Geaux Saints and here is why!

Saints will have fans in the unlikeliest place on Sunday

Steve Ginsburg

FORT LAUDERDALE, Florida

Thu Feb 4, 2010 5:35pm EST






FORT LAUDERDALE, Florida (Reuters) - The most passionate New Orleans
Saints fans outside of Louisiana on Sunday will come from the
unlikeliest of places -- Baltimore.

U.S. | Sports

It's not that Baltimoreans have any kind of special relationship
with The Big Easy, or an uncommon affinity for Mardi Gras, Bourbon
Street or historic Jackson Square.


More than a quarter-century after the Baltimore Colts left town for
Indianapolis, Marylanders continue to seethe, desperately wanting to
see the team mauled each time it plays.


The stakes will rise -- along with Baltimoreans' blood pressure --
when the Indianapolis Colts face the Saints in the Super Bowl on Sunday
at Dolphin Stadium in Miami.


"In recent history of the NFL, even before the Colts, there had been
some teams that moved around but I don't think there was ever one that
you had moving trucks coming in the middle of the night and the team
was gone in the morning," long-time Baltimore broadcaster Scott Garceau
told Reuters.

"The nature of the move had something to do with it. That team and
that city had a love affair. The Outdoor Insane Asylum, the Johnny
Unitas days and the championships. That team meant so much to that
community."


The point that has still Baltimoreans breathing fire is that when
the Colts left town, they took everything with them -- records,
uniforms, trophies and even the distinctive horseshoe logo on the
helmet.

Indianapolis kicker Matt Stover knows the pain felt in Baltimore. He
was with the Cleveland Browns when they relocated to Maryland in 1996
and became the Baltimore Ravens.


"Going from Cleveland to Baltimore was bad for Browns fans but all
of the colors, the records, and even the name stayed back in
Cleveland," said Stover, who played with the Ravens for 13 seasons
before signing with Indianapolis.


"When the Colts left, they lost everything. Even the horseshoe.
That's a big piece of why a lot of the Baltimore people haven't been
able to let go of the Colts."

BAND MARCHES ON


The Colts band kept marching for 12 years even without a football
team, working at Thanksgiving Day parades and sometimes at other NFL
stadiums.


"We lost the team, we lost the name but we never lost the band," said Garceau.

To this day, when Indianapolis comes to Baltimore the word "Colts"
is never spoken over the public address system for fear of inciting the
crowd.


Cleveland never felt the sting because when the city was awarded a
new team in 1999, they retained their colors and rich history.


March 28, 1984 is a date well-known to Baltimoreans.


Owner Robert Irsay knew the move to Indianapolis would incense the
Colts' loyal fan base, so he ordered moving vans to pick up the team's
belongings in the middle of a snowy night.

By daybreak the Colts had vanished.


A deal to move to Indianapolis had materialized so quickly -- and
covertly -- that most Baltimoreans woke up to the news they no longer
had a team.


"People felt like they had their hearts pulled out," said Garceau.

When Baltimoreans see Peyton Manning on the field Sunday, his
uniform will look just like the one worn by Unitas, Lenny Moore and
John Mackey. That does not sit well in Maryland, even though the Ravens
won their own Super Bowl for the 2000 season.


Perhaps the only Indianapolis link remaining to that fateful night
the Colts left town is team owner Jim Irsay, who took over the
franchise when his father Robert died in 1997.

"A lot of people in the community, those in their 40s, 50s, 60s and older, will never cheer for Indy," said Garceau. "Never."

Cleveland never felt the sting in 99? Right, having a garbage team come back and watching many of our old players get a Super Bowl ring two years later while we were mired in awfulness really softened the blow.

/ Homer'd

Ehwmatt wrote:Cleveland never felt the sting in 99? Right, having a garbage team come back and watching many of our old players get a Super Bowl ring two years later while we were mired in awfulness really softened the blow.

/ Homer'd

It sucked for Cleveland too. But not as much. Imagine Jim Brown being listed with the "Baltimore Browns" in the hall of fame. That's the kind of thing I deal with growing up as a Baltimore Colts fan.

The Colts come in here to play the Ravens and wear the uniform that represented my hometown and I grew up rooting for. Now imagine Cleveland getting a new team and having to watch the Baltimore Browns in the same uniforms against the Cleveland (fill in name of new team).

That's the difference for me anyway. Eventually the Browns will turn it around, and they will still be the Browns with all history, colors and records in tact.

Both Baltimore and Cleveland can blame Paul Taglibue. Giving Jacksonville and to a lesser extent Charlotte those expansion teams in 94 (stupid move) set the wheels in motion. Also the city and state governments in both markets hold blame. Neither fan base deserved what they got.

As for the Super Bowl thing, the Ravens started play in Baltimore in 1996. I'd have to look at the roster, but I don't think there were that many remaining Browns on the roster during the Super Bowl win.

Ed wrote:

Ehwmatt wrote:Cleveland never felt the sting in 99? Right, having a garbage team come back and watching many of our old players get a Super Bowl ring two years later while we were mired in awfulness really softened the blow.

/ Homer'd

It sucked for Cleveland too. But not as much. Imagine Jim Brown being listed with the "Baltimore Browns" in the hall of fame. That's the kind of thing I deal with growing up as a Baltimore Colts fan.

The Colts come in here to play the Ravens and wear the uniform that represented my hometown and I grew up rooting for. Now imagine Cleveland getting a new team and having to watch the Baltimore Browns in the same uniforms against the Cleveland (fill in name of new team).

That's the difference for me anyway. Eventually the Browns will turn it around, and they will still be the Browns with all history, colors and records in tact.

Both Baltimore and Cleveland can blame Paul Taglibue. Giving Jacksonville and to a lesser extent Charlotte those expansion teams in 94 (stupid move) set the wheels in motion. Also the city and state governments in both markets hold blame. Neither fan base deserved what they got.

As for the Super Bowl thing, the Ravens started play in Baltimore in 1996. I'd have to look at the roster, but I don't think there were that many remaining Browns on the roster during the Super Bowl win.

For some reason I was thinking there were a fair amount of players. I could be wrong.

Your points are all valid and well-taken, but at the end of the day, losing the team hurt bad regardless of whether we kept the name and the history.

To be frank, the history means less and less to die hard fans every year save yearning for the halcyon days of old because this new team has shown no resemblance of the teams it shares its history with. It hurts more every year when we watch the organization just endlessly drive itself into the ground.

If they don't get it right with Holmgren at the helm, I'm not sure they ever will.