[woodbuck27]

Aren't the Cardinals another one of the original franchises? I read somewhere that the Cards are the oldest continuous franchise in the league.

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

" The Arizona Cardinals are a professional American football team whose team facilities are headquartered in Glendale, Arizona, a suburb of Phoenix. They are currently members of the Western Division of the National Football Conference (NFC) in the National Football League (NFL). The Cardinals were founded in 1898, and are the oldest continuously run professional American football club in the United States.[1]

The team was established in Chicago in 1898 and was a charter member of the NFL in 1920. Along with the Chicago Bears, the club is one of two NFL charter member franchises still in operation since the league's founding. " Fr. LINK

[woodbuck27]

These things all depend on what you look at. The Chicago Bears today were the Decatur Staleys then, and the then Chicago Bears are the present day Cardinals. The Packers franchise is just as old, formed in 1919 when the league was born, but the Packers didn't actually start playing until two years later, in 1921. The Bears and Staleys started playing in the league in 1920.

So are the Chicago Bears, oops, I mean the Cardinals, really older than the Packers? Are the Staleys, oops, I mean Bears (but aren't they the Cardinals???) really older than the Packers?

Are the Bears/Cardinals and Staleys/Bears older just because they began playing a year earlier, although they and the Packers were all formed the same year?

" the then Chicago Bears are the present day Cardinals " Patler

Are you sure of that Patler?

My research indicates that 'the BEARS' were never called 'the Cardinals' or vice versa.

The Chicago Bears ( the former Decatur Staleys ) and Chicago Cardinals ( now the Arizona Cardinals ) are the 'only' remaining charter members of the original founding of the NFL (1920).

The Green Bay Packers are the third-oldest franchise in the NFL. The Green Bay Packers, founded 1919, is the oldest NFL franchise in continuous operation 'with the same name in the same location'. They joined the American Professional Football Association (APFA) in 1921, the forerunner to what is known today as the National Football League (NFL).


Which current NFL team can trace it's lineage back further in history?

The Arizona Cardinals were founded in 1898, and are credited as the oldest continuously run professional American football club in the United States. The Green Bay Packers can trace their lineage to other semi-professional teams in Green Bay dating back to 1896.

[KYPack]

"George Trafton, Laurie Walquist, Verne Lewellen and Lavvie Dilweg "

Wasn't Laurie Walquist Lori Nickle's sister?