Were the '87 49ers the BEST ONE-AND-DONE playoff team ever?

[Brian wolf]

I think CS, that the Minnesota win against SF was an example of a good defensive line having their way with a smaller SF offensive line. It happened also with the Giants fronts in some other playoff losses. The Niners did a good job of handling the Vikings the next two years though. It also seemed like whatever Wilson threw up, Carter was coming down with. A great game from a receiver who should have had better career numbers but the Viking QBs just didnt get the ball to him enough.

[SeahawkFever]

I don’t know if I would say the 87 49ers are the best team to go one and done ever, but they are certainly in the conversation for me.

2011 Packers also deserve mention, as do the 2019 Ravens.

[Ten Minute Ticker]

With a point differential of plus-192 (in a 14-game season) and one of the best defenses of all-time, the 1970 Vikings deserve mention.

My issue with the 1987 49ers being included is their record and PD is inflated by the strike games.

[Crazy Packers Fan]

The 2011 Packers went 15-1 and lost that one game by only five points. Then they got blown out at home by the New York Giants in the divisional round after a bye. One of the greatest offenses ever (and while the defense's numbers were bad, there was a lot of garbage time this season). They certainly have a case for this title.

[SeahawkFever]

2006 Chargers

Absolutely. 14-2. Tomlinson MVP. Gates AP1. Merriman 3rd in DPOY — 17 sacks in 12 games! (PED suspension). Rivers really solid in first year as a starter. Losses to the 13-3 Ravens and 9-7 KC. 1st in points, 7th in points allowed. Dominant as a team and had true game-breakers.

Not as shocking as the Colts the year before, since the Colts had been around longer and the Chargers lost to the Pats. But shocking.

'96 Broncos to me was the big one. Losing, and the opponent, and how it happened. All three. Stunning.

If they beat New England are they beating Indianapolis as well in your book?

[SeahawkFever]

With a point differential of plus-192 (in a 14-game season) and one of the best defenses of all-time, the 1970 Vikings deserve mention.

My issue with the 1987 49ers being included is their record and PD is inflated by the strike games.

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: If Fran Tarkenton is on the Vikings his entire prime, then in 1970 they would’ve had a better chance than they ever did with him in reality.

The Purple People Eaters were better in 69 and 70 than 73-77, and in 1970 specifically had they played Dallas, they’d face Craig Morton, not Roger Staubach, and the AFC team was the 1970 Colts (in my book a worse opponent than the four teams they lost to)

[SeahawkFever]

The 2011 Packers went 15-1 and lost that one game by only five points. Then they got blown out at home by the New York Giants in the divisional round after a bye. One of the greatest offenses ever (and while the defense's numbers were bad, there was a lot of garbage time this season). They certainly have a case for this title.

I’ve heard that they had a safety that had a career ending injury. Nick Collins I think his name is?

[Crazy Packers Fan]

The 2011 Packers went 15-1 and lost that one game by only five points. Then they got blown out at home by the New York Giants in the divisional round after a bye. One of the greatest offenses ever (and while the defense's numbers were bad, there was a lot of garbage time this season). They certainly have a case for this title.

I’ve heard that they had a safety that had a career ending injury. Nick Collins I think his name is?

Yep, he would have been a real star in the NFL, some say a Hall of Famer (I'm not going to go that far). He had the pick-six in the Super Bowl as his crowning achievement.

[74_75_78_79_]

With a point differential of plus-192 (in a 14-game season) and one of the best defenses of all-time, the 1970 Vikings deserve mention.

My issue with the 1987 49ers being included is their record and PD is inflated by the strike games.

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: If Fran Tarkenton is on the Vikings his entire prime, then in 1970 they would’ve had a better chance than they ever did with him in reality.

The Purple People Eaters were better in 69 and 70 than 73-77, and in 1970 specifically had they played Dallas, they’d face Craig Morton, not Roger Staubach, and the AFC team was the 1970 Colts (in my book a worse opponent than the four teams they lost to)

Take away San Fran's scab games, and it's still 10-2. As for #1 in offense and defense, not sure if those stats hold-up if you take away Wks#4-thru-#6. I can't imagine it'd be much less. They were still a SB-win-caliber team to me, only losing at Pittsburgh in the very first game and allowing the Saints, who also finished 10-2, to split with them. I guess they and the '96 Broncos would have to be the top-two teams in this given thread. This, especially, considering they'd each go on to win back-to-back Super Bowls the next two seasons!


The 1970 Vikings not only didn't have Tarkenton, but not Kapp either. This definitely keeps them from 'best' one-and-done. And not just that...but no Chuck Foreman yet either! He needs to be mentioned in this in the same way that Fran is!

Of course you got to love Joe Kapp's style - a 'football player' as much as he was a QB! Gritty, smash-mouth, LBer-mentality, played with a kicker's mask, etc. But truthfully, MVP season aside, he was a downgrade from HOFer-to-be Tarkenton. IMO the Vikings with Fran instead don't beat the Chiefs either in SBIV, but maybe with he and Foreman, they have an even-odds chance! And they definitely ought to win-it-all in 1970 with, again, an even-odds chance to beat Dallas (then Miami) in '71 as well.

I've very recently come to the opinion (writing this, actually, for the first time) that the 1973 Vikings are now the best Viking team ever, thus very recently demoting 1969. The '73 team did win 12 games, started 9-0, and within that very start beat three winning teams: one of them an AFFCG-participant, and another a team that finished 12-2 just as they themselves did!

Yes, Minny's defense by then was beneath their turn-of-the-decade status from a few years prior, but not at all by much. STILL the Purple People Eaters! Tarkenton & Foreman, however, a significant upgrade! Just like I think had Ferragamo/Tyler been with the Rams all decade long, the Rams at least make it to (maybe, just maybe, even win) a Super Bowl prior to '79 - on a bigger scale - I think Fran/Chuck, '69-thru-'71, wins Minny at least one Super Bowl period.

A super defense the '69 team had! Their best-ever such unit, among the all-time best. But relatively-speaking (yes, MVP Joe Kapp), they were little else. Thinking of it, the difference between them and the '63 Bears is they still had to play in a Super Bowl and Chicago didn't.


But back to the subject at hand, it is '87 SF & '96 Den with me - take your pick for #1.

The 2011 Packers went 15-1 and lost that one game by only five points. Then they got blown out at home by the New York Giants in the divisional round after a bye. One of the greatest offenses ever (and while the defense's numbers were bad, there was a lot of garbage time this season). They certainly have a case for this title.

2011 Packers? Yes, I felt it was a big deal when they finally lost a game after starting 13-0, and thought at the time that if anyone could pull it off with just passing, they could do it. They were, after all, defending-Champs and had defensive players on their roster from the year before like Matthews, Woodson, Raji, etc. But looking back, they were (as many here say) a 'video-game' kind of team and when the playoffs began, boy, were they exposed! And those Giant-killer G-men led by Coughlin & Eli were the sensible ones to send them home. As un-sexy as their 10-6 previous installment was, they had the balance and that championship mettle which made them the best once those playoffs began en route to winning-it-all!

As for 2010, the same applies to that year's 14-2 Patriots. Pretty much all-offense relatively. Losing to Jets, even with Sanchez under center, can't be seen as too wild of an upset.

[Ten Minute Ticker]

With a point differential of plus-192 (in a 14-game season) and one of the best defenses of all-time, the 1970 Vikings deserve mention.

My issue with the 1987 49ers being included is their record and PD is inflated by the strike games.

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: If Fran Tarkenton is on the Vikings his entire prime, then in 1970 they would’ve had a better chance than they ever did with him in reality.

The Purple People Eaters were better in 69 and 70 than 73-77, and in 1970 specifically had they played Dallas, they’d face Craig Morton, not Roger Staubach, and the AFC team was the 1970 Colts (in my book a worse opponent than the four teams they lost to)

Take away San Fran's scab games, and it's still 10-2. As for #1 in offense and defense, not sure if those stats hold-up if you take away Wks#4-thru-#6. I can't imagine it'd be much less. They were still a SB-win-caliber team to me, only losing at Pittsburgh in the very first game and allowing the Saints, who also finished 10-2, to split with them. I guess they and the '96 Broncos would have to be the top-two teams in this given thread. This, especially, considering they'd each go on to win back-to-back Super Bowls the next two seasons!

The '70 Vikings not only didn't have Tarkenton, but not Kapp either. This definitely keeps them from 'best' one-and-done. And not just that...but no Chuck Foreman yet either! He needs to be mentioned in this in the same way that Fran is!

Of course you got to love Joe Kapp's style - a 'football player' as much as he was a QB! Gritty, smash-mouth, LBer-mentality, played with a kicker's mask, etc. But truthfully, MVP season aside, he was a downgrade from HOFer-to-be Tarkenton. IMO the Vikings with Fran instead don't beat the Chiefs either in SBIV, but maybe with he and Foreman, they have an even-odds chance! And they definitely ought to win-it-all in 1970 with, again, an even-odds chance to beat Dallas (then Miami) in '71 as well.

I've very recently come to the opinion (writing this, actually, for the first time) that the 1973 Vikings are now the best Viking team ever, thus very recently demoting 1969. They did win 12 games, started 9-0, and within that very start beat three winning teams: one of them an AFFCG-participant, and another a team that finished 12-2 just as they did! Yes, Minny's defense by then was beneath their turn-of-the-decade status from a few years prior, but not at all by much. STILL the Purple People Eaters! Tarkenton & Foreman, however, a significant upgrade! Just like I think had Ferragamo/Tyler been with the Rams all decade long, the Rams at least make it to (maybe, just maybe, even win) a Super Bowl prior to '79 - on a bigger scale - I think Fran/Chuck, '69-thru-'71, wins Minny at least one Super Bowl period.

Disagree.

The 1970 Vikings may not have had the offensive names, but they were third in scoring that season. They put 54 on the Cowboys and scored 30 at Detroit that season. In their final two regular season games, admittedly against lousy competition, they scored 35 and 37.

That Vikings team barely gave up 10 points per game. For all of their lack of star power, their best defensive players - Alan Page and Carl Eller - are two of the best of all-time and they were at their zenith in this period. You can't ignore their elite defensive players in assessing them.

Other than as an aside, I'm not sure what makes the 1973 Vikings relevant to this. They weren't a one-and-one. The 1971 Vikings are the comp, but they were much worse than 1970 in terms of scoring even as the defense was slightly better than 1970.

As for the 1987 49ers? I'm sorry, but I cannot take anything from the 1987 season seriously. I think the nature of that season makes historical comparisons disqualifying. All of the team stats are skewed by the strike games. At least in 1982, all of the games were played by bona fide NFL players, even if the much smaller sample size also makes historical comparisons disqualifying.

The non-strike Niners were 10-2 and were obviously good, but they also needed a gift-wrapped victory against the clueless Bengals just before the strike to get there. They finished strong, the margins of victory were well up there, but apart from the Bears, they achieved it against flotsam (Green Bay, Atlanta, Rams).

They both belong on a list of the best without doubt.