Your Unpopular Football Opinions

[Saban1]

A popular opinion is that the domination of the 1946-49 All-America Conference (AAFC) by the Cleveland Browns is what ruined that league. I don't agree. The AAFC would have folded even if the Browns were one of the weaker teams in that league, IMO. About the only difference is probably only 2 teams (49ers and Colts) would have ended up in the NFL in 1950, if that.

What ruined the AAFC was lack of TV revenue and owners (of the weaker teams) were not willing to continue to lose money. There was also some mismanagement. There was also mismanagement in the 1960's AFL, but TV revenue helped to keep them going when things were tough.

The AFL owners in 1960 bought into the idea that Cleveland's domination is what ruined the AAFC, and tried mostly for equality among the teams, which included a draft right in the first year. The AAFC did not have a draft in 1946 which allowed teams like Cleveland, the 49ers, and the New York Yankees to pretty much hand pick the players for their teams. Other teams did also, but not so well.

Despite the draft and maybe other efforts to insure equality with the AFL teams, the early league was dominated by the Houston Oilers, playing in the first 3 championship games and winning the first 2, and the San Diego Chargers, who played in 5 of the first 6 championship games.

Houston's AFL championship run may have lasted longer, but they changed head coaches 3 times in the first 3 years. In 1963, injuries to key players (Billy Cannon, Don Floyd, and Al Jamison) and maybe the coaching changes contributed to the end of Houston's domination of the AFL's Eastern Division. Houston's 3rd head coach, Pop Ivy, was fired after the 1963 season.

The Los Angeles/San Diego Chargers did win the AFL Western Division 5 of the first 6 years of the league's existence, and may have made it 6 for 6 if not for a blunder by the coaching staff or someone, putting their star quarterback, Jack Kemp, on waivers after the 1961 season. He was picked up by the Buffalo Bills. The Chargers had to go with rookie quarterback John Hadl in 1962 and only won 4 games that year. In 1963, San Diego picked up veteran quarterback Tobin Rote, who led them to the AFL title. In the mean time, Hadl improved and became a good quarterback.

While the Cleveland Browns did win the AAFC title 4 times in 4 years, it was never that easy. They had 2 tough championship games in 1946 and 1947 with the New York Yankees and had some pretty stiff competition in their own division with the rival San Francisco 49ers in 1948 and 1949.

The 1960 AFL had a unique draft. I don't think that any of the teams had full coaching staffs yet and the entire draft was done by 4 people. It was done differently than any other draft in history. Here is how it was done:

First, there was a territorial draft where all 8 teams were awarded a top player from their area. The only team that benefited from this very much was the Houston Oilers getting running back Billy Cannon. Most of the other territorial picks signed with NFL teams, like Don Meredith, who was the Dallas Texans pick, but was signed by the NFL Cowboys.

The AFL then went to picking players by position. 8 players were put in a pool at each position and then picked at random by the different teams. If a team already had a player at that position from the territorial draft, then they did not get to pick in the opening round at that position (The Chargers did not get to pick an end because they had picked Monte Stickels in the territorial draft, even though Stickels later signed with the 49ers of the NFL).

This was done at every offensive position and then was repeated 3 times, so every team should have ended up with 33 college players. A little while later, 2 more rounds were picked, bringing up this total to 55 college players drafted by each team.

A chief talent scout in the NFL criticized the AFL draft of 1960 (actually held in November of 1959), but Dallas Texans owner Lamar Hunt replied, "We feel that we accomplished exactly what we wanted. We were striving primarily for equalization and we did a good job in that respect."

The AFL did not want to make the same mistake (?) that the All-America Conference did 15 years earlier, wanting the teams to be as equal as possible. However, Houston and Los Angeles did dominate the first few years.

[Saban1]

A popular opinion is that the domination of the 1946-49 All-America Conference (AAFC) by the Cleveland Browns is what ruined that league. I don't agree. The AAFC would have folded even if the Browns were one of the weaker teams in that league, IMO. About the only difference is probably only 2 teams (49ers and Colts) would have ended up in the NFL in 1950, if that.

What ruined the AAFC was lack of TV revenue and owners (of the weaker teams) were not willing to continue to lose money. There was also some mismanagement. There was also mismanagement in the 1960's AFL, but TV revenue helped to keep them going when things were tough.

The AFL owners in 1960 bought into the idea that Cleveland's domination is what ruined the AAFC, and tried mostly for equality among the teams, which included a draft right in the first year. The AAFC did not have a draft in 1946 which allowed teams like Cleveland, the 49ers, and the New York Yankees to pretty much hand pick the players for their teams. Other teams did also, but not so well.

Despite the draft and maybe other efforts to insure equality with the AFL teams, the early league was dominated by the Houston Oilers, playing in the first 3 championship games and winning the first 2, and the San Diego Chargers, who played in 5 of the first 6 championship games.

Houston's AFL championship run may have lasted longer, but they changed head coaches 3 times in the first 3 years. In 1963, injuries to key players (Billy Cannon, Don Floyd, and Al Jamison) and maybe the coaching changes contributed to the end of Houston's domination of the AFL's Eastern Division. Houston's 3rd head coach, Pop Ivy, was fired after the 1963 season.

The Los Angeles/San Diego Chargers did win the AFL Western Division 5 of the first 6 years of the league's existence, and may have made it 6 for 6 if not for a blunder by the coaching staff or someone, putting their star quarterback, Jack Kemp, on waivers after the 1961 season. He was picked up by the Buffalo Bills. The Chargers had to go with rookie quarterback John Hadl in 1962 and only won 4 games that year. In 1963, San Diego picked up veteran quarterback Tobin Rote, who led them to the AFL title. In the mean time, Hadl improved and became a good quarterback.

While the Cleveland Browns did win the AAFC title 4 times in 4 years, it was never that easy. They had 2 tough championship games in 1946 and 1947 with the New York Yankees and had some pretty stiff competition in their own division with the rival San Francisco 49ers in 1948 and 1949.

The 1960 AFL had a unique draft. I don't think that any of the teams had full coaching staffs yet and the entire draft was done by 4 people. It was done differently than any other draft in history. Here is how it was done:

First, there was a territorial draft where all 8 teams were awarded a top player from their area. The only team that benefited from this very much was the Houston Oilers getting running back Billy Cannon. Most of the other territorial picks signed with NFL teams, like Don Meredith, who was the Dallas Texans pick, but was signed by the NFL Cowboys.

The AFL then went to picking players by position. 8 players were put in a pool at each position and then picked at random by the different teams. If a team already had a player at that position from the territorial draft, then they did not get to pick in the opening round at that position (The Chargers did not get to pick an end because they had picked Monte Stickels in the territorial draft, even though Stickels later signed with the 49ers of the NFL).

This was done at every offensive position and then was repeated 3 times, so every team should have ended up with 33 college players. A little while later, 2 more rounds were picked, bringing up this total to 55 college players drafted by each team.

A chief talent scout in the NFL criticized the AFL draft of 1960 (actually held in November of 1959), but Dallas Texans owner Lamar Hunt replied, "We feel that we accomplished exactly what we wanted. We were striving primarily for equalization and we did a good job in that respect."

The AFL did not want to make the same mistake (?) that the All-America Conference did 15 years earlier, wanting the teams to be as equal as possible. However, Houston and Los Angeles did dominate the first few years.

Here is something related to the last post regarding the starting of the 1960 AFL. The AFL in 1960 was to be comprised of 8 franchises. One of the new franchises was going to be in Minnesota and had even been part of the first AFL draft in 1960. The NFL lured the owners of the Minnesota franchise with an offer of an NFL franchise in Minnesota in 1961. The Minnesota owners took up the NFL on their offer and became the Vikings in 1961.

Dallas Texans owner Lamar Hunt and Houston Oilers owner Bud Adams were both also offered franchises in the NFL in an effort to break up the AFL before it ever got started. Hunt and Adams both turned down the NFL's offer and decided to move on with their plans for the new football league.

A little more than 10 years later, the participants in Super Bowl IV were Lamar Hunt's Kansas City Chiefs and the Minnesota Vikings, who still had the same owners that they would have had if they had stayed in the AFL and had not defected to the NFL.

Kansas City won that Super Bowl 23 to 7 and looked like the better team that day. After the game and in the locker room, a reporter was talking to almost anyone connected to the Chiefs. One reporter asked Lamar Hunt, "What AFL team are the Minnesota Vikings most like?" Hunt replied, "the Miami Dolphins." This was an obvious put down being that Miami was the worst team in the AFL at that time.

I wondered at the time why someone like Lamar Hunt would make such an ungracious remark, especially. after their very satisfying victory in Super Bowl IV. I know that there had been some bitterness between the NFL and AFL, but still.

It wasn't until years later that I finally connected it up. Minnesota was the AFL team that had defected, hence Hunt's rub it in remark. Some people don't forget, even after 10 years.

[BD Sullivan]

Some people don't forget, even after 10 years.

Like Paul Brown about Mac Speedie, when the latter introduced himself while scouting at a post-game college all-star game in the 1970's. Speedie asked Brown if he remembered him and Brown coldly noted, "You're the guy who went to Canada."

[Saban1]

Some people don't forget, even after 10 years.

Like Paul Brown about Mac Speedie, when the latter introduced himself while scouting at a post-game college all-star game in the 1970's. Speedie asked Brown if he remembered him and Brown coldly noted, "You're the guy who went to Canada."

Think I've heard that story a few times before. I believe that Speedie had more time left in his Browns contract when he jumped to Canada in 1953. Cleveland could have used him in the 1953 championship when they lost to Detroit by one point.

Cleveland defensive tackle John Kissell also left to play in Canada in 1953, but I think that his contract with the Browns was up. Paul Brown gladly took Kissell back in 1954 because they needed another defensive tackle with the retirement of Darrell Palmer.

I heard that Vince Lombardi took it personally when Jim Taylor played out his option and signed with New Orleans in 1967.

"Nice guy" Steve Owen set up rookie Frank Gifford to be clobbered by a tough linebacker in a Giants practice in preseason. Stout Steve resented the Southern California glamour boy and decided to "put him in his place." Gifford was knocked out cold on the play. I think that was the mentality of many football coaches and I had something like that happen to me many years ago, but not as bad as Gifford.

Paul Brown could be tough, but I don't think that he would intentionally do something that could physically hurt one of his players. I am sure that some players found Brown to be difficult to play for (Lombardi too and a lot of others), but he did do some good things for his players.

Where other coaches would wait until the final cuts to release some players, using them for practice, Brown would often release them earlier and give them time to catch on with other teams, or simply trade them to where they could play. Players on other teams that were in the final cuts were out of football because there was no place for them to go. Not making this up. I read about this in the Cleveland Browns edition of "Great Teams, Great Years" by Jack Clary.

Back in the day, many coaches would scrimmage their teams all week in pads, just like in a game. During the season, Paul Brown would save the rough stuff for Sundays, and just run the plays in practice with no tackling. This may have been another of his innovations. It may have saved on injuries.

[SixtiesFan]

Some people don't forget, even after 10 years.

Like Paul Brown about Mac Speedie, when the latter introduced himself while scouting at a post-game college all-star game in the 1970's. Speedie asked Brown if he remembered him and Brown coldly noted, "You're the guy who went to Canada."

Think I've heard that story a few times before. I believe that Speedie had more time left in his Browns contract when he jumped to Canada in 1953. Cleveland could have used him in the 1953 championship when they lost to Detroit by one point.

Cleveland defensive tackle John Kissell also left to play in Canada in 1953, but I think that his contract with the Browns was up. Paul Brown gladly took Kissell back in 1954 because they needed another defensive tackle with the retirement of Darrell Palmer.

I heard that Vince Lombardi took it personally when Jim Taylor played out his option and signed with New Orleans in 1967.

"Nice guy" Steve Owen set up rookie Frank Gifford to be clobbered by a tough linebacker in a Giants practice in preseason. Stout Steve resented the Southern California glamour boy and decided to "put him in his place." Gifford was knocked out cold on the play. I think that was the mentality of many football coaches and I had something like that happen to me many years ago, but not as bad as Gifford.

Paul Brown could be tough, but I don't think that he would intentionally do something that could physically hurt one of his players. I am sure that some players found Brown to be difficult to play for (Lombardi too and a lot of others), but he did do some good things for his players.

Where other coaches would wait until the final cuts to release some players, using them for practice, Brown would often release them earlier and give them time to catch on with other teams, or simply trade them to where they could play. Players on other teams that were in the final cuts were out of football because there was no place for them to go. Not making this up. I read about this in the Cleveland Browns edition of "Great Teams, Great Years" by Jack Clary.

Back in the day, many coaches would scrimmage their teams all week in pads, just like in a game. During the season, Paul Brown would save the rough stuff for Sundays, and just run the plays in practice with no tackling. This may have been another of his innovations. It may have saved on injuries.

What I've read indicates Lombrdi really disliked Jim Taylor's playing out his option, and it was personal During the 1966 season. Lombardi supposedly never spoke to Taylor or referred to him by name. I spotted something in a more extensive highlight of Super Bowl I. A clip showed Lombardi emptying the bench late in the game. He said: "Andy go in for Pitts. Grabbo, go in for..." Lombardi wouldn't even say "Go in for Taylor." His voice just trailed off.

Anybody else notice this?

[Saban1]

In Jerry Kramer's book, "Instant Replay," Kramer relates that Lombardi, giving his opening speech at the 1967 training camp, goes on and on about how much the team will miss Paul Hornung, who was taken by New Orleans in the expansion draft. He then says that "We will replace that other guy," referring to Jim Taylor, who had played out his option and signed with the expansion Saints.

Kramer remarked something about Lombardi does put a high value on loyalty.

[Saban1]

Regarding the post about Paul Brown having his final cuts earlier to enable players to catch on with other teams, here is what NFL Commissioner Bert Bell had to say about that after Cleveland's opening day 35 to 10 win in 1950 over the two time NFL Champion Philadelphia Eagles:

"No wonder the Browns are so successful. Look what they do for their players. Paul Brown made his final waivers 10 days before the season was to start and then helped the players that he let go find spots on other teams. Some of the NFL teams held on to their players until they were forced to get down to the limit and those poor guys had no place to go.

That was from page 19 of the Cleveland Browns edition of the "Great Teams, Great Years" book series." Bert Bell also said that "Cleveland is the best football team I have ever seen," following the Browns 35 to 10 victory over the Eagles.

Paul Brown had some baggage, like the rest of us, but he did have some good points. The early waiving of players and helping to find them jobs with other teams may have been another innovation of Paul Brown's.

[Jay Z]

In Jerry Kramer's book, "Instant Replay," Kramer relates that Lombardi, giving his opening speech at the 1967 training camp, goes on and on about how much the team will miss Paul Hornung, who was taken by New Orleans in the expansion draft. He then says that "We will replace that other guy," referring to Jim Taylor, who had played out his option and signed with the expansion Saints.

Kramer remarked something about Lombardi does put a high value on loyalty.

Didn't Lombardi have a contract when he left the Packers for the Redskins and a nice ownership cut?

He was sort of a hypocrite with Taylor. There was going to be fallout from signing Anderson and Grabowski. I don't think Lombardi was ever going to move anyone out to play rookies, but they were still getting paid more than the vets. I don't know that the vets resented the rookies, they knew it was a business and the rookies had bargaining power. But Taylor found a way to get a better payday and he took it. It wound up working out for everyone. Taylor got his money, and Grabowski, Ben Wilson, and Mercein did about as well as anything Taylor would have done at that point.

[Citizen]

Didn't Lombardi have a contract when he left the Packers for the Redskins and a nice ownership cut?

Yes, his Packers contract was set to run through 1974, but the team tore it up so he could go to Washington.

Lombardi's attitude was hypocritical, but also reflective of the times. Loyalty in sports was strictly a one-way street then, with players expected (and legally bound in some ways) to stay with one team. Taylor took heat for doing what many players wished they could do -- go where the money was.

[jeckle_and_heckle]

Didn't Lombardi have a contract when he left the Packers for the Redskins and a nice ownership cut?

Yes, his Packers contract was set to run through 1974, but the team tore it up so he could go to Washington.

Lombardi's attitude was hypocritical, but also reflective of the times. Loyalty in sports was strictly a one-way street then, with players expected (and legally bound in some ways) to stay with one team. Taylor took heat for doing what many players wished they could do -- go where the money was.

And then there's Steve Owen, who coached the Giants for more than twenty years without a written contract.