Has anybody been able to rewatch Super Bowl XII

[Rupert Patrick]

With all this talk of Super Bowl XII and youtube, I do have to admit I went to youtube and subscribed to the NFL sub-channel there and started watching Super Bowl XII.

[Bryan]

Thanks for the heads-up...just watched this on Youtube and here are my thoughts:

*One thing that stands out from watching the actual broadcast is how many times the action is stopped for a penalty. It’s definitely hard to sit through.

*Denver’s defense did a great job in giving up only 27 points since they were seemingly on the field the entire game. Dallas’ offense made a ton of mistakes but they kept getting the ball back with a short field. One play in the second quarter had Staubach scrambling to his right, stopping, then ridiculously heaving the ball 40 yards across the field into the end zone. Bill Thompson intercepts, but the officials mistakenly rule that Staubach stepped out of bounds before throwing. The Cowboys kick a gift FG on the next play.

*Craig Morton was terrible, but Denver’s offensive line didn’t give him much help. Not sure about Denver’s protection schemes…on one play, the LG across from Randy White moves away to block someone else, the C can’t reach White in time, and White runs up the middle untouched to sack Morton. It was almost comical that on the couple passes Morton did complete downfield, his receivers ended up fumbling anyways. Red Miller had Morton run the option in the 3rd quarter, and Morton was creamed by Hollywood Henderson. It never would have happened, but Miller would have been better off starting Norris Weese at QB.

*Rules of the era, blah blah, I still think the ref screwed up the Butch Johnson TD call.

*If anything could be called the turning point of this game, I thought it was a two-play sequence early in the game. Tony Hill misplayed a punt at the goal-line, and Hill was able to poke the ball out of John Schulz’s hands as Schulz was sliding into the endzone. If Denver scores a TD early, perhaps (a big “perhaps”) the game unfolds differently. Still, Dallas was stuck on their own 1-inch line, and with Denver’s attacking defense a safety was a real possibility. The first play Tom Jackson blows his assignment and allows Dorsett to circle out of the backfield uncovered for an easy 15 yard completion. I think if Jackson covers Dorsett and Denver’s defense pins in the Dallas offense, the momentum of the game would have been different. Dorsett even fumbled later on in the drive, but Dallas recovered (again).

*Dallas knew they couldn’t outflank Denver’s defense, and Tony Dorsett did a nice job of grinding out inside yards. Dorsett was such a tough RB for a guy who wasn’t very big. He gave the Steelers fits early on in SB XIII with both his rushing and receiving, yet Landry stopped using him for some reason and the Steelers took over the game (shades of Landry and Don Perkins in the 66 title game).

*Denver’s defense was loaded with HOVG players. Its kind of glossed over in history, but I think Pittsburgh’s/Bradshaw’s performance against Denver in the 1978 postseason was remarkably good. They dominated the Orange Crush which no other team did from 1977-1979.

[lastcat3]

Maybe it is hard to make a comparison between the two teams because one team came at a time when rules were much more favorable to the offenses but since I have watched several of the '70's Cowboys games now I have gotten the impression that the '90's Cowboys were quite a bit better than the '70's Cowboys were. But again maybe that is just due to the different eras they played in.

Though Staubach was a great clutch qb he didn't seem to be as consistently good as Aikman was. The Dallas offense under Staubach may struggle for a good portion of the game but then hit a few big plays that would put them in the drivers seat. Where as the Dallas offense in the '90's during their Super Bowl years would bulldoze defenses from the first play of the game to the last. I'm not saying that I think that Aikman was better than Staubach but it just seems like in a lot of ways the '90's Cowboys offenses were better overall than the '70's Cowboys offenses. But again that is being said without me really knowing what many other teams from the '70's played like. Could very well be that the '70's Cowboys offense was still better relative to their competition than the '90's Dallas offense was. Not a whole lot of games were kept from the '70's so it is difficult to look back at that era now and see what the non Super Bowl type teams were like.

[7DnBrnc53]

If anything could be called the turning point of this game, I thought it was a two-play sequence early in the game. Tony Hill misplayed a punt at the goal-line, and Hill was able to poke the ball out of John Schulz’s hands as Schulz was sliding into the endzone. If Denver scores a TD early, perhaps (a big “perhaps”) the game unfolds differently. Still, Dallas was stuck on their own 1-inch line, and with Denver’s attacking defense a safety was a real possibility. The first play Tom Jackson blows his assignment and allows Dorsett to circle out of the backfield uncovered for an easy 15 yard completion. I think if Jackson covers Dorsett and Denver’s defense pins in the Dallas offense, the momentum of the game would have been different. Dorsett even fumbled later on in the drive, but Dallas recovered (again).

Also, with about 12:52 to play in the game, Denver only trailed 20-10. They had the ball at the Dallas 46, and they were facing a 3rd and 10. Norris Weese hit Jack Dolbin with a pass at the 35, but he was just out of bounds. If they get that, and end up getting a FG, they are only down 20-13. The Broncos were strong that year in the fourth quarter, and the Orange Crush could have pulled it out.

[Todd Pence]

Watching the last to minutes of the half and waiting for it to end is probably the closest an earthbound human can experience to what it is like to approach the event horizon of a black hole.

[Mark L. Ford]

Boring, but significant factoid-- If you do rewatch the game, one thing to look for is a defender bumping an eligible receiver on the way downfield, because it was the last NFL game where that type of contact was allowed more than five yards past the line of scrimmage. I have a feeling that you'll note a lot more ball-carrying in this telecast than you would see today, because it really marked the end of an era. The passing game was opened up significantly in the 1978 season by the change in the rules that basically made it easier on the receiver once he had made it more than five yards.

[74_75_78_79_]

I've only ever seen the basic, NFL Films, highlights of it and was sort-of bored just by that, lol. Same with when I first read about it in a 'Super Bowl' book I ordered from the book club in 4th grade. Fourteen chapters, each one about the last (first) XIV SBs; Stallworth's Classic catch over Perry front cover, the Lombardi itself with Old Glory in the background on the back cover. It came with a 'Super Steelers' poster that I had on my bedroom wall above my desk into the late-'80s. Bradshaw dropping back midfield/NFL logo, his O-line taking on Manster & Co; and at each corner of the poster, a small pic of each of their 4 SB victories, and a bunch of info on the back of the poster.

Anyways, back to SBXII, I always assumed it was an (on-the-scoreboard) lopsided version of SBV (Colts/Dallas). But many of you have said that SBV was actually still a good game, hard-hitting defenses creating those mistakes/turnovers in the first place; a game I would really like to see (just wish the 4th Q can finally be available on film; someone's got to have to stored somewhere). As for SBXII, lopsided or not (even if, as 7Den points out, Broncos do get into range and make that possible 4th Q field goal to trail by just a TD; 20-13), the game seems to have a pretty bad consensus.

Irony of SBXII, it was the last game of the 'dead-ball' era yet it was played in...a dome. You'd think no such SBs until the following year. But I'm glad Miami served as the backdrop for SBXIII instead just as I'm also glad that the gritty, defense-heavy IX was fittingly in cold Tulane Stadium.

[Mark L. Ford]

What I find remarkable is that for Super Bowls 1 through 31, only seven of those -- less than 25%-- were "one score" games where the trailing team still had the potential to win or tie in the final minutes. On the other hand, in the games from SB XXXII onward, all except for seven (15 out of 22) have been close.

[Bryan]

Though Staubach was a great clutch qb he didn't seem to be as consistently good as Aikman was. The Dallas offense under Staubach may struggle for a good portion of the game but then hit a few big plays that would put them in the drivers seat. Where as the Dallas offense in the '90's during their Super Bowl years would bulldoze defenses from the first play of the game to the last. I'm not saying that I think that Aikman was better than Staubach but it just seems like in a lot of ways the '90's Cowboys offenses were better overall than the '70's Cowboys offenses. But again that is being said without me really knowing what many other teams from the '70's played like. Could very well be that the '70's Cowboys offense was still better relative to their competition than the '90's Dallas offense was. Not a whole lot of games were kept from the '70's so it is difficult to look back at that era now and see what the non Super Bowl type teams were like.

I agree. I think the 90's Dallas offense had a much better offensive line and a great blocking FB with Johnston. It seemed like teams with good defensive lines could overwhelm the 1970's Cowboys OL, especially from a pass-rush standpoint. I was surprised when Rayfield Wright made the HOF, because those 70's Cowboys OLs weren't all that good IMO. LC Greenwood would dominate Wright whenever they played. It appeared that many times all the Cowboys could do on offense was hope for Staubach to make plays on his own, which he sometimes did, whereas those Aikman offenses had machine-like efficiency.

[74_75_78_79_]

Of all of the HOF QBs, Aikman has likely produced the least amount of comeback victories yet alone of the two-minute-drill variety. I’m sure that there were quite a few but the only thing coming to mind is one that didn’t even result in a Dallas win - and that would be against Cleveland in ’94, Troy marching his team all the way down the field but in all in vain.

Yes, as said, that ’90s Dallas team simply just a machine. Comebacks weren’t necessary in that they simply dominated out the gate and kept going and going there on out. And for that, they should be considered one of the better offenses the league has seen (hey, balanced or more run-oriented offenses can be considered amongst all-time best too; not just Air Coryell, ’99 Rams, etc).