1950s NFL with the '69 AFL playoff format

[74_75_78_79_]

Four teams make the playoffs with each division winner hosting the runner-up from the other division.

Assuming that a coin-toss would still be applied in 1950, to decide who gets the two top-seeds/home games in the semis, it would be...

Bears at Browns, Giants at Rams

Neither of these two match-ups took place in the regular season so its fun to think of.

1951? Despite the 7-4-1 Forty Niners sweeping the Lions who were also 7-4-1, both of them tied for 2nd in their conference, I'm assuming they would have played for a tie-breaker whilst I also assume that a coin-flip would determine who'd get home-field. If so, the winner of that game then plays at 11-1 Cleveland while Giants (9-2-1) play at Rams (8-4) again while also not playing each other during that regular season.

Here are the rest (with aforementioned coin-flips considered)...

1952: 9-3-0 Rams at 8-4 Browns, NYG/Phi-winner (both 7-5) at 9-3 Lions

1953: 9-3 Forty Niners at 11-1 Browns, 7-4-1 Eagles at 10-2 Lions

1954: 8-4 Bears at 9-3 Browns, 7-4-1 Eagles at 9-2-1 Lions

1955: 8-4 Bears at 9-2-1 Browns, 8-4 Redskins at 8-3-1 Rams

1956: 9-3 Lions at 8-3-1 Giants, 7-5 Cardinals at 9-2-1 Bears

1957: 8-4 Forty Niners at 9-2-1 Browns, 7-5 Giants at 8-4 Lions

1958: Bears/Rams-winner (both 8-4) at 9-3 Giants, 9-3 Browns at 9-3 Colts

1959: 8-4 Bears at 10-2 Giants, Clev/Phi-winner (both 7-5) at 9-3 Colts


Which one of these hypo-games most intrigue you? I'm not sure if this "most" intrigues me but just to be enlightened that the Cards mustered a winning finish at all in the '50s yet alone 2ND place, actually starting 5-1, and that they would have played against their crosstown rivals, and that their regular season game was a close D-slugfest (Bears won at Wrigley, 10-3, in Wk#11)!

Washington in a playoff game in '55 pretty neat as well.

Question I got, and thanks in-advance for the answer, Does Layne return for that hypo-semifinal in '56? If Lions do win at the Stadium, with or without Bobby, the Bears at least wouldn't have to worry about their opponent...wearing sneakers! This, of course, is because they'd be at home instead of the Bronx.

There are other things to be intrigued by in this overall '50s scenario, not just these hypo-games offered above...

If 6-4-1 Washington doesn't lose at home to the 5-6 Steelers in the 1953 finale, they tack on another playoff berth! They would play the 7-4-1 Eagles in a tie-breaker to get the right to advance to Detroit. 8-3-1 Rams come up just short for 2nd to 9-3 San Fran!

1954: Opposite of last year in that San Fran comes up just short to LA. In the other conference, quite a play-in game in the final week - 7-4 NYG@6-4-1 Phi!

1956: Heartbreak in DC! Wash & ChC each 6-4 after Wk#10 as well as both at 6-5 the following week. FInal week, the Cards win at Cleveland (assuring Browns that losing season), and Redskins lose at Baltimore.

'57 offers up same suspense in the Western as the case in real-time.

1959: If 7-4 San Fran wins at home against Vince's 6-5 Pack, then they get a tie-breaker against the 8-4 Bears. A '76 precursor this Forty Niner team was. They also started 6-1.


Yes, being old-school, I heavily respect the "only division-winners should get in" logic. And I definitely wish there wouldn't be as many teams making the playoffs in not just football, but sports-in-general (especially the CFL; and even MORE-SO Canadian COLLEGE football). But not minding a little bit more jelly in the PB sand, I think this scenario would have made the NFL '50s - and also the '60s - more fun. JMHO.

[Brian wolf]

Giants fans have to lament that 1950 playoff loss to Cleveland, who they had already beaten twice. Had the Giants played at home instead of Cleveland, maybe a different outcome?
I felt the Giants defense could have stopped the Rams in the championship game. You also have to wonder if their close win over the Eagles, took alot out of the team prior to playing the Browns?

[JuggernautJ]

I think 49ers fans (like me) would love another crack at the '57 Playoffs.
No second half meltdowns would be appreciated...

That was a darn good team and a very memorable one, too.

John Henry Johnson was gone (to the Lions, no less... arg) but they still had 3/4s of the Million Dollar Backfield with Title, The King and Joe the Jet.
Add in Billy Wilson and R.C. Owens and they had a pretty darn good offense.
Leo Nomellini and Bob St. Clair... they had a lot of Hall of Fame players and some who were "Very Good."
They could well have gone the distance in your scenario.

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/ ... o/1957.htm

[74_75_78_79_]

Giants fans have to lament that 1950 playoff loss to Cleveland, who they had already beaten twice. Had the Giants played at home instead of Cleveland, maybe a different outcome?
I felt the Giants defense could have stopped the Rams in the championship game. You also have to wonder if their close win over the Eagles, took alot out of the team prior to playing the Browns?

We sure missed out on that 'Greatest Show' precursor going against the 'Umbrella' in each of Steve Owens' last two championship-caliber campaigns in '50 & '51. It would have been a match-up to see in either of those seasons.

As I've said before, I once thought it was "unfair" that the Browns & Rams not only made the playoffs in '50 despite getting swept by both Giants & Bears respectively, but that each also got home-field. But some here have pointed out that, then, both Giants & Bears shouldn't have each lost the two games outside their sweeps over them to lower their records down to Cleveland & LA's in the first place.

Now the Giants & Bears, then, should have had home-field in those tie-breaker games? Okay, that's fine. But if we're having tie-breakers in the first place for the reason given, then having a coin-flip anyway not far-fetched. I can go either way on that particular one. But a tie-breaker, I now feel for quite some time, is the way it should go regardless of one sweeping the other. Hey, look at Major League Baseball. A tie-breaker game was always played regardless of regular season H2H record both teams had against each other.

As for MLB, my ideal version is each League having two divisions with the 1st and 2nd place teams making the playoffs and crisscrossing - each 2nd place team playing against (at) the 1st place team from the other division. I used to think it should be 'best two non-division-winners' but not anymore. 3rd place, no matter how great their record, tough luck; that's the breaks - unless there's a tie-breaker game(s) for 2nd that would need to be decided, that is. I think the NBA ,and also the NHL, should be that way as well (each round a 7-game series).

If a conference, or division, is too small - 5 or less teams (as the case with the CFL or new UFL; or WNBA if they divide it in two, which I think they should do - 4x4) then strictly division-winners get in (unless a tie-breaker game needed, that is). SIX or more per? Then the aforementioned 1st place/2nd place crisscross.

Just my take.

I think 49ers fans (like me) would love another crack at the '57 Playoffs.
No second half meltdowns would be appreciated...

That was a darn good team and a very memorable one, too.

John Henry Johnson was gone (to the Lions, no less... arg) but they still had 3/4s of the Million Dollar Backfield with Title, The King and Joe the Jet.
Add in Billy Wilson and R.C. Owens and they had a pretty darn good offense.
Leo Nomellini and Bob St. Clair... they had a lot of Hall of Fame players and some who were "Very Good."
They could well have gone the distance in your scenario.

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/ ... o/1957.htm

In my opinion, the three strongest pre-Walsh San Fran teams are '48, '49, and '57. Not Nolan/Brodie's '70-thru-'72 run although a nice run to hang hat on for sure.

San Fran "should have" held on vs Detroit in '57. But you can say the same thing about the Lions last year. Det/SF '57/2023 is plain and simply the same as Oak/NE '76/2001. Fortunately and unfortunately, whomever you rooted for, it all evens out.

[RichardBak]

I think 49ers fans (like me) would love another crack at the '57 Playoffs.
No second half meltdowns would be appreciated...

That was a darn good team and a very memorable one, too.

John Henry Johnson was gone (to the Lions, no less... arg) but they still had 3/4s of the Million Dollar Backfield with Title, The King and Joe the Jet.
Add in Billy Wilson and R.C. Owens and they had a pretty darn good offense.
Leo Nomellini and Bob St. Clair... they had a lot of Hall of Fame players and some who were "Very Good."
They could well have gone the distance in your scenario.

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/ ... o/1957.htm

The 49ers gave the Lions the most angst during Detroit's glory years in the '50s. They were the only team Buddy Parker had a losing record against during his 6 seasons at the Lions' helm, and even those games he won were typically one-score affairs. But then, it was George Wilson who was HC in that '57 playoff. Well, as others have pointed out, SF got payback in last year's championship game. So I guess it all evens out in the end.