Historical Misconceptions that "grind your gears" Started by

oldecapecod11 · Post by **oldecapecod11** » Wed Nov 26, 2014 7:12 pm

Historical Misconceptions that "grind your gears"
Started by Hail Casares, Jun 18 2014 04:49 PM

This thread has been ready for a couple of days but it was held until this evening.

HAPPY THANKSGIVING

Most Replied To Thread of PFRAForum v.2
Started by ronfitch, Yesterday, 04:11 PM
#1 ronfitch
Forum Visitors
Posted Yesterday, 04:11 PM
As this version of the forum closes down tomorrow, if you check to see which thread had the most replies it is Hail Casares' somewhat recent "Historical Misconceptions that 'grind your gears'" thread:
http://www.pfraforum...?showtopic=3596
Began in June of this year, the thread went 13 pages. Seems fitting for the group - nice work, all y'all.

Page 1 of 13
NOTE: Page 2 Missing - continues with
Page 3 of 13
NOTE: Page 11 Missing - continues with
Page 12 of 13

I wonder? Did our bored decide to ravage this thread so that someone might not be able to save it in its entirety?
Only a bored member would have access to an entire thread. We can only edit our own posts - or so I thought?
The entire conjunction of events leading to the notification and then trashing of the archives is quite mysterious -
especially when you realize how long others were playing with the new site.

Archive

247 replies to this topic

#1 Hail Casares
Forum Visitors
Posted 18 June 2014 - 04:49 PM
One of mine is this idea that the 1985 Bears defense was this "flash in the pan" and one year wonder. That's not even close to being true.

Starting in 1983 the Bears defense began to make a run into the top 5 and 10 ranks of the NFL:

Year: Rnk in Pts/Rank in Yds/Defenseive SRS via PFR.com (0.0 is average)

1983: 5/8/ 1.5
1984: 3/1/ 6.4
1985: 1/1/ 9.4
1986: 1/1/ 7.7
1987: 4/2/ 2.3
1988: 1/2/ 6.6
1989: 20/25/ -1.8 (Injury plagued year. Singletary and McMichael missed major time)
1990: 9/6/ 3.3
1991: 9/4/ 2.0
1992: 22/17/ -3.3 (Ditka fired)

Even with the departure of Buddy Ryan the Bears defense stayed an elite unit for another 3-5 years after his departure and at the very least a very good unit with the exception of the injury marred 1989 season prior to it all falling apart in 1992.

Too often the '85 defense gets lumped in with the unmet expectations of the Bears in general following that Super Bowl winning season and I'm sure that clouds the perception of them.

The Bears overall average ranks for the decade of 1983-1992:

7.5/6.7/ 3.41

Taking out the two huge anomalies in that 10('89 and '92) year period you have a defense that for 80% of this time period was ranked on average:

4.1/3.1/ 4.9

The Bears defense was really good for a pretty long time.

What are some of you guys'?

#2 james
PFRA Member
Posted 18 June 2014 - 04:53 PM
That the 1972 Dolphins were the ONLY Undefeated team in history. The 1948 Cleveland Browns were 14-0. That just makes me mad that the 1948 Browns are not even ackowledged.

#3 SixtiesFan
Forum Visitors
Posted 18 June 2014 - 05:10 PM
Georgia Frontiere was often called "the first female owner of a pro football team" when in fact, Violet Bidwill Wolfner was majority owner of the Chicago-St. Louis Cardinals from 1947 until her death in 1962.

#4 Todd Pence
Forum Visitors
621 posts
Posted 18 June 2014 - 05:14 PM
That the 1980 Oakland Raiders were the "first wild card team to win a Super Bowl", when, in point of fact, it was the 1969 Kansas City Chiefs.

#5 mark22
PFRA Member
Posted 18 June 2014 - 06:24 PM
Mike Garrett is often mentioned as the 1966 AFL ROY...when it was Bobby Burnett!

#6 smith03
Forum Visitors
Posted 18 June 2014 - 06:52 PM
how about this Kansas city in 69 was the first non division winner to win the super bowl and Oakland was the first wild card in 80? I don't believe the term wild card was used in the 69 afl play-offs, does anyone know why the afl expanded the playoffs the last season? was it just to have as many games as the nfl?

#7 oldecapecod 11
PFRA Member
Posted 18 June 2014 - 07:05 PM
That anything in the past 15 years (maybe more) has ever been done for "the sake of" or for "the benefit of" or in "the interest of" those poor critters known as "the fans."
Hogwash!!! is far too mild...

#8 Mark L. Ford
Administrators
Posted 19 June 2014 - 10:05 AM
smith03, on 18 Jun 2014 - 6:52 PM, said:
how about this Kansas city in 69 was the first non division winner to win the super bowl and Oakland was the first wild card in 80? I don't believe the term wild card was used in the 69 afl play-offs, does anyone know why the afl expanded the playoffs the last season? was it just to have as many games as the nfl?
That's true, the "wild card" concept didn't come about until 1970. The 1969 playoffs simply included the second place finishers in each division, competing against the winners of the other division, nothing more, nothing less.

I've heard it argued that a wild card means any team that doesn't win its division but still gets in the playoffs. I just haven't ever seen that written down anywhere. Specifically, a wild card is the non-division winner that has a better overall record in the conference than the other non-division winners. Under the first definition, one could say that the Cleveland Browns were the first "wild card" team to win the NFL title, since they didn't win their division either-- they finished with the same record as the New York Giants in 1950, so there was a playoff. As for 1969, the non-division winner with the fourth best overall record was the San Diego Chargers, whose record was better than the Houston Oilers, but the Oilers went to the playoffs as the fourth team because they were the #2 team in their division.

The reason I've read for 4 teams in the 1969 playoffs (in The $400,000 Quarterback) was that it had been forced on the AFL by Pete Rozelle after the Jets won the Super Bowl, as part of the "they shouldn't have been there in the first place" mentality that the Giants would get decades later. The Raiders and Chiefs had both finished 12-2-0 in 1968 and had to have a playoff while the 11-3-0 Jets got to the title game automatically, and the logic was that the Jets might not have made it to the Super Bowl if they re had been a playoff. Under the 4-team playoff, of course, the Jets did lose to the Chiefs and the AFL title matched the Chiefs against the Raiders, supposedly (not sure I agree with the author) Rozelle's revenge on Broadway Joe.

#9 SixtiesFan
Forum Visitors
Posted 19 June 2014 - 10:39 AM
Mark L. Ford, on 19 Jun 2014 - 10:05 AM, said:
That's true, the "wild card" concept didn't come about until 1970. The 1969 playoffs simply included the second place finishers in each division, competing against the winners of the other division, nothing more, nothing less.

I've heard it argued that a wild card means any team that doesn't win its division but still gets in the playoffs. I just haven't ever seen that written down anywhere. Specifically, a wild card is the non-division winner that has a better overall record in the conference than the other non-division winners. Under the first definition, one could say that the Cleveland Browns were the first "wild card" team to win the NFL title, since they didn't win their division either-- they finished with the same record as the New York Giants in 1950, so there was a playoff. As for 1969, the non-division winner with the best overall record was the San Diego Chargers, whose record was better than the Houston Oilers, but the Oilers went to the playoffs because they were the #2 team in their division.

The reason I've read for 4 teams in the 1969 playoffs (in The $400,000 Quarterback) was that it had been forced on the AFL by Pete Rozelle after the Jets won the Super Bowl, as part of the "they shouldn't have been there in the first place" mentality that the Giants would get decades later. The Raiders and Chiefs had both finished 12-2-0 in 1968 and had to have a playoff while the 11-3-0 Jets got to the title game automatically, and the logic was that the Jets might not have made it to the Super Bowl if they re had been a playoff. Under the 4-team playoff, of course, the Jets did lose to the Chiefs and the AFL title matched the Chiefs against the Raiders, supposedly (not sure I agree with the author) Rozelle's revenge on Broadway Joe.

This is just my opinion, but letting the second place teams in the playoffs resulted in two more games and extra TV revenue. This has always been the primary aim of those who run pro football.

#10 SixtiesFan
Forum Visitors
Posted 19 June 2014 - 10:44 AM
Historical misconceptions that "grind your gears?" As someone who first followed pro football in 1958, there are a lot of them. One, favored by some Dallas Cowboy partisans, is that the Long Bomb didn't exist prior to Bob Hayes.

#11 bachslunch
Forum Visitors
Posted 19 June 2014 - 03:24 PM
SixtiesFan, on 19 Jun 2014 - 10:44 AM, said:
Historical misconceptions that "grind your gears?" As someone who first followed pro football in 1958, there are a lot of them. One, favored by some Dallas Cowboy partisans, is that the Long Bomb didn't exist prior to Bob Hayes.

Agreed. Related to this are the ideas that Hayes was the first deep speed threat receiver and that the zone defense was invented to stop Hayes.

Others:

-Ray Guy was the Greatest Punter Ever, End Of Discussion.

-two Super Bowl wins alone automatically make Jim Plunkett and Tom Flores HoF worthy, regardless of any other considerations.

-5 ringzzz alone automatically makes Charles Haley HoF worthy, regardless of any other considerations.

-meaningful pro football history doesn't exist prior to the Super Bowl years.
.

#12 smith03
Forum Visitors
Posted 19 June 2014 - 03:58 PM
excellent point about pre Super Bowl history

#13 james
PFRA Member
Pro Football 1920's-1970's, collecting football cards, collecting and reading football books.
Posted 19 June 2014 - 04:02 PM
bachslunch, on 19 Jun 2014 - 3:24 PM, said:
-meaningful pro football history doesn't exist prior to the Super Bowl years.
.
Agreed. The NFL does NOT acknowledge anything pre-Super Bowl nor do any of the networks. Makes me mad as most people have NO CLUE!

#14 BD Sullivan
Forum Visitors
Posted 19 June 2014 - 04:25 PM
*Paul Brown helped turn Otto Graham into a HOF quarterback, and that he pioneered film grading. Graham said himself that it was Blanton Collier who "taught me everything I know.” Collier also spent the offseason after the Browns' first year in the AAFC breaking down every play and every player. In the latter case, Brown's HOF web page actually states, "he became the first to ... grade his own players based on film study."

#15 oldecapecod 11
PFRA Member
Posted 19 June 2014 - 05:03 PM
Mark L. Ford
Posted Today, 09:05 AM
"... I've heard it argued that a wild card means..."
It has always been my understanding that a "wild card" is a changeable item varying from game to game or hand to hand and declared at the discretion of the dealer?

If there is any validity in that theory, a "wild card" can be anything that suits the whim (or hopefully need) of the system in any given year.

Since the playoff format is known at the start of each season, there is little or no opportunity for a "preferred" team to receive a playoff berth.

#16 Jagade
PFRA Member
Posted 19 June 2014 - 09:10 PM
That teams did not blitz until the 1960's. I have seen teams blitz in games from the early 1950's.

Also not right is that almanacs often do not include the All-America Conference in their pro football history, as if the league never existed. They will have the NFL championships from 1933 on, and the AFL from 1960 through 1969, and no AAFC.

#17 Jeremy Crowhurst
PFRA Member
Posted 19 June 2014 - 10:42 PM
oldecapecod 11, on 19 Jun 2014 - 5:03 PM, said:
Mark L. Ford
Posted Today, 09:05 AM
"... I've heard it argued that a wild card means..."
It has always been my understanding that a "wild card" is a changeable item varying from game to game or hand to hand and declared at the discretion of the dealer?
If there is any validity in that theory, a "wild card" can be anything that suits the whim (or hopefully need) of the system in any given year.

Since the playoff format is known at the start of each season, there is little or no opportunity for a "preferred" team to receive a playoff berth.
The best definition I've heard is that it's a playoff spot that isn't determined by a team's divisional ranking. Seems to fit how the NFL, NHL, and MLB have always used it. (Can't comment on hoops, don't follow it.)

#18 smith03
Forum Visitors
Posted 19 June 2014 - 11:12 PM
it would also be nice if those almanacs included APFA/NFL champs 1920-32

#19 Jagade
PFRA Member
Posted 20 June 2014 - 01:41 AM
smith03, on 19 Jun 2014 - 11:12 PM, said:
it would also be nice if those almanacs included APFA/NFL champs 1920-32

True, but for some reason, many of the almanacs only want to go back to 1933, when they started having championship games. Apparently, they consider 1933 the start of the "modern era."

The thing about the AAFC being left out is that it is very likely that the Cleveland Browns, who were the champions of the All-America Conference during its entire 4 year existence (1946-49), were the best team in all of football during most or all of the AAFC years. The Browns also became the most dominant team in the NFL for 6 years after entering that league in 1950, and also won the NFL Championship in 1950, their first year in the NFL. So, it seems like a farce that the AAFC is not even recognized as a major pro football league by these almanacs.

#20 Mark L. Ford
Administrators
Posted 20 June 2014 - 08:57 AM
Most almanacs will only acknowledge the American Football League as the only one whose title games rate a mention with the NFL, but the AFL was one of those rare instances of a competitor completing its run with all of its teams intact. Baseball's American League is the only other example I can think of, playing the World Series against the more established guys after only three seasons, and later serving under one Commissioner. The AAFC, like the ABA and the WHA, contributed only a few of its members after a merger agreement.

Page 1 of 13
oldecapecod 11

Historical Misconceptions that "grind your gears"
Started by Hail Casares, Jun 18 2014 04:49 PM

NOTE: Page 2 Missing - continues with
Page 3 of 13

Page 3 of 13

#41 BD Sullivan
Forum Visitors
Posted 21 June 2014 - 03:51 PM
Versatile John, on 21 Jun 2014 - 3:27 PM, said:
"Historical misconceptions" on the collegiate level about one guy:

When these morons claim that Joe Montana was a legend at Notre Dame and was one of the all-time greats in college football history. They base it off his NFL career. I watched every Domer game that Montana played in as a starter (live games and the replays with Nelson and Connor) and NOT one time did they say Montana was this legendary performer.

Plus, they will tell you Montana led ND to a helluva lot of come from behind victories......

NONE of this is true.
The fact that his last game with Notre Dame was a tremendous comeback while he was under the weather (to say the least), and that the game is on video that ESPN (and others) seemingly show all the time is what sticks in people's minds about his entire career with the Irish. It fits perfectly with the narrative they want to push about the superstar who wills his team to victory against tremendous odds.

#42 Versatile John
PFRA Member
Posted 21 June 2014 - 04:13 PM
Very true, Sullivan.

Yes, "The Chicken Soup" game was very impressive, no doubt. But, he was not this collegiate phenom that folks will have you believe.

Every year the legend of Joe Montana grows....and grows...and grows......

If you watch college games, everyone makes a reference to a Notre Dame QB as being "the next Joe Montana" as a player South Bend, not in the NFL. There were SO many other Domer QB's that were WAY more decorated than Montana. It is very comical. And I am not really talking about Fighting Irish fans, either. They know the facts.

In "Rudy," they even had a scene, where Rudy is sitting in a locker room and is looking at #3 walking through there as if it was a bat boy staring at Babe Ruth in 1927 with such hero worship. LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Again, Montana was NEVER all of that. If he had never been a phenom in the NFL, his collegiate career would barely be remembered. But, yet, people will have you believe he was this college superstar. HA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

In fact, that is my broad point about historical misconceptions: Basing a guy's collegiate career on his NFL career; they are two different things entirely. Ron Dayne, Ryan Leaf, Brian Bosworth, Tony Mandarich (last two aided by steroids) were college superstars.....Montana, Tom Brady, Willie Wood were not.

#43 JuggernautJ
PFRA Member
Posted 21 June 2014 - 04:53 PM
Versatile John, on 21 Jun 2014 - 4:13 PM, said:
Every year the legend of Joe Montana grows....and grows...and grows......

Hence the term "legend".
(It's kind of in the definition of the word)

My gears grind pretty easily but I think if I had to put the majority of my objections into a single category it would fall generally under the summary statement of "people judging something to be the 'best ever' without any reference to historical perspective."

#44 Versatile John
PFRA Member
Posted 21 June 2014 - 06:09 PM
I should have put quotations around the word in reference to Montana as in, the "legend" of Joe Montana at Notre Dame grows.....meaning it sarcastically.

Point: Montana was NOT the "legend" hs is cracked up to be as far as Notre Dame greats. Angelo Bertelli, Leon Hart, Tim Brown (better as a junior), Raghib Ismail, Paul Hornung (should not have won the Heisman in 1956, IMO), Ross Browner, Johnny Lujack, Johnny Lattner, George Gipp, Mike McCoy, the Four Horsemen, etc....Those people were true legends at Notre Dame; Montana was FAR from that.

#45 Mark L. Ford
Administrators
Posted 21 June 2014 - 06:30 PM
TouchdownTimmy, on 21 Jun 2014 - 03:17 AM, said:
I don't know if this should "grind my gears" or not. If I'm wrong then it shouldn't:

Mine is that the league we know as the National Football League was founded in 1920.

As a child I always read that the league began in 1919 as the American Pofessional Football Association. I also read that the Chicago Staleys were not one of the original members. Which means George Halas was not one of the NFL's founding fathers.

I don't know if this is fact, but it's what I have read in many older publications.
I remember reading that same thing about the APFA being founded in 1919 rather than 1920 and that "no records remain from that first season" or something equally mysterious-- and it was in the 1977 edition of Roger M. Treat's Encyclopedia of Pro Football, no less, so it had the weight of authority with it. I had an interesting discussion with Bob Carroll years later about that, and he said that there were so many misconceptions and legends that had been perpetuated that historians referred to them as "Treatisms". He added that it was regrettable, because Treat had done so much to preserve the early history of pro football back in the early 1950s, when so many of the original participants were still alive, and probably prevented quite a bit of the records from getting thrown away.

The 1919 thing was probably the most avoidable of blunders, though, because newspapers like the Canton Repository were saved in bound volumes during those pre-microfilm days. Regardless, that's something that shouldn't have been printed without first being attributed to a source.

#46 smith03
Forum Visitors
Posted 21 June 2014 - 07:29 PM
I have a theory and it only a theory, the reason why akron winning the 1920 championship was lost for so long and only seemed to surface after George halas died, was because without a 1920 champion, that made his 1921 Chicago team the "first" champion. like I said it just a theory. To put it another way had Decatur won the 1920 championship it wouldn't have been lost.

#47 74_75_78_79_
Forum Visitors
Posted 21 June 2014 - 07:56 PM
This one is way too obvious, which is why no one has posted it yet, but that the '80s Niners were a...'finesse' team. Many gritty tough SOBs on that team but, somehow, it seems to be lost amongst even the above-casual football fans (even if one of them....cut their finger off to keep on playing in a game or had a nickname like....'Hacksaw'). Their late-'80s backfield was literally a Nebraska Cornhusker backfield! Can't get any more smash-mouth/blue-collar than that! All those stupid, ignorant stereotypes against Joe not being a 'tough' QB, only throwing 'short' passes; simply all that SBXIX pre-game anti-hype against him in favor of Marino. Not that this is the first example of this (not even close), but playing in the cold against Ditka's Bears in the '88 NFCC (arguably his best performance ever)! And not that this is the first (not even close) example but being beaten almost to a pulp vs Philly at the Vet in '89, Week #3, Buddy still deciding to keep blitzing in the 4th Q against then-assistant Jeff Fisher's suggestion and Joe GETS UP (and you know the rest). Bill Walsh a 'wimp' as Paul Brown, actually, tried to depict him to aspiring employers who sought after him for a reference. Obviously, Brown didn't want to see him go. The 'white wine-drinking' 'Genius' (having a history of being a boxer) could be just as much a 'tough guy' as the Ditkas and Tunas and what not. Just about every starting defender on those '80s Niners teams would have very well fit-in with the Andy Russells, Mean Joes, Blounts, Hams, Lamberts, etc! They technically didn't really need MATT MILLEN to...'toughen them up' but he came onboard and - with Lott's permission - did just that anyway! Toughened them up even MORE! And that very added leadership of his (wrinkle) was definitely integral to how amazing and special that Classic '89 squad was! And while we're on this very subject, how about how Seifert 'inherited' his SBXXIV Ring as HC? Yes, Walsh should still get more of the credit simply being that he built the whole thing in the first place, but who knows (if however not too likely) that maybe, just maybe what made '89 work as it did was the sudden different setting? Hey, you never know! Walsh was ticked off all through '88 about the "what have you done for me lately" heat that DeBartolo was giving him and then after winning the Super Bowl after all, he (like Pacino's character in 'Any Given Sunday') resigned. Perhaps if he would have pondered the decision a bit longer then decided to sweep it under the rug and go-through-the-motions, maybe (just maybe) it may have not worked out. That is, however, doubtful so I'll just say this...though Walsh gets more credit for '89 either way, who else would have been as good a defensive guy behind to help him win those SBs in the first place (let's face it, the defense was the 'main character' in those '80s titles)? I know that 1-15 season at Carolina (along with, very unfairly, the help of his unassuming - actually Noll-like - stoic nature) will never be overlooked by the HOF-voters but it really should be! Heck, on both occasions in '89 & '94, he never got carried off the field by any TWO players from his team (what the...??). In addition to all that was said, THAT should place him in the Hall!

Heck, and I'm not even a Niners-fan (hated them when they were 'catching-up' to my Steelers in the '80s and some 'experts' were actually placing them as '#1 all-time'), but give due it's due!

#48 JWL
PFRA Member
Posted 21 June 2014 - 09:09 PM
The Jets winning Super Bowl 3 caused the AFL-NFL merger. You will see or hear this from casual fans.

Joe Namath sucked. Most people write or say this.

#49 ronfitch
Forum Visitors
Posted 21 June 2014 - 09:10 PM
Not sure if this isp a misconception is simply factually wrong, but it bugs me that so many journalists and fans - even longtime Viking fans living here - don't know that the Vikings won the '69 NFL championship. And the Colts won the '68 NFL championship.

That and the whole Dan Devine dog story in Green Bay, which Devine fueled and half-assed admitted did not happen the he suggested it had in his autobiograhy.

#50 smith03
Forum Visitors
Posted 21 June 2014 - 09:42 PM
this Vikings fan knows and tries to educate, actually I do think the local media in town (MSP) does a good job of pointing out Bud Grant won 1 NFL and 3 NFC championships for example, heck in 1989 the Viking wore a patch honoring the 69 NFL champs 40 for 60

#51 JohnH19
Forum Visitors
Posted 21 June 2014 - 10:05 PM
Versatile John, on 21 Jun 2014 - 3:27 PM, said:
Also, not an historical misconception, but a philosophical misconception: This horse manure that QB's win championships and everyone else is just along for the ride.

There's also the somewhat larger camp that says defense wins championships.

#52 Reaser
PFRA Member
Posted 21 June 2014 - 10:19 PM
1. Using stats over actually watching the games to rate or judge players, especially historically.

probably thousands of examples but here's two real quick;
At least once a year there's a "Bobby Layne was bad" post or comment, then someone who never saw him play, has seen zero film or anything, goes on to post meaningless stats to 'prove' how poor of a player he was.

The stats thing happens with Paul Warfield, too. Whether on these forums in the past or articles online somewhere, sure everyone's see it. Many more examples, whether it's using career stats or single-season stats, but point is made.

2. That the Associated Press All-Pro team is the only all-pro team.

3. Not so much a misconception but play-calling is completely ignored (less and less here since a handful of us point it out everytime) in the evaluation of past QB's.

4. All premature or flawed discussion of current players 'legacies' ... along with that is labeling players who aren't even a third of the way through their career as "future HOFers" ...

#53 JohnH19
Forum Visitors
Posted 21 June 2014 - 10:28 PM
Reaser, on 21 Jun 2014 - 10:19 PM, said:
4. All premature or flawed discussion of current players 'legacies' ... along with that is labeling players who aren't even a third of the way through their career as "future HOFers" ...

The whole media obsession with future HOFers in the big four North American team sports is annoying as hell.

#54 Teo
PFRA Member
Posted 21 June 2014 - 11:00 PM
Two from the Cowboys:

- Tom Landry had finished with a winning sesson when he was fired.

-Michael Irvin was drafted by Jimmy Johnson, his college coach.

#55 Teo
PFRA Member
Posted 21 June 2014 - 11:14 PM
Others relating to the PFRA Meeting in Cleveland:

-That pro football was born in Canton, Ohio, not in Western Pennsylvania.

-That Fawcett Stadium was home of the 1920s Canton Bulldogs.
#56 Teo
PFRA Member
Posted 21 June 2014 - 11:23 PM
Amongst uniform colors:

-The Green Bay Packers have always wore green, they have never worn blue.

-The Chicago Bears' colors are black and red ( as opposed to navy blue and orange).

#57 BD Sullivan
Forum Visitors
Posted 21 June 2014 - 11:35 PM
Teo, on 21 Jun 2014 - 11:23 PM, said:
Amongst uniform colors:

-The Green Bay Packers have always wore green, they have never worn blue.

-The Chicago Bears' colors are black and red ( as opposed to navy blue and orange).
In that same vein, that the Lions colors have always been Honolulu Blue. In 1948, they had either red or black jerseys with red helmets, then wore the red/maroon jerseys for at least one game in 1950. The reason? Their new coach, Bo McMillin, came from Indiana U., which wore those colors. Not sure why they went back to strictly blue in '49.

Also, that the Browns have always worn orange helmets--in their AAFC years, they wore white, then mixed and matched them in 1950-51.

#58 smith03
Forum Visitors
Posted 22 June 2014 - 12:19 AM
how about the browns have never had anything on their helmets? they wore numbers for a while

#59 3243
Forum Visitors
301 posts
Posted 22 June 2014 - 01:27 AM
"In that same vein, that the Lions' colors have always been Honolulu blue."

In 1966, the Lions wore a darker shade of blue, more like royal blue. To me, they look better in royal blue and silver than in Honolulu blue and silver, because silver numbers show up a lot better on royal blue jerseys. And the Lions look better with silver block numbers than with white stylized numbers anyway.

Don't forget those who think the Raiders have always worn silver-and-black or were even the first pro football team to do so (the Eagles, I think, wore that combination for one season in the late 1930s or early '40s) or that the Chargers were wearing the legendary powder blue jerseys from their beginning (in the early '60s they wore Collegiate blue, which was a shade below [but closer to] royal blue; heck, they wore navy blue jerseys in 1967).

#60 JuggernautJ
PFRA Member
Posted 22 June 2014 - 02:06 AM
ronfitch, on 21 Jun 2014 - 9:10 PM, said:
...many journalists and fans - even longtime Viking fans living here - don't know that the Vikings won the '69 NFL championship. And the Colts won the '68 NFL championship.

Somehow, I think of this as a secret bit of information that only we who study football history acknowledge and understand.
It's kind of like our secret handshake or something... one of those topics that only one of "us" knows.

Page 3 of 13
oldecapecod 11

oldecapecod11 · Post by **oldecapecod11** » Wed Nov 26, 2014 7:15 pm

Historical Misconceptions that "grind your gears"
Started by Hail Casares, Jun 18 2014 04:49 PM

Page 4 of 13

247 replies to this topic

#61 Versatile John
PFRA Member
Posted 22 June 2014 - 09:36 AM
Another collegiate reference (sorry, I know more about college):

After the 1970 Alabama--USC game, where Sam Cunningham "integrated" the South, this story that Paul Bryant took Sam Cunningham into the Alabama locker room after the game and told his players, "Boys, this is what a real football player looks like."

Cunningham, Scott Hunter, among others, say this NEVER happened.

Plus, this business that Bryant scheduled this game knowing his team would probably lose, just so his "superiors" would allow him to recruit black players is also another horse crap deal, IMO. Bryant and John McKay were close friends and had probably talked about playing each other; Bryant had an enormous ego and was a great competitor, so he would not have risked his team losing just to prove a point to integrate. Also, Bryant told Condredge Holloway that "Alabama (and the SEC) is just not ready for a black quarterback (this was later than the aforementioned 1970 game, by the way)."

#62 Mark L. Ford
Administrators
Posted 22 June 2014 - 10:06 AM
Teo, on 21 Jun 2014 - 11:14 PM, said:
Others relating to the PFRA Meeting in Cleveland:

-That pro football was born in Canton, Ohio, not in Western Pennsylvania.

-That Fawcett Stadium was home of the 1920s Canton Bulldogs.

Or, for that matter, that pro football was "born" in Latrobe, Pennsylvania (there was even consideration for putting the HOF there). That, of course, was when it was still thought that Dr. Brailler was the first pro, rather than Pudge Heffelfinger.

Or that Pudge's team was the first pro football team, even though he was the only person who got paid for that 1892 game.

Teo, on 21 Jun 2014 - 11:23 PM, said:
Amongst uniform colors:
-The Green Bay Packers have always wore green, they have never worn blue.

-The Chicago Bears' colors are black and red ( as opposed to navy blue and orange).
I'm guilty of having once believed that they were black and red, and I think that a lot of people are-- it was a logical conclusion if your only sight of them had been on a 1970s color TV or in most magazines. Some of the color quality of the pictures in old Sports Illustrated was off too, perhaps worse as colors faded over the years. Growing up, I had seen SI photos of the Steelers pre-1960s gold helmets with a black stripe, and was convinced that their colors had been orange and blue.

#63 Versatile John
PFRA Member
Posted 22 June 2014 - 10:57 AM
Mark Ford:
Please check your Facebook account .

Another one: Jim McMahon was the tough QB that played "with the mentality of a linebacker," yet he was hurt frequently. He was tough, in that he was not afraid to lower his head and shoulder and take on a tackler, but for all the credit he received for being this tough guy, he sure did get injured a great deal. Meanwhile, guys like Namath were showboats that are not remembered as being as tough by many people these days. Lynn Swann was another guy that did not get enough credit for going across the middle. He was not a Willie Gault; he blocked and took hits all over the field (legal and illegal ones, Georgie Atkinson).

#64 Citizen
Forum Visitors
Posted 22 June 2014 - 11:08 AM
ronfitch, on 21 Jun 2014 - 9:10 PM, said:
That and the whole Dan Devine dog story in Green Bay, which Devine fueled and half-assed admitted did not happen the he suggested it had in his autobiograhy.
The way Devine embroidered this story says a lot about what a devious, peculiar man he was. By mid-1974, his position in Green Bay was so tenuous and his locker room so divided that he was desperate for something that would paint him in a sympathetic light. When the mostly apocryphal dog story was reported in Time, it might have made him look like a victim of crazed fans to the nation at large, but everyone in Green Bay knew better.

#65 BD Sullivan
Forum Visitors
Posted 22 June 2014 - 11:45 AM
Citizen, on 22 Jun 2014 - 11:08 AM, said:
The way Devine embroidered this story says a lot about what a devious, peculiar man he was. By mid-1974, his position in Green Bay was so tenuous and his locker room so divided that he was desperate for something that would paint him in a sympathetic light. When the mostly apocryphal dog story was reported in Time, it might have made him look like a victim of crazed fans to the nation at large, but everyone in Green Bay knew better.
Desperate would also describe his trade for Hadl--that probably set Starr and Co. back at least 3-4 years.

#66 giasyc94
Forum Visitors
Posted 22 June 2014 - 12:08 PM
Mark,
I originally thought the Bears colors were Black and Red too. In fact, the people, back in the early 70s, who painted the players for the Tudor Electric Football thought the same. My order had the Bears home team in Black and Red.

Roger

#67 SixtiesFan
Posted 22 June 2014 - 01:02 PM
Citizen, on 22 Jun 2014 - 11:08 AM, said:
The way Devine embroidered this story says a lot about what a devious, peculiar man he was. By mid-1974, his position in Green Bay was so tenuous and his locker room so divided that he was desperate for something that would paint him in a sympathetic light. When the mostly apocryphal dog story was reported in Time, it might have made him look like a victim of crazed fans to the nation at large, but everyone in Green Bay knew better.

In a Sport Magazine article soon after taking the Packer job, Devine described himself as a "fussbudget."

#68 97Den98
Forum Visitors
Posted 22 June 2014 - 02:47 PM
1. I hate the misconception that Elway was overrated because of his stats under Dan Reeves. Reeves' Edsel System (the name given to the scheme by Steve Watson) held him back a great degree. Also, I see people on message boards say that Terrell Davis carried Elway to two SB titles. Not really true. That was a great team.

2. The misconception that the 90's Cowboys were so talented. They weren't the most talented team in the league in the early-90's. Houston had more talent. Those Cowboy teams had a lot of overrated players, like Ken Norton, Kevin Smith, Emmitt Smith, and Alvin Harper. They won two of their SB's because they played Buffaluck, and O'Donnell handed them the third one.

#69 Rupert Patrick
PFRA Member
Posted 22 June 2014 - 02:48 PM
Teo, on 21 Jun 2014 - 11:14 PM, said:
Others relating to the PFRA Meeting in Cleveland:

-That pro football was born in Canton, Ohio, not in Western Pennsylvania.

-That Fawcett Stadium was home of the 1920s Canton Bulldogs.

Another one from the PFRA meeting - not a gripe but a statement of fact. Those CD's the guy gave out with the 1964 NFL Championship game audio recreation and he claimed his CD was the only radio broadcast of the game that existed, he was wrong. I got home and checked my library and I have an alternate radio call of the game, although i don't know who the announcers are. I appreciated the free CD and it was interesting to listen to, and it's raising money for a good cause, but it is not the only version of the game available.

#70 BD Sullivan
Forum Visitors
Posted 22 June 2014 - 03:17 PM
Rupert Patrick, on 22 Jun 2014 - 2:48 PM, said:

Another one from the PFRA meeting - not a gripe but a statement of fact. Those CD's the guy gave out with the 1964 NFL Championship game audio recreation and he claimed his CD was the only radio broadcast of the game that existed, he was wrong. I got home and checked my library and I have an alternate radio call of the game, although i don't know who the announcers are. I appreciated the free CD and it was interesting to listen to, and it's raising money for a good cause, but it is not the only version of the game available.
Presuming we're both thinking of the same guy, the recreation was made in 1982, when the Browns flagship needed to fill time due to the strike, The announcers for that game were the then-current announcers Gib Shanley (PBP) and Jim Mueller (Color). The original had Shanley on the call and Jim Graner doing the color. I know the original exists because 20 years ago, a Cleveland station rebroadcast the game with the original announcers, and I can't imagine they got rid of it, considering the historic nature of the broadcast. Here's an article from a few years ago about the guy with the fake original:

http://www.clevescen...ent?oid=3076296

Speaking of history blunders involving the Browns, I can recall in 1985, the local ABC affiliate had a special right before the Browns-Steelers MNF broadcast. They looked back at the 1970 game against the Jets, with the narrator (Doug Dieken, the Browns color man) actually saying that, "the game wasn't shown locally because it wasn't sold out in time."

#71 evan
PFRA Member
Posted 22 June 2014 - 03:19 PM
This isn't really a misconception as it is really sloppy historical research. Click this link and you'll see the "other" 1951 Rams-Yanks game being represented as Van Brocklin's 554-yard game. The sad part is someone might buy this program without realizing the mistake of the seller. Grrrrr.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/NOVEMBER-18-195 ... 35d8533e14

#72 BD Sullivan
Forum Visitors
Posted 22 June 2014 - 03:21 PM
evan, on 22 Jun 2014 - 3:19 PM, said:
This isn't really a misconception as it is really sloppy historical research. Click this link and you'll see the "other" 1951 Rams-Yanks game being represented as Van Brocklin's 554-yard game. The sad part is someone might buy this program without realizing the mistake of the seller. Grrrrr.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/NOVEMBER-18-195 ... 35d8533e14
In that same vein, someone hyping an "old" program from the 90's!

#73 ronfitch
Forum Visitors
Posted 22 June 2014 - 08:59 PM
Citizen, on 22 Jun 2014 - 11:08 AM, said:
The way Devine embroidered this story says a lot about what a devious, peculiar man he was. By mid-1974, his position in Green Bay was so tenuous and his locker room so divided that he was desperate for something that would paint him in a sympathetic light. When the mostly apocryphal dog story was reported in Time, it might have made him look like a victim of crazed fans to the nation at large, but everyone in Green Bay knew better.

BD Sullivan, on 22 Jun 2014 - 11:45 AM, said:
Desperate would also describe his trade for Hadl--that probably set Starr and Co. back at least 3-4 years.

In the chapter about Devine in "The Packer Legend: An Inside Look," Packer Board of Directors member John Torinus wrote that the Dan Devine of 1973-'74 was a "completely different man" than the Dan Devine of 1971-'72 and attributed it in part to his wife's M.S. diagnosis in mid-'73. Torinus writes that Devine's family was very close and that it was at this time that Devine became defensive and his relationship with local press deteriorated.

Torinus uses the phrase "sheer desperation" to explain the Hadl trade and signing RB John Brockington to the biggest contract in Packer history to that point, a three-year no-cut contract. Torinus writes that he learned of the Hadl trade on the news and called Packer Board President Dominic Olejniczak, who had just learned the news in the same manner. The board did not involve itself in player trades, but that in the past Packer GMs advised the board of trades. With Brockington, his contract was up and the WFL's Chicago franchise had territorial rights to sign him. Devine told the board that he had to have Brockington "at any price."

Torinus writes that Devine pushed the the Packer board into giving him a decision regarding his status on the last year of his contract (the '75 season) immediately after the last game of the '74 season. The Board wanted to wait until the next scheduled meeting in a month, but Devine pushed again. By this time, the Board had had enough, called a special meeting and voted to pay him for the '75 season but release him. When Devine and his attorney met with Tornius and other Board members a few days later to wrap things up, they ended the meeting and Devine left, returning quickly to announce that he was going to Notre Dame. That afternoon, Notre Dame had a press confernce announcing Devine as head coach.

#74 nicefellow31
PFRA Member
Posted 23 June 2014 - 04:17 PM
JohnH19, on 21 Jun 2014 - 10:05 PM, said:
There's also the somewhat larger camp that says defense wins championships.
Geno Auremia the UConn women's basketball was quoted this year saying "defense keeps you in the game, you're offense determines how many points you win by."

#75 Chrisskreager
Forum Visitors
Posted 23 June 2014 - 04:49 PM
That the NFC was always better than the AFC every year during the 13-year SB dominance run.

At times, they were the better conference in terms of depth and quality teams (1989, 1991), but then there are years like 1994 when it was DAL/SF who towered over everyone instead of the conference, ignoring the fact that the rest of the 1994 NFC teams weren't that much better than the AFC. Or 1984 when it was essentially the 49ers and a bunch of flawed teams.

#76 TouchdownTimmy
Forum Visitors
Posted 23 June 2014 - 09:36 PM
I remember reading that same thing about the APFA being founded in 1919 rather than 1920 and that "no records remain from that first season" or something equally mysterious-- and it was in the 1977 edition of Roger M. Treat's Encyclopedia of Pro Football, no less, so it had the weight of authority with it. I had an interesting discussion with Bob Carroll years later about that, and he said that there were so many misconceptions and legends that had been perpetuated that historians referred to them as "Treatisms". He added that it was regrettable, because Treat had done so much to preserve the early history of pro football back in the early 1950s, when so many of the original participants were still alive, and probably prevented quite a bit of the records from getting thrown away.

The 1919 thing was probably the most avoidable of blunders, though, because newspapers like the Canton Repository were saved in bound volumes during those pre-microfilm days. Regardless, that's something that shouldn't have been printed without first being attributed to a source.

Yes, I remember "Treatisms". I miss old Bob.

Here is something else from the 1963 book "Pro Football: the history of the game and the great players" by Robert Smith.

"It seemed altogether natural that Jim Thorpe should be made president of the league-when the pro teams got around to making one. This happened in 1919, in the most casual way possible, on a hot summer day in the showroom of Ralph Hay's automobile agency in Canton, Ohio. Jim was there that day loafing on the running board of a new touring car. Also present besides Ralph Hay, who was General Manager of the Bulldogs, were Leo Lyons of the Rochester Jeffersons, Joe Carr of Columbus (where there were a dozen independent football teams already), Frank Neid of Akron (which harbored, in addition to the Indians,Neid's team,an eleven sponsored by the Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company and known as the "Silents") and Carl Storck of the Dayton Triangles.

The league called itself the Amercian Football Association,but within two years changed its name to the National Football League. Each of the five cities represented that day was assessed twenty-five dollars for a franchise....."

This may be one of the older publicaions that you are talking about. The league of 1919 that it chronicles definitely has an Ohio flavor to it.

#77 TouchdownTimmy
Forum Visitors
Posted 23 June 2014 - 09:41 PM
Mark. I tried to quote you in that last post, but it got changed in the edit.

#78 TouchdownTimmy
Forum Visitors
Posted 23 June 2014 - 09:43 PM
Hey Coach Troup. Who were the original "Fearsome Foursome"? Was it the 1960's Chargers or the Rams? Or was it the 1950's Giants?

#79 TouchdownTimmy
Forum Visitors
Posted 23 June 2014 - 10:14 PM
"Historical misconceptions" on the collegiate level about one guy:

When these morons claim that Joe Montana was a legend at Notre Dame and was one of the all-time greats in college football history. They base it off his NFL career. I watched every Domer game that Montana played in as a starter (live games and the replays with Nelson and Connor) and NOT one time did they say Montana was this legendary performer.

Plus, they will tell you Montana led ND to a helluva lot of come from behind victories......

NONE of this is true.

In fact, Montana cannot be a member of the College Football HOF because the geezer never made an All-American team. BUT these same toadstools claim he was this collegiate phenom in South Bend. Obviously, if he had been as great as these assgeeks claim, he would have already been in the College HOF.:

I don't know if Montana is a Notre Dame legend or not. He did quarterback the Irish to two historic wins, the first being the '78 Cotton Bowl against a top-ranked Texas team led by Heisman winner Earl Campbell and the second of course being the "Chicken Soup" game.

I do know that he scared the hell out of me in 1978 when he brought the Irish back from a 24-6 fourth quarter deficit against USC at the Coliseum. When Montana hit Pete Holohan to put Notre Dame up 25-24 with 46 seconds to play I thought the Trojans hopes for a national championship were done (If USC had been as stunned as I was they would have been). But the Trojans came back to kick a field goal on the final play of the game to win 27-25. USC went on to win a share of the title.

Maybe if Notre Dame had used him differently, Montana would have been a college legend, but I think he did pretty well for himself.

#80 SixtiesFan
Forum Visitors
Posted 24 June 2014 - 01:14 AM
TouchdownTimmy, on 23 Jun 2014 - 9:43 PM, said:
Hey Coach Troup. Who were the original "Fearsome Foursome"? Was it the 1960's Chargers or the Rams? Or was it the 1950's Giants?

The term "Fearsome Foursome" was used to describe the Detroit Lions defensive line in the early 60's. I believe I heard the Lions (McCord, Brown, Karras, Williams) called by that name before the Rams.

This is just my own memory.

Historical Misconceptions that "grind your gears"
Started by Hail Casares, Jun 18 2014 04:49 PM

Page 5 of 13

247 replies to this topic

#81 evan
PFRA Member
Posted 24 June 2014 - 09:36 AM
One of the most often repeated falsehoods in sports is that the Cowboys drafted Emmitt Smith and Darren Woodson with the Vikings draft picks from the Herschel Walker trade. Untrue.

The Cowboys traded all of the Vikings draft picks they received in the Walker trade, packaging them with picks of their own and picks they received from other teams in order to move around to draft Smith and Woodson.

For the record, here are the exact picks the Vikings gave to the Cowboys for Walker, and who wound up using them, and for which players:
1990 1st round - No. 21 - TE Eric Green (Liberty) - Pittsburgh Steelers
1990 2nd round - No. 47 - DT Dennis Brown (Washington) - San Francisco 49ers

1991 1st round - No. 11 - T Pat Harlow (USC) - New England Patriots
1991 2nd round - No. 38 - DB Daryll Lewis (Arizona) - Houston Oilers

1992 1st round - No. 13 - T Eugene Chung (Virginia Tech) - New England Patriots
1992 2nd round - No. 40 - QB Matt Blundin (Virginia) - Kansas City Chiefs
1992 3rd round - No. 71 - RB Kevin Turner (Alabama) - New England Patriots

You’d think for all the bad publicity the Vikings got from the Walker trade, that all of those guys above would be in Canton by now. Not so.

Also for the record, here is how the Cowboys got these mainstays of their Super Bowl teams after the Walker trade:
1990 No. 17 - Emmitt Smith (from Pittsburgh); No. 64 DT Jimmie Jones (from New England)
1991 No. 1 DT Russell Maryland (from New England); No. 12 WR Alvin Harper (Dallas’ pick); No. 37 LB Dixon Edwards (from Detroit); No. 70 T Erik Williams (from New Orleans); No.173 DT Leon Lett (from Denver), No. 320 DB Larry Brown (Dallas’ pick).
1992 No. 17 DB Kevin Smith (from Philadelphia); No. 37 DB Darren Woodson (from New England).

#82 Citizen
Forum Visitors
Posted 24 June 2014 - 10:31 AM
But Dallas would not have had all those picks (including Emmitt Smith) if not for the lopsided terms of the Walker deal. It was the Cowboys putting a conditional tag on the veteran players Minnesota sent them that led to Dallas's subsequent draft bonanza and made Mike Lynn a laughing stock.

The Cowboys waived or traded all but one (Isaaic Holt) of the veteran players Minnesota sent them in order to maximize the number of picks they would receive in the deal. Once the dust settled and the picks Dallas got from Minnesota were traded to other teams for more picks, the bounty included Smith, Maryland, Woodson, etc. Those picks weren't packaged in the Walker trade itself, but they were a byproduct of it. It's not a great leap IMO to say that the Cowboys traded Herschel Walker for three Lombardi trophies.

The gory details are here: http://www.vikingupd...s/thetrade.html

#83 BD Sullivan
Forum Visitors
Posted 24 June 2014 - 10:40 AM
SixtiesFan, on 24 Jun 2014 - 01:14 AM, said:

The term "Fearsome Foursome" was used to describe the Detroit Lions defensive line in the early 60's. I believe I heard the Lions (McCord, Brown, Karras, Williams) called by that name before the Rams.

This is just my own memory.
From a January 4, 1963 UPI article on the Lions: "Chief talk in football circles is their 'fearsome foursome,' the four-man defensive line which made gridiron history by upsetting the all-conquering Green Bay Packers in beating the world champions, 26-14."

#84 coach tj troup
PFRA Member
Posted 24 June 2014 - 10:41 AM
.....no doubt that the walker trade coupled with maturation and talent took them to the "dance" quickly. though more than one trade involved, still am firmly entrenched in the belief that wellington mara hit the bullseye three times to not only make nyg viable but division champs by getting erich barnes, del shofner, and ya tittle. how many teams have acquired 3 former pro bowl players that earn a pro bowl berth in their first season with their new team?

#85 SixtiesFan
Forum Visitors
Posted 24 June 2014 - 10:55 AM
BD Sullivan, on 24 Jun 2014 - 10:40 AM, said:
From a January 4, 1963 UPI article on the Lions: "Chief talk in football circles is their 'fearsome foursome,' the four-man defensive line which made gridiron history by upsetting the all-conquering Green Bay Packers in beating the world champions, 26-14."

Thanks.

#86 Mark L. Ford
Administrators
Posted 24 June 2014 - 10:56 AM
TouchdownTimmy, on 23 Jun 2014 - 9:36 PM, said:
Yes, I remember "Treatisms". I miss old Bob.

Here is something else from the 1963 book "Pro Football: the history of the game and the great players" by Robert Smith.

"It seemed altogether natural that Jim Thorpe should be made president of the league-when the pro teams got around to making one. This happened in 1919, in the most casual way possible, on a hot summer day in the showroom of Ralph Hay's automobile agency in Canton, Ohio. Jim was there that day loafing on the running board of a new touring car. Also present besides Ralph Hay, who was General Manager of the Bulldogs, were Leo Lyons of the Rochester Jeffersons, Joe Carr of Columbus (where there were a dozen independent football teams already), Frank Neid of Akron (which harbored, in addition to the Indians,Neid's team,an eleven sponsored by the Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company and known as the "Silents") and Carl Storck of the Dayton Triangles.

The league called itself the Amercian Football Association,but within two years changed its name to the National Football League. Each of the five cities represented that day was assessed twenty-five dollars for a franchise....."

This may be one of the older publicaions that you are talking about. The league of 1919 that it chronicles definitely has an Ohio flavor to it.

That Robert Smith quote is even worse-- he's describing the Hupmobile showroom meeting and then putting it in the wrong year. Probably the one carelessness that grinds my gears the worst goes beyond football, and that's when somebody screws up a date that everyone should know-- I remember a pastor at a church, talking in his sermon, about the bombing of Pearl Harbor "on December 7, 1942"-- and this was back 20 years ago, when there were still quite a few veterans of World War II in the audience.

I probably make too much of a big deal out of that, so I'll probably have a stroke in a few more years when someone tells me that "men first landed on the moon on July 20, 1979", or that "the World Trade Center was destroyed on September 11, 2002".

#87 evan
PFRA Member
Posted 24 June 2014 - 01:28 PM
Certainly Dallas wound up benefiting down the road from the Herschel trade, but Dallas parlaying the picks along with other picks they acquired from Pittsburgh and New England, etc. is not the same thing as Dallas using the exact draft slots the Vikings traded, which is what I've heard oft-repeated and I consider a historical misperception. Hearing someone say "The Vikings traded draft picks to Dallas which the Cowboys used to draft Emmitt Smith" is simply untrue.

I would say the Cowboys took several leaps from the Walker trade to win their Lombardi trophies. The Walker trade alone didn't do it. They had a lot of work to do after that to parlay their trades the way they did, and most importantly, draft very smartly. I don't see that if the Vikings kept those picks in those slots that they would have improved their team that much, certainly not with the players who were taken in those slots, but even allowing for other sorts of players, those draft slots simply were not compelling enough to value very highly. The Cowboys certainly didn't think very highly of those draft slots, as they traded all of them.

At the time of the trade (1989 week 6) it did appear that the Vikings were a franchise back away from dominating the NFL, as it hadn’t been quite established yet that the 49ers were as infallible as they turned out to be. The 49ers were 4-1 at the time, but had won by 6, 4, 10 and 4 points. It was only after the Vikings acquired Walker that the 49ers went off, as their last 10 wins were by an average of 17 points. Indeed, before Week 6, it seemed as though the Vikings could be counted on for a Super Bowl run with Walker.

However, what the Vikings didn’t know was that Montana and Rice were at that point entering a stretch of play that possibly has never been equaled, and even the remarkable skills of Millard, Doleman, Studwell, Browner, et al were not going to be enough to slow down a 49ers team that was in the midst of winning 34 of 37 games from mid-1988 through late 1990.

Watching Herschel frustrated the heck out of me in most of 1989 and all of 1990, but I think in some ways Herschel gets more blame than he deserves. The Vikings weren’t going to the Super Bowl without him. It’s just that since they didn’t go with him, everyone thinks he was the reason they fell short. If the Vikings kept the draft picks they gave to Dallas there’s no telling that they would have used them wisely anyway. They traded for the best available player at the position that they felt they needed most, and it just didn’t work out.

The other factor that adds to the legend here is that the Vikings petered out in 1990 and 1991, just as the Cowboys were ascending, and people pointed at Herschel as the turning point for both teams. But the Vikings had myriad problems beyond Herschel's high-mileage that left him with that maddening pitter-pat running style. Many of their best players such as A.C., Millard, Browner, Studwell, Jordan, Wilson were slowing down, aging or injured, without any play-making backups in the wings. The burden of unmet expectations ruined team morale, and they were going down, whether or not they ever traded for Herschel.

At least that's my opinion

P.S. There are so many other bizarre and significant draft pick trade stories that rarely get discussed. Look at most of the Saints' early drafts. Among the players selected with the exact slots the Saints traded away were Pro Bowlers Bubba Smith, Ted Hendricks, Fred Carr, Ted Kwalick, Bert Jones, Cleveland Elam.

#88 BD Sullivan
Forum Visitors
Posted 24 June 2014 - 03:52 PM
evan, on 24 Jun 2014 - 1:28 PM, said:
P.S. There are so many other bizarre and significant draft pick trade stories that rarely get discussed. Look at most of the Saints' early drafts. Among the players selected with the exact slots the Saints traded away were Pro Bowlers Bubba Smith, Ted Hendricks, Fred Carr, Ted Kwalick, Bert Jones, Cleveland Elam.
In their first decade, the Saints traded:

1967: The #1 overall (Smith), as well as veteran Bill Curry, a #3 and #7 for (essentially) Gary Cuozzo. They somehow got Minnesota to give them two #1's for Cuozzo, but the Saints took Kevin Hardy and John Shinners.
1968: The #5 overall (Carr) for a washed up Jim Taylor.
1969: The #7 overall (Kwalick) and 1968 first rounder Kevin Hardy as compensation for free agent Dave Parks, who never again came close to his first three years of production.
1973: The #2 overall (Jones) for DE Billy Newsome and a #4
1974: Traded down from #8 to #13 and gave up a #6 in '75 for OT Dave Thompson (who played two seasons and was done), and got LB Rick Middleton at #13--one pickoff in two years before spending his last three seasons in San Diego

In 1970, they drafted Ken Burrough with the #10, then traded him AND DT Dave Rowe to the Oilers before the next draft for a #2 in '71, Hoyle Granger and two other stiffs.
1971 and '76 were the only top picks they got right--Archie Manning at #2 overall and Chuck Muncie at #3.
1972: Royce Smith (#8 overall)
1975: Larry Burton (#7 overall); they also traded Billy Newsome for the Jets' #1 (#12 overall)--and again took an Ohio State LB who flopped, Kurt Schumacher.

The Saints got RB Tony Lorick (who gained 355 yards in two seasons) from the Colts for what turned out to be Hendricks, but I'm not sure who they got for what turned out to be Elam.

The current Browns would be envious of such incompetence.

#89 SixtiesFan
Forum Visitors
Posted 24 June 2014 - 05:04 PM
BD Sullivan, on 24 Jun 2014 - 10:40 AM, said:
From a January 4, 1963 UPI article on the Lions: "Chief talk in football circles is their 'fearsome foursome,' the four-man defensive line which made gridiron history by upsetting the all-conquering Green Bay Packers in beating the world champions, 26-14."

I dug out my DVD of the 1962 Detroit Lions highlight film. The narrator, Van Patrick, referred to the Lion defensive line as the "Fearsome Foursome."

#90 Jeffrey Miller
PFRA Member
Posted 24 June 2014 - 05:29 PM
Great work, BD and Evan ...

#91 JohnMaxymuk
PFRA Member
Posted 24 June 2014 - 06:20 PM
Re: fearsome foursome
The 1960 packers yearbook includes an article by lee remmel called A Fearsome Foursome about the Packers four lbs (Bettie's, forester, currie and nitschke). He also uses the term in the article so it's not just a headline.

#92 ronfitch
Forum Visitors

474 posts
Gender:Male
Location:Twin Cities, MN, USA
Posted 24 June 2014 - 07:16 PM
JohnMaxymuk, on 24 Jun 2014 - 6:20 PM, said:
Re: fearsome foursome
The 1960 packers yearbook includes an article by lee remmel called A Fearsome Foursome about the Packers four lbs (Bettie's, forester, currie and nitschke). He also uses the term in the article so it's not just a headline.

Yikes! The '60 Packer yearbook is a rare item, the first in the series. Pick it up for the "Packers by the Numbers" book, John?
Like This
"Now, I want pizza."
- Ken Crippen

#93 Citizen
Forum Visitors
Posted 24 June 2014 - 08:23 PM
I don't doubt that John has a copy, but that first Packer yearbook can also be seen here, along with the subsequent seven: http://content.wisco...ion/tp/id/69243

#94 rhickok1109
PFRA Member
Posted 24 June 2014 - 09:09 PM
JohnMaxymuk, on 24 Jun 2014 - 6:20 PM, said:
Re: fearsome foursome
The 1960 packers yearbook includes an article by lee remmel called A Fearsome Foursome about the Packers four lbs (Bettie's, forester, currie and nitschke). He also uses the term in the article so it's not just a headline.
I'm not surprised; that sounds like Lee's style. He was very fond of phrases like that.

#95 John Turney
PFRA Member
Posted 24 June 2014 - 09:42 PM
I saw that phrase used in a New York paper, perhaps the Post, in late 1950s to refer to Robustelli, Grier, etc . . . it said "A Fearsome Foursome" in the title of an article.

#96 Ness
Forum Visitors
Posted 24 June 2014 - 09:49 PM
To this day people still think that Joe Montana had Jerry Rice for all four of his Super Bowl victories. I kid you not.

#97 Jagade
PFRA Member
Posted 24 June 2014 - 09:50 PM
JohnMaxymuk, on 24 Jun 2014 - 6:20 PM, said:
Re: fearsome foursome
The 1960 packers yearbook includes an article by lee remmel called A Fearsome Foursome about the Packers four lbs (Bettie's, forester, currie and nitschke). He also uses the term in the article so it's not just a headline.

i think that the Giants DL might have been called the "fearsome foursome" during the late 1950's when they had Robustelli, Grier, Modzelewski, and Katcavage. Whether they were called that or not, they were pretty good. Then they had Huff, Svoboda, and Svare as linebackers (Scott came in 1958 or 1959). With Tunnell. Patten, Lynch and Crow (and Nolan some years), they had some talent on their defensive unit.

#98 JohnMaxymuk
PFRA Member
Posted 24 June 2014 - 09:54 PM
Ron:
I do not have a copy. I have photocopies from the library in my files, but these days refer to the wisconsin turning points site that citizen noted.

#99 BD Sullivan
Forum Visitors
Posted 24 June 2014 - 09:54 PM
Ness, on 24 Jun 2014 - 9:49 PM, said:
To this day people still think that Joe Montana had Jerry Rice for all four of his Super Bowl victories. I kid you not.
Some also think that Fran Tarkenton was QB for all four of the Vikings SB losses.

#100 ronfitch
Forum Visitors
Posted 24 June 2014 - 10:00 PM
TouchdownTimmy, on 21 Jun 2014 - 03:17 AM, said:
I don't know if this should "grind my gears" or not. If I'm wrong then it shouldn't:

Mine is that the league we know as the National Football League was founded in 1920.

As a child I always read that the league began in 1919 as the American Pofessional Football Association. I also read that the Chicago Staleys were not one of the original members. Which means George Halas was not one of the NFL's founding fathers.

I don't know if this is fact, but it's what I have read in many older publications

Mark L. Ford, on 21 Jun 2014 - 6:30 PM, said:
I remember reading that same thing about the APFA being founded in 1919 rather than 1920 and that "no records remain from that first season" or something equally mysterious-- and it was in the 1977 edition of Roger M. Treat's Encyclopedia of Pro Football, no less, so it had the weight of authority with it. I had an interesting discussion with Bob Carroll years later about that, and he said that there were so many misconceptions and legends that had been perpetuated that historians referred to them as "Treatisms". He added that it was regrettable, because Treat had done so much to preserve the early history of pro football back in the early 1950s, when so many of the original participants were still alive, and probably prevented quite a bit of the records from getting thrown away.

The 1919 thing was probably the most avoidable of blunders, though, because newspapers like the Canton Repository were saved in bound volumes during those pre-microfilm days. Regardless, that's something that shouldn't have been printed without first being attributed to a source.

Perhaps a "Treatism" but perhaps not Roger Treat?

I have the first edition of "The Official National Football League Football Encyclopedia" from 1952. It specifically states 1920:

"The actual birth of the National Football League during the hot afternoon of September 17, 1920, as its founders gathered at the automobile agency of Ralph Hays in Canton, Ohio." (The Story of the Game, pg. 11)

The only other I have is "The Official Encyclopedia of Football" (tenth revised edition, by Roger Treat with revisions by Suzanne Treat) from 1972. Roger has died in 1969 and revisions were taken over by Suzanne Treat, according to the preface). It, too, states 1920 in two places, though without a specific date in either place:

"With the formation of the American Professional Football League in 1920, until today, the growth has been phenomenal." (from the Forward by Pete Rozell, pg. 6)

and

"Starting in 1904, and lasting until 1920 when the American Professional Football Association, the father of the National Football League, was formed, Ohio was teh battleground, and the nursery, for major league football." (The Story of the Game, pg. 19)

Note that it is stated as "... the American Professional Football League ..." in Rozelle's forward of the 1972 edition.

According to the copyright page of the 1972 edition, editions for 1952, 1959, 1961, 1964, 1967, 1968 and 1969 are copyrighted to Roger Treat and 1970, 1971 and 1972 editions are copyrighted to A.S. Barnes and Co., Inc.

Page 5 of 13
oldecapecod 11

Historical Misconceptions that "grind your gears"
Started by Hail Casares, Jun 18 2014 04:49 PM

Page 6 of 13

247 replies to this topic

#101 ronfitch
Forum Visitors
Posted 24 June 2014 - 10:03 PM
Citizen, on 24 Jun 2014 - 8:23 PM, said:
I don't doubt that John has a copy, but that first Packer yearbook can also be seen here, along with the subsequent seven: http://content.wisco...ion/tp/id/69243

JohnMaxymuk, on 24 Jun 2014 - 9:54 PM, said:
Ron:
I do not have a copy. I have photocopies from the library in my files, but these days refer to the wisconsin turning points site that citizen noted.

Thanks, Citizen. I have them going back to '67 ... sitting on the shelf near John's "Packers by the Numbers" and Bob Carroll's "When the Grass was Real" book (and perhaps books by a few others here as well).

#102 Reaser
PFRA Member
Posted 24 June 2014 - 10:38 PM
BD Sullivan, on 24 Jun 2014 - 9:54 PM, said:
Some also think that Fran Tarkenton was QB for all four of the Vikings SB losses.
Especially before the 2012 Ravens, media/fans (more annoying when it was media, ESPN/NFLN said it All The Time!) had Ed Reed with a ring, as part of the 2000 Ravens ... Which was bad, but even worse when considering that he was on one of the greatest college football teams of all-time (2001 Miami), which you would think people covering football would know, but according to them he played with the Ravens and won a SB in 2000, then went back to college to win a National Championship with Miami . . .

#103 Mark
PFRA Member
Posted 24 June 2014 - 11:54 PM
Ness, on 24 Jun 2014 - 9:49 PM, said:
To this day people still think that Joe Montana had Jerry Rice for all four of his Super Bowl victories. I kid you not.

I don't recall which magazine I read it but I recall someone writing that Joe Montana wasn't that great and that the only reason he had the success he had was because of Jerry Rice...never mind that he was arguably the top QB in the league and had two Super Bowl wins before Rice was drafted.

#104 TouchdownTimmy
Forum Visitors
Posted 25 June 2014 - 12:07 AM
Thanks for all of the feedback on the "Fearsome Foursome". I recall reading about the term being used to describe the Giants of the 50's, Lions quartet of the early 60's and the Chargers and Rams. Interesting to hear about the Packer linebackers.

#105 Teo
PFRA Member
Posted 25 June 2014 - 05:03 AM
Another one: That Doug Plank was a part of the Chicago Bears' Super Bowl XX team because of the 46 Defense.

#106 Jeffrey Miller
PFRA Member
Posted 25 June 2014 - 08:05 AM
Sure ... now I have my doubts about the Beatles being the Fab Four ...

#107 coach tj troup
PFRA Member
Posted 25 June 2014 - 09:21 AM
...."she's got a ticket to ride" sung by the rams version of the fearsome foursome....

#108 rhickok1109
PFRA Member
Posted 25 June 2014 - 09:26 AM
I have the 1979 edition. It contains the same foreword by Rozelle, still referring to "the formation of the American Professional Football League in 1920," but the editorial note at the end of preface now reads, "With the death of Roger Treat in 1969, revisions were taken over by Suzanne Treat. Pete Palmer assumed the editorship in 1974."

This edition also has the same "The Story of the Game" section, with its reference to the formation of the APFA in 1920.

BUT -- the second section is headed "Year-by-Year History from 1919 to the Present" and it begins with a summary of the 1919 season. Here are the first two paragraphs of that summary:

"The National Football League was conceived in July, 1919, in Canton, Ohio. It was a predictable act of growth from the dozens of professional teams that had developed in the midwest and in upper New York state.

"Five teams signed up that day and all of them remained in the league until 1925, some longer. These were the pioneers: Akron (Frank Neid), Canton (Ralph Hays [sic], in whose auto agency the meeting was held); Columbus (Joe Carr, who would become league president from 1921-39), Dayton (Carl Storck) and Rochester (Leo Lyons). They called it the American Professional Football Association. Franchise cost was $25."

It goes on to say that Canton won the championship by beating Massillon 3-0 "in the showdown game at the end of the season."

There are actually 12 teams listed, with rosters, but team records and standings are not shown. (They aren't shown for 1920, either.)

The teams listed are: Akron Pros, Canton Bulldogs, Cleveland Indians, Columbus Panhandles, Dayton Triangles, Detroit Heralds, Hammond Pros, Massillon Tigers, Rochester Jeffersons, Rock Island Independents, Toledo Maroons, and Wheeling (no team name given).

Somewhere between 1972 and 1979 there may be a "missing link" edition in which the 1919 season was originally summarized. Could it be that Pete Palmer, of all people, was responsible for adding it?

So far as I know, Pete is still alive and he may even be a PFRA member. I think he might be able to shed some light on this mystery.

#109 Ken Crippen
Administrator
Posted 25 June 2014 - 10:03 AM
rhickok1109, on 25 Jun 2014 - 09:26 AM, said:
I have the 1979 edition. It contains the same foreword by Rozelle, still referring to "the formation of the American Professional Football League in 1920," but the editorial note at the end of preface now reads, "With the death of Roger Treat in 1969, revisions were taken over by Suzanne Treat. Pete Palmer assumed the editorship in 1974."

This edition also has the same "The Story of the Game" section, with its reference to the formation of the APFA in 1920.

BUT -- the second section is headed "Year-by-Year History from 1919 to the Present" and it begins with a summary of the 1919 season. Here are the first two paragraphs of that summary:

"The National Football League was conceived in July, 1919, in Canton, Ohio. It was a predictable act of growth from the dozens of professional teams that had developed in the midwest and in upper New York state.

"Five teams signed up that day and all of them remained in the league until 1925, some longer. These were the pioneers: Akron (Frank Neid), Canton (Ralph Hays [sic], in whose auto agency the meeting was held); Columbus (Joe Carr, who would become league president from 1921-39), Dayton (Carl Storck) and Rochester (Leo Lyons). They called it the American Professional Football Association. Franchise cost was $25."

It goes on to say that Canton won the championship by beating Massillon 3-0 "in the showdown game at the end of the season."

There are actually 12 teams listed, with rosters, but team records and standings are not shown. (They aren't shown for 1920, either.)

The teams listed are: Akron Pros, Canton Bulldogs, Cleveland Indians, Columbus Panhandles, Dayton Triangles, Detroit Heralds, Hammond Pros, Massillon Tigers, Rochester Jeffersons, Rock Island Independents, Toledo Maroons, and Wheeling (no team name given).

Somewhere between 1972 and 1979 there may be a "missing link" edition in which the 1919 season was originally summarized. Could it be that Pete Palmer, of all people, was responsible for adding it?

So far as I know, Pete is still alive and he may even be a PFRA member. I think he might be able to shed some light on this mystery.

I'll send Pete an email.

#110 ronfitch
Forum Visitors
Posted 25 June 2014 - 10:17 AM
rhickok1109, on 25 Jun 2014 - 09:26 AM, said:
I have the 1979 edition. It contains the same foreword by Rozelle, still referring to "the formation of the American Professional Football League in 1920," but the editorial note at the end of preface now reads, "With the death of Roger Treat in 1969, revisions were taken over by Suzanne Treat. Pete Palmer assumed the editorship in 1974."

This edition also has the same "The Story of the Game" section, with its reference to the formation of the APFA in 1920.

BUT -- the second section is headed "Year-by-Year History from 1919 to the Present" and it begins with a summary of the 1919 season. Here are the first two paragraphs of that summary:

"The National Football League was conceived in July, 1919, in Canton, Ohio. It was a predictable act of growth from the dozens of professional teams that had developed in the midwest and in upper New York state.

"Five teams signed up that day and all of them remained in the league until 1925, some longer. These were the pioneers: Akron (Frank Neid), Canton (Ralph Hays [sic], in whose auto agency the meeting was held); Columbus (Joe Carr, who would become league president from 1921-39), Dayton (Carl Storck) and Rochester (Leo Lyons). They called it the American Professional Football Association. Franchise cost was $25."

It goes on to say that Canton won the championship by beating Massillon 3-0 "in the showdown game at the end of the season."

There are actually 12 teams listed, with rosters, but team records and standings are not shown. (They aren't shown for 1920, either.)

The teams listed are: Akron Pros, Canton Bulldogs, Cleveland Indians, Columbus Panhandles, Dayton Triangles, Detroit Heralds, Hammond Pros, Massillon Tigers, Rochester Jeffersons, Rock Island Independents, Toledo Maroons, and Wheeling (no team name given).

Somewhere between 1972 and 1979 there may be a "missing link" edition in which the 1919 season was originally summarized. Could it be that Pete Palmer, of all people, was responsible for adding it?

So far as I know, Pete is still alive and he may even be a PFRA member. I think he might be able to shed some light on this mystery.

I will check the '52 and '72 editions for a timeline later tonight. Thanks, Ralph.

#111 Mark L. Ford
Administrators
Posted 25 June 2014 - 11:31 AM
rhickok1109, on 25 Jun 2014 - 09:26 AM, said:
I have the 1979 edition. It contains the same foreword by Rozelle, still referring to "the formation of the American Professional Football League in 1920," but the editorial note at the end of preface now reads, "With the death of Roger Treat in 1969, revisions were taken over by Suzanne Treat. Pete Palmer assumed the editorship in 1974."

This edition also has the same "The Story of the Game" section, with its reference to the formation of the APFA in 1920.

BUT -- the second section is headed "Year-by-Year History from 1919 to the Present" and it begins with a summary of the 1919 season. Here are the first two paragraphs of that summary:

"The National Football League was conceived in July, 1919, in Canton, Ohio. It was a predictable act of growth from the dozens of professional teams that had developed in the midwest and in upper New York state.....

There are actually 12 teams listed, with rosters, but team records and standings are not shown. (They aren't shown for 1920, either.)

The teams listed are: Akron Pros, Canton Bulldogs, Cleveland Indians, Columbus Panhandles, Dayton Triangles, Detroit Heralds, Hammond Pros, Massillon Tigers, Rochester Jeffersons, Rock Island Independents, Toledo Maroons, and Wheeling (no team name given).

Good-- I thought I was losing my mind. If I'm not mistaken, the non-existent Wheeling team was referred to in one of the editions of the NFL Record Manual, like around 1980, where the 1920 chronology referred to a team called "West Virginia". That hadn't been the 1974 manual, and I didn't see it again after that, so maybe I imagined it.

#112 rhickok1109
PFRA Member
Posted 25 June 2014 - 11:38 AM
Mark L. Ford, on 25 Jun 2014 - 11:31 AM, said:
Good-- I thought I was losing my mind. If I'm not mistaken, the non-existent Wheeling team was referred to in one of the editions of the NFL Record Manual, like around 1980, where the 1920 chronology referred to a team called "West Virginia". That hadn't been the 1974 manual, and I didn't see it again after that, so maybe I imagined it.
For the record, here's the roster of the 1919 Wheeling team, as listed in the Treat-Treat-Palmer encyclopedia (no coach is listed):

Abbott, - E
Becker, - G
Fausch, Frank - B
Fesit, - C
Fleischman, -T
Gasteen, - E
Mallaney, - Q
Munson, - B
O'Connell, - B
Sloan, - T
Stone, - B
Strobel, - E
Stump, - T
Thomas, Carl - G

#113 JWL
PFRA Member
Posted 25 June 2014 - 12:01 PM
Mark L. Ford, on 25 Jun 2014 - 11:31 AM, said:
Good-- I thought I was losing my mind. If I'm not mistaken, the non-existent Wheeling team was referred to in one of the editions of the NFL Record Manual, like around 1980, where the 1920 chronology referred to a team called "West Virginia". That hadn't been the 1974 manual, and I didn't see it again after that, so maybe I imagined it.
I do not have the 1980 manual, but do have the 1979 and 1981 ones. The 1920 entries are identical, so I imagine the one in the 1980 book is the same. There is no mention of a West Virginia team. There is a note that the teams came from five states. Curiously, Wisconsin is surrounded by quotations.

#114 Ken Crippen
Administrator
Posted 25 June 2014 - 12:24 PM
Pete Palmer Response:
Quote
I have the 1st (1952) and the 3rd, 4th and 5th revised (1964-65-67). The 1919 date was first mentioned
in the 1967 edition. This was one that introduced the yearly rosters. P 23 has 'conceived July 1919' as you listed below. The previous editions, under 'the modern era', says the actual birth was 9/17/20 at Hay's.
These were well before I started doing them in mid 1970s.

#115 Todd Pence
Forum Visitors
Posted 25 June 2014 - 12:31 PM
I forget the exact game, but it was a playoff match between two divisional rivals where one had already swept the other during the regular season. In the pregame commentary, the subject was how difficult it was to defeat the same team three times in the same season. Terry Bradshaw then chipped in, claiming that his Steelers had accomplished the feat against the Houston Oilers. For the record, the Steelers lost a regular season contest against Houston in both '78 and '79.

When Chuck Knox was hired as the Seahawks coach in 1983, he commented in interviews about how the franchise had never had a winning season. The Seahawks were 9-7 in both 1978 and 1979.

And of course the historical revisionism of Joe Theismann during his broadcast career is legendary. In one preseason game the conversation turned to the 1987 strike and Theismann recalled how the Redskins had won a terrible game 6-3 against the Giants. (The game actually involved the Giants and the Buffalo Bills.)

#116 Teo
PFRA Member
Posted 25 June 2014 - 01:44 PM
I remember in a Kansas City Chiefs game in the early 90s when the announcer said that Nick Lowery had played his entire career in KC. He didn't knew that Lowery had played two games with the Patriots (as Dom Lowery, as I recall) two years before starting his great career with the Chiefs.

#117 rhickok1109
PFRA Member
Posted 25 June 2014 - 01:51 PM
Ken Crippen, on 25 Jun 2014 - 12:24 PM, said:
Pete Palmer Response:

Thanks for that, Ken. So it was a Treatism, and a Roger Treatism, at that. But I wonder what inspired him (if "inspired" is the right word) to suddenly add the spurious information about 1919 in 1967.

#118 BD Sullivan
Forum Visitors
Posted 25 June 2014 - 03:04 PM
That the 1970 Jets-Browns MNF game was the first prime time NFL regular season network broadcast. CBS had been doing it since 1966, albeit only a few times per year.

That the winning scores in both the Immaculate Reception and Sea of Hands games were the last plays of the game. Both opponents got one last shot to try for a miracle.

#119 Todd Pence
Forum Visitors
Posted 25 June 2014 - 05:21 PM
Another one about the Immaculate Reception is that it was the Steelers' first-ever playoff game. The Steelers had played a 1947 tiebreaker playoff against the Eagles but were shut out 21-0.

#120 BD Sullivan
Forum Visitors
Posted 25 June 2014 - 05:48 PM
Todd Pence, on 25 Jun 2014 - 5:21 PM, said:
Another one about the Immaculate Reception is that it was the Steelers' first-ever playoff game. The Steelers had played a 1947 tiebreaker playoff against the Eagles but were shut out 21-0.
Well, you should remember that the NFL had only begun in 1966...

Page 6 of 13
oldecapecod 11

oldecapecod11 · Post by **oldecapecod11** » Wed Nov 26, 2014 7:17 pm

Historical Misconceptions that "grind your gears"
Started by Hail Casares, Jun 18 2014 04:49 PM

Page 7 of 13

247 replies to this topic

#121 Rupert Patrick
PFRA Member
Posted 25 June 2014 - 06:26 PM
Todd Pence, on 25 Jun 2014 - 12:31 PM, said:
And of course the historical revisionism of Joe Theismann during his broadcast career is legendary. In one preseason game the conversation turned to the 1987 strike and Theismann recalled how the Redskins had won a terrible game 6-3 against the Giants. (The game actually involved the Giants and the Buffalo Bills.)
This game was the low point of the replacement games, and surely the worst pro football game I have ever seen as far as the quality of both teams and the lousy execution. It was like neither team wanted to win this one.

http://www.pro-footb...98710180buf.htm

LT was playing for the Giants, but you would think against a replacement team with QB Brian McClure who made his first and final appearance in an NFL game, he should have racked up about a dozen sacks and had been like the Forrest Whittaker character in Fast Times at Ridgemont High who literally destroyed the opposing team on the field in retaliation for his car being destroyed. Instead, Taylor got a mere two sacks.

#122 BD Sullivan
Forum Visitors
Posted 25 June 2014 - 06:55 PM
Rupert Patrick, on 25 Jun 2014 - 6:26 PM, said:
This game was the low point of the replacement games, and surely the worst pro football game I have ever seen as far as the quality of both teams and the lousy execution. It was like neither team wanted to win this one.

http://www.pro-footb...98710180buf.htm

LT was playing for the Giants, but you would think against a replacement team with QB Brian McClure who made his first and final appearance in an NFL game, he should have racked up about a dozen sacks and had been like the Forrest Whittaker character in Fast Times at Ridgemont High who literally destroyed the opposing team on the field in retaliation for his car being destroyed. Instead, Taylor got a mere two sacks.
That was a few months after LT said he avoided rehab for his coke problem--by playing golf.

#123 smith03
Forum Visitors
Posted 25 June 2014 - 07:39 PM
i think I am right on this. A lot of people credit joe Namath with being the first player to wear white shoes, but I believe there others before him including the giants in 56 nfl championship game

#124 74_75_78_79_
Forum Visitors
Posted 25 June 2014 - 09:11 PM
Barry Foster or Jerome Bettis played for Pittsburgh in '95/against Dallas in SBXXX.

Bill Cowher's final year in Pittsburgh was 2005 when they won SBXL vs Seattle.

#125 Reaser
PFRA Member
Posted 25 June 2014 - 09:20 PM
74_75_78_79_, on 25 Jun 2014 - 9:11 PM, said:
Barry Foster or Jerome Bettis played for Pittsburgh in '95/against Dallas in SBXXX.
Ya, this is a pretty common one.

#126 ronfitch
Forum Visitors
Posted 25 June 2014 - 10:03 PM
Ken Crippen, on 25 Jun 2014 - 12:24 PM, said:
Pete Palmer Response:
rhickok1109, on 25 Jun 2014 - 1:51 PM, said:
Thanks for that, Ken. So it was a Treatism, and a Roger Treatism, at that. But I wonder what inspired him (if "inspired" is the right word) to suddenly add the spurious information about 1919 in 1967.

Okay, got home, took the kid to ice skating lesson, mowed the yard and now looking at the books.

Umm ... what Pete corresponded and Ralph wrote.

In addition to what I listed previously, the 1952 edition includes a "Chronological History of Professional Football" which has nothing for 1919, but has this:

"1920 - American Profesional Football Association formed September 17 at Canton, Ohio, with the following membership: Canton Bulldogs, Cleveland Indians, Dayton Triangles, Akron Professionals, Massillon Tigers, Rochester (N.Y.), Rock Island (Ill.), Muncie (Ind.), Staleys of Decatur (Ill.), Chicago Cardinals and Hammond (Ind.)." (pg. 18)

The League Standings section (pg. 257) begins with 1921 and has no intro, just begins with the league standings for 1921.

For the 1972 edition, the Year-by-Year history with the July 1919 reference:

"The National Football League was conceived in July, 1919, in Canton, Ohio." (pg. 23)

#127 conace21
Forum Visitors
Posted 25 June 2014 - 10:25 PM
Maybe one of the reasons LT only had two sacks was the Bills' offensive strategy. From Marv Levy's autobiography: a Bills lineman (Will Grant?) was called for holding Taylor a half dozen times in the first half. Levy confronted the player at halftime about the six being penalties and the player responded "Coach, that's pretty good, because I've been holding him every play.
What makes the sloppy play surprising was that Jeff Rutledge was a seasoned pro at QB, LT played, and the Bills had four players cross the picket line. Leon Seals and Keith McKeller were both starters for some of the Super Bowl teams, and Robb Riddick scored 12 TDs in 1988. Seals had a sack, McKeller had a career high 9 catches for 80 yards, and RB Carl Byrum had a career high 139 yards. Riddick only managed 11 carries for 29 yards.

#128 Reaser
PFRA Member
Posted 25 June 2014 - 10:41 PM
rhickok1109, on 25 Jun 2014 - 09:26 AM, said:
I have the 1979 edition.
and Wheeling (no team name given)
I have this one as well, have always wondered about Wheeling, don't have it in front of me at the moment but pretty sure all the other teams have their full team names, majority of the players on the rosters had first and last names listed and all but one or two other teams had the coaches listed. Then you get to Wheeling, with no name, no coach, no full names (besides the two listed in your other post) and generally no info.

#129 nicefellow31
PFRA Member
Posted 26 June 2014 - 11:30 AM
smith03, on 25 Jun 2014 - 7:39 PM, said:
i think I am right on this. A lot of people credit joe Namath with being the first player to wear white shoes, but I believe there others before him including the giants in 56 nfl championship game
The Giants were wearing tennis shoes(Chuck Taylor's!) instead of cleats to combat the icy field. They were white so I guess they would make them the 1st.

#130 Mark L. Ford
Administrators
Posted 26 June 2014 - 11:44 AM
http://espn.go.com/n...er-nfl-classics

There's the proof (and they are, indeed, Chucks). I didn't realize they had recycled their 1934 sneaker game idea

#131 JWL
PFRA Member
Posted 26 June 2014 - 11:52 AM
The Giants, at least some of them, wore white shoes/sneakers in the 1950 playoff game against the Browns.

#132 smith03
Forum Visitors
Posted 26 June 2014 - 02:10 PM
wasn't there also some other players on the jets who had whites shoe prior to or at least at the same time as joe Namath ?

#133 Jeffrey Miller
PFRA Member
Posted 26 June 2014 - 11:16 PM
Was it Eddie Bell?

#134 TouchdownTimmy
Forum Visitors
Posted 26 June 2014 - 11:23 PM
The 1976 edition of "The Encyclopedia of Football" says the league was conceived in July 1919 and has team rosters, but no standings, for that year. It pretty much has the same info as the book I mentioned earlier.

"The First 50 Years" has the year as 1920.

#135 TouchdownTimmy
Forum Visitors
Posted 26 June 2014 - 11:34 PM
I don't get too upset when TV analysts get historical facts incorrect, because they are not paid to know history nor study it. Most, if not all, of them are ex-players who spend more time at their craft than reading or studying about the history of the game.

What does get me at times is when I see an NFL Films clip where the highlight does not coincide with the history. For example a player can be talking about something that happened in 1973 and they will show a clip from another year. They did this once with Sonny Jurgensen. Jurgensen was telling a story about a 1973 game against the 49ers when he replaced an injured Bill Kilmer and head coach George Allen told him to run a draw play and set up for the field goal. Sonny instead threw the ball and the Skins scored a touchdown. NFL Films showed a clip frm the 1960's of Jurgensen throwing a touchdown pass against the Niners. It is obvious that the year is not 1973 as Washington is wearing the helmet with the indian lance on the side whereas the '73 helmet has the side profileof an indian. But Steve Sabol always said that they were telling a story.

#136 TouchdownTimmy
Forum Visitors
Posted 26 June 2014 - 11:35 PM
Doug Williams was not the first minority quarterback to start or win a Super Bowl. Joe Kapp was the first to start in Super Bowl IV and Jim Plunkett the first to win in Super Bowl XV.

#137 Teo
PFRA Member
Posted 26 June 2014 - 11:42 PM
TouchdownTimmy, on 26 Jun 2014 - 11:34 PM, said:
I don't get too upset when TV analysts get historical facts incorrect, because they are not paid to know history nor study it. Most, if not all, of them are ex-players who spend more time at their craft than reading or studying about the history of the game.

What does get me at times is when I see an NFL Films clip where the highlight does not coincide with the history. For example a player can be talking about something that happened in 1973 and they will show a clip from another year. They did this once with Sonny Jurgensen. Jurgensen was telling a story about a 1973 game against the 49ers when he replaced an injured Bill Kilmer and head coach George Allen told him to run a draw play and set up for the field goal. Sonny instead threw the ball and the Skins scored a touchdown. NFL Films showed a clip frm the 1960's of Jurgensen throwing a touchdown pass against the Niners. It is obvious that the year is not 1973 as Washington is wearing the helmet with the indian lance on the side whereas the '73 helmet has the side profileof an indian. But Steve Sabol always said that they were telling a story.

One example is in the Holy Roller: when Bill King famous words that "Madden is on the field, he wants to know if it is real...." It shows scenes from another game: it's in shade, there are another officials, etc. but it doesn?t show the Raiders opponent, so they could complement the lack of footage of Madden in the field.

#138 74_75_78_79_
Forum Visitors
Posted 26 June 2014 - 11:47 PM
'Mean' Joe Greene played for the Eagles. Serious, came across that deception from a sub-casual football fan twice.

#139 Reaser
PFRA Member
Posted 27 June 2014 - 12:27 AM
TouchdownTimmy, on 26 Jun 2014 - 11:35 PM, said:
Doug Williams was not the first minority quarterback to start or win a Super Bowl. Joe Kapp was the first to start in Super Bowl IV and Jim Plunkett the first to win in Super Bowl XV.
Similar is Art Shell being the first black coach and/or first minority coach ...

and since we're in this ballpark;

That Warren Moon went undrafted because the NFL had no and/or refused to have any black QB's ...

That Warren Moon went undrafted because the NFL refused to draft black QB's (humorously bad since Doug Williams went in the first round in '78) ...

Hear and read both of those frequently - as well as other inaccuracies - especially since Moon going off about the NFL being racist against black QB's has become like clockwork ... and naturally it gets a lot of coverage locally (which is when the above false statements are made) ... Almost a running joke with friends these days, as the NFL Draft gets closer eventually someone will say; "the draft can't and will not happen until Warren Moon goes on a rant about racism against black QB's", which is yearly, in recent times.

Rants aside, everytime it leads to someone in the media saying something like "he should have been a first round pick but the NFL didn't draft black QB's in the first round" or it gets really ridiculous and; "Warren Moon was the first black QB in the NFL" ... and so on, which leads to fans and casual fans and people who watch/read the news repeating what they heard or read and the incorrect information spreads. Not sure how big it is nationally, I know it's usually a story, but locally (WA) we get a lot of it.

#140 oldecapecod 11
PFRA Member
Posted 27 June 2014 - 08:21 AM
Reaser
Posted Today, 12:27 AM
" Similar is Art Shell being the first black coach and/or first minority coach ..."

Uh oh!
Then maybe Al Davis was not the first to FIRE a black coach?
Poor Al... another chip in his legacy.

Page 7 of 13
oldecapecod 11

Historical Misconceptions that "grind your gears"
Started by Hail Casares, Jun 18 2014 04:49 PM

Page 8 of 13

247 replies to this topic

#141 NWebster
Forum Visitors
Posted 27 June 2014 - 10:19 AM
Ray Didinger's made up story that the Philadelphia Bulletin referenced Norm Willey's massive sack total in the paper following Norm's famous Polo Grounds romp. Not sure why you'd lie about something so easily refutable. I think of Hillary Clinton saying she mis-remembered that she was surrounded by gunfire in Bosnia a number of years ago - not sure about you but my poor memory generally involves forgetting things that DID happen not thinking thinking things happened that didn't.

#142 oldecapecod 11
PFRA Member
Posted 27 June 2014 - 10:39 AM
Hillary's formative years were spent actively in the South Side of Chicago.
I would think she was familiar with being surrounded by gunfire?

#143 Tod Maher
PFRA Member
Posted 30 June 2014 - 09:02 PM
smith03, on 21 Jun 2014 - 11:02 AM, said:
to answer your question, I believe a lot of the teams that founded the NFL (APFA) in 1920 had come from the Ohio League which had been around for sometime.
Decatur being in Illinois wasn't part of the ohio league. Also there were 2 meetings in 1920 the first in August only involved teams from ohio that is what formed the APF Conference and then on Sept 17 a larger group in which Hales was part of created the APFA.
1. Ugghh...referring to the "Ohio League" as if it was actually a league.
2. Calling it the "Ohio League" (with our with quotes).

#144 Mark L. Ford
Administrators
Posted 01 July 2014 - 09:21 AM
That raises a question I have-- was the "Anthracite League" really a league? Even if there is evidence of something with bylaws and corporate organization, did its official name ever refer to anthracite coal in any way?

#145 oldecapecod 11
PFRA Member
Posted 01 July 2014 - 10:16 AM
Mark L. Ford
Posted Today, 09:21 AM
"That raises a question I have-- was the "Anthracite League" really a league? Even if there is evidence of something with bylaws and corporate organization, did its official name ever refer to anthracite coal in any way?"

According to one of your favorite reference sources, it was:
(Plus, Jack Palance told my Mother he played in that league so it must be true?)
And, yes; it was strongly associated with coal.
Note: Wilkes-Barre - the baseball team of the same name was later sponsored / owned by a coal mining company. The owner was known as "The Baron" (similar to Lamar Hunt's friend "The Chief.") The coal company was sold and the NEW owner had flaming red hair so the name was changed to the Red Barons. For years, the team (and others sponsored) was later known as the Scranton / Wilkes-Barre Red Barons.

The Pottsville Maroons were named the 1924 Anthracite League Champions.
Team G W L T
Pottsville Maroons* 14 12 1 1
Gilberton Cadamounts 13 4 3 1
Shenandoah Yellow Jackets 8 4 4 0
Coaldale Big Green 10 4 6 0
Wilkes-Barre Barons 1 0 1 0

http://en.wikipedia....thracite_League

#146 LJP
Forum Visitors
Posted 02 July 2014 - 01:58 PM
After George Halas died, the Bears added a patch to their jerseys with the initials GHS.

#147 BD Sullivan
Forum Visitors
Posted 02 July 2014 - 02:30 PM
That Vince Lombardi was responsible for putting together the Packers dynasty. Lombardi was a great coach who got the most out of his players, but Jack Vainisi was the guy who brought seven Hall of Famers: Hornung, Taylor, Starr, Gregg, Ringo, Nitchske and Wood, not to mention Jerry Kramer. Wood was the only one that Lombardi might have had an input on.

#148 Citizen
Forum Visitors
Posted 02 July 2014 - 02:44 PM
Vainisi also took part in drafting Jim Ringo and drove trades for Henry Jordan and Willie Davis; Lombardi's pick of Herb Adderley was based on his recommendation as well. In fact, it's said that the heaviest recruiting the Packers did for Lombardi was done by Vainisi himself behind the scenes.

#149 ronfitch
Forum Visitors
Posted 02 July 2014 - 02:55 PM
BD Sullivan, on 02 Jul 2014 - 2:30 PM, said:
That Vince Lombardi was responsible for putting together the Packers dynasty. Lombardi was a great coach who got the most out of his players, but Jack Vainisi was the guy who brought seven Hall of Famers: Hornung, Taylor, Starr, Gregg, Ringo, Nitchske and Wood, not to mention Jerry Kramer. Wood was the only one that Lombardi might have had an input on.
Jay Bengtson - Phil Bengtson's son - wrote "Launching the Glory Years: The 1959 Packers" with Len Wagner which is made up of the assistant coaches evaluations (including Bengtson and I think Cochran, Hecker and Austin) of the players on the roster as they took over the team. If I recall correctly, the basis of the book was found in a box in his dad's attic. Some interesting and very candid comments about players (comments are not attributed to any particular assistant). But, yeah, the team was pretty much already there when Lombardi was hired.

Jack Vainisi was quite the talent. More on him at http://host.madison....e214462d21.html

#150 coach tj troup
PFRA Member
Posted 02 July 2014 - 03:06 PM
....the "launching of the glory years" is a valued research tool along with film for me to evaluate the players from the beginning days of st. vince. jack vainisi was a master at evaluating talent. add to that his innate sense of communication with lombardi....shows us how quickly green bay rose from 1 win to 8.

#151 Bryan
Forum Visitors
Posted 02 July 2014 - 03:25 PM
Would you give Joe Thomas similar credit for putting together the early-70's Dolphins teams?

#152 JuggernautJ
PFRA Member
Posted 02 July 2014 - 03:35 PM
No.
Maybe George Wilson...

#153 coach tj troup
PFRA Member
Posted 02 July 2014 - 05:25 PM
...as much as many folks despise him, joe thomas did a masterful job in all three areas 1)bringing in free agents that actually could play and contribute, and in the case of jim langer for one....become a dominant center 2) pick top talent in the draft, and he did this right away especially giving griese time to mature and grow as he played early in his career, and finally 3) trades that brought the final pieces in....and since am firmly rooted in the belief that paul w. is a once in a lifetime difference maker...he set the stage for don shula to guide/teach/ and master motivate these men to dominance. no doubt thomas hated shula getting all the credit, yet his place in dolphin team history is secure, and since he had success with the vikings and colts...league history.

#154 BD Sullivan
Forum Visitors
Posted 02 July 2014 - 05:33 PM
Bryan, on 02 Jul 2014 - 3:25 PM, said:
Would you give Joe Thomas similar credit for putting together the early-70's Dolphins teams?
Considering he was there at the beginning, as well as the early years of the Vikings and the early Irsay Colts that rebuilt the team, in a word, YES. His mistake was his huge ego, which annoyed the hell out of Don Shula when he strongly hinted that Shula walked into a great situation, not to mention his infamous 49ers meltdown.

#155 97Den98
Forum Visitors
Posted 02 July 2014 - 06:15 PM
BD Sullivan, on 02 Jul 2014 - 5:33 PM, said:
Considering he was there at the beginning, as well as the early years of the Vikings and the early Irsay Colts that rebuilt the team, in a word, YES. His mistake was his huge ego, which annoyed the hell out of Don Shula when he strongly hinted that Shula walked into a great situation, not to mention his infamous 49ers meltdown.

When I think of Joe Thomas, I think of Al Davis.

It has been said that Davis gave the Steeler Dynasty a nudge when he told Noll to start Bradshaw in 74.

Well, he also gave the 49er dynasty a nudge because he was the one who suggested to the Morabito Family that they don't sell to Wayne Valley, and sell to the DeBartolo's instead.

The Debartolo hire led to the hiring of Joe Thomas (after watching the Football Life about Eddie, him and Joe were joined at the hip. Thomas may not have gone there without him. He may have gone to Atlanta, another team that was looking at him), which led to all the dysfunction, and the hiring of Walsh in 1979.

#156 oldecapecod 11
PFRA Member
Posted 02 July 2014 - 09:49 PM
It is with the avoidance of honoring people such as Vainisi and Thomas and others that the structure in Canton fails miserably - miserably - to live up to its mission statement.

The Hall of Fame Today
Mission Statement
Honor the Heroes of the Game
Preserve its History
Promote its Values
Celebrate Excellence EVERYWHERE

I.E.
* It honors only limited heroes (as directed by the NFL)
* It preserves only that history pertinent to the enhancement of the NFL
* It promotes only those values that are designed to generate income
* It ignores "Excellence EVERYWHERE" as Vainisi with Green Bay and Thomas with Miami and other franchises

Were it not for the solitary effort of a lonesome sportswriter (Mike Miller, April 23, 2009,) the memory of our own BDSullivan, and the interests of a few others who learn from this Forum, the Vainisi's of Sports would fade like those AFL and other professional leagues of yore.

#157 JuggernautJ
PFRA Member
Posted 02 July 2014 - 10:12 PM
I defer to the experts in regard to Thomas' contributions to building three dynasties.

However I can't ignore the damage he did to the 49ers, their History and the History of the game.

#158 BD Sullivan
Forum Visitors
Posted 03 July 2014 - 12:22 AM
JuggernautJ, on 02 Jul 2014 - 10:12 PM, said:
I defer to the experts in regard to Thomas' contributions to building three dynasties.

However I can't ignore the damage he did to the 49ers, their History and the History of the game.

Thomas pretty much wrecked his reputation with his 49ers job--though in the months leading up to the '78 season, he was being hailed as resurrecting the franchise. He did return to the Dolphins in '81, but was limited to negotiating contracts, and died in February '83.

His first stint with the Dolphins ended when he quit over "contract differences" in February 1972--no doubt connected to a power struggle with Shula.

In both the Colts and 49ers situations, Thomas helped put the sale of the team together, and was rewarded with the GM position. Like the 49ers situation, he enraged people in Baltimore by getting rid of the team's legends (i.e. history), but he was crafty enough to stockpile top draft picks for them, so the damage was muffled. The beginning of the end came after Ted Marchibroda temporarily quit prior to the start of the '76 season over "front office interference," which was directly related to Thomas. It was noted that prior to that mess, the two had spoken pretty much every day, and after the blowup, didn't speak at all. After the season, Irsay gave Thomas the right to talk with other teams (since he had one year left on his contract), first (as noted) talking with Atlanta before connecting with the DeBartolo's.

In some ways, Thomas was the NFL's version of Billy Martin--improving a team for a few years before he self-destructs and goes elsewhere,

#159 Ness
Forum Visitors
Posted 03 July 2014 - 06:12 AM
Quote
Especially before the 2012 Ravens, media/fans (more annoying when it was media, ESPN/NFLN said it All The Time!) had Ed Reed with a ring, as part of the 2000 Ravens ... Which was bad, but even worse when considering that he was on one of the greatest college football teams of all-time (2001 Miami), which you would think people covering football would know, but according to them he played with the Ravens and won a SB in 2000, then went back to college to win a National Championship with Miami . . .

I've heard this one before too. I get the feeling that Ed Reed himself has had folks come up to him telling him how awesome he was on that 2000 Ravens team.

As a matter of fact, that reminds me. There were so many people this past season assuming Peyton Manning hadn't won a Super Bowl. Perhaps they all forgot? It wasn't that long ago.

#160 Bryan
Forum Visitors
Posted 03 July 2014 - 08:43 AM
BD Sullivan, on 03 Jul 2014 - 12:22 AM, said:
Thomas pretty much wrecked his reputation with his 49ers job--though in the months leading up to the '78 season, he was being hailed as resurrecting the franchise. He did return to the Dolphins in '81, but was limited to negotiating contracts, and died in February '83.

His first stint with the Dolphins ended when he quit over "contract differences" in February 1972--no doubt connected to a power struggle with Shula.

In both the Colts and 49ers situations, Thomas helped put the sale of the team together, and was rewarded with the GM position. Like the 49ers situation, he enraged people in Baltimore by getting rid of the team's legends (i.e. history), but he was crafty enough to stockpile top draft picks for them, so the damage was muffled. The beginning of the end came after Ted Marchibroda temporarily quit prior to the start of the '76 season over "front office interference," which was directly related to Thomas. It was noted that prior to that mess, the two had spoken pretty much every day, and after the blowup, didn't speak at all. After the season, Irsay gave Thomas the right to talk with other teams (since he had one year left on his contract), first (as noted) talking with Atlanta before connecting with the DeBartolo's.

In some ways, Thomas was the NFL's version of Billy Martin--improving a team for a few years before he self-destructs and goes elsewhere,

I think the Billy Martin comparison is apt. Both Thomas and Martin seem to be a weird mix of ego and insecurity, and I don't think their subordinates enjoyed working for them. One story has some scouts asking Thomas for his opinion about a fictional college player, and Thomas responding with a BS detailed report on the palyer.

Joe Thomas is one of the most interesting characters in NFL history, IMO. His field of expertise (personnel) only adds to the intrigue. Perhaps Thomas doesn't get credit because his peers were envious of his success and put off by his personality.

Its too bad the Niners thing was such a failure, because I think Thomas' rep never recovered. It seems like Thomas tried to duplicate the rebuilding plan that had worked with the Colts. I think the 1976 Niners were a much more promising team than the 1972 Colts, so the "total rebuild" might not have been necessary. The big deviation for Thomas was the OJ Simpson trade. It really made no sense from a personnel standpoint, because the 1977 Niners had RBs like Delvin Williams, Paul Hofer, & Wilbur Jackson. The Niners gave the Bills a lot of high draft picks for OJ, which was really out of character for Thomas. I wonder if Thomas deferred to DeBartolo and made the trade for box office reasons at DeBartolo's urging. That probably set the Niners back, but I think the main reason why Thomas failed at SF was that no head coach wanted to work for him, which is also the reason why Thomas left Miami and Baltimore. Monte Clark was immediately fired, and the three guys Thomas had as HCs were nondescript.

Comparing his first two Colts drafts to his first two Niners drafts, Thomas had a lot more picks to work with in Baltimore. That said, even the high picks he had in SF were average at best (Ken MacAfee and Dan Bunz). The highest pick Thomas had in 1977 was a 3rd rounder and that entire draft produced nothing (Brian Billick was an 11th rounder). The 1978 draft was better...after kind of botching his two 1st rounders on MacAfee and Bunz, Thomas picked up Fred Quillan, Archie Reese, and Walt Downing in subsequent rounds. A decent draft, but not nearly good enough to make up for the 1977 whiff. After two drafts in Baltimore, Thomas had Glenn Doughty, Lydell Mitchell, Bruce Laird, Stan White, Mike Barnes, Joe Ehrmann, Bert Jones, and a few other starters and backups

Page 8 of 13
oldecapecod 11

Historical Misconceptions that "grind your gears"
Started by Hail Casares, Jun 18 2014 04:49 PM

Page 9 of 13

247 replies to this topic

#161 coach tj troup
PFRA Member
Posted 03 July 2014 - 09:31 AM
....while history cannot be changed, the '76 Niners with a 6-1 start sure looked like at least a wild card team. what would the changes have been in the city by the bay if they would have finished 10-4 and in the play-offs? watching film of this fascinating team that was well coached by monte clark sure leaves me with more questions than answers. the late season loss to san diego is so ironic since the offensive co-ordinator with the chargers was bill walsh. how the wheels of irony turn?

#162 97Den98
Forum Visitors
Posted 03 July 2014 - 03:02 PM
Bryan, on 03 Jul 2014 - 08:43 AM, said:

I think the Billy Martin comparison is apt. Both Thomas and Martin seem to be a weird mix of ego and insecurity, and I don't think their subordinates enjoyed working for them. One story has some scouts asking Thomas for his opinion about a fictional college player, and Thomas responding with a BS detailed report on the palyer.

Joe Thomas is one of the most interesting characters in NFL history, IMO. His field of expertise (personnel) only adds to the intrigue. Perhaps Thomas doesn't get credit because his peers were envious of his success and put off by his personality.

Its too bad the Niners thing was such a failure, because I think Thomas' rep never recovered. It seems like Thomas tried to duplicate the rebuilding plan that had worked with the Colts. I think the 1976 Niners were a much more promising team than the 1972 Colts, so the "total rebuild" might not have been necessary. The big deviation for Thomas was the OJ Simpson trade. It really made no sense from a personnel standpoint, because the 1977 Niners had RBs like Delvin Williams, Paul Hofer, & Wilbur Jackson. The Niners gave the Bills a lot of high draft picks for OJ, which was really out of character for Thomas. I wonder if Thomas deferred to DeBartolo and made the trade for box office reasons at DeBartolo's urging. That probably set the Niners back, but I think the main reason why Thomas failed at SF was that no head coach wanted to work for him, which is also the reason why Thomas left Miami and Baltimore. Monte Clark was immediately fired, and the three guys Thomas had as HCs were nondescript.

Comparing his first two Colts drafts to his first two Niners drafts, Thomas had a lot more picks to work with in Baltimore. That said, even the high picks he had in SF were average at best (Ken MacAfee and Dan Bunz). The highest pick Thomas had in 1977 was a 3rd rounder and that entire draft produced nothing (Brian Billick was an 11th rounder). The 1978 draft was better...after kind of botching his two 1st rounders on MacAfee and Bunz, Thomas picked up Fred Quillan, Archie Reese, and Walt Downing in subsequent rounds. A decent draft, but not nearly good enough to make up for the 1977 whiff. After two drafts in Baltimore, Thomas had Glenn Doughty, Lydell Mitchell, Bruce Laird, Stan White, Mike Barnes, Joe Ehrmann, Bert Jones, and a few other starters and backups.

In Monte Clark's case, didn't he quit because he hated Thomas because of their time in Miami (as well as losing his dual HC/GM status)? I thought I heard that somewhere.

As for DeBartolo, wasn't he more of a hands-off owner his first year or so with the team? Because if he was, I am not sure that he would have ordered Thomas to trade for O.J.

There's no question, though, that his SF tenure was the death knell to Joe's career. Say the Niners have a different owner, and he goes to Atlanta instead (In a 1977 SI issue, there was an article about Atlanta's dreadful teams, and it mentioned how Joe turned them down), his legacy may have been different because that team was a dumpster fire, and a complete renovation was necessary.

Another comment on the O.J. trade: If that trade wasn't made, Walsh would have had the #1 pick in the 79 draft, and he probably would have taken Phil Simms.

#163 BD Sullivan
Forum Visitors
Posted 03 July 2014 - 03:56 PM
Thomas was actually fired because he wouldn't accept a new contract that made Thomas his boss. Had he done so, he would have gotten a raise from $57,000 to $75,000 , along with a two-year extension.
Not sure how much Clark and Thomas interacted in Miami, but I have to imagine that Shula gave him an earful about Thomas' abrasive style.

The O.J. deal had some of DeBartolo's fingerprints on it, since the Niners' attendance had dropped from the year before, but Thomas was equally enthusiastic about the deal.

Going back to the '76 season, the four-game losing streak after the 6-1 start was a tailspin San Fran never recovered from, with the first three losses all winnable:

*The first in St. Louis was a three-point loss in OT, with special teams getting all of the blame: on the opening kickoff, the two Niner return men allowed the Cardinals to recover the ball on the SF 9, quickly converting that to a touchdown. SF scored in the second quarter, but Steve Mike-Mayer missed the XP. In the fourth, Mike-Mayer shanked a 23-yard FG (due to a bad snap) with two minutes left, and then in OT, the Cardinals punted from their own 8, but SF fumbled and St. Louis then drove for the winning FG. Delvin Williams had a great game with 194 yards rushing.

*Against the Redskins at home--another three-point loss, the Niners couldn't stop Joe Theismann from running for a first down on a fake FG in the final five minutes that ironically set up an actual game-winning FG just after the two-minute warning. Monte Clark grumbled afterward that everyone knew the fake FG was coming, but they still couldn't stop it. Williams was having another great game for SF, but suffered a concussion with about nine minutes left and didn't return. The Niner secondary was torn apart by the Skins' Frank Grant, who had 11 catches for 200 yards.

*Facing the 2-7 Falcons in a cold (37 degrees) and rainy game in Atlanta, the flat Niners threw away another game. The wet weather played a part in both of Atlanta's two fourth quarter touchdowns--both of them coming after San Francisco fumbles. The Niners had one last chance, and Plunkett looked to have thrown a go-ahead score, but the receiver didn't have both feet in bounds.

#164 smith03
Forum Visitors
Posted 03 July 2014 - 05:09 PM
did he (Thomas) leave the Vikings when Finks was hired? His name is hardly if ever included in Vikings history

#165 BD Sullivan
Forum Visitors
Posted 03 July 2014 - 06:12 PM
smith03, on 03 Jul 2014 - 5:09 PM, said:
did he (Thomas) leave the Vikings when Finks was hired? His name is hardly if ever included in Vikings history
No, Finks arrived in September 1964, and Thomas left just over a year later.

#166 Bernard Brinker
Forum Visitors
Posted 04 July 2014 - 08:12 AM
Some (me for one) may hold an ancient animosity against Joe Thomas for the way he dismantled the Colts. I aasume head coach Don McCafferty was fired (week 4 or 5) because he would not follow Thomas' order to bench John Unitas (Unitas was at or near the top of the AFC in passer rating so whatever wrong with the Colts was not due to John's poor play).

Someone mentioned ego was a big part of Joe Thomas' problem, that fits here---he wanted to show that he was the big dog running the Colts.

#167 3243
Forum Visitors
Posted 04 July 2014 - 07:19 PM
"However I can't ignore the damage he did to the 49ers, their History and the History of the game."

What kind of nutcase would order all of the 49ers' film footage (prior to his arrival) destroyed anyway, as former 49er quarterback John Brodie related in Episode 4 of the Lost Treasures series?

#168 SixtiesFan
Forum Visitors
Posted 04 July 2014 - 08:12 PM
3243, on 04 Jul 2014 - 7:19 PM, said:
"However I can't ignore the damage he did to the 49ers, their History and the History of the game."

What kind of nutcase would order all of the 49ers' film footage (prior to his arrival) destroyed anyway, as former 49er quarterback John Brodie related in Episode 4 of the Lost Treasures series?

I recall seeing somewhere that Thomas tried to do destroy films of the Colts soon after taking over as Colt GM in 1972. Someone saw the film canisters in a garbage bin behind the Colt offices and saved them according to the story I saw.

Anyone else remember this story?

#169 JuggernautJ
PFRA Member
Posted 04 July 2014 - 09:56 PM
3243, on 04 Jul 2014 - 7:19 PM, said:
"However I can't ignore the damage he did to the 49ers, their History and the History of the game."

What kind of nutcase would order all of the 49ers' film footage (prior to his arrival) destroyed anyway, as former 49er quarterback John Brodie related in Episode 4 of the Lost Treasures series?

Joseph Goebbels.

#170 fgoodwin
Forum Visitors
Posted 04 July 2014 - 11:22 PM
bachslunch, on 19 Jun 2014 - 3:24 PM, said:

Agreed. Related to this are the ideas that Hayes was the first deep speed threat receiver and that the zone defense was invented to stop Hayes.

I'm a Cowboy fan and, in the spirit of historical accuracy, I try to correct this myth everytime it comes up. The Baltimore Colts were playing zone defenses for years before Hayes even came into the League, but Cowboy fans (most of whom were born long after Hayes retired) don't want to hear it.

#171 fgoodwin
Forum Visitors
Posted 04 July 2014 - 11:32 PM
Versatile John, on 21 Jun 2014 - 3:27 PM, said:
"Historical misconceptions" on the collegiate level about one guy:

When these morons claim that Joe Montana was a legend at Notre Dame and was one of the all-time greats in college football history. They base it off his NFL career. I watched every Domer game that Montana played in as a starter (live games and the replays with Nelson and Connor) and NOT one time did they say Montana was this legendary performer.

Plus, they will tell you Montana led ND to a helluva lot of come from behind victories......

NONE of this is true.

In fact, Montana cannot be a member of the College Football HOF because the geezer never made an All-American team. BUT these same toadstools claim he was this collegiate phenom in South Bend. Obviously, if he had been as great as these assgeeks claim, he would have already been in the College HOF.

The Browns undefeated season was already covered...great call on that.

Not an historical misconception, but another opinion that bothers the hell out of me: When people claim Gene Lipscomb is not worthy of being a HOFer, but Rich Jackson overwhelmingly is. HA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Also, not an historical misconception, but a philosophical misconception: This horse manure that QB's win championships and everyone else is just along for the ride.

I'm guessing much of Montana's mythical status in college was built on his come-from-behind win over U. of Houston in the 1979 Cotton Bowl (1978 season).

#172 fgoodwin
Forum Visitors
Posted 05 July 2014 - 12:33 AM
I see a recent inaccuracy cropping up time and again: that the Dallas-Washington rivalry was abetted by Dallas taking Eddie LeBaron in the expansion draft after George Preston Marshall "failed to protect" LeBaron, on the belief that he had retired.

Of course, LeBaron did indeed retire and Dallas did not take him as one of their three choices from the Redskins. Schramm and Landry later talked Eddie out of retirement, and as a result the Cowboys had to compensate the Redskins, which they did to the tune of 1st and 6th round picks in the 1961 draft.

I don't know where this falsehood first developed, but I try to correct it whenever I see it.

#173 JuggernautJ
PFRA Member
Posted 05 July 2014 - 02:02 AM
And lest we forget the Granddaddy of them all:
That the Bears/Packers are the two oldest teams/rivalry in the NFL.

#174 james
PFRA Member
Posted 05 July 2014 - 08:43 AM
JuggernautJ, on 05 Jul 2014 - 02:02 AM, said:
And lest we forget the Granddaddy of them all:
That the Bears/Packers are the two oldest teams/rivalry in the NFL.

Woulbn't it be the Cardinals and Bears?

#175 rhickok1109
PFRA Member
Posted 05 July 2014 - 08:56 AM
fgoodwin, on 04 Jul 2014 - 11:22 PM, said:
I'm a Cowboy fan and, in the spirit of historical accuracy, I try to correct this myth everytime it comes up. The Baltimore Colts were playing zone defenses for years before Hayes even came into the League, but Cowboy fans (most of whom were born long after Hayes retired) don't want to hear it.
I think all NFL teams used zone defenses at times during the 1950s, although it was most often used as a prevent defense. Steve Owen's "Umbrella Defense," created in 1950 to stop Cleveland's passing attack, was essentially a zone defense.

#176 Versatile John
PFRA Member
Posted 05 July 2014 - 12:42 PM
Fgoodwin:
It is that, along with his great pro career, and the fact this foolish mainstream philosophy exists that QB's are primarily judged by wins and championships. The fact is, Montana was never a serious Heisman or All-American candidate, even after his team won the 1977 national championship and he returned for his senior year in 1978. He was never this once in a lifetime college talent that people ASSume he was now. It is quite comical.

I have no problem with folks saying Montana was in Dan Devine's vanilla system and could have done more (other than the hand ball off to Jerome Heavens and sophomore Vagas Ferguson, throw high percentage passes to Kris Haines and tight end phenom Ken MacAfee, and not turn the ball over, etc.).....BUT he was not the player at ND that he was in the NFL.

I have heard Beano Cook, Cowherd, among others--too many others--claim he was this great "winner" and dominant player at ND. You see these polls about best Notre Dame players of all-time and he is on the list. You see these polls about best QB's in college history and often times, he is listed. And we all know Collinsworth's comments referring to Ron Powlus: "Move over, Joe Montana. There is a new sheriff in town."

All of this garbage is just pure myths.....perpetuated by his NFL career (and the other aforementioned scenarios).

#177 Versatile John
PFRA Member
Posted 05 July 2014 - 01:00 PM
During his playing career--and it is worse now--you would/will hear that Dan Marino could not "lead" his team in come from behind wins in clutch time. I do not know the exact numbers (I know you guys have them, but I don't), but Marino "led" his team to quite a lot of come from behind 4th quarter victories during his career. It was always said that Marino had the most next to Elway, at the time, in terms of current QB's. But the average, casual fan will tell you he was not clutch....when the facts show otherwise.

#178 Reaser
PFRA Member
Posted 05 July 2014 - 01:17 PM
Versatile John, on 05 Jul 2014 - 1:00 PM, said:
During his playing career--and it is worse now--you would/will hear that Dan Marino could not "lead" his team in come from behind wins in clutch time. I do not know the exact numbers (I know you guys have them, but I don't), but Marino "led" his team to quite a lot of come from behind 4th quarter victories during his career. It was always said that Marino had the most next to Elway, at the time, in terms of current QB's. But the average, casual fan will tell you he was not clutch....when the facts show otherwise.
Another team kept 'stat' that was inflated, the Broncos were crediting Elway with 'comebacks' in a lot more generous way than the Dolphins were crediting Marino, so Marino actually had/has more 4th Qtr comebacks.

Like This
Though profits are important, the sport must take precedence over the business

#179 BD Sullivan
Forum Visitors
Posted 05 July 2014 - 01:28 PM
Versatile John, on 05 Jul 2014 - 12:42 PM, said:
I have heard Beano Cook, Cowherd, among others--too many others--claim he was this great "winner" and dominant player at ND. You see these polls about best Notre Dame players of all-time and he is on the list. You see these polls about best QB's in college history and often times, he is listed. And we all know Collinsworth's comments referring to Ron Powlus: "Move over, Joe Montana. There is a new sheriff in town."
To a lesser extent, a similar situation exists at Ohio State. Kirk Herbstreit's career, which consisted mostly of one year starting--leading the team to an 8-3-1 record, and a loss in the Citrus Bowl, has somehow become more memorable to fans, where a poll a few years ago ranked him MUCH higher than he should have been for all-time OSU quarterbacks. Obviously, his prominence on ABC/ESPN keeps his name in people's minds, but his career was nothing special.

#180 Versatile John
PFRA Member
Posted 05 July 2014 - 02:09 PM
Yes, a great example, BD. Oh, and the loss was against UGA (the Antichrist).

One of my biggest pet peeves is when people cannot separate college and NFL careers and making a guy better (or worse) than what he was in college based off an NFL career.

Tom Brady was not a great player at UM; he was a very good player, but many people will name him to their all-time UM team over others.

Willie Wood gets named to many all-time USC teams when he was nothing outstanding. He was the first black QB on the west coast and was a fine DB, but he was not among the all-time greatest defensive backs.

Clay Matthews, III is regarded as one of the best SC defenders in the 2000s...based off his NFL career.

Ray Lewis, according to many, was by far the best Hurricane LBer ever........HA!!!!!!!

Michael Irvin, along that same vein, was clearly the best UM Cane WR ever. Hosrse sheet! IMO, Eddie Brown was arguably as good in college and had much less overall talent around him. People that watched them both will tell you this.

I have conversations with college fans all the time, and many will tell you Munoz was the most dominant OT in college at the time (and in history)...when he was hurt most of his career. He was a starter in 1977, he missed about four games in 1978 (was a second team All-American, though) and missed the entire 1979 season (went down early in the opener against Texas Tech...true frosh Don Mosebar started in his place....with exception of one game, where Bruce Matthews, a true frosh started).....Munoz only started one game, which was the 1980s Rose, where he was fabulous. But, he was hurt too much. The fact is, Munoz was never even a first team All-American, either.

You will hear folks say that no UT Vols back can come close to Arian Foster and Jamal Lewis in their history as college backs.

Trojan fans will tell you Ronnie Lott was a legend the minute he stepped on the campus, when Dennis Smith was better early on in their careers, had better stats and more accolades until their senior years. Kenny Easley (for you, Reaser) was CLEARLY a better player early on in college and was the guy that made an immediate impact as a collegian, not RL42.

Nebraska (my second favorite program) will say that Will Shields was overwhelmingly better tan Dean Steinkuhler as a Husker. HA!

According to many CAL fans, etc., no Golden Bear back could compare to Marshawn Lynch.

Adrian Peterson is an interesting guy.....People name him among the best backs of the 2000s, in OU history and in collegiate history. He had a great true frosh year in 2004, but he was hurt a good deal the rest of his last two years. He had over 4000 career rushing yards, but damn near half of it came in his freshman year. When USC and OU met in the 2005 Orange Bowl (2004 season), Leinart was the true star that night, as he earned MVP honors. Peterson rushed for approximately 85 yards, with much of it at the end of the game when USC had the backups in the game. Point: Many people thought maybe Leinart was the right choice for the Heisman after that game, given their head-to-head matchup. Now, since their pro careers have taken opposite directions, these same people look back and say "AD was robbed." LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

On the flip side, re: Herbstreit.....people think Mark May was not all that in college, because he is more controversial as a commentator. Mark May was a great player, winning the Outland and was an All-American OT in 1980.

You cannot make a guy better or worse off an NFL career...what he was in college is what he was.

Page 9 of 13
oldecapecod 11

oldecapecod11 · Post by **oldecapecod11** » Wed Nov 26, 2014 7:23 pm

Historical Misconceptions that "grind your gears"
Started by Hail Casares, Jun 18 2014 04:49 PM

Page 10 of 13

247 replies to this topic

#181 rhickok1109
PFRA Member
Posted 05 July 2014 - 02:21 PM
Reaser, on 05 Jul 2014 - 1:17 PM, said:
Another team kept 'stat' that was inflated, the Broncos were crediting Elway with 'comebacks' in a lot more generous way than the Dolphins were crediting Marino, so Marino actually had/has more 4th Qtr comebacks.
According to Pro-Football-Reference.com, Manning is the all-time leader with 40, Marino has 36, Elway 35, Brady and Montana 31 each, Tarkenton and Favre 30 each.

#182 Reaser
PFRA Member
Posted 05 July 2014 - 02:25 PM
rhickok1109, on 05 Jul 2014 - 2:21 PM, said:
According to Pro-Football-Reference.com, Manning is the all-time leader with 40, Marino has 36, Elway 35, Brady and Montana 31 each, Tarkenton and Favre 30 each.
They use Scott Kacsmar's data. He who has written many times about Elway's "47" comebacks (Denver's number for Elway) ...

PFHOF uses 47, Denver uses 47, NFL broadcasts use 47 ... but that's the team kept number, while other teams used other criteria (e.g. Dolphins w/Marino) ...

http://www.profootba...spx?PlayerId=64

#183 JuggernautJ
PFRA Member
Posted 05 July 2014 - 04:14 PM
james, on 05 Jul 2014 - 08:43 AM, said:
Woulbn't it be the Cardinals and Bears?

Exactly.
And yet you hear that the Packers/Bears rivalry is the oldest in the NFL every damn time they play.

#184 james
PFRA Member
Posted 05 July 2014 - 04:18 PM
JuggernautJ, on 05 Jul 2014 - 4:14 PM, said:
Exactly.
And yet you hear that the Packers/Bears rivalry is the oldest in the NFL every damn time they play.

Exactly. That's they ever talk about.

#185 Moran
PFRA Member
Posted 05 July 2014 - 07:04 PM
My gears go a grinding whenever people discuss the great defensive players who wore the NY Giants uniform and don't include Mel Hein in the conversation - who have the misconception that because he is described as a "center" he never played defense and don't realize that when he was named the very first NFL MVP it was in large part because of the excellent defensive play of the Giants that year.

#186 james
PFRA Member
Posted 05 July 2014 - 09:00 PM
Moran, on 05 Jul 2014 - 7:04 PM, said:
My gears go a grinding whenever people discuss the great defensive players who wore the NY Giants uniform and don't include Mel Hein in the conversation - who have the misconception that because he is described as a "center" he never played defense and don't realize that when he was named the very first NFL MVP it was in large part because of the excellent defensive play of the Giants that year.

Amen, brother. Hein was agreat LB.

#187 Mark L. Ford
Administrators
Posted 05 July 2014 - 09:27 PM
JuggernautJ, on 05 Jul 2014 - 4:14 PM, said:
Exactly.
And yet you hear that the Packers/Bears rivalry is the oldest in the NFL every damn time they play.
I don't think it's a misconception at all-- the Chicago Bears and Green Bay Packers have met regularly, twice a year, every year since they both took up residence in their respective hometowns (with one exception, when they didn't meet at all, good trivia question to ask sometime). The Chicago Bears used to have regular games against the Chicago Cardinals, but they have occasionally played against the St. Louis/Arizona/Wherever Cardinals in the last 53 years, hardly a "rivalry".... it's about as tradition-laden as the Lions playing the Panthers, or the Bengals and the Patriots.

#188 james
PFRA Member
Posted 05 July 2014 - 09:48 PM
Moran, on 05 Jul 2014 - 7:04 PM, said:
My gears go a grinding whenever people discuss the great defensive players who wore the NY Giants uniform and don't include Mel Hein in the conversation - who have the misconception that because he is described as a "center" he never played defense and don't realize that when he was named the very first NFL MVP it was in large part because of the excellent defensive play of the Giants that year.

When Hein won the MVP Award in 1938, was it for his play at Center or was it for his Center and his play on defense?

#189 NWebster
Forum Visitors
Posted 05 July 2014 - 09:48 PM
Mark L. Ford, on 05 Jul 2014 - 9:27 PM, said:
I don't think it's a misconception at all-- the Chicago Bears and Green Bay Packers have met regularly, twice a year, every year since they both took up residence in their respective hometowns (with one exception, when they didn't meet at all, good trivia question to ask sometime). The Chicago Bears used to have regular games against the Chicago Cardinals, but they have occasionally played against the St. Louis/Arizona/Wherever Cardinals in the last 53 years, hardly a "rivalry".... it's about as tradition-laden as the Lions playing the Panthers, or the Bengals and the Patriots.

There was a period in the 50's when the Cards had surprising success against the clearly stronger Bears, much to the consternation of the local papers - who even at the time seemed to favor the Bears.
#190 JuggernautJ
PFRA Member
Posted 06 July 2014 - 12:52 AM
Mark L. Ford, on 05 Jul 2014 - 9:27 PM, said:
I don't think it's a misconception at all-- the Chicago Bears and Green Bay Packers have met regularly, twice a year, every year since they both took up residence in their respective hometowns (with one exception, when they didn't meet at all, good trivia question to ask sometime). The Chicago Bears used to have regular games against the Chicago Cardinals, but they have occasionally played against the St. Louis/Arizona/Wherever Cardinals in the last 53 years, hardly a "rivalry".... it's about as tradition-laden as the Lions playing the Panthers, or the Bengals and the Patriots.

There's a difference between having the oldest rivalry and having the rivalry with the most games played.

It is my understanding that the Bears/Packers qualify for the latter but it is the Bears/Cardinals (the only two teams extant from the 1920 APFA) that hold the former distinction.

#191 Jeremy Crowhurst
PFRA Member
Posted 06 July 2014 - 02:22 AM
JuggernautJ, on 06 Jul 2014 - 12:52 AM, said:
There's a difference between having the oldest rivalry and having the rivalry with the most games played.

It is my understanding that the Bears/Packers qualify for the latter but it is the Bears/Cardinals (the only two teams extant from the 1920 APFA) that hold the former distinction.

Does anybody talk about the Browns - 49ers rivalry, the two remaining AAFC teams? Hell, does anybody talk about the Browns having a rivalry with anyone?

I get what you're saying, but I think Mark's point is stronger -- for there to be a rivalry, they have to actually play each other, somebody has to care, and the takeaway has to be something other than a crazed lunatic ranting at the podium about how they were who they thought they were.

#192 coach tj troup
PFRA Member
Posted 06 July 2014 - 10:31 AM
....what is the best? most intense, meaningful rivalry for all of you? though the bears and packers gets folks fired up....have talked with people from both minnesota and wisconsin....and they talk about the vikings and packers as BITTER rivals. add to that the lifetime record between the two. that to me is a rivalry. though the rams went to the midwest.....the history of the franchise against the 49ers still carries weight, and again the lifetime record against each other sure shows the ebb and flow.

#193 Citizen
Forum Visitors
Posted 06 July 2014 - 10:46 AM
2014 will be the 85th straight season the Bears and Lions have renewed acquaintances (allowing that the Lions weren't yet the Lions for the first few of those seasons). Is that not the longest-running uninterrupted series? Then after that, I think, would come Giants-Redskins, then Packers-Lions (also Giants-Eagles if you care to count the 1943 Giants-Steagles games).

#194 Citizen
Forum Visitors
Posted 06 July 2014 - 10:51 AM
The 2010 NFC championship and last year's de facto NFC North title game have been just about the only truly meaningful Packers-Bears games of the past 40 years, at least. The Green Bay-Chicago rivalry is a bit overblown, to put it mildly.

Ask anyone under 50 (especially if they're from the western half of Wisconsin), and they'll tell you that the Vikings are Green Bay's #1 rival. The older folks and people from GB/Milwaukee are more likely to cite the Bears.

#195 BD Sullivan
Forum Visitors
Posted 06 July 2014 - 11:45 AM
Jeremy Crowhurst, on 06 Jul 2014 - 02:22 AM, said:
Does anybody talk about the Browns - 49ers rivalry, the two remaining AAFC teams? Hell, does anybody talk about the Browns having a rivalry with anyone?
The Browns-Steelers "rivalry" is still hyped, even though it's been ridiculously one-sided since Cleveland's return in '99--and even before then. The Browns' other supposed "rivalry" with the Bengals began mostly because of the enmity between Modell and Paul Brown. It now clings to the fact that both teams are from Ohio, since Brown's death in 1991 and Modell's move four years later have completely taken that aspect away.

#196 Versatile John
PFRA Member
Posted 06 July 2014 - 11:53 AM
Absolutely on Hein.

That is why it pissed me off that Hein was behind Terry Bradshaw and Bart Starr--way behind, at that--in the "Top 100 NFL Players of All-Time" segment. You compare the careers of Mel Hein. Emlen Tunnell, Larry Allen, among others, to that of Bradshaw and Starr and they were clearly greater players in their era than Bradshaw and Starr were in their eras, respectively.

#197 Moran
PFRA Member
Posted 06 July 2014 - 12:39 PM
james, on 05 Jul 2014 - 9:48 PM, said:
When Hein won the MVP Award in 1938, was it for his play at Center or was it for his Center and his play on defense?
http://www.bigbluein...ew-york-giants/

The New York Giants had a respectable offense ...Ed Danowski ...Tuffy Leemans ... Hank Soar. The Giants real strength came from the one player Head coach Steve Owen built both sides of the ball around: Mel Hein. Hein was the lynchpin in Owen’s versatile A-Formation, which featured the line strong to one side and the backs strong to the opposite side. On defense, Hein was equally impressive. Chicago Bear Bronko Nagurski recalled Hein as being “the surest, cleanest and most effective tackler” he’d ever faced. When he wasn’t delivering a bone jarring hit, Hein was dropping into coverage. He was one of the few players capable of staying with Hutson,

In 1938, Hein led a defense that over 11 games surrendered just eight touchdowns and a league-low 79 points in total. Those efforts earned Hein the first Joe F. Carr Trophy as league MVP.

Owen instituted the unique two-platoon system in 1937, where he’d change out nearly complete units of 10 players at the end of the first and third quarters. The lone exception was Hein. “He was too good to take out,”

#198 Mark L. Ford
Administrators
Posted 06 July 2014 - 01:14 PM
JuggernautJ, on 06 Jul 2014 - 12:52 AM, said:

There's a difference between having the oldest rivalry and having the rivalry with the most games played.

It is my understanding that the Bears/Packers qualify for the latter but it is the Bears/Cardinals (the only two teams extant from the 1920 APFA) that hold the former distinction.
I guess it depends on how one defines the word "rivalry". If a team considers every other team its rival, no matter how seldom they may meet, yes, the Bears and Cardinals first met back in 1920, when the Decatur Staleys played the Chicago Cardinals twice. However, I don't think that the average Bears fan could care less about the Arizona Cardinals. It's nothing more than a curiosity, kind of like the occasional Bears-Falcons game.

#199 oldecapecod 11
PFRA Member
Posted 06 July 2014 - 01:21 PM
Jeremy Crowhurst
Posted Today, 02:22 AM
"JuggernautJ, on 06 Jul 2014 - 12:52 AM, said:
There's a difference between having the oldest rivalry and having the rivalry with the most games played.
It is my understanding that the Bears/Packers qualify for the latter but it is the Bears/Cardinals (the only two teams extant from the 1920 APFA) that hold the former distinction."

" ... Does anybody talk about the Browns - 49ers rivalry, the two remaining AAFC teams?
" ...I get what you're saying, but I think Mark's point is stronger..."

No; they do not - and there are a multitude of reasons why not.
First and foremost is that the master you serve, the NFL, does not approve of any historically significant facts about the AAFC.
Another and far more legitimate reason is that any rivalries would pale with chronological comparison to those of the APFA or NFL. (That's 1940s vs. 1920s.)
But, it is good to see some have learned when to use the scalp knife to spread butter and pay homage to the similarity to Josie Wales' "words of iron."

Citizen
Posted Today, 10:46 AM
" ...2014 will be the 85th straight season the Bears and Lions have renewed acquaintances (allowing that the Lions weren't yet the Lions for the first few of those seasons). Is that not the longest-running uninterrupted series? Then after that, I think, would come Giants-Redskins, then Packers-Lions (also Giants-Eagles if you care to count the 1943 Giants-Steagles games)."

Of course it is allowed that the Lions were not the Lions. The Staleys were not the Bears.
And... "uninterrupted" certainly must enter the mix.

Ah yes, the Giants vs. those Braves / Redskins / (Whining Cows if some would have their way.)
The Polo Grounds was far more "electric" when the savages from the Potomac were in town and long before there was Huff vs. Brown it was the hated Eagles that created the stir.
Whoops! Eagles / Steagles and R.I.P. W.C. Fields.

#200 BD Sullivan
Forum Visitors
Posted 06 July 2014 - 01:24 PM
That Art Modell magnanimously gave Cleveland the Browns name, history, etc. when he moved. He was fully planning on the team becoming the Baltimore Browns, but that got a negative reaction in Baltimore. More importantly, he knew he couldn't win a lawsuit to hold the team to its Cleveland Stadium lease for three more years--for one thing, it would have had all Clevelanders on the jury. Thus, he used it as a bargaining chip to get out of the lawsuit.

In that same vein, the national media likes to make the case that Belichick was forced out of Cleveland by media harassment and fan unpopularity. The fact is, when the move was announced in early February 1996, he was still the team's coach. One week after, Art Modell went back on his word (big surprise) that he would keep Belichick, and fired Mr. Charm
Page 10 of 13
oldecapecod

Historical Misconceptions that "grind your gears"
Started by Hail Casares, Jun 18 2014 04:49 PM

NOTE: Page 11 Missing - continues with
Page 12 of 13

Page 12 of 13

247 replies to this topic

#221 fgoodwin
Forum Visitors
Posted 18 July 2014 - 09:18 AM
Todd Pence, on 18 Jul 2014 - 08:22 AM, said:
Wow, here's a really bad one.

http://www.starter.c...-brief-history/
"Dallas and Pittsburgh met for the first time in Super Bowl X"

Not only did the two have a ten year history of playing each other when they were both members of the NFL, but they had already met once post-merger during the 1972 season.

Being in opposite conferences, the only way the Cowboys and Steelers could have met in 1972 would be in the Super Bowl and they did not play in the 1972 Super Bowl (Super Bowl VI: Dallas 24 Miami 3); nor did they meet after the 72 season: Super Bowl VII: Miami 24, Vikings 7.

#222 Mark L. Ford
Administrators
Posted 18 July 2014 - 09:37 AM
Yes, but Todd's comment goes to the misstatement that the Cowboys and Steelers had never met before, period-- and of course, they had met in the regular seasons from 1960 to 1969, and (as he notes) in the regular season in 1972. As an odd bit of trivia, the Dallas Cowboys' opening game in their very first season was against the Steelers.

#223 fgoodwin
Forum Visitors
Posted 18 July 2014 - 12:29 PM
My bad. He said post merger but I read it as post season.

#224 Todd Pence
Forum Visitors
Posted 18 July 2014 - 01:08 PM
Also, I believe the Cowboys first ever win came against Pittsburgh.

#225 Teo
PFRA Member
Posted 18 July 2014 - 04:49 PM
Others I think about:

- That the Dallas Cowboys have played every Thanksgiving since their foundation.

-That the Carolina Panthers always have played in Charlotte, ignoring the fact that they played at Clemson University in their first year.

#226 smith03
Forum Visitors
Posted 18 July 2014 - 05:35 PM
how about Detroit has always played on thanksgiving day did not happen during ww2

#227 Mark L. Ford
Administrators
Posted 19 July 2014 - 02:10 PM
Still, it's very impressive if they've played every Thanksgiving Day since 1945-- that would make this year's game the 70th in a row. I honestly didn't realize it went back as far as it did. I wonder why they discontinued it from 1939 through 1944? World War II wasgoing on during those years, but that wouldn't explain the 1939, 1940 and 1941 Thanksgiving Days before we got into the war. Certainly, the 1939 schedule was already in place before the war began on September 1. They had it for their first five years in Detroit (1934-1938), then dropped it for awhile, then started the tradition again after a six year hiatus.

#228 Jagade
PFRA Member
Gender:Male
Posted 19 July 2014 - 03:43 PM
Teo, on 18 Jul 2014 - 4:49 PM, said:
Others I think about:

- That the Dallas Cowboys have played every Thanksgiving since their foundation.

-That the Carolina Panthers always have played in Charlotte, ignoring the fact that they played at Clemson University in their first year.

I think that the Cowboys didn't play on Thanksgiving in 1975 and 1977 for some reason. Dallas first got their home game on Thanksgiving in 1966 against Cleveland. I guess that you could call it a success for Dallas because they beat the Browns for the first time since 1962, which helped them win the Eastern Conference title for the first time.

The home field advantage gives the Thanksgiving home team an edge in 2 consecutive games late in the season. On Thanksgiving Day, the visiting team doesn't get much time to prepare and has to spend part of a day traveling. In their next game the teams that play on Thanksgiving get 3 extra days to prepare and get over some of their bumps and bruises. Al Davis used to really hate that (Dallas getting the Thanksgiving home games).

I think that the Thanksgiving home game also helped Detroit at times, especially during the 1950's and early 1960's. I know that Vince Lombardi put a stop to Green Bay's annual Thanksgiving game at Detroit.

#229 smith03
Forum Visitors
Posted 19 July 2014 - 04:08 PM
the eagles and Pittsburgh played thanksgiving day 1939,40 so it wasn't some league policy, now FDR did break tradition and tried to move thanksgiving around so that may have had something to do with it from 39-41 and then ww2 42-44.

#230 Jeremy Crowhurst
PFRA Member
Posted 19 July 2014 - 04:30 PM
The way the schedule was determined pre-Rozelle would have been a great show, in and of itself, almost gladitorial in nature.

If Detroit wanted the Thanksgiving games in those years, I'm betting that their representative at the scheduling bloodmatch had a weak bladder, and got locked out of the room once he left to use the facilities. By 1945 he probably figured out that he needed to bring an empty pop bottle rather than a full coffee cup....

#231 fgoodwin
Forum Visitors
Posted 19 July 2014 - 04:30 PM
Jagade, on 19 Jul 2014 - 3:43 PM, said:
I think that the Cowboys didn't play on Thanksgiving in 1975 and 1977 for some reason. Dallas first got their home game on Thanksgiving in 1966 against Cleveland. I guess that you could call it a success for Dallas because they beat the Browns for the first time since 1962, which helped them win the Eastern Conference title for the first time.

The home field advantage gives the Thanksgiving home team an edge in 2 consecutive games late in the season. On Thanksgiving Day, the visiting team doesn't get much time to prepare and has to spend part of a day traveling. In their next game the teams that play on Thanksgiving get 3 extra days to prepare and get over some of their bumps and bruises. Al Davis used to really hate that (Dallas getting the Thanksgiving home games).

I think that the Thanksgiving home game also helped Detroit at times, especially during the 1950's and early 1960's. I know that Vince Lombardi put a stop to Green Bay's annual Thanksgiving game at Detroit.
The reason Dallas didn't host Thanksgiving Day games in 1975 and 1977 was the League listened to the complaints and for those two years awarded the game to St. Louis (the Cardinals, not the Rams).

I don't have a link but "received wisdom" holds that CBS's rating were so bad those two years (compared to Dallas hosting the game) they convinced the NFL to move the game back to Dallas and the story (perhaps apocryphal) goes that Tex Schramm agreed to take the game back on one condition: that the NFL never move it again. Well it hasn't been moved, albeit other games were added.

I always wondered: while people were complaining about Dallas' alleged home field advantage as a result of hosting the Thanksgiving day game and the ten day break before the next game, were fans making the same complaint about Detroit? And if Dallas got an advantage from the ten day break, didn't the visiting team get that same advantage? And didn't Detroit and its visiting team get that same advantage?

It would interesting to compile the records of the two visiting teams in the next game to see how the ten day break worked for them, and for Detroit. I know Dallas had a pretty substantial positive W-L record both on Thanksgiving Day and the game after, but I never looked at the next game W-L record for visiting teams.

About the claim that the Thanksgiving Day game gives the home team the edge for two consecutive games: I agree the ten day break is an advantage, but that overlooks the short-week the hosting team must go through for the Thanksgiving Day game. Yes Dallas is used to it. I suppose Detroit is, too, yet their record on Thanksgiving isn't quite as good as Dallas' (that's a guess I don't know the W-L record for Detroit)

Anyway you slice it, fours days is a very short time to prepare for your next game. But nobody talks about that little detail.

#232 Chrisskreager
Forum Visitors
Posted 19 July 2014 - 09:44 PM
Even when the Lions won on Thanksgiving in the old days, they didn't always use it as a playoff springboard.

1979- One-win Lions shock playoff bound Bears, don't win again rest of the season.

#233 Mark L. Ford
Administrators
Posted 20 July 2014 - 12:29 PM
smith03, on 19 Jul 2014 - 4:08 PM, said:
the eagles and Pittsburgh played thanksgiving day 1939,40 so it wasn't some league policy, now FDR did break tradition and tried to move thanksgiving around so that may have had something to do with it from 39-41 and then ww2 42-44.

There may be something to that. Actually, FDR did indeed change Thanksgiving Day during his term, from the last Thursday of November, to the fourth Thursday. The Lions' 1934 Turkey Day game was played on November 29, which would never happen now. He started that in 1939, so if the Lions had had any plans to play at home on November 30 that year, it would have been a workday instead of a holiday, and it would have been only three days an already scheduled game with the Packers. Chris is right about moving it around, because in 1940 and 1941, he proclaimed the third Thursday of the month (11/21/40 and 11/22/41) as Thanksgiving Day.

The change was made on lobbying by retailers, back in the days when stores were closed on Sundays, society still frowned on putting up Christmas decorations before what we now call "Black Friday", and people still advertised "only ___ shopping days until Christmas". You couldn't even shop Amazon.com on Sunday back then!!! Today, every day is shopping day.

#234 smith03
Forum Visitors
Posted 20 July 2014 - 01:51 PM
anyone know when Michigan celebrated thanksgivings from 1939-41?

#235 Rupert Patrick
PFRA Member
Posted 20 July 2014 - 07:49 PM
Mark L. Ford, on 20 Jul 2014 - 12:29 PM, said:
There may be something to that. Actually, FDR did indeed change Thanksgiving Day during his term, from the last Thursday of November, to the fourth Thursday. The Lions' 1934 Turkey Day game was played on November 29, which would never happen now. He started that in 1939, so if the Lions had had any plans to play at home on November 30 that year, it would have been a workday instead of a holiday, and it would have been only three days an already scheduled game with the Packers. Chris is right about moving it around, because in 1940 and 1941, he proclaimed the third Thursday of the month (11/21/40 and 11/22/41) as Thanksgiving Day.

The change was made on lobbying by retailers, back in the days when stores were closed on Sundays, society still frowned on putting up Christmas decorations before what we now call "Black Friday", and people still advertised "only ___ shopping days until Christmas". You couldn't even shop Amazon.com on Sunday back then!!! Today, every day is shopping day.

When FDR changed the date of Thanksgiving, many areas did not recognize it, and they referred to the FDR Thanksgiving as "Franksgiving":

http://en.wikipedia....ki/Franksgiving

#236 BD Sullivan
Forum Visitors
Posted 20 July 2014 - 09:03 PM
In both '75 and '77, CBS got stuck with two duds: the '75 game saw the Rams win 20-0, with neither team putting up much offense; two years later, one first half TD probably bored people waiting for mid-afternoon Turkey, though the Bears exploded for 31 second half points.

NBC's two games saw the Cardinals score first and last in '75--with Buffalo scoring 32 points in between. Two years later, Miami destroyed the Cards, 55-14; the only drama might have been to see if Griese could get a record-tying seventh TD pass. It was 28-7 at the half and 48-7 after three.

#237 Jagade
PFRA Member
Posted 20 July 2014 - 09:53 PM
Detroit did pretty well on Thanksgiving during the Layne era (1950-58), losing only in 1956 to Green Bay, 24 to 20, on a last minute TD pass from Tobin Rote to Bill Howton. Buddy Parker was so impressed with Rote that he traded for him the next year. Parker said that he also wanted a good backup to Layne as a result of Layne's injury in the 1956 season ending game (Ed Meadows game) against the Bears. That trade was key to Detroit's 1957 NFL Championship.

Anyway, Detroit was 8 wins and 1 loss in their Thanksgiving Day games from 1950 through 1958.

#238 BD Sullivan
Forum Visitors
Posted 20 July 2014 - 11:17 PM
The 1961 and '70 Lions games were the only ones in eons that saw the Lions wear white jerseys at home: the 1961 game, because George Wilson got superstitious after the Lions had run off a winning streak in the whites; the 1970 game was because of a request from NBC (and possibly the NFL) due to the Raiders' silver numbers on white jerseys causing havoc.

#239 Mark L. Ford
Administrators
Posted 21 July 2014 - 08:49 AM
smith03, on 20 Jul 2014 - 1:51 PM, said:
anyone know when Michigan celebrated thanksgivings from 1939-41?
They went along with the rest of the nation, observing it on November 23, 1939. The next year, they observed in on November 21 (the earliest official Thanksgiving holiday in U.S. history, and the only time it ever happened).
#240 smith03
Forum Visitors

142 posts
Gender:Male
Location:Minnesota
Posted 21 July 2014 - 10:15 AM
thanks it would be interesting to know why the lions didn't play on thanksgiving those years (39-41) , I assume WW2 took care of 42-44

Page 12 of 13

Historical Misconceptions that "grind your gears"
Started by Hail Casares, Jun 18 2014 04:49 PM

Page 13 of 13

247 replies to this topic

#241 BD Sullivan
Forum Visitors
Posted 21 July 2014 - 10:46 AM
This UPI item is in reference to college football, but can probably be applied to the Lions situation from 1939-41: "Because of the confusion caused by the change of the date of Thanksgiving last year, the big schools refused to take a chance on a Turkey Day game this year."

#242 Timmy B
Forum Visitors
Posted 24 July 2014 - 12:12 PM
BD Sullivan, on 20 Jul 2014 - 11:17 PM, said:
The 1961 and '70 Lions games were the only ones in eons that saw the Lions wear white jerseys at home: the 1961 game, because George Wilson got superstitious after the Lions had run off a winning streak in the whites; the 1970 game was because of a request from NBC (and possibly the NFL) due to the Raiders' silver numbers on white jerseys causing havoc.
I can understand the 1970 game, but I am really curious how the 1961 game got the exemption. By 1970, teams could wear white at home if they so chose. But in 1961, as I understand it, it was actually a RULE that all home must wear color jerseys and all away teams must wear white jerseys.

From 1957 through 1963, the 1961 T-Day game is the ONLY game in the NFL where a home team wore white jerseys at home. Did the Lions grease a young Pete Rozelle's palm to get their way here?? Curious.

#243 BD Sullivan
Forum Visitors
Posted 24 July 2014 - 05:46 PM
Timmy B, on 24 Jul 2014 - 12:12 PM, said:
I can understand the 1970 game, but I am really curious how the 1961 game got the exemption. By 1970, teams could wear white at home if they so chose. But in 1961, as I understand it, it was actually a RULE that all home must wear color jerseys and all away teams must wear white jerseys.

From 1957 through 1963, the 1961 T-Day game is the ONLY game in the NFL where a home team wore white jerseys at home. Did the Lions grease a young Pete Rozelle's palm to get their way here?? Curious.
From an AP article the day before the game: "(George) Wilson, fed up with the Lions' inability to win at Tiger Stadium, sought--and received--permission to have players wear road uniforms against the Packers." No indication if Rozelle was enriched monetarily, but my guess would be that Pete was secretly hoping for a Detroit upset and figuring it couldn't hurt anything, since it would tightened things up, putting the Lions just a half-game out of first place. Instead, GB won 17-9, and virtually clinched the conference title.

Prior to the game, the Lions were 5-0-1 on the road and 1-3 at home. Green Bay's one loss at home before this contest was against--the Lions--in Week One.

#244 3243
Forum Visitors
Posted 30 July 2014 - 08:15 PM
"Two years later (1977), Miami destroyed the Cards, 55-14; the only drama might have been to see if Griese could get a record-tying seventh TD pass."

That, and Conrad Dobler instigating a bench-clearing brawl in the game's closing moments.

#245 Todd Pence
Forum Visitors
Posted 31 July 2014 - 12:55 PM
Dobler later selected the Thanksgivng game as the most memorable of his career,. Tells you something about the guy's priorities.

#246 Bryan
Forum Visitors
Posted 31 July 2014 - 02:29 PM
Don't know if these have already been mentioned, but a couple come to mind. The first is that the 1958 Championship game led to a huge increase in attendance and the popularity of the NFL. I don't believe the numbers support this concept. The second is that the Browns were "too good" for the AAFC and the attendance numbers dwindled, but I think the AAFC had pretty solid attendance all 4 years, and their attendance numbers were always comparable to the NFL's.

Quick aside, what do you think would have happened in 1950 had their been a full merger of the AAFC and NFL? Would the best teams still have been the Browns and Rams? Would the Giants have been any good? Would the the other AAFC teams have been competitive?

#247 Reaser
PFRA Member
Posted 31 July 2014 - 03:12 PM
Bryan, on 31 Jul 2014 - 2:29 PM, said:
Quick aside, what do you think would have happened in 1950 had their been a full merger of the AAFC and NFL? Would the best teams still have been the Browns and Rams? Would the Giants have been any good? Would the the other AAFC teams have been competitive?
The AAFC and NFL in terms of talent/quality of teams were essentially equals. So the Yankees probably would have been good in 1950, the Bills would probably would have been average in 1950, etc ... The NFL teams that benefit from the influx of AAFC players obviously wouldn't have improved as they did.

#248 Jagade
PFRA Member
Posted 01 August 2014 - 12:55 AM
I think that the Browns might have been undefeated in 1950 if there was a merger including all of the AAFC teams. After all, the Giants were a 6 and 6 team in 1949, but the players received by the Giants in 1950 (Weinmeister, Schnellbacher, Landry, Rowe, Mastrangelo, Rapacz, and Woodard) from the AAFC made them into a defensive powerhouse.

The Giants were the only team to beat Cleveland in 1950.

Page 13 of 13

END of Part 1 of what might have been the longest thread in PFRA history.

Once Again: HAPPY THANKSGIVING

Reaser · Post by **Reaser** » Wed Nov 26, 2014 11:06 pm

Weird that entire pages couldn't be saved, and in other saved threads that individual posts were evidently deleted before the move to the new forum? Can't think of any legitimate reasoning for that to have happened.

oldecapecod11 · Post by **oldecapecod11** » Thu Nov 27, 2014 12:15 am

They certainly could have been saved but they had been removed. The old forum allowed for 20 posts per page. One can readily see here that exactly 20 posts were removed - TWICE - in full page fashion, I.E. #21 - #40.
There is another thread here where it was not done in such a precise manner. A few people were asked to look at that thread and the telltale signs that "something" happened was evident.
It is also quite evident that there was activity in the new forum by a number of people long before we were notified that the threads were going to be trashed.
Recently, it was pointed out that certain people had "re-registered" which, of course, removes their name(s) from the early registrants list. Should that act or those acts ever be disputed, there is a photo of the early events.
So real question that remains is why? Why has everything been so secretive and withheld from the membership?
Already, we have seen other serious problems with this website and there is no reason why the documentation and discussion(s) that led to a unanimous vote should not be made available.
If it was a mistake, it was a mistake. Just man up and let's work together - not as a small group slinking behind the backs of those this website is meant to serve.

Byron · Post by **Byron** » Thu Nov 27, 2014 4:50 pm

Most almanacs will only acknowledge the American Football League as the only one whose title games rate a mention with the NFL, but the AFL was one of those rare instances of a competitor completing its run with all of its teams intact. Baseball's American League is the only other example I can think of, playing the World Series against the more established guys after only three seasons, and later serving under one Commissioner. The AAFC, like the ABA and the WHA, contributed only a few of its members after a merger agreement.

The AAFC only contributed three full teams to the NFL but the overall influx of talented players resulted in a major shift in the NFL landscape. Teams like the Giants and Yanks became competitive while teams that didn't add AAFC talent--such as Philadelphia--usually dropped like a stone in the standings.

2. The misconception that the 90's Cowboys were so talented. They weren't the most talented team in the league in the early-90's. Houston had more talent. Those Cowboy teams had a lot of overrated players, like Ken Norton, Kevin Smith, Emmitt Smith, and Alvin Harper. They won two of their SB's because they played Buffaluck, and O'Donnell handed them the third one.

I'm not even sure how to reply to this. The 90s Cowboys were incredibly deep in talented players. To call Ken Norton and Emmitt Smith "overrated" is insane. It's true not every player was "the best" at their position (what team can claim that?) but Dallas had legitimate All-Pros at the skill positions in Aikman, Smith, Johnston, Irvin, Novacek and all along the Offensive Line. Harper was not "great" but he was a great fit in that offense, as was Kelvin Martin (as a quick #3 WR--the precursors to the Welkers and Beasleys of today). The defense was deep along the line and the secondary. Guys like Holt, Kevin Smith, Larry Brown, James Washington and Thomas Everett were good players, while Darren Woodson was elite.

The real key here is this: Dallas had a LOT of very good players on defense and a few (Norton, Woodson, Haley, Lett) that were legitimately great during that timeframe. They had a lot of great players on offense but what made the overall team so good was the number of really good players that surrounded the great ones. Those early-90s teams were stocked with talent. You can argue that Houston or even San Francisco may have had more talent (if you choose to do so) but there's not a good argument to be made, IMHO, that the talent on the Dallas teams was "overrated".

As for Buffalo, they had a good team and some impressive talent as well. Those teams were not push-overs; you don't go to four Superbowls in a row by being a mediocre team.

7DnBrnc53 · Post by **7DnBrnc53** » Thu Nov 27, 2014 11:08 pm

I'm not even sure how to reply to this. The 90s Cowboys were incredibly deep in talented players. To call Ken Norton and Emmitt Smith "overrated" is insane. It's true not every player was "the best" at their position (what team can claim that?) but Dallas had legitimate All-Pros at the skill positions in Aikman, Smith, Johnston, Irvin, Novacek and all along the Offensive Line. Harper was not "great" but he was a great fit in that offense, as was Kelvin Martin (as a quick #3 WR--the precursors to the Welkers and Beasleys of today). The defense was deep along the line and the secondary. Guys like Holt, Kevin Smith, Larry Brown, James Washington and Thomas Everett were good players, while Darren Woodson was elite.

The real key here is this: Dallas had a LOT of very good players on defense and a few (Norton, Woodson, Haley, Lett) that were legitimately great during that timeframe. They had a lot of great players on offense but what made the overall team so good was the number of really good players that surrounded the great ones. Those early-90s teams were stocked with talent. You can argue that Houston or even San Francisco may have had more talent (if you choose to do so) but there's not a good argument to be made, IMHO, that the talent on the Dallas teams was "overrated".

As for Buffalo, they had a good team and some impressive talent as well. Those teams were not push-overs; you don't go to four Superbowls in a row by being a mediocre team.

Dallas had a great offensive line, and a solid defensive line, but only Haley was elite on the D-line. Their linebackers were nothing to write home about (including Norton), and while Holt and Smith were good, and Woodson was elite, Brown, Washington, and Everett were just average.

As for Buffalo, you go to four SB's in a row if you play in a mediocre conference. Also, those Bill teams didn't have that great of a defense, especially the D-line and secondary.

They also usually didn't play teams in the AFC Playoffs those four years that had great ground attacks except the 1990 Raiders (were missing Bo) and the 1992 Steelers. They were exposed in Super Bowls against teams who had better running games.

Byron · Post by **Byron** » Thu Dec 04, 2014 4:47 pm

7DnBrnc53 wrote:
I'm not even sure how to reply to this. The 90s Cowboys were incredibly deep in talented players. To call Ken Norton and Emmitt Smith "overrated" is insane. It's true not every player was "the best" at their position (what team can claim that?) but Dallas had legitimate All-Pros at the skill positions in Aikman, Smith, Johnston, Irvin, Novacek and all along the Offensive Line. Harper was not "great" but he was a great fit in that offense, as was Kelvin Martin (as a quick #3 WR--the precursors to the Welkers and Beasleys of today). The defense was deep along the line and the secondary. Guys like Holt, Kevin Smith, Larry Brown, James Washington and Thomas Everett were good players, while Darren Woodson was elite.

The real key here is this: Dallas had a LOT of very good players on defense and a few (Norton, Woodson, Haley, Lett) that were legitimately great during that timeframe. They had a lot of great players on offense but what made the overall team so good was the number of really good players that surrounded the great ones. Those early-90s teams were stocked with talent. You can argue that Houston or even San Francisco may have had more talent (if you choose to do so) but there's not a good argument to be made, IMHO, that the talent on the Dallas teams was "overrated".

As for Buffalo, they had a good team and some impressive talent as well. Those teams were not push-overs; you don't go to four Superbowls in a row by being a mediocre team.
Dallas had a great offensive line, and a solid defensive line, but only Haley was elite on the D-line. Their linebackers were nothing to write home about (including Norton), and while Holt and Smith were good, and Woodson was elite, Brown, Washington, and Everett were just average.

As for Buffalo, you go to four SB's in a row if you play in a mediocre conference. Also, those Bill teams didn't have that great of a defense, especially the D-line and secondary.

They also usually didn't play teams in the AFC Playoffs those four years that had great ground attacks except the 1990 Raiders (were missing Bo) and the 1992 Steelers. They were exposed in Super Bowls against teams who had better running games.

I would disagree--especially about Norton. In 1993 he tore his bicep but played through it and made the Pro Bowl for his efforts. After that, he went to San Francisco and was good (two more Pro Bowls in 1995 and 1997) for several seasons. The issue with depth is that it doesn't have to be elite--it just has to be good, and Dallas' defense had good depth players surrounding a few elite (or very good) players in Haley, Lett and Woodson. Players like Tolbert, Maryland, Jones and Casillas were actually very good in their roles. None of them will ever sniff the Hall of Fame but they did yeoman's work in the trenches. Same with the secondary--full of good, solid players including some good nickel corners but none of them will ever make the "all-time team" (even just for Dallas) aside from Sanders.

As for Buffalo, they weren't a great team from 1990-1993 but they were very good. The NFC was simply the better conference during that stretch but that doesn't mean the AFC wasn't any good.

Professional Football Researchers Association Forum

Historical Misconceptions that "grind your gears" Started by

Historical Misconceptions that "grind your gears" Started by

Re: Historical Misconceptions that "grind your gears" Starte

Re: Historical Misconceptions that "grind your gears" Starte

Re: Historical Misconceptions that "grind your gears" Starte

Re: Historical Misconceptions that "grind your gears" Starte

Re: Historical Misconceptions that "grind your gears" Starte

Re: Historical Misconceptions that "grind your gears" Starte

Re: Historical Misconceptions that "grind your gears" Starte

Re: Historical Misconceptions that "grind your gears" Starte