Professional Football Researchers Association Forum

Rupert Patrick wrote:According to the 12/17/74 Pittsburgh Press pg 29, a Pittsburgh vs. Miami AFC Championship game would have been held in Pittsburgh and it would have been a 4 PM start.

I checked the Guide, and you're right. I stand corrected.

I liked my way better. That system was more screwed up than I thought.

Rupert Patrick wrote:

ChrisBabcock wrote:

Here may or may not be an unpopular opinion. I think that Miami's 1973 team was better than their 1972 team, even though the 1972 team was undefeated and untied.

Conversely, at the opposite end of the spectrum, and somewhere else in Florida, the 1977 Bucs team was far worse than the 0-14 1976 team. Well, at least the first 12 games. That 3-30 TD-INT ratio is... shocking.

The 77 Bucs offense was the worst of any team since WWII, but their defense had made a quantum leap forward from 1976 and were assembling a lot of good young players. The 77 Bucs defense was average to a little above average. I've said in the past I thought the 77 Bucs were maybe the best 2-12 team in pro football history and I'll stick with that, and in 1977 offense was at such a low that their defense kept them in many games. They only gave up 20 points or more three times on the season, and lost eight games by 10 points or less. If you had taken the 1977 Bucs and added Jim Zorn and Steve Largent, I think they might have won the NFC Central division.

The TB defense allowed 17 points or less in 10 games, but their offense scored in SINGLE digits in nine games (shut out six times) and 10 points in another. In their opening 12 losses, they scored 53 points. In their two wins to end the season, they scored 50 points.

BD Sullivan wrote:The TB defense allowed 17 points or less in 10 games, but their offense scored in SINGLE digits in nine games (shut out six times) and 10 points in another. In their opening 12 losses, they scored 53 points. In their two wins to end the season, they scored 50 points.

Their offense didn't really score 50 points in the last two games. Since the defense score 3 touchdowns, the offense only scored 29 points for the season. For the season the Buccaneers scored 11 touchdowns... seven by the offense, four by the defense.

BD Sullivan wrote:

Saban wrote:Here may or may not be an unpopular opinion. I think that Miami's 1973 team was better than their 1972 team, even though the 1972 team was undefeated and untied.

One thing that the 1973 team did that those Dolphins teams usually had a hard time doing was that they beat Oakland, and in the AFC championship game.

The 1973 team's two losses came in the 12-7 game at Berkeley against the Raiders and then a throwaway game against the Colts (in Baltimore in Week 13, with reserves dotting the lineup.

I think that the early season loss to Oakland took some pressure off of the Miami Dolphins in 1973. Miami played great the rest of the year.

James wrote:Otto Graham to me is the best QB EVER! Ten years of playing professional football and going to the Title/Championship game all ten years and going 7-3 in said games. Better than both Manning & Brady in my opinion. The closest we have seen and probably ever will see was Kelly quarterbacking the Bills to four straight Super Bowls.

The 1972 Dolphins are NOT the only undefeated team, the 1948 Browns were also undefeated.

Don Hutson IS the GREATEST WR to ever play the game.

Mel Hein is the only Center to win league MVP -1938. Would love to see something like that again, but will never happen today.

Agree!

Along the same lines of C Mel Hein being elected MVP and we'll never see that happen again, after Mark Moseley was elected MVP in 1982, I doubt we'll ever see another pure kicker elected MVP. I think the uniqueness of the strike season had a lot to do with Moseley winning, that because of the strike we didn't have our normal statistical frame of reference for picking an MVP. There were no 1000-yard rushing seasons, no monster seasons in progress other than Fouts who was on course to smash his single season passing yards record. (Moseley did in fact beat Fouts by two votes in the MVP voting.) Moseley did have a great season, and he is one of a handful of kickers in pro football history (Groza, Hornung, Vinatieri, Stenerud I guess) who were among the three or four key players on a championship winning team. The 1982 Redskins key players and team leaders were Theismann, Riggins and Moseley. Before Moseley, no kicker got an MVP vote since Hornung won in 1961, but he was also a RB who scored 10 TD's in addition to his kicking. Since Moseley in 1982, no kicker has gotten a single vote for MVP, not even in 1998 when Gary Anderson had his big season when he hit 35 of 35 FG's for the 15-1 Vikings.

Rupert Patrick wrote:Along the same lines of C Mel Hein being elected MVP and we'll never see that happen again, after Mark Moseley was elected MVP in 1982, I doubt we'll ever see another pure kicker elected MVP. I think the uniqueness of the strike season had a lot to do with Moseley winning, that because of the strike we didn't have our normal statistical frame of reference for picking an MVP. There were no 1000-yard rushing seasons, no monster seasons in progress other than Fouts who was on course to smash his single season passing yards record. (Moseley did in fact beat Fouts by two votes in the MVP voting.) Moseley did have a great season, and he is one of a handful of kickers in pro football history (Groza, Hornung, Vinatieri, Stenerud I guess) who were among the three or four key players on a championship winning team. The 1982 Redskins key players and team leaders were Theismann, Riggins and Moseley. Before Moseley, no kicker got an MVP vote since Hornung won in 1961, but he was also a RB who scored 10 TD's in addition to his kicking. Since Moseley in 1982, no kicker has gotten a single vote for MVP, not even in 1998 when Gary Anderson had his big season when he hit 35 of 35 FG's for the 15-1 Vikings.

William Andrews in 1982 was close to a 1,000/1,000 season pace. Could've beaten Roger Craig to the honor by a few years.

If not for Clarence Davis they win 3 Super Bowls in row[/quote]


I think if the Dolphins had gotten past Oakland in the Sea of Hands game, Pittsburgh would have beaten Miami in the AFC Championship. After the 1972 Championship and the 1973 MNF game, Pittsburgh had the revenge factor on their side. The Steelers also had the home field advantage on their side, and the temps in Pittsburgh on 12/29/74 were clear and in the mid 40's.[/quote]

The game would have been in Miami. This was the last year of the rotational system for determining seeds. Pittsburgh was #1, that's why they got to play Buffalo. Under the seeding system, operative the next year, Oakland would have hosted Buffalo and Pittsburgh would have gone to Miami in the divisional round. Here, Pittsburgh was the #1 seed. But for the conference championship, the host was always the winner of the #2-#3 game. So Miami would have hosted them.

I think Pittsburgh wins anyway. Miami's secondary was banged up and they kind of got torched by Stabler. The question would be Noll taking the wraps off Bradshaw enough. The injuries hurt the Dolphins a lot, because their run defense was always good but not great. You could run on the Dolphins, but they could run it more and protect the lead when they got it.

Pittsburgh really got the benefit of the home field draw. They got the AFC championship at home in 1972 because they were #2 and the winner of that game got the home game. Then in 1973 they were wild card, but division winny Cincy got the tougher game, at Miami where Pittsburgh was at Oakland. Then in 1974 they were third seed by record and got to host Buffalo in the 1st round. Then in 1975 they had the best record in conference, and lucky for them, the NFL started seeding by record.

Had the Steelers had to go through both Miami and Oakland, maybe they don't pull it off in 1974. The Raiders had their own problems, a weak run defense, but who knows.[/quote]


Even if the Dolphins edged Oakland, were 100% healthy, and hosted the Steelers, I don't think they have enough to win. The 1974 Steelers were a more mature, talented team than the one Miami edged by a total of eight points in 1972 and 1973. The '74 Draft paid immediate dividends, as Stallworth, Swann, and Lambert were upgrades over the past at those positions. Swann also had a big year returning punts in 1974. Bradshaw was starting to emerge, and the defense was improving as a whole. I think the Dolphins score maybe 14 points, and Miami's defense eventually buckles from the pressure of the offensive weapons of the Steelers.

L.C. Greenwood wrote:If not for Clarence Davis they win 3 Super Bowls in row

I think if the Dolphins had gotten past Oakland in the Sea of Hands game, Pittsburgh would have beaten Miami in the AFC Championship. After the 1972 Championship and the 1973 MNF game, Pittsburgh had the revenge factor on their side. The Steelers also had the home field advantage on their side, and the temps in Pittsburgh on 12/29/74 were clear and in the mid 40's.[/quote]

The game would have been in Miami. This was the last year of the rotational system for determining seeds. Pittsburgh was #1, that's why they got to play Buffalo. Under the seeding system, operative the next year, Oakland would have hosted Buffalo and Pittsburgh would have gone to Miami in the divisional round. Here, Pittsburgh was the #1 seed. But for the conference championship, the host was always the winner of the #2-#3 game. So Miami would have hosted them.

I think Pittsburgh wins anyway. Miami's secondary was banged up and they kind of got torched by Stabler. The question would be Noll taking the wraps off Bradshaw enough. The injuries hurt the Dolphins a lot, because their run defense was always good but not great. You could run on the Dolphins, but they could run it more and protect the lead when they got it.

Pittsburgh really got the benefit of the home field draw. They got the AFC championship at home in 1972 because they were #2 and the winner of that game got the home game. Then in 1973 they were wild card, but division winny Cincy got the tougher game, at Miami where Pittsburgh was at Oakland. Then in 1974 they were third seed by record and got to host Buffalo in the 1st round. Then in 1975 they had the best record in conference, and lucky for them, the NFL started seeding by record.

Had the Steelers had to go through both Miami and Oakland, maybe they don't pull it off in 1974. The Raiders had their own problems, a weak run defense, but who knows.[/quote]


Even if the Dolphins edged Oakland, were 100% healthy, and hosted the Steelers, I don't think they have enough to win. The 1974 Steelers were a more mature, talented team than the one Miami edged by a total of eight points in 1972 and 1973. The '74 Draft paid immediate dividends, as Stallworth, Swann, and Lambert were upgrades over the past at those positions. Swann also had a big year returning punts in 1974. Bradshaw was starting to emerge, and the defense was improving as a whole. I think the Dolphins score maybe 14 points, and Miami's defense eventually buckles from the pressure of the offensive weapons of the Steelers.[/quote]

Like the Steelers much, LC?

The game would have been in Miami. This was the last year of the rotational system for determining seeds. Pittsburgh was #1, that's why they got to play Buffalo. Under the seeding system, operative the next year, Oakland would have hosted Buffalo and Pittsburgh would have gone to Miami in the divisional round. Here, Pittsburgh was the #1 seed. But for the conference championship, the host was always the winner of the #2-#3 game. So Miami would have hosted them.

Actually, a hypo 1974 Dolphin-Steeler AFC Title game would have taken place at the confluence.

In 1972, when the Steelers hosted Miami, the rotation priority for the AFC Title was Central, East, and West. By 1974, however, it was West, Central, and then East. Just like 1971, the East champ wasn't slated to have any home games. The only reason the Dolphins played the 1971 title game at home was because they played the WC Colts. If the Browns would have defeated Baltimore, Miami would have had to go to the shores of Lake Erie.