Talk:Bert Bell/Archive 1

Archive 1

Comments

Actually, I think Bell had far more to do with pro (team founder/owner, head coach, league commissioner) than college football (player, assistant coach).--BillFlis 19:13, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

He was sort of the Ed Snider of the 1930s and 1940s, a real mover and shaker in sports, especially in Philadelphia. Another factoid: supposedly, he borrowed the $2500 with which he bought the Eagles franchise from his future wife (who was an accomplished Broadway actress).--BillFlis 22:19, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Actually, the Sportsnet article under "External links" compares him to Pete Rozelle and Paul Tagliabue, high praise. BTW, that article is by Ray Didinger, formerly of Philadelphia Daily News, winner of the Dick McCann Memorial Award and author of the book The Eagles Encyclopedia, so I think it's pretty authoritative.--BillFlis 21:40, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

hall of fame inductee bell

For all I know he could have been the first one inducted because his last name started with the letter B. So him being inducted first, as I mention in the article, that may need to be revisited. Same page and same footnote, he was the first of 17 inductees. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 01:14, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

FWIW, Sammy Baugh was also inducted that year. Eagles 24/7 (C) 01:17, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

I would definitely add Baugh in there if he was picked in a draft by Bell, or maybe at least played for Bell at one time. But I do not see any information like that. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 23:27, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

I meant that Bell couldn't have been the first player ever inducted since Baugh was also a member of the Hall of Fame Class of 1963 and Baugh comes before Bell alphabetically. Eagles 24/7 (C) 23:43, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Point taken. I do not see how anyone could argue that his induction, being the first in the history of the hall of fame, is not notable. I will revert it next edit if you do not. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 23:54, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

bert bell being the first person inducted into the HOF, per Lyons, is ignored per Eagles247 reversion of my edit....apparently lyons made a boo-boo or, probably more importantly, Lyons produced no evidence that says "he was the first person enshrined in the nfl because of x, y, and z." What Eagles247 said was Bell being elected first lacked common sense. I agree.66.234.33.8 (talk) 22:29, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Manual of Style and layout

The article is short. But I am going to bring in subsection headers under NFL commissioner including:

1. no header at this time
2. Filchock-Hapes scandal (my digital copy has it as Mapes not Hapes - I think its a typo)
3. AAFC-NFL merger (pointing to the main article AAFC on wikipedia

The rationale is that they are discrete notable events whose names, for the most part, are recognizable. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 23:44, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Infobox

The infobox in the article is of an NFL player. I tried to make it for an NFL player coach but I failed. I spent several hours trying to fix it. I am not going to revisit it. It is too complicated for me to handle. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 00:51, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

If I knew how, then I would create my own infobox. The player/coach infobox does not cut it. Bell was a college player, a college coach, an NFL team owner, an NFL head coach, an NFL team executive, and an NFL executive. That's 6 different infoboxes. He has probably more applicable infoboxes than anyone in the history of wikipedia sports, lol. All that is missing is college team executive, ncaa executive, and nfl player. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 17:25, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

First televised game in NFL History

Dodgers over Eagles at Ebbets field Algeo p 161 and 162. I see no reason to put that in this article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.234.33.8 (talk) 12:08, 28 April 2011 (UTC) I changed my mind. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 13:24, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

The Steagles finished 5-4-1 in 1943. Algeo pg. 204 This was the first winning season for the eagles history and the second in the steelers history. pg. 202 and I do not know if it belongs. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 12:22, 28 April 2011 (UTC) it does not. 66.234.33.8 (talk)

Duplicate citations

There is no help pages, that I know of, that deals with duplicate citations. But everything in Algeo's book about the NFL's relationship with African-Americans, according to Algeo's explanation of his footnotes, appears to come from Tackling Jim Crow. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 13:05, 28 April 2011 (UTC) Duplicate citations, after further review by me, I believe gives professional authors their chance to review and criticize events. The fact that a professional author does not alter their interpretation of events is not inconsequential. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 22:16, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

abridged sections

I have abridged some sections like AAFC merger because all the details are not pertinent. I want to keep this about 40k like the help files say. As far as articles like Jackie Robinson being 110k that's because that article is at least 10 times harder to write than this one. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 18:55, 28 April 2011 (UTC) Also, fortunately did not take many notes so there is not much of a paper trail, thank goodness. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 18:56, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

It looks like this article is destined for 110k. I guess I underestimated it. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 22:41, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

NFL commissioner

Ruck says Bell was not respected in "Pittsburgh." I changed it to by the Pittsburgh fan base because I think he made a mistake. There exists more quotes from Bell to the media than Rooney. Bell was still commuting to Pittsburgh from Philly. Unless there exists something on the order of Bell and the Mayor of Pittsburgh fighting over taxes, then I do not think it makes any sense to say the entire city of Pittsburgh was against Bell. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 11:40, 29 April 2011 (UTC) Reverted my edit, Bell and Pittsburgh were apparently at odds somehow. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 19:09, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

Citation mistakes in Lyons

The Lyons book only has about 323 pages in it according to the digital copy I am looking at now. I used my other computer which I do not have access to now to cite Lyons. It may be a bug in the software or my screw up. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 21:07, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

Yep, its a bug in the software. One copy of my digital book on one computer lists about 466 pages and another copy on another computer lists about 328 pages. This is really bad. I'll have to go back and do an independent check. 173.52.5.48 (talk) 21:49, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

The help files on Wikipedia specifically state I am allowed to introduce content that may be difficult to find but it is permissible and allowable to be introduced even though page numbers may not be correct.

Everything I have introduced has been w good intentions. Everything in adobe digital editions I have introduced that has caused problems is because of garbage adobe software. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 00:13, 1 May 2011 (UTC) All citations have been double checked and all the mistakes I made should now be corrected - only took 12 hours. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 23:35, 1 May 2011 (UTC) :I'm sure I screwed a lot of up by now again. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 23:55, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

nobots

I asked someone on live help to turn off bots affecting the article because they mess up my citations and it takes me too long to fix them or understand what they do. I was told the nobot template just has to be removed. I want no bots for a few weeks, probably lasting until June 1, 2011. This is only a start class article anyway. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 16:45, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Book sources

I can not find Michael MacCambridge's book using the ISBN number I provided in this article. Also, I am changing the publishing date from 2004, 2005 to 2005. I have no idea why ISBN 978-0-307-48143-6 draws a blank when trying to find the book. But my book has that as the ISBN # and online sources like http://www.randomhouse.com/book/104941/americas-game-by-michael-maccambridge/ebook show that to be the correct ISBN #. 173.52.5.48 (talk) 01:17, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

The 12 owners of the NFL were the honorary pall bearers.

This has to be fixed. Obviously, every one knows the Packers had no "owner." I need to find the legal term for how the Packers were organized. The honorary pall bearer representing the Packers was Alex Olexxxxx - I forget his last name. 173.52.5.48 (talk) 02:19, 8 May 2011 (UTC) fixed...i feel no need to cite him as president of GBP. I'm kind of sick of the number of citations in this article. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 23:59, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Bert's christened name

At least two source are showing it as deBenneville instead of de Benneville. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 09:03, 9 May 2011 (UTC) I am only going to list his possible real first names are. I do not think it matters anyway. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 20:22, 20 May 2011 (UTC) All offical first name spellings are now listed and cited. Probably the most meaningless and useless aspect of the article. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 23:47, 31 May 2011 (UTC) Littlewood quotes, I think, Red Smith in a newspaper article wherein Bert's official first name is given as Bertal. I have ignored it - I suspect it is a typo but Littlewood should have put a [sic] after Bell's first name was written. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 18:36, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

Disparity in number of African-Americans on 1939 UCLA Bruins

Jackie Robinson numbers them as 4. I number them according to the book I read, which is 5. Their source is the online encyclopedia Brittanica http://www.today.ucla.edu/portal/ut/970425TeammatesRecall.aspx . Only 4 of 5 I listed were starters or frequent starters. Wynne played rarely and my book just says 60 man roster. Wynne might not be on the official roster, where ever that official roster is hiding I do not know. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 08:01, 11 May 2011 (UTC) Actually, there are 2 books I read that say there were 5. The other was Strode's autobiography, Goal Dust, which - I know I am going to get in trouble for this - is an absolute must read. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 23:52, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Washington in Chicago

So the owners say there was not a color barrier. Ross insinuated this is disingenuous. Washington says he was asked to stay around for a week. Peterson says football discriminated against blacks. Then Peterson turns around and says that since Halas never mentioned anything in his autobiography about asking Washington to stay around for a week that it was unlikely that he did. If there was a color barrier, Halas had every reason to lie or omits facts. I see no reason why Washington would say he disappeared for a week. IOW, unless I am reading Ross and Peterson wrong, they are calling Washington and/or Strode liars. I see no reason to give their interpretations any credence. I am ignoring them in this matter. Furthermore, Jackie Robinson called Washington the greatest football player he ever saw. There was reportedly 100k people at the L.A. Coliseum for the 1939 match up between USC and UCLA. Lastly, the Bears signing Red Grange, when Washington was a baby, was a financial bonanza for the Bears. Halas had some strong financial reasons why he would try to sign Washington. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 20:04, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

This is a long story. I think I figured out what happened. I was wrong to complain about Ross. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 23:46, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

"Washington said later, that after the All-Star game, Halas asked him to stick around while he tried to figure out how to get the black star into the NFL. That seems unlikely, because if, as owners maintained, the league had no color line, there could be no problem about signing Washington." Peterson, p. 170.

The problem is the word "that" in the 2nd sentence. It could refer be interpreted in a slew of different ways. Another author bungles it up - I can't find it who bungled it up and which book it is in. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 05:42, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

173.52.5.48 (talk) 23:17, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

And the problem is with Levy using the word "apparently" which suggests that he has doubts that Halas asked Washington to hang around for a week. I have annotated that in the footnotes. I need to go back to Strode's and Levy's book and reevaluate. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 14:51, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

Details

Westcott says Topping was paid 25k up front and 75k was due from gate proceeds the next year. I followed the authors and just wrote it as 100k payment. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 20:22, 20 May 2011 (UTC) What I wrote is not precise and probably should not be construed as accurate. But I do not honestly think it is worth an extra trip to the library. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 19:44, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

Actually, it looks to be a little more involved than I thought...see Ken Crippen's book on the original bills listed in further reading....this is not a show stopper though 66.234.33.8 (talk) 21:55, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Job Description of an NFL Commissioner

# there is no source, that I can find, that delineates what his job description was

1. Layden clearly states in his book he had at least one job description - maintain the purity of the game (no tampering from gamblers) - and ,at the very least, a financially incentive to keep the league operating in a time of war (his pay would drop about 75% if the league discontinued for more than 1 year in a time of war)
2. the fact that a wikipedia editor has to make up his job description, out of thin air, is not bad because it will fit nicely in the introduction, which does not need citations, and the job description should be supported by the rest of the article. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 23:59, 2 June 2011 (UTC) his job description is detailed in the NFL constitution which is in the 1957 Congressional meetings I put a link to. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 14:36, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

Owner of the Detroit Lions

George Arthur Richards, George A. Richards, Dick Richards, etc. I have no info on him anywhere. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.234.33.8 (talk) 23:06, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

The NFL HOF has published, at least one, reference book (1993). It is a bibliography list that is obviously sorely outdated. G.A. Richards' name is not even listed. So G. A. Richards is a dead-end. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 23:13, 15 August 2011 (UTC) I double-checked, there is no one listed with the last name of Richards, whether it's Dick, George, George A, etc. its a total dead end in the HOF bibliography....The HOF bibliography looks to have dealt with well over a thousand entities and their endeavors in 1993 may have faced manpower constraints. I know nothing of the nfl HOF. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 22:05, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Bell becomes NFL commissioner

I can not edit better than that. Littlewood is the key there. His analysis I think is awesome. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 23:21, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Plagiarism

"threatened to disband" ...that is a direct usage of Littlewood's 3 words in his book...I cited it, but I did not quote it. I do not know if I have to quote 3 words because I use 4 different citations...but for all I know it could be considered plagiarism. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 23:27, 11 July 2011 (UTC) I put it in quotes and moved the three other citations from three other authors, that backed it up, to a place where the citations can be deleted later. Three words is borderline whether or not I can be accused of plagarism. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 21:55, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

OK, I'll bite. I accuse you of plagiarism. Defend yourself! Ha-ha-ha-ha! How about "said they would disband"? That word "threatened" is a little bit uncyclopedic, don't you think? BTW, when are you going to break down and get a user ID, Number 66.etc? "I am not a number. I am a free man." Or woman, whatever the case may be.--BillFlis (talk) 01:22, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

First of all, thanks for all your edits to the article you created. I am sorry that I am not as good as an editor as others. Specifically, I think you are right, I think I can rephrase the sentence. That being said, Littlewood is far and away the best author associated with this article, IMHO, but "threatened" can/should be reworked - I agree. The end game is to get to Bell's recognition of the NFLPA. Bell, although unilaterally, and not the NFL officially, recognized a "sports" union, the NFLPA, 20 years before baseball. I read Rozelle's and Rooney's testimony before the U.S. Congress (in 1971 or 1972 or 1973). There is really nothing like what Bell did. The sources are scant and Lyons, is all around it, but he does not drive it home.

I apologize that you have to deal with a very inexperienced editor :) 66.234.33.8 (talk) 15:12, 16 July 2011 (UTC) How about three words does not constitue plagiarism, see this wikipedia help file blah.wikipedia.com or 5 does, see blah.blah.wikepdia.com

Rephrase, done

Hession, miraculously, chooses the phrase "threatened to disband" years after Littlewood's book.../* Plagiarism */ Littlewood looks to be a complete genius and well over 100 years before his time but Hession should have quoted him when using his threatened to disband phrase......The authors associated with this article are by and large sloppy..They never hold another author accountable for screw-ups (except once, an author comes down on Dr. March). this is problematic because i have to go and fix things........... 66.234.33.8 (talk) 00:24, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

Filchock-Hapes gambling scandal

The injury report stuff is very sketchy. Did the teams have to list the players who could not play, or would not play (because i.e. there mom was sick, etc). This stuff is not listed in his legacy at all but contemporary writers credit him with nipping it in the bud. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 23:37, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

AAFC-NFL Merger

This was viewed as a major success for Bell by contemporary writers and in speaking about his legacy. There is nothing in this article about it being a success for Bell.66.234.33.8 (talk) 23:40, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

fixing...looking for citation

Philadelphia Eagles and Pittsburgh Steelers

Plain and simple...atrocious... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.234.33.8 (talk) 23:42, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

attempting to fix 66.234.33.8 (talk) 15:01, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

Bill Dudley

Whittingham implies Dudley returned to the NFL in 1946. The professional footbal hall of fame lists Dudley returning in 1945: http://www.profootballhof.com/hof/member.aspx?player_id=61

In the article, I omitted the date he returned to the NFL, whether it was 1945 or 1946 does not seem important. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 18:30, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

assault and battery on television

I think it's valid topic. Contemporaneously, its an extremely hot topic in the broadcasting of NHL games. Evidence indicates the game was not rough in the early 1950s - it was sadistic. And I think its on topic because Bell had to respond to it.66.234.33.8 (talk) 15:21, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

added, done 66.234.33.8 (talk) 22:36, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

bc colts and bills & d texans

i am not covering these topics...too much work....article is too big already....arguably all 3 of those topics are good for criticizing bell's tenure 66.234.33.8 (talk) 00:26, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Inconsistencies

The Frankford Yellow Jackets were around as a pro and amateur team for at least a couple of decades before they joined the NFL. Also, they were not merely renamed the Eagles (see FYJ article), and the NFL considers them separate franchises for records purposes.--BillFlis 19:10, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

this is one of the most problematic things. all authors say Bert renamed the fyj the pe. however, the nfl does not recognize the fyj as the precursor to the pe...however, the nfl made bell assume all the debt of the fyj??? how can you assume all the debt of a former franchise and not be considered a descendant of that franchise??? ...from a player perspective, there was only one "holdover" from the fyj to the pe. this is a simple case of "follow the money" and if the nfl made bell pay for the debt of the fyj, then the nfl is completely b.s. in this matter. money talks, b.s. walks....I'll follow all authors on this, but, if the NFL made Bell pay the debt owed to nfl clubs by the fyj, as far as i am concerned, the pe originate from the fyj...im a lil frustrated, but this is b.s.: the pe clearly originate from the fyj...i understand that there was only one holdover from the fyj to the pe, but if the nfl made him pay the debt owed by the fyj, then the precursor of the pe, imho, is the fyj. of course, i dont have a npov like the nfl has. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 22:57, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Canadian Football Battle

The battle with the Canadian football league over players is written about, however I have no one saying its was important, it cost Bell a lot of time or caused him any considerable angst. The only thing I have is a source saying that it had "negligible impact" on the NFL. 65.88.88.174 (talk) 17:30, 27 April 2011 (UTC) also in the book on Rooney, the CFL was considered a "minor irritant" after 1955. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 13:00, 28 April 2011 (UTC) Moved into AAFC section for now. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 19:33, 28 April 2011 (UTC) I deleted the CFL stuff, that does not mean it does not belong in this article. It just means I could not provide a good transition to its implementation and it was deleted because it was the easy way out. That being said, I still do not see it as a notable event in his role of commissioner. 173.52.5.48 (talk) 02:03, 8 May 2011 (UTC) This needs to be reevaluated. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 22:18, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

I am going to wipe out the CFL stuff again. There are sources out there that show the CFL vs. NFL battle and I am going to put links to it in further reading and remove it from the body of the article. This article is too big already to deal with the CFL. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 02:25, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

Ignoring verifiable sources Lyons

1. Lyons writes it was Jack Mara that Bell befriended at Saratoga instead of Tim Mara. Tim, was a bookie, Jack - unofficially - did not graduate from Fordham until 1930. Jack would have been between 18 and 23 years old a the time. I could be wrong and I can always switch it back. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 10:58, 1 May 2011 (UTC) I am guessing Bell knew Tim Mara by the time he helped set up the Gene Tunney fight in 1926. Both Tim Mara and Bert Bell were at Saratoga in August of 1926. Tim Mara was the agent for Tunney (See Wellington p. 29 - 33.) and Lyons devotes a whole chapter to Bell's involvement in the Tunney - Dempsey fight of 1926. Kahn has a book on Dempsey for further investigation. But as far as I am concerned, Bell and Mara knew each other as of, at the very least, August 1926. 173.52.5.48 (talk) 23:09, 25 May 2011 (UTC) According to Wellington, Jack graduated from law school in 1930. So in 1926, Jack would have been about 18. Case closed. 173.52.5.48 (talk) 23:15, 25 May 2011 (UTC) done
2. Ignoring him again. In the negotiation on Reeves' move to L.A., Lyons says the fee was 5k for visitors. Lyons uses MacCambridge as a source. Ruck says in 1941 that Rooney told a Pittsburgh paper it was a flat fee of 5k. MacCambridge uses 1946 league meetings to come up with the figure 10k for visitors. Lyons never says Mac had a typo. In 1923 it was set as a 60-40 split minus some things associated w stadium costs and had secretly changed to 5k by 41. After all the trouble they went through with Reeves in January of 46, the owners turned around and made it a 60-40 split around Jan 47. So during the war years it secretly changed from 5k to 10k, maybe transportation costs doubled during the war??? I am totally confused and that's good enough for me, I'm done with that.66.234.33.8 (talk) 19:10, 13 May 2011 (UTC) MY BAD, this is not necessarily true. The visiting fee was changed to a flat fee of 2.5k from the 60-40 split during Carr's tenure. As far as everything else, I do not know what is true or not true. See Willis, The Man Who Built the National Football League. and 5k p. 358 66.234.33.8 (talk) 10:05, 19 May 2011 (UTC) The amount the visitors were paid has been deleted - with respect to the Rams move to L.A. I deleted it because I viewed providing inline citations was more important than whether the visitors were paid 10k or 15k for an encyclopedic version. I have provided all the content and references here, and on the article page, so that someone can make their own decision if they deem it important enough to research it. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 22:15, 16 June 2011 (UTC) off topic closed
3. Also ignoring and will increasingly ignore Lyons about Bell's tenure at Temple. Lyons mentions the Villanova game as occurring one year later than it did according to a college football encyclopedia and he lists Pop coming in 1 year later than he did. I do not know what to make of when he was coach at Temple at this time. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 20:34, 13 May 2011 (UTC) There is a History of College Football Bibliography authored by the same person who authored the Professional Football Hall of Fame Bibliography. No person by the last name of Miller remotely resembles Heine Miller. This is a dead end unless a Temple University authored item can be helpful. The Temple University stuff in the HCFB does not look good. Heine Miller looks to be a dead end. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 22:32, 22 August 2011 (UTC) Most sources list Bell as being coach at temple during the college 1930 and 1931 season only. One source, I forget which one, says Bell was a volunteer coach at temple. Another source indicates assistant coaches at colleges (it has to do with Lud Wray) were paid more than professional football coaches during the era. One source says Bell was out of football for the 1932 college season, I forget which one. It's possible bell was paid for 30 and 31 at temple and, given the economic times, not paid for 32 as a volunteer. That would put all the pieces together except for Lyons mistakes with respect to Pop's tenure at temple. Pop was an extremely famous coach at the time and the chance that sources messed up in his tenure at temple is virtually impossible.66.234.33.8 (talk) 08:05, 7 September 2011 (UTC) I have got this in the New York Times on microfilm. It explains when Pop took the job in December 32, and in 33 their is a record of him hiring his new assistants in the Spring, which I have not seen verbatim yet. This will be closed out soon. The door is closing on his last year at Temple; his first year could be a problem, but I think Lyons is correct on his first year at Temple. An ace in the hole is still the NY Daily News 66.234.33.8 (talk) 23:33, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
4. I can't make heads or tails out of what Lyons says about the repeal of the blue laws. The way I see it from other sources is: Carr goes to see Rooney in Feb 1933 about starting a franchise. In April 1933 general assembly of Pa passes bill that repeals blue laws statewide and lets local communities decide in a referendum for Nov 7. Governor passes the bill into law sometime around then an early enuf to get it on the ballot by Nov 7. Carr approves Rooney for franchise may 18, 1933 (p. 309 Willis) Cities, communities throughout pa vote Nov 7. Philadelphia certifies it before Nov 12. Pittsburgh does not certify it before their next home game (if original research was allowed than Rooney bribed police chief in Pittsburgh so he could play his home game Nov 12 without intervention from the police). Bell goes to city hall and gets permit no 1 and plays home game nov 12. Lyons' version is the people pass referendum in philly, that same day they count all the votes in philly, governor signs off on the vote before midnight. I obviously have no clue how referendums work in PA. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 09:50, 18 May 2011 (UTC) Westcott confirms my interpretation from the other guys, i forget who, and confirms my belief that Lyons interpretation is silly. this is closed out. my analysis appears to be correct. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 22:01, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
5. According to Lyons and also Peterson, on July 8, 1933 at an NFL owners meeting w the Reds owner, Kearny, Wray, and Rooney there (according to Willis). Wray, in proxy for Bell and others, agreed to pay 2,500 for an NFL franchise and ALSO agreed to pay off the debts of Frankford (only Lyons, and Didinger and Lyons, list the amount as 11,000 - 11,000 + 2,500 = 13,500 for and NFL franchise) Rooney agreed to pay 2,500 for an NFL franchise and so did Kearns. Lyons does not show Peterson as a source. Peterson's book is published way before Lyons' book. In my digital copies there are no citations at all. I do not understand why Bell and others would pay more than 5 times the amount for a franchise in Philly as Rooney and Kearns would pay for Pittsburgh and Cincy, respectively. But it stays in the article. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 21:22, 18 May 2011 (UTC) Westcott confirms, whether independently or dependently I do not know because he provides no inline citations, that Bell assumed some debt. This now becomes notable because it shows either the extent to which Bell wanted a franchise and/or his stupidity for paying so much more than Rooney or Kearns. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 23:45, 19 May 2011 (UTC) Something is screwy about that 11,500 66.234.33.8 (talk) 14:45, 20 May 2011 (UTC) FYI, Roger L. Treat in his 16th edition, of whatever book he wrote, writes the only player that was on the FYJ squad of 31 and the PE squad of 33 was a center, think it was Koenisberger or some spelling close to that. There is a source out there, if my memory sells me right, that says a few players transferred from FYJ to PE. Why would Bell pay 5x as much as Rooney and Kearns for a franchise and especially considering the PE is not considered to be a direct descendant of the FYJ by the NFL. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 17:38, 22 May 2011 (UTC) Actually, the only logical thing I can think of is Bell was charged a higher fee not because they did not want him nor because of his stupidty, but because Philadelphia was one of the most populous cities in the country and a franchise would have been a prized possession. But there is no source that deals with this so its speculation.66.234.33.8 (talk) 16:31, 13 August 2011 (UTC) that dont make no sense, why 4x the amount, no clue 66.234.33.8 (talk) 16:43, 13 August 2011 (UTC) I figured this out with a new source. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 23:04, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
6. Bell broke his collarbone in college. Bell missed 3 or 4 weeks in his collegiate football career. Lyons does not list things chronologically sometimes. It's blatantly obvious the 3 or 4 weeks he missed were because of his broken collarbone, he kind of explains it very late in his book, if I remember correctly. I have left it out to this point. not important 66.234.33.8 (talk) 21:58, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
7. Lyons said Penn was heavily favored over Oregon in the Rose Bowl. Hibner says the opposite. I know nothing about college football but one of the books I read, probably Hibner, said that people were prejudiced at the time that east coast football teams were always deemed to be better than west coast teams. So I ignored Lyons. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 15:07, 23 May 2011 (UTC) This is confirmed by Schmidt in Shaping College football p. 5 and 6; there existed a prejudice in East vs. West college football programs. poor reading comprehension by me, this is closed out
8. Difficult to tell if Lyons and Peterson are refuting MacCambridge, Coenen, and Davis. It's possible that the NFL formally discontinued in the blackout policy from NFL headquarters because of the pending investigation by the J.D. but then, at the urging of Halas, Bell reimposed it informally. Lyons clearly imply for the 1951 season it was voluntary. Mac, Coenen and Davis imply it was mandatory. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 20:09, 30 May 2011 (UTC) A couple of days ago on a featured article on Wikipedia, that was a biography, there was a little thingie that asked the reader to rate how trustworthy the article was. I would rate, on a scale of 1 to 10, where 10 was very trust worthy, my writing on how the blackout rules played out for the 1951 nfl season, somewhere about 1.0000001. I think if all the planets were aligned, then ok, it was a 10. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 00:02, 1 June 2011 (UTC) It looks like some of the authors messed up, do not know who yet. Generally speaking, the owners meetings for the next season could be held in December of the previous year, though not always. This could have caused confusion with me or them. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 10:42, 10 August 2011 (UTC) I figured this out with a new source. Basically, it appears as if Bell publically proclaimed that they were going to not really have blackouts in January and then by the time the March meeting rolled around, Bell (this is original research: looks to have consulted with his brother) found out/was advised the NFL's case was strong, and they switched gears and reimplemented the blackout policy, but the NFL did not publically promulgate their stance(as far as I can find). I have ny times in on january and although I have researched it extensively for March-I have no public mention of it in march. The NFL went into stealth mode in March, speculating here, but prolly on advice of their lawyers, IOW, John C.66.234.33.8 (talk) 23:33, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Reintegration

Based on verifiable sources, Bell said and did nothing tangible about reintegration. I wrote it. It's, well, for me, grammatically correct. It's all verifiable. The history of the nfl has nothing on it on wikipedia. So I see no reason to remove it at this time in a start class article. But, I mean, he has to at least comment on it, which he never did, for it to stay here. It's a great topic for the history of the nfl, but...... Well, at least its only 1 paragraph :) 66.234.33.8 (talk) 22:12, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Well, this may not be complete. The line coach (or running back coach - I forget which) of the Rams in '46 said that all hell broke loose among the owners in the NFL when it was reintegrated. So Bell was probably in the middle of the storm. <-2 sources on this...But it's not really anything concrete. Then again, wtf, give it to the readers and let them decide. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 22:17, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

this is closed out...'all hell broke loose'...the readers can decide what bell's position is for themselves..i just put out there all the facts and opinions i could find...his son's opinion is valid....look at gpm's daughter's opinion

I have requested this section be merged into Black players in American professional football on their talk page. No one contributes on this page and I consider it a dead page. If no one responds on this or that page. I will move it unilaterally by unanimous consent (me). There is no known source that shows Bell contributing in any fashion to reintegration to the NFL. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 22:16, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

there should be a general rule on biographys somewhere on Wikipedia about: how many sentences can go without mentioning the subject's name...i put it at 3 sentences...tops 4...the reintegration section is an entire section that has 8 sentences which shows no direct involvement by Bell in the process. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 23:13, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

this can easily result in reintegration being reduced from 8 sentences, and all accompanying words removed,...and then 13 more new words added with no new sentences and put in under his initial hiring...which it was..."and it resulted in the reintegration of the NFL and it...becoming a.." [coast to coast] "...integrated...," [sports entertainment industry.] 66.234.33.8 (talk) 23:24, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

merge done..I will put back in 2 sentences 1) it happened 2) all hell broke loose 66.234.33.8 (talk) 22:46, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

as far as i am concerned adding the 2 sentences will have 2 very tasty paragraphs for his inception as nfl commissioner. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 22:48, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

done, closed out 66.234.33.8 (talk) 21:54, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

No evidence of

The following statement I wrote has no proof of it being true: "his primary focus was to design the team schedules to benefit the large city teams" There's no proof of that at all. He wanted the sport to grow in large cities ...that is true. He wanted the sport to have a team in every large city...that is true. How Bell manipulated the schedules as compared to his two predecessors is, I think, important. So, how Carr worked the schedule is consequently important. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 23:04, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Fixed 66.234.33.8 (talk) 13:18, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

one source i used, which i revisited, lists big city teams only wanted to play big city teams, which was an oversimplification of who teams wanted to play against. it's accurate, but not precise. There may have been pressure to adjust the schedules to benefit certain teams, but I know of no proof that swayed Carr to bias schedules accordingly, albeit there is iron-clad evidence (Willis) that Carr wanted teams in big cities to prosper. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 22:45, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

this is fixed 66.234.33.8 (talk) 20:54, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Bankruptcy

I do not remember any author saying that television threated to bankrupt the NFL in its entirety. Nevertheless, the 92nd congress, according to what I see from my notes, clearly write that it was a guaranteed result for the NFL, circa 1953. As far as I am concerned, Congress is a primary source and the newbie Wikipedia help files say don't use primary sources. Fortunately, its a citation needed for now so it can be deleted later. On the other hand, nowadays, who would view it even remotely possible that the NFL could go bankrupt? 66.234.33.8 (talk) 14:12, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

I do not know how to cite Congress in a footnote either. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 14:19, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

This really should have gone through a professional author. But, at this time, I honestly due not think they did due diligence. They have trouble getting his first name correct and his date of birth correct. If I look at notes from any author and I find a single author looking at the Congressional record, then I will not include it. If not a single author ever annotates looking at the Congressional record, then, near as I can tell, they are negligent. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 18:56, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

92nd Congress p. 196: "Total financial failure was a very real possibility in 1953, when substantial gate revenues could mean the survival of a team.

'The greatest part of [NFL] clubs income is derived from the sale of tickets to games. Reasonable protection of home game attentance is essential to the very existence of the individual clubs, without which there can be no League and no professional football...'"

IOW, they go bankrupt without black out policy. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 19:11, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Rader, supports the Congressional record, writes televising home games would be "...disastrous for the entire league." p. 86 66.234.33.8 (talk) 10:45, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

The 92nd Congress appears to be a secondary, and not a primary, source and looks to be quoting Grim. I am free on this:'...no professional football..." that is just a deadly quote.66.234.33.8 (talk) 22:51, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

moving to todo page, this is rock solid stuff supported in Bell's testimony to congress in 1957 66.234.33.8 (talk) 22:07, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

no this is a tertiary source...this is rock solid..bell quoted it in 1957 and in 1972 or 1975, the Congressional recored requoted Bell ...case closed. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 19:39, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

NPOV

Wikipedia newbie help files say you have to recognize your biases. I am extremely biased against the violence of the NFL, especially in the 1950s. I strongly advocate promulgating the violence of the NFL, during, its golden age, the 1950's. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 18:50, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

doing it. The NFL, as a source, can not be considered as a historically NPOV. This is by Bell's admission in the 1950s. This might be open to reevaluation in the last several years and is not necessarily true in 2011. Books I have used as references may be have been funded by the NFL and may violate NPOV. All I can say is that I am aware of the bias that might exist in these books. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 17:15, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

no, nfl books might not have bias...they are biased...Maule is a blatant cheerleader for the NFL. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 19:42, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

Yost

"... and if Bert Bell was ever wrong about anything in his tenure as NFL commisioner, it was his early position on televised football." Yost - p. 63.(or p. 77). Professional criticism. I am not including it at this time because I believe it is a wee bit more complicated than Mr. Yost suggests, see attendance figures for Rams from MacCambridge, 92nd U.S. Congress minutes, et. al. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 19:34, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

I will reevaluate this criticism. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 22:30, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

reevaluated, too many historical inaccuracies on that page, yost is writing bell did not want to televise games at all...which is ridiculous, the criticism should be he did not get the owners to agree on sharing money as early as possible 66.234.33.8 (talk) 12:18, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Newbie help files on Wikipedia

The help files on wikipedia say the table of contents target average is 16 lines. Young adult reading will be wiped out, so thats 19. Filchock is small...18..Nfl schedule will be wiped out 17...aafc-nfl merger will be wiped out..16....postbellum will be added..17...television era and nflpa will be wiped out...15...golden age will be added...16...golden age is a cliche, but it works. This, from a TOC, standpoint diminishes the television era and nflpa sections...but what do i know. i'm not doing it now because the television era and nflpa sections are not stable.

golden age is a major cliche and i am definitely not going to move fast on deleting nflpa and television era. the other stuff will definitely be wiped out, a better section title than postbellum would be helpful though...i'll take 17 toc lines...i think bell could require 1 more toc line than other featured articles, on average 66.234.33.8 (talk) 18:24, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

under reevaluation, moved to todo page because of Kenesaw Mountain Landis and the golden age cliche 66.234.33.8 (talk) 14:46, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Elmer's vs. Bert's contract

Elmer got a contract 5 yr deal at at 20k for 5 years; Bert got a deal at 20k per for 3 years. Do not fall into the trap some authors have set. In a close examination of Layden's contract one would see that Layden's salary would end up getting destroyed if the United States entered WWII and the NFL had to discontinue operations. (It's in Layden's book and at least one other book - that's at least one plausible explanation why Layden supported continuing the NFL during the war.) Prima facia evidence of Bell's contract vs. Layden's contract suggests the NFL owners thought very little of Bert, which may be true, but it is not necessarily true. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 22:07, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

Primary sources and findings of fact

I think it does not go astray of wikipedia rules when I use primary sources for a finding of fact. Case in point, the NFL constitution in 1941 is revealed in the 1957 Congressional testimony. I offer no interpretation of the NFL constitution. I just annotate it and say go look at it for yourself. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 19:08, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

The Excursus section, which I just introduced, is the basis of this. The excursus section does not belong in this article. But the wikipedia newbie files clearly state there is no such thing as a perfect article. So when articles on the NFL get better, then this section should eventually be wiped out. It has to be included now because articles have to be, according to wikipedia newbie files, self-sufficient. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 19:11, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

the excursus section will be deleted very soon...good intention..bad execution 66.234.33.8 (talk) 21:50, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

excursus section gone 66.234.33.8 (talk) 21:46, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Biases again

My edits bias everything towards the biographer. If there's a tie, and it is a and utterly and completely very detailed and very trivial matter, Lyons wins. If it's not a trivial matter, then I seek other sources when in a conflict between sources. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 19:30, 4 September 2011 (UTC) I cut the biographer no slack anymore. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 00:27, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Primary transition headaches

# steelers to bell's hiring...when should the aafc be brought in 66.234.33.8 (talk) 22:36, 6 September 2011 (UTC) done

Merge to NFLPA

Stuff in this article is too detailed. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 12:34, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Merge to NFL Draft== Stuff in this article is too detailed and the NFL Draft has no history. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.234.33.8 (talk) 13:13, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Submitting for good article review

I am going to submit this for good article review. It's missing, at least, the following:

1. children's careers. All of them are extremely successful.
2. the lead is atrocious
3. the Philadelphia Eagles section is confusing because he was both an owner and a coach and there are no featured articles on Wikipedia about owners that I know of
4. the 1st paragraph on the Steelers I think I can tighten up....I think I can improve that
5. I have to do battle with the Steagles article, I need to get too detailed info on SOS out of there and just generalize done
6. 3rd paragraph of steelers is a problem ...it reads like a team history...yuck
7. television era just basically needs ALOT more research, although i've spent oodles of time on it
8. NFLPA is a major problem ....both in context with the NFLPA and the fact it needs lots of research between 1946 and 1956
9. and the legacy and honors section last paragraph is really bad
10. and the legacy and honors section does not include criticism by Coenen and the judge in an antitrust case against the NFL. The judge's comments are out of context because it was 20 years after Bell died and it is contemperaneously disputed by Paul Brown. Both Coenen and the judge disparage the NFL draft as enhancing competitive parity...(it's really not a simple issue and I think I have to fault Coenen for really not looking into it more deeply than he did. The judge's comments could be seen to as completely denigrate the effect of the draft since 1936 when a fair reading suggests it had almost no impact when compared to Rozelle's negotiation of a tv revenue sharing plan circa 1962.) That being said, the criticism needs to be in this article.
11. and mandatory, I need Bert's children mentioning he never got full value for selling the Steelers to Rooney.
12. In intro: "In times of impasse among the owners, he acted unilaterally and decisively for the betterment of the league" not supported by body - thats after the AAFC-NFL merger...easy fix— Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.234.33.8 (talk) 20:57, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

And I'm not signing my name anymore, that's for people with accounts. Bots sign my name :)

Refactoring citations

I am refactoring citations to reduce overcitation. No dispute exists over the veracity.

1. Date of birth, date of death, and age at death: Most incorrect info stems from Rothe's Who's Who probably. I changed the deleted citations to a e.g. list and put it in the accurate citation. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 15:12, 16 October 2011 (UTC) done
2. Filchock-Hapes scandal: converted to e.g. list again 66.234.33.8 (talk) 15:24, 16 October 2011 (UTC) done
3. Price to buy the franchise: minor omissions of details exists among authors converting to e.g. list again 66.234.33.8 (talk) 15:35, 16 October 2011 (UTC) done
4. Parters in buying the franchise: minor omissions of details exists among authors converting to e.g. list again 66.234.33.8 (talk) 15:45, 16 October 2011 (UTC) done
5. Filchock-Hapes who was present at the interview: extremely minor omission of detail depending on the author, converting to e.g. list again 66.234.33.8 (talk) 16:01, 16 October 2011 (UTC) done
6. His dad's accomplishments: most authors omit the trivial fact his father was a public speaker. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 16:19, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
7. Same old steelers: excessive citations 66.234.33.8 (talk) 16:33, 16 October 2011 (UTC) done
8. Blue laws: minor omissions of details exist among others, move to e.g. list 66.234.33.8 (talk) 16:42, 16 October 2011 (UTC) done
9. Mendelson: Mendelson was brought in to contrast the difference Bell and Rooney paid to get in the league. But the solution was supplied by Joe Horrigan, Mendelson citation not needed 66.234.33.8 (talk) 17:11, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
10. Ray Kemp: minor omissions of details exists among others, principally including whether he was cut, he didn't want to return because he wanted to to back to college to graduate, or he didn't want to return because he wanted to go to his alma mater and become a coach 66.234.33.8 (talk) 17:30, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

Merge tag AAFC-NFL competition (1946-1949)

Off topic info: moving to History of the St. Louis Rams 66.234.33.8 (talk) 21:57, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

Merge to|Blue law|date=October 2011

Off topic info: moving to Blue law 66.234.33.8 (talk) 22:21, 22 October 2011 (UTC) done 66.234.33.8 (talk) 23:08, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

lost sources

1. my library lost joe king's book. being i have made so many mistakes with citations, i was hoping to double-check the quote king attributed to bell. i really think it's a quote that fits in the article nicely. since the library lost the book, i can not double-check it. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 22:02, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

IOW, if some can please help me look at the Joe King attributed citations I made, then I would greatly appreciate it. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 17:19, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

1. my library is missing who's who from 1909 until 1920. Bell's father shows up as a trustee in 1920 but there is no mention of him in 1909 66.234.33.8 (talk) 21:41, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
2. my library is also missing who's who for 1950, which was when the first time Bert Bell was incorporated into the who's who...it appears as if all sources in the 1950s are using that book to erroneously state his date of birth 66.234.33.8 (talk) 21:50, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
3. my library also lost Maule's book

keepalive 66.234.33.8 (talk) 00:32, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

employees under bell

I want to make a new section but it looks like it requires a template which I do not know how to make. I want the employees bell hired, their position, and the year they came on. It should be less than 5 total positions and 6 employees (one guy retired in mid 50s. This will be a very hard to list to create because the info is very sketchy. But, generally its important because he had so few employees. Should be general counsel, assistant to commissioner, secretary, public relations director, and one other one I think. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 12:41, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

It becomes important because it will not be long until Rozelle the Rozelle article on Wikipedia says something to the effect that Bell ran the NFL from his kitchen table. The This article can have some continuity with Rozelle's article in that respect. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 20:57, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

This is very close to being correct and is covered by U.S. Congress 1957 in one fell swoop. What is left out in that is the secretary, his assistant (I think)(his assistant is covered by Danzig) and Shorty (Shorty should have been hired about 1938 and he was the technical advisor or supervisor of officials; I forget which.66.234.33.8 (talk) 16:47, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

keepalive, reevaluate, interesting. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 00:31, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Most wanted

1. Most wanted is a quote about Bert from his daughter that should exists somewhere on the internet. I can not find it. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 22:56, 22 August 2011 (UTC) yep, after reevaluation...I believe any comments from his daughter rank extremely high on importance. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 22:23, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
2. Ruck implies Rooney felt that he was better off running the Steelers on his own in 1945. Then Ruck writes Bell was unpopular in Pittsburgh at the time. If that's the case, then there might be a chance it is listed in contemporary sources that are not affiliated with the NFL. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 09:10, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
3. first fine levied by an NFL commissioner for unsportsmanlike conduct...this is actually more complicated than it looks...the union went bonkers over Rozelle levying a fine sometime in the 1960s or early 70's for players leaving the bench to engage in a brawl...one of the sports illustrated articles in further reading basically states...that guy pummelled our guy in the last game, now its time for payback, IOW, boys will be boys and the commish was out of the picture...and that should have been b4 the nflpa was formally created 66.234.33.8 (talk) 21:45, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

keepalive 66.234.33.8 (talk) 00:25, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

George Preston Marshall

There is only anecdotal evidence about him that I can find. Nevertheless, he was inducted into the hall of fame. Albeit, he is universally attacked, with extremely strong evidence, that he was a racist. The lack of a professional author to tackle, excuse the metaphor, GPM does hurt this article. Hopefully, someday a professional author will put out a biography of his life....It will be a gigantic task...much more than bell and even much more than lombardi. The lack of a biography on gpm does hurt this article 66.234.33.8 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 19:37, 3 September 2011 (UTC). keepalive 66.234.33.8 (talk) 00:28, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Television and payments

Jackie Gleason, if memory serves me right which it usually does not, should have been getting much more for his weekly show than the NFL got for its weekly broadcast in the early 1950s. This should be investigated for veracity and relevancy. I think historical records will show Gleason to be the most popular tv figure of his time. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 21:18, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

keepalive, intersting 66.234.33.8 (talk) 00:29, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Filchock-Hapes scandal

I proposed a split in Frank Filchock to create a new page Filchock-Hapes scandal. I am consequently requesting a merge to that article. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 18:29, 23 October 2011 (UTC) done 66.234.33.8 (talk) 23:08, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Deleting off topic too detailed stuff

This should free up some space for the Bills. It's not the Bills I care about per se, it's bringing in Crippen's criticism of Bell's pocket veto of the Bills, and also freeing up space for his children's successes in their media/football ventures after his passing. There's one other thing I want to bring in also , but I forget what it is :0, I would hope at least 50 citations to be wiped out and some replaced by online sources ...um I am going to try to utilize online newspaper articles for sources and thus find no need to say: In this month and this year and let the citations do that ugly work for me. I hope to consolidate lots of citations. It's just not fun seeing that many citations, but I should get credit for doing all the research I have done. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 00:23, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Birth date controversy

Bell's biographer lists his birthdate as in 1893 and on another page says he died just shy of his 67th birthday. MacCambridge lists his birthdate as in 1895 and the newspaper account of his death list him as dying just shy of 65th birthday. I can not discern MacCambridge's source for his birthdate in my electronic copy of his book except to say there is nothing about going to look up his birth certificate. My electronic copy of Lyons book is completely lacking any information on sources. I honestly don't care one way or another but I would prejudiced to believer the biographer would have been more thorough. The biographer does over and over again mention how all his contemporary in school kept saying how mature Bell was for his age. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 19:50, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

His gravestone says 1895-1959. See his Find-A-Grave memorial for photo.--BillFlis (talk) 03:46, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

I saw that. Bottom line is I did not notice until about 10 minutes ago that Lyons lists his passing away on October 12. Also I looked at his sources in his book. He did not say he went to look at his birth certificate. I also spent 45minutes watching a video yesterday where Lyons introduced his book. He did not say anything about a birth date inconsistency. It's entirely a blue blood family in the late 1800s that could have lied if their child was born out of wedlock. But the previous items mentioned made me switch everything around. A professional biographer should have picked up on that. Obviously I have no idea when he was born and it really makes no difference whether he was born in 1893 or 1895. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 23:34, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

Ruck reports Bell died at age 65.

Joe King, in a book that Bert Bell wrote the foreword for, writes that Bell was born in 1894. I do not know if Bell read the book before he wrote the foreword, but if he did, how could he not have picked up on his birth date being listed wrong??? It's just an absolutely terrible job all around by all the authors of the various books. He was only born about a hundred years ago...and to an extremely rich family to boot. 173.52.5.48 (talk) 00:19, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

The Who's Who of 1950 looks to be the culprit for almost all of the incorrect dates of Bell's birth. My library that book so I can not read it. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 21:57, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

keepalive; looks like Rothe is to blame for all of this 66.234.33.8 (talk) 23:17, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

NFLPA vs. Television Era

Noone has knocked Lyons more than me. But he has it right. Bell's dealings with the infant NFLPA look to be more important than how he handled the infant television industry. When you look at Unitas and the pre-59'ers and the original Bell contract that became the Bell-Rozelle contract with the union......this aritcle has tremendous gaps and holes...there are scant sources on this...it's really terrible 66.234.33.8 (talk) 23:15, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

fixing..working around Lyons otherwise I just might as well just copy and paste from his book, which, imho, is the dominant football book for that era, bar none 66.234.33.8 (talk) 12:40, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

keepalive 66.234.33.8 (talk) 23:12, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia lead

I am not using death in the first sentence. It's passed away. His children are still alive. So, I do not think it is a burden on this article to say passed away in the very first sentence of the article. I think words have to be chosen properly and respectfully, for his children and his grandchildren. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 23:12, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

"Death" is a neutral word, "passed on" is a euphemism and should not be used per WP:EUPHEMISM and the Manual of Style. Eagles 24/7 (C) 00:28, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

1951 NFL Championship Game tv rights

Bell negotiated a 95k contract, not 75k. The Associated Press looks to be the primary culprit with the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette falling into the trap and authors following suit. See MacCambridge p. 480 where he discusses the conflict. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 09:42, 31 October 2011 (UTC) Mac, quotes Keller from Sport and Television in the 1950s: A Preliminary Survey, 'Not even God knows much about televised sport in the 1950s.' 66.234.33.8 (talk) 09:58, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Passion for the game

A full text reading of sources shows Bell only to be, at the very least, equaled by Halas in passion about the game of football. Rooney, Mara, Marshall, are not simply in the same league of these two. Halas is a monumental figure in the NFL. This article does not really bring out Bell's passion and devotion to the game. Halas is prolly in a league of his own. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 23:46, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

How would you suggest we change the article to reflect these thoughts?P0PP4B34R732 (talk) 23:57, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Great question. Let me think about it. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 22:22, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

First of all, this article is tremendously remiss in detailing the finanacial sacrifice Bell and his family endured to promote the NFL. Also, and in particular, this article almost completely omits the financial support Bell had from his wife, Frances (the emotional support Bell had from Frances is omitted, not because of me, but because of the lack of support from reliable sources that I have utilized). A full reading of the sources show, (arguably, I have been neglectful in finding more sources with respect to Frances) Frances being, at the very least, a catalyst to his and the NFL's success. Hrmmm...Secondly, really what is not brought out in this article properly is that Bell put his job on the line to ensure that the NFL draft would continue to be a viable part of the NFL - I've discussed this before, see Talk:National Football League Players Association. Thirdly, some of the stuff is not chronologically placed correctly and is stuck in Family Life and Death, this will be fixed eventually. Some of the stuff is avoided because of peacock terms and the like. Generally speaking, Lyons is ultimately dead on in that he and his family sacrificed greatly and, although his greatest chess moves as commissioner were with dealing with the television media, really he was decades ahead of everyone with respect to dealing with the new labor movement of the NFLPA. I think the professional football hall of fame and others attribute too much acclaim to him w respect to dealing with television, and far, far, far too little acclaim w dealing w the NFLPA. But, I can only write what reliable sources say :) 66.234.33.8 (talk) 22:53, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Let me just get a timeline down first.

There's a funny story Lyons relates in his book, which I just think is completely hilarious, someone asks him to sign something about something, and bell basically replies (paraphrasing)Sonny, my father was Attorney General of Pennsylvania and my brother is a Justice on the Supreme Court of Pennsylania, so I don't sign anything but "Happy Birthday"...I'm laughing just thinking about it...but iow, its tough to find some stuff out sometimes. (i click show preview, and I'm still laughing)

Certainly, numerous sources recount Bell openly crying at owners' meetings, but I am not putting in that directly because it's in book after book after book. But I can certainly paraphrase that and I probably will...."became severly emotionally distraught over Marshall's selfish nature in not [thinking league-first]" (Not going to say league-first, it's a cliche used over and over and over again). If I can not find an author willing to say "passion and devotion", then I will do exactly what they do and build up a case, by exhibiting example after example after example after example and let the reader decide what it means 66.234.33.8 (talk) 21:00, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Some of the stuff I have written is really bad. I mean, who cares if the Eagles were 1-9 in whatever year. It reads like a team history article. Yuck. One thing I know I want in this article in the Eagles section is when 20-30 people attended a game on a really cold wintery day and Bell invited them all up to the press box and served them coffee and donuts. That was Bert Bell. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 00:48, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

I am open to suggestions :) 66.234.33.8 (talk) 00:54, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

I have started it thanks to Robert A. Maxwell and the Evening Public Ledger. Too bad, Maxwell died 2 young and looks to have been a great friend of Bell's by all accounts.

I still think Florence was a heavy hitter, but there are no sources on that. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 02:09, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

There's a bunch of things now popping up. First and foremost is his friendship with Maxwell. 2ndly I now have a reason he was so protective of officiating which has not been brought out and must be brought out. What was intended .....the way the violence of the game was described by me was supposed to how even in the adversity of this negative publicity (and this negative publicity extended for decades against the NFL) he still staunchly defended the game.....Maybe my tone was wrong. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.234.33.8 (talk) 22:53, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

keepalive 66.234.33.8 (talk) 23:07, 20 January 2012 (UTC) keepalive 66.234.33.8 (talk) 22:59, 2 February 2012 (UTC) keepalive

Things are relevant. Historically speaking, the gizmo player which Bell utilized in 1938 or 1939, which needs fact checking by me, from Sing Sing, is now relevant to what is going on with the New York Jets in 2012. I can't do anything because my hands are tied by other matters. But, it's an extremely fascinating historical perspective. When you look at the player that Bell brought in against the immortal George Halas and you look at what's goin' on now w the Jets now it's mind blowing. I need fact checking, but the gizmo player brought in - should have been brought in during the worst season in the history of the Philadelphia Eagles. Generally speaking, I have done a pathetic job in showing Bell's passion for the game. So this is a keepalive. This article is suffering because of things that are going on in my life, the utter understatement, imho, by Lyons of Francis' support for Bert. There's got to be some way to get out of this hole. If I had the time I would really like to tackle 1940-1946 from local newspapers. However, I did a respectable job with the bounty stuff which is now (2012) contemporary. This article is all over "bounties" back to 1946-1951 thanks to Ratterman. I am way out in the front on that. I can not do anything, my hands are tied for the next 2 months. Very sad. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 01:01, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

wikipedia is supposed to be a collaboration. Guys, read Ratterman's book. Bounties were not bounties, they were just sophmoric traits or maybe even just some kind of post wwii ptsd thingie. They did not create bounties to injure opponents, per se, they just did it for (this is a talk page so I'll just run and gun) "fun". Sorry. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 01:06, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

keepalive 66.234.33.13 (talk) 00:36, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

keepalive 66.234.33.13 (talk) 04:15, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

Criticism of the draft

The draft that Bell implemented was eventually ruled illegal on 2 occassions (Mackey and Yazoo). I absolutely love criticizing Bell because the NFL is just a cheerleading squad. But the Yazoo stuff has to get out of this article because it's not really in context. It has to be explained in the history of the nfl draft. The reason being is that I will have to editorialize in this article. To include that the draft is ruled unconstitutional in this article, 20+ years after he died, is very simply not fair and lacks context which this article can not afford to utilize to explain. Maybe I can come up with a work around and just say it was ruled unconstitutional and then point to a subsection in the history of the draft...But.....that's like really hard to do. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 00:43, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Likewise, its not fair to include Yost saying the draft was the best thing since slice bread in his book because his book was published in 2006. If I include Yost, then I have to include opinions of federal judges. What I can include is Paul Brown, Red Grange and a host of other contemporary witness that keep the discussion in context. Errr...lemme rethink...I can always, always include Lyons and Lyons refers to Yost so...maybe Yost is fair to use. I will have to reevaluate. Anything Lyons says is pertinent; he's the biographer 66.234.33.8 (talk) 21:21, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

keepalive 66.234.33.8 (talk) 02:10, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Keepalive 66.234.33.8 (talk) 23:08, 20 January 2012 (UTC) keepalive 66.234.33.8 (talk) 01:08, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

keepalive 66.234.33.13 (talk) 04:16, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

Deleting duplicate citations 20111108

duplicate citations are being deleted and the citations are stored in a copy under (cf. Authorname page number) 66.234.33.8 (talk) 16:35, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

keepalivce 66.234.33.13 (talk) 00:37, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

keepalive 66.234.33.13 (talk) 04:16, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

Bert Bell and Phoenixville

I have utterly hammered the idea in this article and the Union article that Bell played for Union. It's not true. He was the head linesman for the game. See the further reading section. Also every single solitary citation in the union article is a dead link. Also, that article has blatant inaccuracies. Bell formed his own team in 1920, but he disbanded it because of the Black Sox Scandal. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 02:04, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

keepalive. I do not want anyone saying Bell played against Thorpe as Lyons suggests. That looks to be inaccurate. 66.234.33.8 (talk) 01:07, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

keepalive 66.234.33.13 (talk) 00:37, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

keepalive 66.234.33.13 (talk) 04:17, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

, Time Magazine (11/29/1954)

Why did I use this as a citation for his name? Ijustreadbooks (talk) 21:30, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

this is a dump of number of television sets because ...long story

Also, although there was only about 60,000 sets in the country,<ref>Powers, 1984, p. 46. (cf. Coenen 153)</ref> he was given the task of approving each TV announcer, before they could be employed to announce a game.<ref name="Lyons, 2010, pp. 132-133.">Lyons, 2010, pp. 132-133.</ref> However, each NFL franchise was empowered to market its own games with television broadcasting companies.<ref name="Lyons, 2010, pp. 132-133."/><ref name="Coenen, 2005, p. 153.">Coenen, 2005, p. 153.</ref> Ijustreadbooks (talk) 03:31, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

Archive dump of salary increase of 1951 which is not important

Also, Bell's salary was increased again for the remainder of his contract.<ref>{{cite news | title = Pro Teams End Draft; Give Bert Bell Raise | date = 1951-01-20 | url = http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=KhVPAAAAIBAJ&sjid=K04DAAAAIBAJ&dq=bert%20bell&pg=4372%2C2006981 | work = [[St. Petersburg Times]] | pages = 19 }}; cf. Lyons: 174-175</ref>Ijustreadbooks (talk) 03:11, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

reversed course, no source

<!--missing a source here, clearly someone got to him and said the DOJ's had no case so he reversed course; Judges of that era were always blabbering (it was probably someone to GPM--> blatantly obvious someone got to him Ijustreadbooks (talk) 04:06, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Archive Radovich vs NFL July 12 2012

Furthermore, the Court delineated a disparity in American professional sports which the Court said was "unrealistic, inconsistent, or illogical"; professional baseball was exempt from antitrust laws, but other professional sports were not.<ref name="NYT on antitrust exemption for baseball">{{cite news | url=http://www.nytimes.com/1999/12/19/sports/backtalk-from-hearst-to-stern-the-shaping-of-an-industry-over-a-century.html |title=Backtalk; From Hearst to Stern: The Shaping of an Industry Over a Century |author=Burton, Rick |date=December 19, 1999 |work=The New York Times}}</ref><ref name="Tuscaloosa compares baseball and football antitrust">{{cite web | url=http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=PRsfAAAAIBAJ&sjid=3pkEAAAAIBAJ&pg=7098,6475798&dq=bert+bell&hl=en |title=Pro Football Would Welcome Probe, Says NFL Commissioner Bert Bell |date=February 26, 1957}}</ref><ref name="HJH-0006, 1957, p. 1.">U.S. House Committee I, 1957, p. 1.</ref> The Court suggested it was Congress's responsibility to legislate uniformity across all of professional sports.<ref name="RUCK, p. 293."/> Congress immediately scheduled hearings on the ramifications of the ruling.

The word "Furthermore" indicates off-topicIjustreadbooks (talk) 01:16, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Questions

territorial rights ?? define it or not. To this day, confusion still exists about it. It is defined in Willis' book. Should I do one of those Note thingie sections? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ijustreadbooks (talk • contribs) 03:09, 17 July 2012 (UTC) Ijustreadbooks (talk) 03:11, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

dump layden being fired

====Second NFL commissioner==== [[Elmer Layden]] was hired as NFL commissioner in 1941, but Ward was viewed as dictating his hiring.<ref>Littlewood: 133</ref> Some of the owners believed Layden had a conflict of interest in dealing with the AAFC.<ref>Littlewood: 157–158</ref> Throughout 1945, a feud between [[Dan Topping]], owner of the [[Brooklyn Dodgers (NFL)|Brooklyn Dodgers]], and Mara,<ref>Peterson:, 149; cf. Piascik: 52–54, MacCambridge 2005: 14</ref> resulted in Topping taking his Dodgers from the NFL to the AAFC.<ref>Littlewood: 161; cf. Carroll; with Gershman, Neft, and Thorn: 527</ref> The competition from the AAFC, Layden's attitude on the threat of the AAFC, and Topping's departure, contributed to Layden getting fired in January 1946.<ref>Davis 2005: 199; cf. MacCambridge 2005: 15, Peterson: 159</ref> Bell, who was not well respected in Pittsburgh,<ref>Ruck; Patterson and Weber: 225; cf. Davis 2005: 201</ref> was elected to become the second<ref>Williams: 41.</ref> NFL commissioner.<ref>Lyons: 116–117; cf. MacCambridge 2005: 15</ref>

need to delete lots of off topic bytes Ijustreadbooks (talk) 04:39, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Pittsburgh Steelers section comments

I was asked to perform a peer review for the Pittsburgh Steelers section of this article. My comments are below:

• What is the "Pennsylvania Polka"? Is that a nickname for the team swap Bell and Thompson did? That needs to be clarified in the article, like "In December 1940, in what was called (or "considered") the "Pennsylvania Polka," Bell negotiated..."
• "Bell and Rooney became equal partners in the Steelers after Rooney bought a half interest in Bell's Eagles(REF) before they subsequently swapped franchises with Thompson.(REF)" needs to be reworded in respect to the "after" and "before" in the same sentence.
• The "S" in "Same old Steelers" should be lowercase or lowercase in brackets like this: "[s]ame" ?
• Should "patriots" be in quotations in the article?
• The third sentence of the second paragraph may need to be broken up.

Overall the section is very informative and well-researched, but some areas need to be cleaned up. Eagles 24/7 (C) 05:32, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

I am going to read the whole page over several times and then come bother you again. That's too many mistakes to have in one section. I just chopped 40% bytes of History of the NFL out of this article. I probably went too fast. 66.234.33.13 (talk) 01:28, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

1. ok on same old steelers
2. rephrased "as patriots" to patriotic duty - i am apt to get a book on baseball history and look at FDR's letter to Kenesaw Mountain Landis, which is a featured article and rephrase it totally with a citation and maybe an online newspaper source
3. 3rd sentence, 2nd paragraph - needs total rewrite
4. Pennsylvania Polka - I messed that up

66.234.33.13 (talk) 01:54, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Removed from Steeler section because Bell's is not mentioned for 2 sentences in a row - leave here for safekeeping.

Player salaries were immediately driven up drastically,<ref>Ruck; Patterson and Weber: 228; cf. Davis 2005: 200–201</ref> and the NFL reacted by creating a rule to ban players for five years from NFL-associated employment if they left the NFL to join the AAFC.<ref>Lyons: 120; cf. Coenen: 182</ref> 66.234.33.13 (talk) 02:10, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

I don't understand what this part means: with a phrase that would morph into the "[s]ame old Steelers".

"it immediately drove up NFL player salaries(REF) by battling for the best players." should read "it immediately drove up NFL player salaries(REF) with battles for the best players."

That's it for my comments, everything else looks good. Eagles 24/7 (C) 02:09, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

ok ill try to rephrase both those sentences Ijustreadbooks (talk) 03:23, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

fyi, there are two versions of the phrase he uttered which was morphed into SOS. The Steagles editors have the version in their article which I do not believe is factual. Lyons offers compelling evidence that the Steagles editors got it wrong. My gut feeling is to let that sentence slide and let you figure out what to do. I'll put a ticky mark by that and we'll deal with it later after I better explain the dilemma. It's not a show stopper at this time.Ijustreadbooks (talk) 03:29, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

I think you will have to come up with a resolution, or at least a suggestion, on how to handle "morphed" and the SOS stuff - it's above my level. The relevant section is stuck on the Steagles page Steagles Talk Page. Me personally, I'd prefer to squash those editors and go with Lyons. He has the most compelling case.

I'm skipping SOS and onto the Eagles. Ijustreadbooks (talk) 08:09, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

The inaugural 1933 Philadelphia Eagles Season

I am a Giant fan, but I can see how that can be important. The 1933 NFL season has been deprecated in favor of the 1933 Philadelphia Eagles season. Ijustreadbooks (talk) 04:43, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

delete section further reading -> ill get this book

==Further reading== * Lower Merion Historical Society (2000). ''The first 300 : the amazing and rich history of Lower Merion''. Ardmore, Pa. : The Society Ijustreadbooks (talk) 05:00, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

off topic rose bowl dump

At the time, this game was considered to be the greatest football game ever played on the [[West Coast of the United States|West Coast]].<ref>Hibner: 25</ref> Ijustreadbooks (talk) 06:06, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

cross posted from another user's edit

i undid your edit on the bert bell article. I really no nothing about navboxes. I did not put that navbox thingie in the article cause i dont know how to do stuff like that. But, I will buy that he can be considered the general manager of the eagles while he was the coach, owner, and president of the eagles. If you feel that strongly about it, then revert my edit. I think it's splitting hairs at this time; was Bert Bell officially ever know as the general manager of the Eagles - no. But you have to put things in context. When Bert Bell was the owner/president/coach of the Eagles did he carry out all the duties (which I consider to be that of a GM) of a present day football GM, yes. If you feel strongly about this topic, (I do not), then just revert my edit, no big deal.Ijustreadbooks (talk) 05:26, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

I'm moving this to the talk page on Bert Bell for futher analysis.

Maybe I have done a bad job in explaining Bert Bell's role with the Eagles. (Not maybe, probably actually). The navox thingie stays put for now. I'll probably have to revisit this kinda stuff. 05:33, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

User Jrcla2's edit which includes a navbox of Bell as GM of the Eagles

This edit will be reverted unless a source can be provided. I personally agree that Bell should be considered the GM of the Eagles but there was no such thing as GM in football in the 1930s. I know of no source that says Bell was the official GM of the Eagles. You can not jack navboxes on an article without a source and that is what user Jrcla2 did to this page. Ijustreadbooks (talk) 02:02, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Some light reading for User:Ijustreadbooks – WP:PA, WP:OWN. Jrcla2 (talk) 13:47, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Cute, you've put a navbox on in this article. It took me 18 months to refute a navbox that Bell actually played professional football in the NFL against Jim Thorpe. How about a citation for your navbox. And, btw, I agree with you, he was the GM of the Eagles, and the CEO, and the CIO, and the COO. But you have provided no citation. Your edit will be deleted without a citation. Ijustreadbooks (talk) 23:07, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

How difficult is this, you provide a citation for including the navbox, or I delete your navbox. Step up to the plate and provide a citation. I will not provide a citation from Lyons because his comment is flippant. There was no GM of the Eagles in 1930s and I honestly bundgled Steelers history in retrospect but I believe he was the VP of the Steelers (long story), but never the GM of the Steelers. I have heard enough, you have not provided a citation, you navbox is removed forthwith.Ijustreadbooks (talk) 23:14, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Bert Bell as GM

User Eagles 24/7 says their is a source that indicates Bell was the GM of the Eagles. I will vet the source. At this time I do not believe his source meets Wikipedia criteria for being a valid source. I do in fact believe that Bell was the de facto GM of the Eagles, but I do not believe such a position existed in the NFL in the 1930S. Ijustreadbooks (talk) 23:32, 26 January 2013 (UTC)