1946 Super Bowl: Browns vs Bears

[Saban1]

Talking about Cleveland's 6 HOF players in 1946, there were also other good players who were either named to 1st or 2nd team all-pro or all-league teams sometime during their careers. Some were: Mac Soeedie, Lou Rymkus (Speedie and Rymkus were named to all-league teams in both the AAFC and NFL), Lin Houston, Ed Ulinski, and Lou Saban (Saban played almost exclusively on defense, but was named all-league and all-pro center as a special consideration in 1948 and 1949 because there was not any all-pros named at defensive positions during the 1940's). Edgar Jone was named all-league in Canada in 1950, so maybe that should count for something. Jones averaged 7 yards per carry in 1946 and 6.4 yards per carry in 1947, but was not named to any all-league teams then probably because so many other Cleveland players filled up so many of the 11 player slots (like Graham, Motley, Lavelli, Speedie, Rymkus, Willis, Ulunski, and Scarry). Rymkus was named 1st team all-pro by the Chicago Herald-American in 1946.

There were no defensive positions on the various all-pro or all-league teams named during the 1940's, but there were players for Cleveland on the defensive side that would have been named to some all-league or all-pro teams during their careers if there were such teams. How about Tom Colella, who led the AAFC in interceptions with 10 in 1946, or Cliff Lewis, who led the AAFC in interceptions over the league's 4 year span with 24. Tackle Chet Adams had been named to some all-pro teams in the NFL, and I am sure that John Yonakor and George Young would have been named to at least a 2nd team all-league team sometime during the AAFC years (1946-49) if there were defensive all-pro teams during that decade.

Bottom line, the Cleveland Browns were really an all-star team in 1946, even though it was their first year as a team.

The Chicago Bears also had their share of good players other than their 4 Hall of fame players in 1946. How about Dante Magnani, Hugh Gallarmeau, Bill Osmanski, Ray McLean, George Wilson, Jim Keane, Ray Bray, Fred Davis, Ed Sprinkle, etc. Maybe not quite as many good and great players as their powerful teams of the early 1940's, but still impressive.

I wish that there was such a game and it was on film. I would have loved to have seen it.

[Bryan]

Start with Otto Graham for Cleveland. A possible knock on Otto was that he was a rookie in 1946. Despite that, his passing numbers were about the best of his career, although they were pretty close in 1953 except for the championship game.

In relation to the mythical 1946 Super Bowl matchup, I think the inexperience of the Browns in general is mitigated by the fact that their game with the Bears would take place at the end of the year. They would have had a full season of experience to draw upon. Also, the Bears in 1946 would have zero experience in facing a Paul Brown offense, which was much different than any NFL offense. Bob Waterfield won the NFL title in 1945 as a rookie; I think Otto Graham being a rookie in 1946 isn't that much of a factor.

[Saban1]

Start with Otto Graham for Cleveland. A possible knock on Otto was that he was a rookie in 1946. Despite that, his passing numbers were about the best of his career, although they were pretty close in 1953 except for the championship game.

In relation to the mythical 1946 Super Bowl matchup, I think the inexperience of the Browns in general is mitigated by the fact that their game with the Bears would take place at the end of the year. They would have had a full season of experience to draw upon. Also, the Bears in 1946 would have zero experience in facing a Paul Brown offense, which was much different than any NFL offense. Bob Waterfield won the NFL title in 1945 as a rookie; I think Otto Graham being a rookie in 1946 isn't that much of a factor.

I think that you are right. Besides, Cleveland did have some players that had NFL experience like center Scarry, tackles Adams and Rymkus, halfbacks/defensive backs Colella and Greenwood, fullback/linebacker Gaylon Smith, end Al Coppage, and backs Edgar Jones and Bob Steuber. Also, some of Cleveland's rookies had played service football, for what ever that is worth.

I also believe that Otto Graham must have had so much self confidence and confidence in his team. Graham had already been an All-American basketball player and had played for the Rochester Royals basketball champions of the NBL (National Basketball League) of 1946. I don't believe that Graham was in awe of the Chicago Bears or any other football team. He had nothing but success in his life up until then.

The Chicago Bears may have had some surprises for the Cleveland Browns in 1946, but the Browns may have had some surprises for the Bears as well, as they did for Philadelphia a few years later.

[Saban1]

Start with Otto Graham for Cleveland. A possible knock on Otto was that he was a rookie in 1946. Despite that, his passing numbers were about the best of his career, although they were pretty close in 1953 except for the championship game.

In relation to the mythical 1946 Super Bowl matchup, I think the inexperience of the Browns in general is mitigated by the fact that their game with the Bears would take place at the end of the year. They would have had a full season of experience to draw upon. Also, the Bears in 1946 would have zero experience in facing a Paul Brown offense, which was much different than any NFL offense. Bob Waterfield won the NFL title in 1945 as a rookie; I think Otto Graham being a rookie in 1946 isn't that much of a factor.

Good point about Waterfield leading the Rams to the NFL Championship in 1945 as a rookie in the NFL. Waterfield was a wonderful quarterback, but I believe that most objective fans of that time and football historians would put Graham above Waterfield on any all-time list of quarterbacks. Of course, Bob Waterfield could also kick field goals, but Cleveland had Lou Groza for that.

Graham was a rookie in 1946, but his numbers were sensational. His average yards per pass attempt was 10.54. Otto's passer rating was 112.1. If you look at the early years of the AFL of the 1960's, I don't think that any quarterback even comes close to having numbers like that, and most of the early AFL quarterbacks already had NFL experience (Blanda, Dorow, Dawson, Parilli, Davidson, Tripucka, Rote, etc.), and I believe that the early AAFC was as good or better of a league than the early 1960's AFL as far as quality of football compared to the NFL of the same time. About the closest numbers to Graham's in 1946 that I know of from the early 1960's AFL were George Blanda's in 1961, Len Dawson's in 1962 and Tobin Rote's in 1963 (Blanda's YPA in 1961 was 9.20 and his passer rating was 91.3. Dawson's YPA in 1962 was 8.90 and passer rating was 98.3. Rote's YPA in 1963 was 8.78 and passer rating was 86.7).

Waterfield had good numbers as a rookie in 1945 (9.41 YPA and 72.4 passer rating), and was one of the best quarterbacks in pro football right from the start, as was Otto Graham. The Rams had a great receiver in 1945 named Jim Benton and the Browns had two great receivers in 1946 in Dante Lavelli and Mac Speedie. The Rams had good running backs that year like Fred Gehrke and Jim Gillette, but nobody that compared with Marion Motley. Edgar "Special Delivery" Jones was another really good one for Cleveland.

Anyway, I think that you could compare the 1945 Rams position by position with the 1946 Brown and the Rams would come out on the short end for the most part, but that is JMO.

[Reaser]

Of course, Bob Waterfield could also kick field goals

Don't forget having a pretty big leg as a punter, and of course, being good on the defensive side of the ball.

I believe that the early AAFC was as good or better of a league than the early 1960's AFL as far as quality of football compared to the NFL of the same time.

I don't think there's really any comparison. AAFC was much better from the start than the AFL was, though I don't think the AFL was as 'minor league' (player wise) as some do - that's just my opinion though.

The Rams had a great receiver in 1945 named Jim Benton

I know we throw overrated/underrated around a lot here, but seems like Benton should at least get mentioned more by people (does that make him underrated or just forgotten? I don't know or if there's even a difference?) Looks pretty dang good to me, based on what I've seen.

Where do you have this hypothetical 1946 'World Championship' game taking place? Neutral site? I would think a place like Miami would have jumped on that and wanted the game most - which obviously wouldn't have worked for Cleveland. Plus Miami was an AAFC city so probably a non-starter, though based on the time period if it was open for bidding it seems to me Miami would have went after the game strongest.

So then, I think if the NFL had agreed to such a game that if there was an alternation of which league would host the championship that there's roughly a 100% chance the NFL would have hosted the first year, putting the game in Chicago (perhaps someone - Brad seems good with this type of info - can tell us what the weather would have been on a/the possible championship game day?) ...

I saw that you considered the 3 options (Chicago, Cleveland, Neutral) in your initial post. I doubt Cleveland would have been a likely option. Neutral doesn't seem all that likely either, which leaves Chicago - where you had Chicago winning.

[BD Sullivan]

Well, since I was asked :

Presumably, the game would have taken place on December 29, since the Browns won the title on 12/22, one week after the Bears. I think Halas would have thrown a fit if they would have had to wait until 1/5.

Given the college football was more revered at the time, I'm guessing that using either the Sugar Bowl, Cotton Bowl or Rose Bowl as options were non-starters, considering those games were just days away. But for the sake of argument, let's include them. You could probably throw in the Orange Bowl, given the fact that Miami was such a disaster for the AAFC that any concern about a "hometown" crowd is probably a myth. Here's the weather for the respective cities (note the Dallas outlier) for that day:

Cleveland and Chicago: In the 20's, foggy and some rain/snow mix
Miami: In the high 70's/low 80's
New Orleans: In the high 60's/low 70's
Dallas: In the high 20's, windy
Pasadena/Los Angeles: In the 50's

[Bryan]

If the 1946 Super Bowl is in Dallas or New Orleans, are Motley and Willis allowed to play?

[oldecapecod11]

by Bryan » Mon Jan 25, 2016 10:03 am
"If the 1946 Super Bowl is in Dallas or New Orleans, are Motley and Willis allowed to play?"

Highly doubtful - both cities had a large SEC fan base.
At the time, the SEC banned "colored" players by Constitution and By-laws and faciities generally honored those rules.
As late as 1952, a minor-league umpire was fired and a manager suspended and fined for allowing participation
by a "colored" bat boy in Georgia.
The left coast would have likely been the warm weather option.

(Edited to correct year [typo])

[Saban1]

Of course, Bob Waterfield could also kick field goals

Don't forget having a pretty big leg as a punter, and of course, being good on the defensive side of the ball.

I believe that the early AAFC was as good or better of a league than the early 1960's AFL as far as quality of football compared to the NFL of the same time.

I don't think there's really any comparison. AAFC was much better from the start than the AFL was, though I don't think the AFL was as 'minor league' (player wise) as some do - that's just my opinion though.

The Rams had a great receiver in 1945 named Jim Benton

I know we throw overrated/underrated around a lot here, but seems like Benton should at least get mentioned more by people (does that make him underrated or just forgotten? I don't know or if there's even a difference?) Looks pretty dang good to me, based on what I've seen.

Where do you have this hypothetical 1946 'World Championship' game taking place? Neutral site? I would think a place like Miami would have jumped on that and wanted the game most - which obviously wouldn't have worked for Cleveland. Plus Miami was an AAFC city so probably a non-starter, though based on the time period if it was open for bidding it seems to me Miami would have went after the game strongest.

So then, I think if the NFL had agreed to such a game that if there was an alternation of which league would host the championship that there's roughly a 100% chance the NFL would have hosted the first year, putting the game in Chicago (perhaps someone - Brad seems good with this type of info - can tell us what the weather would have been on a/the possible championship game day?) ...

I saw that you considered the 3 options (Chicago, Cleveland, Neutral) in your initial post. I doubt Cleveland would have been a likely option. Neutral doesn't seem all that likely either, which leaves Chicago - where you had Chicago winning.

I should have mentioned Waterfield's punting ability. Bob Waterfield was a very good punter, but Van Brocklin took over Bob's punting chores a few years later.

I agree with you about the AAFC being a superior league to the AFL in the AFL's early years.

I gave Chicago the edge if the game was in Chicago because the Bears were always very tough at Wrigley Field, and Halas used to get away with a lot of things there. It has been said that George had the refs cowed at Wrigley and he would do things like put the band behind the visitor's bench, making it hard for them to communicate. Also, there was itching powder put in the soap of the visitor's showers and other things like that.

Cleveland did beat the Bears 39 to 10 in 1954 at Wrigley even though the Bears had a 2nd place in the west season that year (George Blanda later said he always hated the Browns because they always got beat bad whenever they played them). However, from 1952 through 1954, the Bears did beat the Detroit Lions 2 out of 3 at Wrigley, and those were the best years of Detroit's 1950's championship teams.

Anyway, I give the Bears the edge at Wrigley, but that doesn't mean that I think that Cleveland couldn't win there.

[Reaser]

Well, since I was asked :

Presumably, the game would have taken place on December 29, since the Browns won the title on 12/22, one week after the Bears. I think Halas would have thrown a fit if they would have had to wait until 1/5.

Given the college football was more revered at the time, I'm guessing that using either the Sugar Bowl, Cotton Bowl or Rose Bowl as options were non-starters, considering those games were just days away. But for the sake of argument, let's include them. You could probably throw in the Orange Bowl, given the fact that Miami was such a disaster for the AAFC that any concern about a "hometown" crowd is probably a myth. Here's the weather for the respective cities (note the Dallas outlier) for that day:

Cleveland and Chicago: In the 20's, foggy and some rain/snow mix
Miami: In the high 70's/low 80's
New Orleans: In the high 60's/low 70's
Dallas: In the high 20's, windy
Pasadena/Los Angeles: In the 50's

Thanks, Brad.

As I hinted at with "obviously wouldn't have worked for Cleveland", having a championship without Motley and Willis wouldn't have been an option so Miami and co. are out. In the mid-40's having Cleveland and Chicago travel to LA seems not likely, at all. I'm going to stick with that the NFL would have hosted first year and that means Chicago, with the weather in the 20's, fog and rain/snow mix.