Super Bowl II discussion

[Jay Z]

This was not a great matchup for the Raiders. The Packers led the league 5 years in a row (1964-68) in fewest yards given up passing. 1967 was the best of those years. Only the 1973 Dolphins were better in a 14 game schedule. The AFL and the Raiders were still too dependent on long passing. Also, the Raiders defensive stats were generally pretty good, but they gave up about 15 yards a completion. They changed their starters a couple times during that season. Not on the same level as the Packers. Starr took advantage a couple of times.

I'm not sure how the 1970s Steelers would have done against the Packers either. Maybe they could've shut down Bradshaw's long throws. I think the 1970s Dolphins probably matched up better.

If we're talking about about the 1975-1979 Steelers, the Packers are in trouble. I'm struggling to think of any opponent Green Bay faced which had the firepower possessed by those Steelers teams. Both Swann and Stallworth could run any route, and were lethal after the catch. Those old highlights you see of Swann and Stallworth catching passes behind defenses don't tell the whole picture of the damage they did on shorter routes. Bradshaw liked to throw downfield, but we're not talking about Daryle Lamonica here. Whether it was bubble screens, or 10-15 yard patterns, Swann and Stallworth were very dangerous, and could not be intimidated. And with Franco Harris in the backfield, that's another problem for Green Bay's defense. It's a pick your poison type of situation. I think those mature Steelers teams would have beaten the 1966-67 Cowboys teams decisively.

I have complete respect for Swann and Stallworth, though in fairness they didn't peak until 1977, by which time other parts of the team were starting to slip. Still, the Packers were the team of the 1960s, the Steelers, the 1970s.

Packers had to go up against Warfield and Gary Collins with the Browns, Hayes and Lance Rentzel with the Cowboys. Warfield by all accounts could do it all. Bob Hayes did not do much against the Pack; he was different than Swann and Stallworth to be sure.

By the same token, I would put the Packers' pass defense above any of the top 1970s teams. Dolphins were the closest, and they didn't sustain it for as long. It would be a matchup of strength against strength. At the end, Swann and Stallworth were the Steelers' atom bomb, seemingly able to overcome Bradshaw INTs, special team mishaps, pedestrian efforts by Franco or the defense. Could they have done it again against perhaps the best pass defense ever? We'll never find out.

[L.C. Greenwood]

If we're talking about about the 1975-1979 Steelers, the Packers are in trouble. I'm struggling to think of any opponent Green Bay faced which had the firepower possessed by those Steelers teams. Both Swann and Stallworth could run any route, and were lethal after the catch. Those old highlights you see of Swann and Stallworth catching passes behind defenses don't tell the whole picture of the damage they did on shorter routes. Bradshaw liked to throw downfield, but we're not talking about Daryle Lamonica here. Whether it was bubble screens, or 10-15 yard patterns, Swann and Stallworth were very dangerous, and could not be intimidated. And with Franco Harris in the backfield, that's another problem for Green Bay's defense. It's a pick your poison type of situation. I think those mature Steelers teams would have beaten the 1966-67 Cowboys teams decisively.[/quote]

I have complete respect for Swann and Stallworth, though in fairness they didn't peak until 1977, by which time other parts of the team were starting to slip. Still, the Packers were the team of the 1960s, the Steelers, the 1970s.

Packers had to go up against Warfield and Gary Collins with the Browns, Hayes and Lance Rentzel with the Cowboys. Warfield by all accounts could do it all. Bob Hayes did not do much against the Pack; he was different than Swann and Stallworth to be sure.

By the same token, I would put the Packers' pass defense above any of the top 1970s teams. Dolphins were the closest, and they didn't sustain it for as long. It would be a matchup of strength against strength. At the end, Swann and Stallworth were the Steelers' atom bomb, seemingly able to overcome Bradshaw INTs, special team mishaps, pedestrian efforts by Franco or the defense. Could they have done it again against perhaps the best pass defense ever? We'll never find out.[/quote]


The Packers did have that strong pass defense, but I don't remember those guys throwing elbows at the heads of receivers like the 70s Raiders secondary. I think the offensive weapons would be too much for the early 70s Dolphins to handle as well. The 72-73 Dolphins edged a young Steelers team by four points each time, and the later Steelers teams were much stronger. Like the mythical game with Green Bay, I can't think of a team the Dolphins faced with two HOF receivers, HOF RB, and HOF QB. The '74 draft really transformed the Steelers.

[JohnH19]

Comparing teams from different seasons, never mind a different decade, is so incredibly pointless.

[L.C. Greenwood]

Comparing teams from different seasons, never mind a different decade, is so incredibly pointless.

It's always been interesting to me to hear opinions about these hypothetical matchups. Bobby Beatherd, who helped put together the 1972 Dolphins, and Bill Walsh, thought the 1978 Steelers would have defeated the 17-0 Dolphins had they actually played.

[Jay Z]

Comparing teams from different seasons, never mind a different decade, is so incredibly pointless.

It's always been interesting to me to hear opinions about these hypothetical matchups. Bobby Beatherd, who helped put together the 1972 Dolphins, and Bill Walsh, thought the 1978 Steelers would have defeated the 17-0 Dolphins had they actually played.

That's interesting. To me, the earlier Steeler teams were better because the competition was tougher. I'm not all that impressed by the 1978-79 Steelers playing Denver and Houston in the playoffs one year, then Miami and Houston the next year. Those teams were too limited. There was a bigger group of strong teams, especially the Raiders, in the mid 1970s.

Plus, some of these teams were second to none in whatever they did at the time, so you can only compare them to other eras. Packers pass defense was unmatched at the time, and I saw Swann/Stallworth do things other teams couldn't match, especially with the deep balls. So the comparisons come up.

[BD Sullivan]

Comparing teams from different seasons, never mind a different decade, is so incredibly pointless.

It's always been interesting to me to hear opinions about these hypothetical matchups. Bobby Beatherd, who helped put together the 1972 Dolphins, and Bill Walsh, thought the 1978 Steelers would have defeated the 17-0 Dolphins had they actually played.

That's interesting. To me, the earlier Steeler teams were better because the competition was tougher. I'm not all that impressed by the 1978-79 Steelers playing Denver and Houston in the playoffs one year, then Miami and Houston the next year. Those teams were too limited. There was a bigger group of strong teams, especially the Raiders, in the mid 1970s.

Plus, the '79 Steelers got the call on Renfro's catch in the AFCCG and were in a dogfight for most of the game against the huge underdog Rams in Super Bowl XIV.

[74_75_78_79_]

Usually the all-time great championship defenses were primarily strongest on the D-line and/or LBs. I guess a bit different with Lombardi’s Pack. Those ’80s Forty Niner defenses, especially early on, were strongest in the secondary as well. And then you got Seattle’s from 2013! They perhaps were the most secondary-heavy of all the great championship defenses. Just how secondary-heavy was that Packer-D compared to those I just mentioned? What other such defenses did I not mention?

[L.C. Greenwood]

That's interesting. To me, the earlier Steeler teams were better because the competition was tougher. I'm not all that impressed by the 1978-79 Steelers playing Denver and Houston in the playoffs one year, then Miami and Houston the next year. Those teams were too limited. There was a bigger group of strong teams, especially the Raiders, in the mid 1970s.
[/quote]

Plus, the '79 Steelers got the call on Renfro's catch in the AFCCG and were in a dogfight for most of the game against the huge underdog Rams in Super Bowl XIV.[/quote]


Renfro's possible catch was near the end of the third quarter, don't think it would have made any difference in the outcome of the game. The '79 Steelers weren't as strong as the '75 or '78 teams, age was beginning to take affect on the Steelers.

[74_75_78_79_]

Yeah, Steelers beat Houston anyway even if the Renfro catch is called a TD; they simply were the better team. Oilers giving them a challenge nothing at all to be ashamed of. They were tough, division rivals, and were “knocking on the door”. Rams? Nothing to be ashamed of either. By the time the playoffs began, they stopped being that 9-7 team and went on back to being the great team they were all decade long (the team that beat the ‘Burgh a year prior). Also, Bud Carson as their DC...yes, just a bit of familiarity making it an even closer affair than it already would have been. As I said before, ’79 Steelers (like Cowboys 14 years later) were a 12-4 team that could have and should have easily been 15-1 instead. Bradshaw’s INTs and injuries kept the rest of the pack closer to them, but they were still #1 end of day as deserved (they beat SD in a hypo-AFCC IMO).

Back to my last post this thread - how about Tampa’s 2002 D being quite secondary-heavy? Marty’s late-’80s Browns? No, not a championship defense but that’s just the point. As amazing as Minnifield and Dixon were, not enough of a pass-rush which may have very well cost them a Lombardi, ‘the Drive’ game being a great example.

[Rupert Patrick]

That's interesting. To me, the earlier Steeler teams were better because the competition was tougher. I'm not all that impressed by the 1978-79 Steelers playing Denver and Houston in the playoffs one year, then Miami and Houston the next year. Those teams were too limited. There was a bigger group of strong teams, especially the Raiders, in the mid 1970s.

Plus, the '79 Steelers got the call on Renfro's catch in the AFCCG and were in a dogfight for most of the game against the huge underdog Rams in Super Bowl XIV.[/quote]


Renfro's possible catch was near the end of the third quarter, don't think it would have made any difference in the outcome of the game. The '79 Steelers weren't as strong as the '75 or '78 teams, age was beginning to take affect on the Steelers.[/quote]

The 1979 Steelers were awfully lucky they didn't have to travel to San Diego for the AFC Championship game. I think it would have been a great game but I think San Diego would have pulled it out. In 1978 they were also lucky that the Chuck Fairbanks fiasco happened late in the season that derailed the Patriots season. If Fairbanks had kept his mouth shut or waited until the season was over before negotiating with Colorado to take the job, I think the Pats would have beaten Houston in the Divisional game. I'm not saying New England would have went into Pittsburgh on that rainy, icy day and beat the Steelers, but it certainly wouldn't have been a 34-5 game either.

The Steelers did have their share of luck in the postseason, getting two home games in 1972, including the AFC Championship against Miami, and avoiding Miami in the 1973 and 1974 playoffs (although they did have to face Oakland on the road both years, who were just as tough).