1963 NFL Championship - Giants at Packers

[Saban1]

As we all know, the NFL Championship in 1963 was really between the Chicago Bears and the New York Giants. Green Bay finished 2nd in the Western Conference with an 11-2-1 record in 1963, losing only to the Chicago Bears in both of their games. I think that George Allen's double zone defense surprised Bart Starr and the Packers in the opener in Green Bay and the Bears won 10 to 3. In their second game in Chicago, Starr was injured and the Green Bay quarterbacks that day were John Roach and Zeke Bratkowski. End result was a 27 to 6 victory for Chicago.

Green Bay could never make up for those losses as the Bears finished the season with a 11-1-2 record and went to the championship game, which they won, 14 to 10. Green Bay probably had a better team in 1963 than a couple of their teams that won championships like the 1965 and 1967 Green Bay teams, but that's the breaks.

So, supposing that Green Bay had won the Western Conference title in 1963 and played the Giants in the NFL Championship game. Who would win? To tell the truth, I don't know the answer, so I hope I can get some opinions here.

[BD Sullivan]

As we all know, the NFL Championship in 1963 was really between the Chicago Bears and the New York Giants. Green Bay finished 2nd in the Western Conference with an 11-2-1 record in 1963, losing only to the Chicago Bears in both of their games. I think that George Allen's double zone defense surprised Bart Starr and the Packers in the opener in Green Bay and the Bears won 10 to 3. In their second game in Chicago, Starr was injured and the Green Bay quarterbacks that day were John Roach and Zeke Bratkowski. End result was a 27 to 6 victory for Chicago.

Green Bay could never make up for those losses as the Bears finished the season with a 11-1-2 record and went to the championship game, which they won, 14 to 10. Green Bay probably had a better team in 1963 than a couple of their teams that won championships like the 1965 and 1967 Green Bay teams, but that's the breaks.

So, supposing that Green Bay had won the Western Conference title in 1963 and played the Giants in the NFL Championship game. Who would win? To tell the truth, I don't know the answer, so I hope I can get some opinions here.

The game would have been in Green Bay, with the weather just as brutal, so I imagine Lombardi would have found a way to win it. One other unknown scenario that I've mentioned before is that had Pete Rozelle postponed games the weekend of JFK's assassination, this game would have been played on Jan. 5--when the weather was much more amenable in Chicago, and presumably GB.

Another aspect I've noted previously is that Ditka's incredible catch and run in the 11/24 game at Pittsburgh helped the Bears salvage a tie. Had they lost, that presumably would have put them in a playoff game against the Packers. While the Bears certainly seemed to have GB's number that year, there's no way of knowing if they could have beaten the playoff-seasoned Pack.

[Rupert Patrick]

For one thing, in 1963 the Packers didn't have Hornung as he was sitting out his gambling suspension.

The 1963 Bears defense was one of the ten finest single-season defenses of all time. They led the league in fewest points allowed and fewest yards allowed, and fewest yards allowed rushing and passing. In addition, they also led in fewest yards per run and fewest yards per pass attempt. The Bears intercepted 36 passes in the regular season, the Packers 22. The Packers had the second best defense in the NFL in 1963, but the gap between the Bears and Packers defense was probably similar to the gap between the Packers and an average team. The Packers had a pretty good defense, but they weren't the Bears defense. For this reason, I just don't think the Packers would have been able to control Tittle as much as the Bears could have. I think it would have been a close game, but the Giants would have won. Giants 21 - Packers 17.

[74_75_78_79_]

What I don’t get is the G-men’s sudden, abrupt collapse the following year, finishing at 2-10-2. After a 7-7 finish in ’65, they finish worst in league again, this time even worse at 1-12-1 (infamous 72-41 loss to Wash in that mix).

[JeffreyMiller]

What I don’t get is the G-men’s sudden, abrupt collapse the following year, finishing at 2-10-2. After a 7-7 finish in ’65, they finish worst in league again, this time even worse at 1-12-1 (infamous 72-41 loss to Wash in that mix).

Age and poor coaching ...

[Saban1]

What I don’t get is the G-men’s sudden, abrupt collapse the following year, finishing at 2-10-2. After a 7-7 finish in ’65, they finish worst in league again, this time even worse at 1-12-1 (infamous 72-41 loss to Wash in that mix).

Thanks for the responses.

In 1963, Y.A. Tittle had his greatest year. In 1964, Tittle had his worst year. Some of the older players may have been slipping in 1963, but it wasn't noticed because Tittle, Shofner, Gifford, Morrison, Lynch and others were having such great years. In 1963, Giants quarterbacks were sacked 35 times compared with only 17 sacks in 1962.

BTW, There is a good chance that Y.A. Tittle would not have gotten hurt in a 1963 title game against Green Bay as he was against the Bears. Tittle probably would have been 100 per cent in the proposed 1963 Giants/Packers championship game.

[JuggernautJ]

BTW, There is a good chance that Y.A. Tittle would not have gotten hurt in a 1963 title game against Green Bay as he was against the Bears. Tittle probably would have been 100 per cent in the proposed 1963 Giants/Packers championship game.

This is the critical question.
In a game decided (at least partially) by an injury to the NY QB and NFL MVP, Y.A. Title would that situation be replicated
in a different game with a different opponent? Probably not.
And let us not forget the Giants were ahead of the Bears before Larry Morris' hit on Title's knee...

[BD Sullivan]

What I don’t get is the G-men’s sudden, abrupt collapse the following year, finishing at 2-10-2. After a 7-7 finish in ’65, they finish worst in league again, this time even worse at 1-12-1 (infamous 72-41 loss to Wash in that mix).

Thanks for the responses.

In 1963, Y.A. Tittle had his greatest year. In 1964, Tittle had his worst year.

1964 was the year of the iconic photo of an aging (and bleeding) Tittle.

[Saban1]

What I don’t get is the G-men’s sudden, abrupt collapse the following year, finishing at 2-10-2. After a 7-7 finish in ’65, they finish worst in league again, this time even worse at 1-12-1 (infamous 72-41 loss to Wash in that mix).

Thanks for the responses.

In 1963, Y.A. Tittle had his greatest year. In 1964, Tittle had his worst year.

1964 was the year of the iconic photo of an aging (and bleeding) Tittle.

Y.A. Tittle, talking about the 1964 season said, "We all played one year too long." I believe he meant the older Giants like Gifford, Webster, Scott, Stroud, Robustelli, and himself, who all retired after that year.

[74_75_78_79_]

Went on 'WhatIfSports'.com to play this game at Lambeau (set the temp to 5 degrees, light winds) in a best-of-7 but see that, strangely, they have Stofner/Thomas as the starting WRs with no option to change the lineup and install Gifford (can only install him as a starter at RB). Played it anyway just for fun, without Gifford, and Packers won 4 games to 3 (G-men leading 2-1 early on).

Not knowing as much as you others on this site, especially pre-SB, I'd have to think from my point-of-view that Packers pretty much owned the Giants early-'60s in the same way that the Pats owned Peyton's Colts early-'00s. Giants gave GB a real good game late in '61 regular season (as Colts did to NE in '03), but for higher stakes the Pack seemed to win more convincingly. IMO, with or without Hornung (maybe Bears would have been better anyway, maybe not), both Chi & GB - in whatever order - were the top-2 teams in pro football that year (Giants #3); both IMO beat Chargers convincingly in a hypo-SB like SF/Mia '84, Sea/Den '13 ("a good defense beats a good offense"). '63 Pack was just a tad beneath their championship years of that decade; and Giants seemed "another year older" than they were the previous year's 12-2 finish.