Talk:Pottsville Maroons

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject National Football League, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the NFL on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.National Football LeagueWikipedia:WikiProject National Football LeagueTemplate:WikiProject National Football LeagueNational Football League articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Pennsylvania Start‑class Mid‑importance

	Pennsylvania portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pennsylvania, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pennsylvania on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PennsylvaniaWikipedia:WikiProject PennsylvaniaTemplate:WikiProject PennsylvaniaPennsylvania articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

In 2003 the NFL decided to again examine the case regarding the 1925 championship And? RickK 03:19, 14 Oct 2003 (UTC)

no word yet I think the league will sit on itSmith03 03:21, 14 Oct 2003 (UTC)

pottsvillemaroons.com

It is more of an unofficial fan site [1]. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 20:10, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Redskins??

Re: Recent change referring to the Redskins as the last 'incarnation' of the Maroons -- Is that true that the Boston Bulldogs became the Washington Redskins? According to the Redskins page, they were originally the Boston Braves. So which is it? If the Braves and Bulldogs have nothing in common, someone please revert the last change. Isoxyl 14:27, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

POV

To do: cleanup the uncited POV that was added by 24.118.72.227. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 16:58, 30 September 2006 (UTC) hello, I added the information which is apparently being disputed as non-nuetral. I hope this is not the wrong place to discuss this, but this is where I was linked to. If you need citations, here are a few pages I used: [reply]

http://www.footballresearch.com/articles/frpage.cfm?topic=potts-25

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/ptb1925.htm

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/crd1925.htm

http://nflhistory.net/linescores/pdf/1925.pdf#search=%22American%20Professional%20Football%20Association%22

The actual story was handed down from my father, who lived in Chicago shortly after the events.

It is not biased, it is simply a statement of the facts of the matter. Which is unlike the partisan first site I listed. It is clearly an apology for the NFL as it omits key arcs of the story, such as the realities between the Yellow-Jackets and Maroons and the Notre-Dame game. Further, it opens up it's statement with a poisoning-of-the-well which declares that anything anyone says against or on top of it's agenda is pro-Pottsville and that anything that they say is patently false out-of-hand; this is before it has made a single argument to the credit of the viewpoint being presented.

I mention that because if you compare it with the information I posted on the subject, you will see why these themes are central to the issue and that there is not one fact I mention which is disputed. Moreoever, I used said site exactly for the purpose of demonstrating nuetrality on the subject as it is the most respected of all the sites which attempt to argue for the NFLs decision. It does not contradict anything in my article, thus both sides agree that these are the facts of the given matter.

I should also mention that it is all original text, not copied from anywhere. Thank you for your consideration. :)

Although the gist of your contributions is good, some statements like "It is unfortunate that the NFL chooses to avoid the issue, but history clearly shows that the champions of American football in 1925 were the Pottsville Maroons" could be viewed as more editorial commentary than a neutral point of view. Those need to be cleaned up eventually. Thanks. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 17:52, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. I apologize for not being able to figure out how to add the citations when I posted it. I should've waited until I had. I will attempt to add them and try to remove comments which might seem to indicate a personal perception rather than an assessment of the events. Thanks :).

OK. I think I have improved it and I got the citations in there correctly, I believe. Hopefully that is better. :)

I notice it is still listed as disputed. Is there anything else in there that I could work on improving myself please? I worked very hard on this and it has been a long-time desire of mine to try to contribute what I can to Wikipedia. I am a disabled vet so I spend a whole lot of time at my computer and I have gotten a great deal out of Wikipedia and am very proud to do whatever I can to pass that forward. I understand if there are some things that need to done by someone else, but if there is anything I can do to make it better myself, I will gladly do it. Thank you for your consideration and thanks for your help in tidying up my first sizable submission. :)

1925 Schedule

I tried to find a citation for the claim that some thought Pottsville played a weak schedule prior to their suspension, and I went to the PFRA article already cited many times in the text. It said "Until the Maroons went to Chicago, there was a distinct odor of fish emanating from their record. On no fewer than seven different occasions during 1925, Pottsville played teams the day after the same clubs had fought a Saturday game at Frankford. Not surprisingly, Pottsville won six of the encounters. Some critics wondered what the Maroons' record might have been had all their opponents been fresh." But I wasn't sure how to change the point about the last three games - Frankford, Green Bay, and Pottsville all played a heavy schedule that Thanksgiving week: Pottsville played Cleveland on Nov 22, Green Bay on Nov 26, and Frankford on Nov 29; Green Bay played the Bears on Nov 22, Pottsville on Nov 26, and Frankford on Nov 28; and Frankford played Providence on Nov 22, Packers on Nov 28, and Pottsville on Nov 29- I'd say that's about equal. And, when the Cardinals played the Maroons they had a full week of rest.Revmoran 01:02, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Little known" territorial bylaw

I'm all for the Pottsville Maroons and think the punishment for the game in Philly outweighed the violation, especially if there was an agreement that whoever won the Nov 29 game got to play the Notre Dame All Stars. But it is highly debatable and expresses a POV to say the territorial rule in the NFL was "little known." The same owners meeting that gave the championship to the Cardinals also did not allow Grange and Pyle to infringe on Tim Mara's New York territoral rights, leading to the formation of the first AFL rival to the NFL. Territorial rights were a huge issue, so great that the owners defended them even though it almost led to their bankruptcy.Revmoran (talk) 20:13, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"but posted the worst record in franchise history"

Which was...? Please include this detail in the article. 86.132.137.5 (talk) 19:58, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]