Super Bowl XXX: COLTS vs Cowboys?

[74_75_78_79_]

Albeit the almost-Hail Mary or the vital dropped Quentin Coryatt INT in the AFCCG, this match-up is very close to have taken place. 25th Anniversary of Super Bowl V would have been the bulk of the pre-game hype but not much else being that Indy was a 9-7 team that came out of nowhere up against the already-Team of the '90s. A 'David-vs-Goliath', of sorts, with the spread being in the same neighborhood as the previous year's SB.

But Indy wasn't a typical 9-7 playoff team that suddenly got 'hot'. They were no negative in PD like some! Nobody seemed to know this going into the game although cracks were already showing since Jimmy left, but the Dynasty unraveled right before our very eyes as the game wore on after that Irvin TD was called back, thus making Dallas settle for 13-0 instead of 17-0. But the late-game suspense also was due to the Steelers, indeed, having a defense which - unlike the '94 opener - did show up and bring it to the 'Boys! That surprise-onside-kick, of course, a big help as well.

Indy had a good defense themselves in '95. Do you think they bring it to the '92/'93 World Champs as well? Does the Harbaugh magic continue on in the desert? Perhaps not completing two to Larry Brown himself? Sure-enough an onside-kick from Indy would also be needed to give them a shot.

[7DnBrnc53]

The next year, we got a taste of what could have happened when the Colts beat Dallas in Texas Stadium. I think the Colts had a better chance of winning than some think. They wouldn't have come out as uptight as the Steelers did. I don't see Harbaugh throwing the INT's to Larry Brown that O'Donnell threw.

[GameBeforeTheMoney]

The next year, we got a taste of what could have happened when the Colts beat Dallas in Texas Stadium. I think the Colts had a better chance of winning than some think. They wouldn't have come out as uptight as the Steelers did. I don't see Harbaugh throwing the INT's to Larry Brown that O'Donnell threw.

That was my first thought -- that Harbaugh likely wouldn't have made those 2 ints. Those Cowboys were really good, though. I tend to think the Packers were really the biggest threat to them that year.

[Brian wolf]

Ted Marchibroda -- who may be the best coach ever with a losing record -- had the Colts playing as a team and would have given the Cowboys a handful ... The Steelers had stars on the defensive side but were too uptight in the first half of the SB ...

[7DnBrnc53]

The next year, we got a taste of what could have happened when the Colts beat Dallas in Texas Stadium. I think the Colts had a better chance of winning than some think. They wouldn't have come out as uptight as the Steelers did. I don't see Harbaugh throwing the INT's to Larry Brown that O'Donnell threw.

That was my first thought -- that Harbaugh likely wouldn't have made those 2 ints. Those Cowboys were really good, though. I tend to think the Packers were really the biggest threat to them that year.

I don't think that Cowboy team was as good as the 1992 or 93 teams. They didn't have Alvin Harper anymore across from Irvin, and they also didn't have quite as much depth on the D-line (losing Jimmie Jones didn't help). They also had a below average LB core, and they didn't have Kevin Smith across from Prime Time.

[GameBeforeTheMoney]

The next year, we got a taste of what could have happened when the Colts beat Dallas in Texas Stadium. I think the Colts had a better chance of winning than some think. They wouldn't have come out as uptight as the Steelers did. I don't see Harbaugh throwing the INT's to Larry Brown that O'Donnell threw.

That was my first thought -- that Harbaugh likely wouldn't have made those 2 ints. Those Cowboys were really good, though. I tend to think the Packers were really the biggest threat to them that year.

I don't think that Cowboy team was as good as the 1992 or 93 teams. They didn't have Alvin Harper anymore across from Irvin, and they also didn't have quite as much depth on the D-line (losing Jimmie Jones didn't help). They also had a below average LB core, and they didn't have Kevin Smith across from Prime Time.

No question that those Cowboys weren't nearly as dominant as the back-to-back winners. Plus, the team went through a coaching change. From what I've heard from a member of the team, the culture, the coaching style between Johnson and Switzer was a big change. He didn't say that as a negative against Switzer, just that their coaching styles were very different and so it took a lot of adjustment on the players' part. When you add that to the changeover of players, that was another big adjustment.

After getting that insight, it's a bit more remarkable to me that they were able to win 3 out of 4. The Shula Colts and McCafferty Colts both made the Super Bowl. The Walsh and Siefert teams made the Super Bowl. I'm hard-pressed to think of another team that went through a coaching change and made the Super Bowl in a short period of time (at least off the top of my head). Oh, and the Steelers with Cowher and Tomlin. Doesn't really happen that often.

[74_75_78_79_]

I'm thinking that SBXXX is the only time that a Dynasty, or simply a team's great run, was coming to an end during the very final championship game victory at-hand. The window was closing shut after that 13-0 lead, and Big D escaped just in a nick of time.

I agree that Indy likely doesn't start off slow or uptight in such an event. Ted's laid-back demeanor along with Harbaugh's swagger would have made the Colts a perfect "don't know that they're heavy-underdogs" case. Harbaugh would still have to avoid throwing Deion's way, but likely doesn't make those two throws to Brown either. And although Indy's D wasn't on-par with the 'Burgh, they still had a D and would have still brought it to the now-unraveling 'Boys. With they not falling into an early hole, their chances of giving Dallas an even-better game, if not maybe even beat them, I see as being very good. But a surprise-on-side-kick would have likely still been needed and not sure that Ted would have wanted to pull out that trick as Cowher did. Colts either pull off a stunning upset or, the most-likely case, lose but by under a TD. Make Dallas sweat to the very end even-more-so than Steelers did.

I feel that by the time the playoffs began, all three division-winners in the NFC were even. It was simply a matter of who would have to play/eliminate who? GB-beats-SF, SF-beats-Dallas, Dallas-beats-GB. Sadly, for them, if San Fran wanted to truly "earn" another Lombardi in '95, they should have taken care of business in that finale in Atlanta. That way Dallas would knock Green Bay out the way in the divisional round. I always felt that Steelers have an even harder time vs San Fran than they actually did vs Dallas in a hypo-SBXXX match.

[7DnBrnc53]

if San Fran wanted to truly "earn" another Lombardi in '95, they should have taken care of business in that finale in Atlanta. That way Dallas would knock Green Bay out the way in the divisional round. I always felt that Steelers have an even harder time vs San Fran than they actually did vs Dallas in a hypo-SBXXX match.

Exactly. They would have probably made the SB if they beat the pre-Dirty Birds in the season finale that year. However, I think the Steelers beat this 49er team (unlike the year before if they would have played. That would have been a much better game if the Steelers were there, though). SF did beat them the next year in December at the confluence, but that Steeler team wasn't as good as the one that played in SB XXX.

[Brian wolf]

I also believe the Steelers might have beaten the 49ers had they gotten by GB and Dallas ... Young could look great against lesser teams but also struggle with teams with great pass rushes and the Steelers could have fared better against a smaller offensive line but we all know that Rice would have given them problems with Rod Woodson just coming back to game form ...