Looking At the Teams That Attempted to Threepeat

[sheajets]

1980 Steelers
I think of all the teams on this list, this one is the "oldest". The Steelers were past their prime, especially on defense. They had 18 sacks all year.

Yeah, mention of the 1980 "Stillers" surprised me. I remember reading, once, that even Terry Bradshaw has admitted that after the 1979 season he pretty much knew that his team's run of dominance was over (I remember a bad loss by the 1980 'Stillers' to the Chargers - something like 7 - 35 - being "proof" that the "Stillers" of the '70s were done for). I'm guessing due to age.

They had some puzzling games in 1980. Still ended up 9-7

At 8-5 they go into the Astrodome on Thursday night...and lose 6-0 to the Oilers. Committing 5 turnovers. Total dud

Also the MNF game where they're 4-2, lead Oakland 17-7 at home, and proceed to let the Raiders hang 45 on them and lose. Leading the Browns by two scored in the 4th quarter and letting them come back on them. They lead the Bengals by two scores in the 4th...also let them come back on them.

[7DnBrnc53]

Paul Warfield believed had the Dolphins gotten by the Raiders, they would have beaten the Steelers in the Orange Bowl before beating Minn. I am doubtful, without Jake Scott.

1974 was the last year of the rotation system for the AFC Title Game. That year, it went West, Central, and then East. So, if Miami got out of Oakland, they were going to Pittsburgh. You can tell because they were the only division winner in the AFC not to have a home playoff game divisional week.

1980 Steelers
I think of all the teams on this list, this one is the "oldest". The Steelers were past their prime, especially on defense. They had 18 sacks all year.

They looked like world-beaters to open the year, and then injuries were a factor (and poor special teams against Cincy). Also, in 81, they were 8-5 before Bradshaw hurt his thumb in the MNF game against Oakland (and was out for the season). Also, poor personnel moves over time (not keeping Dave Brown and Dwaine Board, plus their drafts after 77) slowly caught up to them.

1990 49ers

Out of all of these, this was the team that was most expected to repeat (either them or the Rams seemed to be the popular picks that year), but Roger Craig (someone who they got rid of one year too late) caught up with them.

[GameBeforeTheMoney]

Doing some research on the mid-50s Lions, who won back to back then made the championship game. This is pre-Super Bowl, of course.

They had a great chance to three-peat in that era. I think the Packers had been the only threepeat before them - in the late 20s/early 30s before the playoff era.

One thing with Detroit that year, Yale Lary was in service. Cleveland dominated the championship game. Impressive that Detroit it made it that far with Lary gone. Just thought I'd throw this team into the discussion.

I don't know how many of the 42 Bears might have been in the service - but they also made the championship game. Interesting that both teams might have had a threepeat interrupted by military service.

[74_75_78_79_]

Doing some research on the mid-50s Lions, who won back to back then made the championship game. This is pre-Super Bowl, of course.

They had a great chance to three-peat in that era. I think the Packers had been the only threepeat before them - in the late 20s/early 30s before the playoff era.

One thing with Detroit that year, Yale Lary was in service. Cleveland dominated the championship game. Impressive that Detroit it made it that far with Lary gone. Just thought I'd throw this team into the discussion.

I don't know how many of the 42 Bears might have been in the service - but they also made the championship game. Interesting that both teams might have had a threepeat interrupted by military service.

I already posted about '42 recently. And I said there that had Washington mustered just another win, that they still should have been a significant-enough underdog despite, in such a hypo case, also being an unbeaten team. Simply looking at the Bears' more dominant body-of-work...as I also said already, it would have been like Yale/Harvard '68, Miami/Penn State '86, etc - one unbeaten team looking more impressive going in than the other unbeaten. But, in either, case, whether they would have been unbeaten as well going in or as they actually were, Washington WAS...10-1, both teams were a...RIVALRY, they DID have...Baugh/Flaherty thus they beating the Mighty Monsters of the Midway not quite like the '34 nor '07 Giants doing their thing!

1954? Why couldn't both Buddy and Paul talk to each other before the game simply agree to play strictly their backups, treat it like a pre-season game, thus making the Bigger game a couple weeks later more a mystery?? Perhaps the Browns, due to revenge reasons, would have lit it up as they actually did anyway, but both teams' starters actually starting that meaningless finale/wearing themselves out with the Lions winning (and without Lary) yet again...its not an excuse, but tough to re-get-up for such an affair yet again two weeks later!

[GameBeforeTheMoney]

Doing some research on the mid-50s Lions, who won back to back then made the championship game. This is pre-Super Bowl, of course.

They had a great chance to three-peat in that era. I think the Packers had been the only threepeat before them - in the late 20s/early 30s before the playoff era.

One thing with Detroit that year, Yale Lary was in service. Cleveland dominated the championship game. Impressive that Detroit it made it that far with Lary gone. Just thought I'd throw this team into the discussion.

I don't know how many of the 42 Bears might have been in the service - but they also made the championship game. Interesting that both teams might have had a threepeat interrupted by military service.

I already posted about '42 recently. And I said there that had Washington mustered just another win, that they still should have been a significant-enough underdog despite, in such a hypo case, also being an unbeaten team. Simply looking at the Bears' more dominant body-of-work...as I also said already, it would have been like Yale/Harvard '68, Miami/Penn State '86, etc - one unbeaten team looking more impressive going in than the other unbeaten. But, in either, case, whether they would have been unbeaten as well going in or as they actually were, Washington WAS...10-1, both teams were a...RIVALRY, they DID have...Baugh/Flaherty thus they beating the Mighty Monsters of the Midway not quite like the '34 nor '07 Giants doing their thing!

1954? Why couldn't both Buddy and Paul talk to each other before the game simply agree to play strictly their backups, treat it like a pre-season game, thus making the Bigger game a couple weeks later more a mystery?? Perhaps the Browns, due to revenge reasons, would have lit it up as they actually did anyway, but both teams' starters actually starting that meaningless finale/wearing themselves out with the Lions winning (and without Lary) yet again...its not an excuse, but tough to re-get-up for such an affair yet again two weeks later!

Just looked up that regular season Browns/Lions game. Otto Graham was 1 for 6 with 15 yards passing! Wow. Maybe the teams were sleepwalking through it to get ready for the big game.

With it supposedly being Graham's last game plus the fact that Det had beaten the Browns twice, I think it might have been serious motivation for the Browns going into that championship game.

[Sonny9]

Just looked up that regular season Browns/Lions game. Otto Graham was 1 for 6 with 15 yards passing! Wow. Maybe the teams were sleepwalking through it to get ready for the big game.

With it supposedly being Graham's last game plus the fact that Det had beaten the Browns twice, I think it might have been serious motivation for the Browns going into that championship game.

The picture on this page may explain the 1 for 6
https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news ... /515014912

December 19, 1954-Cleveland, Ohio: Playing a postponed game in the snow here today, the Cleveland Browns clashed with the Detroit Lions. In this first quarter action Otto Graham, Browns Quarterback, goes over from the one foot line for a touchdown. Graham is at the bottom of this pile. The Lions won 14-10, in a game that may be considered a preview of their championship meeting next Sunday.

[GameBeforeTheMoney]

Just looked up that regular season Browns/Lions game. Otto Graham was 1 for 6 with 15 yards passing! Wow. Maybe the teams were sleepwalking through it to get ready for the big game.

With it supposedly being Graham's last game plus the fact that Det had beaten the Browns twice, I think it might have been serious motivation for the Browns going into that championship game.

The picture on this page may explain the 1 for 6
https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news ... /515014912

December 19, 1954-Cleveland, Ohio: Playing a postponed game in the snow here today, the Cleveland Browns clashed with the Detroit Lions. In this first quarter action Otto Graham, Browns Quarterback, goes over from the one foot line for a touchdown. Graham is at the bottom of this pile. The Lions won 14-10, in a game that may be considered a preview of their championship meeting next Sunday.

Whoa! Amazing find, Sonny9!

And proof that stats don't always tell even half of the story....how did they even know where the yardage lines were? That field looks like what we played on playing football in the snow as kids.