Best Decade of the NFL

[Hail Casares]

Ray Didinger was on an episode of "The Timeline" on NFL Network about the SB and the Iran Hostage crisis and he made a statement I had never heard before.

He felt the 1970's was the best decade of NFL football. I don't remember his exact words but the general reasoning was you had a convergence of great teams, great rivalries, great players, more varied play styles from team to team or league to league etc.

Agree? Disagree? Thoughts?

[74_75_78_79_]

All due respect to the game's history, and not to sound like an NFL Network/ESPN/'football history didn't begin until SBI'-guy, but my personal favorite time period in NFL history is '78 thru '80. Perhaps it's for sentimental reasons being that I'm a Steeler fan and that '80 was my first season following while suddenly being an enthusiast. And that's just it...despite Steelers suddenly not a contender (25 year wait for 'the Thumb' ahead of me) and really liking that Eagles squad and being upset that they lost, I look back so fondly of that '80 season and that Timeline Iran Hostage doc even further reminded me as to why. I think a book should be written about those first three seasons of the 16-game era and if no one ever does...don't temp me.

[Reaser]

I would say of people who have watched and studied football (weighted heavily towards on the field quality) from every decade that the vast majority would have the clear top three decades as the 50's, 60's and 70's. Personal preference would order them, I'm partial to the 50's, myself - or more exact, last handful of years of the 40's through first couple years of the 60's. And I like the 70's, particularly before the '78 season, more than the 60's. So I guess I would say 50's, 70's, 60's, in order.

That's before I was alive, though. If we're going on what we lived, that's 80's to current for me.

I'd rank them, in order: 90's, 80's, 00's, 10's ... 10's not being finished of course but already clinched last place, which coming from a Seahawks fan, to still say this is the worst decade does a good job of summing up the quality of this era.

[MatthewToy]

Another thing to make a case for the 70s is that's when NFL Films was at its peak. In the 60s they were trying to find their identity and after John Facenda passed away in the 80s along with the music getting a little generic they were never the same. I mean that in terms of their season and Super Bowl highlight films. The programs they produce now on NFL Network are top notch.

[Rupert Patrick]

I remember Steve Sabol once said he felt 1978 was the single greatest season in NFL history, because of the great teams and memorable games, great performances, the new players coming into the game like Earl Campbell and old players departing like Tarkenton, and of course a memorable Super Bowl. As a Steelers fan it is difficult not to disagree with him on this. The 70's was a great era, for the most part. You had great offenses, many of which were ball control offenses that could kill you with the run or the pass, and teams with very stingy defenses.

The main problem with the 1970-77 era, looking back, was that most of these teams were one in the same, that you had teams like the Rams and Vikings and Cowboys and Steelers with great offenses AND great defenses year after year and also teams like the Lions and Browns and Saints and Giants who had lousy offenses and lousy defenses year after year due to the lack of player movement other than the advent of the WFL. The result of this was that going into each season, you could pretty much eliminate at least half of the teams in the league from playoff contention before the season started, which left you with maybe ten or twelve teams with even a legitimate shot of even making the postseason and only a half dozen with a shot of winning the Super Bowl. If you were lucky you might have one surprise team a year, like the 1976 Patriots or the 72 Steelers or the 77 Broncos or the 74 Cards, but in many cases, like the Steelers or Broncos, you could see them coming.

The 70's was a great decade if you were a fan of the Steelers or Cowboys or Dolphins, but if you were a Falcons fan, or a Packers fan, or a Chargers fan, I'm not sure you would feel the same way. I don't think we ever saw two consecutive seasons with such a dichotomy in the way the game was played than 1977-1978. As offensive football goes, 1977 was the low water mark since WWII, and the rules changes opened up the game, perhaps too much in my opinion. By 1978, the balanced schedule helped institute parity, and the rules changes opened up the passing game and for the most part brought an end to the balanced offenses and the defensively dominated game we saw in the earlier part of the 70's.

[BD Sullivan]

The 1960's was when the NFL became a professionally-run league. Prior to that, you had haphazard broadcast deals and schedules were produced on Bert Bell's kitchen table, among other relics of the past. Throw in the fact that another league actually was successful enough against the NFL to force a full merger.

[mwald]

There's two ways one could answer this:

In terms of the play itself. This is really a personal preference, usually contingent on when a person came of age. Most (but not all) people dismiss anything that came later as inferior.

In terms of cultural impact. Didn’t hear the Didinger commentary, but if he mentioned the Super Bowl and the Iran Hostage Crisis, he might be talking (or at least including) cultural impact.

I’d go with the 1970s, for both. Rupert made a good point about the also-rans of the decade, but not sure it’s any different today. But the Cowboys, Rams, Raiders, Steelers, Vikings, and Dolphins? Personality par excellence! Don’t know that there’s been a decade with so many teams so good for so long, all who at least had the potential to win the Super Bowl every year.

In terms of cultural impact, no decade comes close. The NFL might’ve hit the national stage in the late 1950s, passing baseball as the most popular sport. And it might make more money today and get higher ratings. But it was never part of the Zeitgeist like it was in the 1970s. NFL Films was at its peak. The entire country loved the Dallas Cowboys. The massively successful nighttime soap opera Dallas showed Texas Stadium it its opening credits. The Cowboys cheerleaders were more popular than some rock bands. The Steelers were the Steelers like the Steelers will never be again. The Super Bowl was actually hip, not a media event or a reason for the latest diva to flip off the camera.

Terry Bradshaw was riding around in Trans Ams with Burt Reynolds, for pete’s sake. For those too young to remember, this was like Tom Brady riding shotgun with….well, no celebrity today comes close.

I can still see the glitter of the 1979 Super Bowl. How beautiful it was.

[BD Sullivan]

The entire country loved the Dallas Cowboys. The massively successful nighttime soap opera Dallas showed Texas Stadium it its opening credits. The Cowboys cheerleaders were more popular than some rock bands. The Steelers were the Steelers like the Steelers will never be again. The Super Bowl was actually hip, not a media event or a reason for the latest diva to flip off the camera.

Terry Bradshaw was riding around in Trans Ams with Burt Reynolds, for pete’s sake. For those too young to remember, this was like Tom Brady riding shotgun with….well, no celebrity today comes close.

*CBS told everybody that they loved the Cowboys.

*"Dallas" might have begun in 1978, but it didn't become a juggernaut until 1980 and beyond.

*The cheerleaders were so popular that they were "featured" in a porno.

*The Niners did a pretty good interpretation of the Steelers, but without the menacing defense.

*Super Bowl X and XIV (along with maybe XIII) were the best of the lot, with the others either poorly played (V) or simply one-sided (IX).

*For a celeb of today, who's become ridiculously overexposed and just plays the same type character in every film?--that was what killed Reynolds' career.

[mwald]

*CBS told everybody that they loved the Cowboys. -- and people believed them.

*"Dallas" might have begun in 1978, but it didn't become a juggernaut until 1980 and beyond. -- yep, it started in 1978

*The cheerleaders were so popular that they were "featured" in a porno. -- your point?

*The Niners did a pretty good interpretation of the Steelers, but without the menacing defense. -- and without half as many national fans

*Super Bowl X and XIV (along with maybe XIII) were the best of the lot, with the others either poorly played (V) or simply one-sided (IX). --agreed

*For a celeb of today, who's become ridiculously overexposed and just plays the same type character in every film?--that was what killed Reynolds' career. ---- don't recall addressing Reynolds' acting chops

[Rupert Patrick]

Rupert made a good point about the also-rans of the decade, but not sure it’s any different today.

I think it is much easier today to rise from an also ran to become competitive. The 2008 Lions went 0-16, and by 2011 were 10-6 and in the playoffs. In 2007 the Dolphins were 1-15, and the following season were 11-5 and won the AFC East in a tiebreaker over the Patriots who went 16-0 the previous season. I think if the right personnel show up in a mediocre franchise (Drew Brees and Sean Peyton comes to mind) they can turn things around in a hurry and keep them competitive. Back in the 70's you used to be able to write off half or more of the league as being out of the running for the playoffs before the season started, these days, I might write off a half dozen or less teams that I think have no chance of making it to .500 going into a season. With free agency and improvements in identifying and qualifying talent via the draft, the gap between the haves and the have nots is a lot less than it was in the 70's.

In the 70's, the Steelers didn't have to worry about losing an LC Greenwood or John Stallworth or Rocky Bleier or Donnie Shell to Free Agency every single year, those guys were going to be with the team as long as the team wanted them to be there or until they chose to retire or were injured and were forced to quit. If the Steelers had to deal with Free Agency in the 70's, there is no way they would have won four Super Bowls in six seasons. Belichick has managed to do it in New England with one anchor at QB (Brady), and very few guys who have spent their entire careers there. How many future HOFers played for the Pats in that era? Brady of course, and Vinatieri. Junior Seau was there for a year, but he had already punched his ticket for Canton before he got to New England. After that maybe one or two, not counting the active guys like Welker, and Gronkowski if he can stay healthy for about 8-10 more years at an elite level.