Professional Football Researchers Association Forum

@Saban, great points. Here’s an alternate view:

1946: The Yankees already having lost twice to the 12-2 Browns, managed to stay in the championship game into the 4th qtr, but the game wouldn’t have been as close had the Browns not missed 4 FGs.

1947: The 12-1-1 Browns ran their overall record against the Yankees to 4-0-1 (the Yankees managed a 28-28 regular season tie), going into the title game rematch. The Browns defeated the Yankees for a fifth time 14-3. They never trailed and had a pair of close calls as Dub Jones was twice called out of bounds on catches in the end zone. The Yankees only crossed midfield 3 times.

1948: The 14-0 Browns met the 7-7 Bills and completed a perfect season by blowing them out 49-7. Arguably, the Browns didn’t play their best as they turned it over 4 times.

1949: Without divisions, the 9-1-2 had to play a playoff game and again defeated the Bills 31-21. In the final, they beat the 49ers 21-7 to complete a 56-4-3 AAFC record.

I get the Browns had success in the NFL as well, but what I was asking is why wasn't there at least one other championship caliber team in the AAFC? And if there was, who was it? Could it have been a lack of coaching? If I accept the NFL and AAFC were equivalent, I should be able to put teams side by side. Obviously, the Browns are comparable against the best team in the NFL, but when you look at 2nd and 3rd best teams in each league, it just doesn't seem close to me.

TanksAndSpartans wrote:I get the Browns had success in the NFL as well, but what I was asking is why wasn't there at least one other championship caliber team in the AAFC? And if there was, who was it? Could it have been a lack of coaching? If I accept the NFL and AAFC were equivalent, I should be able to put teams side by side. Obviously, the Browns are comparable against the best team in the NFL, but when you look at 2nd and 3rd best teams in each league, it just doesn't seem close to me.

The NFL was pretty much garbage in 1949. The East was so bad that Pittsburgh actually finished 2nd. The NY Bulldogs were on life support. Philadelphia went 11-1, with their one loss being to the Bears of the West. The West wasn't much better. The Bears were probably the best team, but the Rams sneaked past them in the standings with an 8-2-2 record and then went on to record 7 first downs, 9 punts, and zero points in the title game against Philly. In some respects, the influx of the Browns and the AAFC teams/players in 1950 came at the perfect time for the NFL.

Despite not beating the Browns, I still feel the 49ers were a quality team despite having a bad 1950 season and Buck Shaw, like the Browns players who excelled in the AAFC, deserves HOF if not HOVG recognition.

HOVG if not HOF recognition. corrected that ... haha

Bryan wrote:The NFL was pretty much garbage in 1949....The NY Bulldogs were on life support.

"Garbage" is pretty subjective. The AAFC wasn't "garbage" in '49? Talk about "life support", there weren't even enough teams left to maintain two divisions in the AAFC.

Bryan wrote:The Bears were probably the best team, but the Rams sneaked past them in the standings with an 8-2-2 record....

If one call had gone their way, the Rams would have defeated the Browns in '50 and they did win the title in '51. Was it because of the influx of AAFC players that the Rams improved or were they basically a continuation of the '49 team? Anyway, which AAFC teams were the equivalent of the Rams or Bears in '49?

TanksAndSpartans wrote:If one call had gone their way, the Rams would have defeated the Browns in '50 and they did win the title in '51. Was it because of the influx of AAFC players that the Rams improved or were they basically a continuation of the '49 team? Anyway, which AAFC teams were the equivalent of the Rams or Bears in '49?

The Rams in 1950 were superior to the 1949 version. They had gotten run over on defense for the second half of the 1949 season, and they picked up Bob Reinhard from the AAFC to shore up one of the DL spots. He really stands out in film study. Stan West was a new addition to the DL as well. Woodley Lewis was added to the secondary and had 12 INTs. Tank Younger's role was changed so that he was almost exclusively an OLB, and he is another guy that really stands out in film study.

On offense, Glenn Davis was a rookie and led the team in rushing as well as being one of the NFL's top receivers. Harry Thompson was also a rookie at RG and is another 'film study standout'. Hamp Pool utilized Norm Van Brocklin and Elroy Hirsch much more in 1950 than Shaughnessy did in 1949.

In general, the 1950 team had a lot of new players who were big contributors. To your point, I think Reinhard was the only AAFC refugee on the Rams, but I also think that the 1950 team was much different than the 1949 team. It would be like comparing the 1973 Steelers to the 1974 Steelers (speaking of "garbage" analogies).

Bryan wrote:

TanksAndSpartans wrote:If one call had gone their way, the Rams would have defeated the Browns in '50 and they did win the title in '51. Was it because of the influx of AAFC players that the Rams improved or were they basically a continuation of the '49 team? Anyway, which AAFC teams were the equivalent of the Rams or Bears in '49?

The Rams in 1950 were superior to the 1949 version. They had gotten run over on defense for the second half of the 1949 season, and they picked up Bob Reinhard from the AAFC to shore up one of the DL spots. He really stands out in film study. Stan West was a new addition to the DL as well. Woodley Lewis was added to the secondary and had 12 INTs. Tank Younger's role was changed so that he was almost exclusively an OLB, and he is another guy that really stands out in film study.

On offense, Glenn Davis was a rookie and led the team in rushing as well as being one of the NFL's top receivers. Harry Thompson was also a rookie at RG and is another 'film study standout'. Hamp Pool utilized Norm Van Brocklin and Elroy Hirsch much more in 1950 than Shaughnessy did in 1949.

In general, the 1950 team had a lot of new players who were big contributors. To your point, I think Reinhard was the only AAFC refugee on the Rams, but I also think that the 1950 team was much different than the 1949 team. It would be like comparing the 1973 Steelers to the 1974 Steelers (speaking of "garbage" analogies).

Coming back to the original point, which AAFC teams besides the Browns were championship caliber? Say what you want about the '49 Rams, but they had the nucleus of a championship team. Can the '49ers say that? They made the playoffs once in the '50s and that's without having to compete in the Browns' division. Maybe one of the teams that didn't enter the NFL in '50? Yankees and Bills had a couple good years in the AAFC. The OP said the Browns in the AAFC were like the Stars in the USFL. Agree or disagree and why?

TanksAndSpartans wrote:
Coming back to the original point, which AAFC teams besides the Browns were championship caliber? Say what you want about the '49 Rams, but they had the nucleus of a championship team. Can the '49ers say that? They made the playoffs once in the '50s and that's without having to compete in the Browns' division. Maybe one of the teams that didn't enter the NFL in '50? Yankees and Bills had a couple good years in the AAFC. The OP said the Browns in the AAFC were like the Stars in the USFL. Agree or disagree and why?

Niners gave both the Lions & Rams a run for their money from '51-'53. They came up a game or two short. I don't think it would have been shocking for them to have won a title during that span.

SF was the only team that Buddy Parker had a losing record against during his 6 seasons as Lions HC. Buddy was 5-7 vs the 49ers, and of those five wins, all but one of them were by 4 or fewer points. (Of course, George Wilson was the coach in '57 when Detroit had their famous comeback in the division playoff.)

IIRC, the 49ers' first win in the NFL was over the Lions (Bo McMillan was Lions HC).

Bryan wrote:The NFL was pretty much garbage in 1949. The East was so bad that Pittsburgh actually finished 2nd. The NY Bulldogs were on life support. Philadelphia went 11-1, with their one loss being to the Bears of the West. The West wasn't much better. The Bears were probably the best team, but the Rams sneaked past them in the standings with an 8-2-2 record and then went on to record 7 first downs, 9 punts, and zero points in the title game against Philly. In some respects, the influx of the Browns and the AAFC teams/players in 1950 came at the perfect time for the NFL.

Pretty much. Also, it seems like I had posted about this before. I had, copy/pasting the post (with edits for the context of this thread):

"In 1949 the Eagles had seven 20+ point victories (Browns had five against AAFC competition), Eagles had one relatively normal loss (Browns' loss was a blowout loss), and not much in the way of competitive games otherwise (Browns had 2 ties and a 2-point win). Then the Browns' playoff and championship games were one score games over halfway through the 4th Quarter because they were competitive games against other good teams.

Somehow the conclusion looking at that, for others, is that the AAFC wasn't competitive in 1949 and the NFL was competitive. Which defies logic. Reality is, on the field and results wise, there was a larger gap between the Eagles and the rest of the NFL than there was between the Browns and the rest of the AAFC in 1949.

So the reason given for the AAFC being inferior -because the Browns didn't have any competition because no other teams or players in the AAFC were good- would then have to be the same for the Eagles/NFL in 1949 -- i.e. "the Eagles didn't have any competition because there was no other good teams/players in the NFL." That, of course, would be stupid to say. Yet applying the same reasoning across the board it's what you would get. Except, the Eagles dominated because they were better than the other good teams in the NFL. Same way the Browns won because they were better than the other good teams in the AAFC.

For what it's worth:

1949 Eagles v. 4th best team in NFL
Beat the Steelers 38-7 & 34-17
or can say the Cardinals were the 4th best team, Eagles beat them 28-3

1949 Browns v. the 4th best team in the AAFC
Tied the Bills 28-28, tied them again 7-7, then beat them in the playoffs 31-21 in a game that was 24-21 until late in the 4Q when the Bills threw a pick-six.

'Obviously', somehow that means the NFL was more competitive in 1949 because of course the AAFC only had one team and everyone else wasn't good and there was no talent in the AAFC which is why the Browns blew them all out and never had any competitive games in 1949.

As I said, it's odd to me the conclusions some come to. Is what it is, I suppose."