1963 NFL Championship - Giants at Packers

[Saban1]

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.

The Packers of Vince Lombardi did seem to own the Giants and also Cleveland and Dallas later on. Also, with the game in Green Bay, it looks like the Packers would be very difficult to beat in 1963. They beat both St. Louis and Pittsburgh rather easily that year during the regular season.

One thing going for the Giants would have been revenge. I have seen it before. When one good team keeps beating another good team, especially in big games, sometimes the losing team will turn things around. How about the Rams in the 1951 title game, or Kansas City over Oakland in the AFL title game in 1969. In football, anything can happen.

[RRMarshall]

I really think the Packers would have won decisively. Green Bay dominated the line of scrimmage in both their title game meetings in 1961 and 1962 and would have been able to one-dimensionalize Y.A's passing offense. Check out the 1961 NFL Championship game on Youtube and draw your own conclusions. True, the loss of Hornung would have been a factor but he was essentially a nonfactor in the game at Yankee Stadium in 1962 where Jim Taylor chewed them up between the tackles. I just can't see Lombardi losing at home in that situation.

Another interesting question is would the Giants have prevailed if Tittle had not gotten hurt? The Giants defense more than held their own in that game, with Giants' turnovers setting up the two Bears TDs. I think the Bald Eagle just might have pulled it off....

[Saban1]

I really think the Packers would have won decisively. Green Bay dominated the line of scrimmage in both their title game meetings in 1961 and 1962 and would have been able to one-dimensionalize Y.A's passing offense. Check out the 1961 NFL Championship game on Youtube and draw your own conclusions. True, the loss of Hornung would have been a factor but he was essentially a nonfactor in the game at Yankee Stadium in 1962 where Jim Taylor chewed them up between the tackles. I just can't see Lombardi losing at home in that situation.

Another interesting question is would the Giants have prevailed if Tittle had not gotten hurt? The Giants defense more than held their own in that game, with Giants' turnovers setting up the two Bears TDs. I think the Bald Eagle just might have pulled it off....

Good points all around here.

Makes me think of another thing. Many people think that the San Diego Chargers would have defeated the Chicago Bears if there was a Super Bowl following the 1963 season. Would that still be their thinking if the Green Bay Packers or the New York Giants had won the NFL Championship that year?

[Jay Z]

I really think the Packers would have won decisively. Green Bay dominated the line of scrimmage in both their title game meetings in 1961 and 1962 and would have been able to one-dimensionalize Y.A's passing offense. Check out the 1961 NFL Championship game on Youtube and draw your own conclusions. True, the loss of Hornung would have been a factor but he was essentially a nonfactor in the game at Yankee Stadium in 1962 where Jim Taylor chewed them up between the tackles. I just can't see Lombardi losing at home in that situation.

Another interesting question is would the Giants have prevailed if Tittle had not gotten hurt? The Giants defense more than held their own in that game, with Giants' turnovers setting up the two Bears TDs. I think the Bald Eagle just might have pulled it off....

Good points all around here.

Makes me think of another thing. Many people think that the San Diego Chargers would have defeated the Chicago Bears if there was a Super Bowl following the 1963 season. Would that still be their thinking if the Green Bay Packers or the New York Giants had won the NFL Championship that year?

I'm not all that on board with the Chargers beating the Bears, so I don't think they beat the Giants or Packers either.

I think there was some air in the Chargers' statistics. Still too early in the AFL history. I am influenced by Lee Grosscup's book. Grosscup played for the 1962 Titans, he made note of how much simpler the defenses were in the AFL. I don't think things changed that much in one year. I don't think Lincoln and Lowe are going to rip off rushing yardage in big chunks the way they could in the AFL. The Bears were an all around top statistical defense in 1963, regardless of how they played in other years. Lincoln and Lowe were never that good in other years either.

The Bears deserved to beat the Packers twice in 1963, they outplayed the Packers in both games. I respect that.

[Saban1]

I really think the Packers would have won decisively. Green Bay dominated the line of scrimmage in both their title game meetings in 1961 and 1962 and would have been able to one-dimensionalize Y.A's passing offense. Check out the 1961 NFL Championship game on Youtube and draw your own conclusions. True, the loss of Hornung would have been a factor but he was essentially a nonfactor in the game at Yankee Stadium in 1962 where Jim Taylor chewed them up between the tackles. I just can't see Lombardi losing at home in that situation.

Another interesting question is would the Giants have prevailed if Tittle had not gotten hurt? The Giants defense more than held their own in that game, with Giants' turnovers setting up the two Bears TDs. I think the Bald Eagle just might have pulled it off....

Good points all around here.

Makes me think of another thing. Many people think that the San Diego Chargers would have defeated the Chicago Bears if there was a Super Bowl following the 1963 season. Would that still be their thinking if the Green Bay Packers or the New York Giants had won the NFL Championship that year?

I'm not all that on board with the Chargers beating the Bears, so I don't think they beat the Giants or Packers either.

I think there was some air in the Chargers' statistics. Still too early in the AFL history. I am influenced by Lee Grosscup's book. Grosscup played for the 1962 Titans, he made note of how much simpler the defenses were in the AFL. I don't think things changed that much in one year. I don't think Lincoln and Lowe are going to rip off rushing yardage in big chunks the way they could in the AFL. The Bears were an all around top statistical defense in 1963, regardless of how they played in other years. Lincoln and Lowe were never that good in other years either.

The Bears deserved to beat the Packers twice in 1963, they outplayed the Packers in both games. I respect that.

Points well taken. I remember those George Allen defenses at Los Angeles and Washington and they were good, and Allen was the Bears defensive coach in 1963.

[74_75_78_79_]

I really think the Packers would have won decisively. Green Bay dominated the line of scrimmage in both their title game meetings in 1961 and 1962 and would have been able to one-dimensionalize Y.A's passing offense. Check out the 1961 NFL Championship game on Youtube and draw your own conclusions. True, the loss of Hornung would have been a factor but he was essentially a nonfactor in the game at Yankee Stadium in 1962 where Jim Taylor chewed them up between the tackles. I just can't see Lombardi losing at home in that situation.

Another interesting question is would the Giants have prevailed if Tittle had not gotten hurt? The Giants defense more than held their own in that game, with Giants' turnovers setting up the two Bears TDs. I think the Bald Eagle just might have pulled it off....

Good points all around here.

Makes me think of another thing. Many people think that the San Diego Chargers would have defeated the Chicago Bears if there was a Super Bowl following the 1963 season. Would that still be their thinking if the Green Bay Packers or the New York Giants had won the NFL Championship that year?

I'm not all that on board with the Chargers beating the Bears, so I don't think they beat the Giants or Packers either.

I think there was some air in the Chargers' statistics. Still too early in the AFL history. I am influenced by Lee Grosscup's book. Grosscup played for the 1962 Titans, he made note of how much simpler the defenses were in the AFL. I don't think things changed that much in one year. I don't think Lincoln and Lowe are going to rip off rushing yardage in big chunks the way they could in the AFL. The Bears were an all around top statistical defense in 1963, regardless of how they played in other years. Lincoln and Lowe were never that good in other years either.

The Bears deserved to beat the Packers twice in 1963, they outplayed the Packers in both games. I respect that.

Also, SD did get swept by the Raiders; giving up 34 (to 33) and then 41 (to 27) points respectively in both those losses. In their other loss that year, Week #5, they give up 50 (to 34) to a Denver team who'd go on to finish 2-11-1. Can only imagine how much the Bears (or GB, or NYG) would have scored on them. Don't want to take away from them, end of day they did deserve that '63 title (rules were strictly division-winners get in, and Raiders simply shouldn't have gotten off to that bad start), but I do agree that the AFL was still very young yet; and it wouldn't surprise me if those Bills teams of the next two years were better than they as well as the previous year's AFLCG-participants, Texans & Oilers.

[BD Sullivan]

I'm not all that on board with the Chargers beating the Bears, so I don't think they beat the Giants or Packers either.

I think there was some air in the Chargers' statistics. Still too early in the AFL history. I am influenced by Lee Grosscup's book. Grosscup played for the 1962 Titans, he made note of how much simpler the defenses were in the AFL. I don't think things changed that much in one year. I don't think Lincoln and Lowe are going to rip off rushing yardage in big chunks the way they could in the AFL. The Bears were an all around top statistical defense in 1963, regardless of how they played in other years. Lincoln and Lowe were never that good in other years either.

The Bears deserved to beat the Packers twice in 1963, they outplayed the Packers in both games. I respect that.

Also, SD did get swept by the Raiders; giving up 34 (to 33) and then 41 (to 27) points respectively in both those losses. In their other loss that year, Week #5, they give up 50 (to 34) to a Denver team who'd go on to finish 2-11-1. Can only imagine how much the Bears (or GB, or NYG) would have scored on them. Don't want to take away from them, end of day they did deserve that '63 title (rules were strictly division-winners get in, and Raiders simply shouldn't have gotten off to that bad start), but I do agree that the AFL was still very young yet; and it wouldn't surprise me if those Bills teams of the next two years were better than they as well as the previous year's AFLCG-participants, Texans & Oilers.

In that 10/6/63 loss to Denver, San Diego had a 27-26 lead with 9:15 left in the game. The Broncos then scored on a TD with 6:08 remaining to take the lead for good. Lincoln then fumbled away the kickoff and Denver scored again, which was followed by a pick-six on a deflected pass from Hadl. Lincoln had two of the other three fumbles for the Chargers, while Rote had also been picked off twice. Finally, Earl Faison didn't play in the game, which hurt their pass rush that allowed John McCormick to throw for 265 yards and three TD passes.

[Saban1]

By the preponderance of the evidence, I believe that the Green Bay Packers would have won an NFL Championship game against the New York Giants in 1963. Here are some reasons:

(1) No Packers team since 1960 ever lost to an Eastern Conference team until they lost their last regular season game to the Pittsburgh Steelers in 1967 when the Pack was obviously looking ahead to their playoff game with the Rams. The game with the Steelers was a throwaway game in 1967 as Green Bay had clinched the NFL Central Division.

(2) The 1963 game would have been played in Green Bay. Green Bay figured to be much harder to beat in Green Bay.

(3) Green Bay was still pretty good in 1963 despite the loss of Paul Hornung.

(4) The Giants best team of that era, IMO, was the 1962 team, and that team played Green Bay in New York. They gave the Packers a tough game under terrible conditions, but the Packers still prevailed. JMO, but I think that the Giants slipped more than Green Bay did in 1963, and would have had to play the game in Green Bay.

(5) Vince was almost invincible.