Playoff Bowl ('60-thru-'69) discussion
- 74_75_78_79_
- Posts: 2526
- Joined: Sat Oct 11, 2014 1:25 pm
Playoff Bowl ('60-thru-'69) discussion
Lombardi famously hated this game; and Lions players who were apart of all three (for three) of their wins in this game are hardly proud of the feat. Not a good 'teller' as to whom was the 'better' team for one or both participants likely weren't really motivated. At least in the earlier games, that is, being that each winning player received $600 with the loser getting not much less at $400. However, in the latter years, the winner would get $1,200 as opposed to $500. Now that FWIW would have served as a better motivator to win thus the result being the better 'teller' after all.
Two questions...
What year did it get set at $1,200/$500?
and
Why did the Eagles get the nod to play in the '66 Playoff Bowl over Cleveland? Both were 9-5, both split with each other, but the Browns did have the better conference record at 9-4 as opposed to 8-5.
Thanks!
Two questions...
What year did it get set at $1,200/$500?
and
Why did the Eagles get the nod to play in the '66 Playoff Bowl over Cleveland? Both were 9-5, both split with each other, but the Browns did have the better conference record at 9-4 as opposed to 8-5.
Thanks!
- Throwin_Samoan
- Posts: 144
- Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2016 5:17 pm
- Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Re: Playoff Bowl ('60-thru-'69) discussion
Apparently because (similar to how some college bowl games used to do it), the Browns (1963 season) had been there more recently than the Eagles (1961 season), so that was the tiebreaker.74_75_78_79_ wrote: Why did the Eagles get the nod to play in the '66 Playoff Bowl over Cleveland? Both were 9-5, both split with each other, but the Browns did have the better conference record at 9-4 as opposed to 8-5.
And winners of the game in January 1967 got $1,200, so it may have been a condition of the merger.
Re: Playoff Bowl ('60-thru-'69) discussion
It seems the Playoff Bowl is viewed in a negative light, but why? Just because of a statement Lombardi made? How is that game any different than any other late season game between two clubs who are out of the running? The participants might be bitter about coming up just short, but any number of teams finishing up their regular season play on with that in mind. Salaries were low back then so a chance to earn a bonus would certainly be welcomed by the players. Was field neutrality something that took away from the game?
In soccer the World Cup still has their runner-up playoff between the losers of the semis. That game would be psychologically more difficult to compete in as their title bids JUST finished in disappointment, not weeks earlier as was the case in runaway conference races.
In soccer the World Cup still has their runner-up playoff between the losers of the semis. That game would be psychologically more difficult to compete in as their title bids JUST finished in disappointment, not weeks earlier as was the case in runaway conference races.
- 74_75_78_79_
- Posts: 2526
- Joined: Sat Oct 11, 2014 1:25 pm
Re: Playoff Bowl ('60-thru-'69) discussion
Thanks, TS! Good points, John!
-
- Posts: 1506
- Joined: Sun Oct 12, 2014 8:57 am
Re: Playoff Bowl ('60-thru-'69) discussion
The only reason for the Playoff Bowl was to raise money for the players' pension fund.
-
- Posts: 2318
- Joined: Mon Oct 13, 2014 1:30 pm
Re: Playoff Bowl ('60-thru-'69) discussion
The game truly became worthless when they expanded the playoffs. Before, if a team didn't win their conference, they were out of luck, so the game was seen by some as a mini-playoff game--except in Lombardi's eyes.
Re: Playoff Bowl ('60-thru-'69) discussion
I wonder how widely known that was among the players at the time. (I have no idea, just curious).rhickok1109 wrote:The only reason for the Playoff Bowl was to raise money for the players' pension fund.
"Now, I want pizza."
- Ken Crippen
- Ken Crippen
- Retro Rider
- Posts: 322
- Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2014 4:03 am
- Location: Washington State
Re: Playoff Bowl ('60-thru-'69) discussion
At one time there was a website that chronicled all ten Playoff Bowl games but I can't seem to find it anymore (MBolding I think). Sad when these resources disappear. I believe CBS televised all of these games, maybe someone can confirm that. In the opening minute or so of the 1966 Eagles highlight film you can hear Joe Kuharich grumbling to his secretary about having to play in the January '67 Playoff Bowl, saying that he didn't have time for "this second place stuff."
On a side note, the NFL used the new Y-shaped/slingshot goal post for the first time in that "67 Eagles vs. Colts Playoff Bowl.
On a side note, the NFL used the new Y-shaped/slingshot goal post for the first time in that "67 Eagles vs. Colts Playoff Bowl.
-
- Posts: 886
- Joined: Sat Oct 11, 2014 8:04 pm
Re: Playoff Bowl ('60-thru-'69) discussion
I used to watch it on TV. CBS televised it. The first three games had low attendance. The 1963 game (January 5, 1964) had the biggest crowd yet, almost 55,000. The Packers played the Browns, a game with some appeal. The Packers won a lop-sided game. Attendance went up the next two years with a crowd of 65,569 for the 1965 game with the Colts (with Tom Matte at QB) blowing out the Cowboys 35-3.
The Super Bowl the next year and the playoffs beginning in 1967 took away fan interest.
The Super Bowl the next year and the playoffs beginning in 1967 took away fan interest.
Re: Playoff Bowl ('60-thru-'69) discussion
https://web.archive.org/web/20120111203 ... f_Bowl.htmRetro Rider wrote:At one time there was a website that chronicled all ten Playoff Bowl games but I can't seem to find it anymore (MBolding I think).
"Now, I want pizza."
- Ken Crippen
- Ken Crippen