No SB til '70 merger what-if

[ChrisBabcock]

Another interesting "what if" is what if the merger NEVER happened? Would the AFL continue its growth and become a full fledged parrallel league to the NFL? Much like Major League Baseball? I think we might all agree most likely. I think at some point the NFL acknowledges the AFL is on equal footing as them and a Super Bowl of some sort begins to be played. When would interleague regular season play begin? If at all?

[BD Sullivan]

Another interesting "what if" is what if the merger NEVER happened? Would the AFL continue its growth and become a full fledged parrallel league to the NFL? Much like Major League Baseball? I think we might all agree most likely. I think at some point the NFL acknowledges the AFL is on equal footing as them and a Super Bowl of some sort begins to be played. When would interleague regular season play begin? If at all?

Considering Al Davis was going nuclear on them right before the merger, I'm sure he would have kept it up.

[74_75_78_79_]

Another interesting "what if" is what if the merger NEVER happened? Would the AFL continue its growth and become a full fledged parrallel league to the NFL? Much like Major League Baseball? I think we might all agree most likely. I think at some point the NFL acknowledges the AFL is on equal footing as them and a Super Bowl of some sort begins to be played. When would interleague regular season play begin? If at all?

I think that what-if was discussed in a previous thread. One that doesn't involve Steelers, Browns, Colts jumping leagues. Instead of Steeler/Dallas SBs (NFL Championship matchups instead), you'd have a couple Steeler/RAIDER SBs (Oakland/Baltimore SBV as well). However, Steelers would still get to play against a Texas team in SBXIII anyway (as well as the following year).

In theory, it would have been 'cool' if there remained two separate leagues, but all of us knowing what we know now about how the '70s actually DID turn out, the merger worked out for the best. Those hypo NFLC/SB matchups just mentioned just don't seem right (even if it means that Bum, a year removed from being back-to-back SUPER BOWL participant instead, gets to stay in Houston after 1980).

Interleague play? Although I, at the time, never wanted baseball to go to it in '97 (because it'd take the 'glitter' out of the WS), I actually now prefer it; and am not too sure I would have ever NOT wanted it in football albeit AFL/NFL or AFC/NFC. Allowing the fan a 'measuring stick', of sorts, giving them an 'idea' in judging the inter games makes looking forward to the SB more fun than any such pre-game 'mystery'. JMO.

[oldecapecod11]

by 74_75_78_79_ » Wed Feb 03, 2016 1:39 pm

ChrisBabcock wrote:
Another interesting "what if" is what if the merger NEVER happened? Would the AFL continue its growth and become a full fledged parrallel league to the NFL? Much like Major League Baseball? I think we might all agree most likely. I think at some point the NFL acknowledges the AFL is on equal footing as them and a Super Bowl of some sort begins to be played. When would interleague regular season play begin? If at all?

"...In theory, it would have been 'cool' if there remained two separate leagues, but all of us knowing what we know now about how the '70s actually DID turn out, the merger worked out for the best. Those hypo NFLC/SB matchups just mentioned just don't seem right (even if it means that Bum, a year removed from being back-to-back SUPER BOWL participant instead, gets to stay in Houston after 1980).

"Interleague play? Although I, at the time, never wanted baseball to go to it in '97 (because it'd take the 'glitter' out of the WS), I actually now prefer it; and am not too sure I would have ever NOT wanted it in football albeit AFL/NFL or AFC/NFC. Allowing the fan a 'measuring stick', of sorts, giving them an 'idea' in judging the inter games makes looking forward to the SB more fun than any such pre-game 'mystery'. JMO."

In reality, it would have been wonderful if the AFL and NFL remained separate. As CB suggest above, certainly growth would have continued and the NFL would have also improved by copying - as it did - many of the more popular aspects of the AFL format. You cannot assume Houston would have remained in place nor can you assume any of the later expansions would have been to the cities currently active (or, active when expansions took place.)
Whatever, it would have been interesting and the end result would not be far from what it is today.

Interleague play was exciting to anticipate but has dwindled in popularity. It helps the backwoods teams but does little for the cities that matter.
While mentioning cities, it might be good to heap some praise on Chicago where they continue with two successful MLB franchises and have for over 100 years.

Meanwhile, the fan doesn't need a measuring stick and a bit of mystery makes the season more exciting.
Any successful marketing exec will tell you: sell the sizzle - not the steak. There is a lot of marketing magic in mystery.

[Jeremy Crowhurst]

Continuing with two drafts, instead of one combined draft, of course means the teams look very different in the 1970's. We might be talking about the "Electric Curtain" in San Diego....

[oldecapecod11]

by Jeremy Crowhurst » Wed Feb 03, 2016 5:07 pm

"Continuing with two drafts, instead of one combined draft, of course means the teams look very different in the 1970's. We might be talking about the "Electric Curtain" in San Diego...."

The draft was where the AFL clearly would have had the edge. They had developed strong inroads in the predominantly black colleges and had NO concern for a "balanced" roster. Meanwhile, the NFL was still "stacking" and signing minorities in "even" numbers for rooming convenience on the road. By the end of the 1970s, the NFL would have fallen so far behind that it would have taken another decade to catch up.
Additionally, the AFL had a better brotherhood of ownership and two men who were willing to help their brethren financially while the NFL ownership resembled more of a cat fight.

[SixtiesFan]

by Jeremy Crowhurst » Wed Feb 03, 2016 5:07 pm

"Continuing with two drafts, instead of one combined draft, of course means the teams look very different in the 1970's. We might be talking about the "Electric Curtain" in San Diego...."

The draft was where the AFL clearly would have had the edge. They had developed strong inroads in the predominantly black colleges and had NO concern for a "balanced" roster. Meanwhile, the NFL was still "stacking" and signing minorities in "even" numbers for rooming convenience on the road. By the end of the 1970s, the NFL would have fallen so far behind that it would have taken another decade to catch up.
Additionally, the AFL had a better brotherhood of ownership and two men who were willing to help their brethren financially while the NFL ownership resembled more of a cat fight.

So the old-line NFL Bears roomed Brian Piccolo and Gale Sayers together out of "rooming convenience?"

[oldecapecod11]

by SixtiesFan » Wed Feb 03, 2016 9:02 pm
"So the old-line NFL Bears roomed Brian Piccolo and Gale Sayers together out of ;rooming convenience?'"

You should know that was a rarity.
Look at NFL team photos of the era and count.
Plus, 1969 was the tenth season of the AFL so the Bears had ten years to study and learn. Other NFL teams did not.

---

"Players at that time were still segregated by race for hotel-room assignments. At the suggestion of the Bears' captain
the policy was changed and each player was reassigned by position, so that wide receivers would room together, quarterbacks would room together, etc. Running back was the only position on the 1969 Bears with one black and one white player, Sayers and Piccolo, respectively."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_Piccolo

[SixtiesFan]

by SixtiesFan » Wed Feb 03, 2016 9:02 pm
"So the old-line NFL Bears roomed Brian Piccolo and Gale Sayers together out of ;rooming convenience?'"

You should know that was a rarity.
Look at NFL team photos of the era and count.
Plus, 1969 was the tenth season of the AFL so the Bears had ten years to study and learn. Other NFL teams did not.

---

"Players at that time were still segregated by race for hotel-room assignments. At the suggestion of the Bears' captain
the policy was changed and each player was reassigned by position, so that wide receivers would room together, quarterbacks would room together, etc. Running back was the only position on the 1969 Bears with one black and one white player, Sayers and Piccolo, respectively."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_Piccolo

Speaking of the AFL-NFL, how many on this Forum regularly watched pro football on TV in the early 1960's? For the most part the NFL was better to watch, better players (Brown, Unitas, Tittle, Mitchell, Jurgensen, etc) at the skill positions for one thing. I liked the AFL's Oilers and Chargers, who were NFL quality from the start and played each other in the first two AFL Championship games.

[oldecapecod11]

by SixtiesFan » Thu Feb 04, 2016 11:03 am


oldecapecod11 wrote:

by SixtiesFan » Wed Feb 03, 2016 9:02 pm
"So the old-line NFL Bears roomed Brian Piccolo and Gale Sayers together out of 'rooming convenience?'"

You should know that was a rarity.
Look at NFL team photos of the era and count.
Plus, 1969 was the tenth season of the AFL so the Bears had ten years to study and learn. Other NFL teams did not.
---
"Players at that time were still segregated by race for hotel-room assignments. At the suggestion of the Bears' captain
the policy was changed and each player was reassigned by position, so that wide receivers would room together, quarterbacks
would room together, etc. Running back was the only position on the 1969 Bears with one black and one white player, Sayers
and Piccolo, respectively."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_Piccolo
---


Speaking of the AFL-NFL, how many on this Forum regularly watched pro football on TV in the early 1960's? For the most part the NFL was better to watch, better players (Brown, Unitas, Tittle, Mitchell, Jurgensen, etc) at the skill positions for one thing. I liked the AFL's Oilers and Chargers, who were NFL quality from the start and played each other in the first two AFL Championship games.
SixtiesFan

Cute; but you misread the chapter on fire and maneuver although it has been used for withdrawal. Nice try, though.
Most on this forum were probably no more than a gleam in some fellow's eye in the "early 1960's."
In the city that never sleeps, we were not limited to television but had two teams just a subway ride away from 1960 on.
The NFL had the better quarterbacks but that was because they had been playing the pro game for a number of years.
Jim Brown was one of a kind and has yet to be matched but, on the tier below, the AFL had some very equal backs.
You should know that too.
The one sure thing the NFL had was continuity - you knew it would be there next week.
Billy Sullivan was in on a wing and and prayer and Harry Wismer took attendance by counting lightbulbs - so we never knew...
The Bills had a few good teams and the Texans/Chiefs were not too shabby - kicking to the clock notwithstanding.