A Vikings/Broncos Super Bowl XXII

[Crazy Packers Fan]

Everyone seems to be on the Vikings' side here, but John Elway was the league MVP (admittedly undeserved over Jerry Rice) and the Vikings were only 8-7 in the regular season. I think the Vikes' magic had to run out at some point, and unless Anthony Carter went off like he did against San Francisco, the Broncos should have pulled it out in San Diego.

[74_75_78_79_]

Everyone seems to be on the Vikings' side here, but John Elway was the league MVP (admittedly undeserved over Jerry Rice) and the Vikings were only 8-7 in the regular season. I think the Vikes' magic had to run out at some point, and unless Anthony Carter went off like he did against San Francisco, the Broncos should have pulled it out in San Diego.

Again, MInny wasn't 8-7 but really 8-4. Yes, not juggernaut, but pretty good. And, again, they had a better non-scab record going into their finale than their opponent, Washington. They were 8-3 with Wash at 7-4.

Just the same, yes, maybe I shouldn't give the Vikings too much credit in this hypothetical. I still think they win, and not by a nail-biter. I still think Minny has a better chance to win this one than either against Denver in '98 or Colts in '09. But maybe I should give '87 Denver a bit more credit here. Yes, they would definitely have the advantage at QB. Vikings weren't a juggernaut and if Denver was favorite over Washington, they sure as heck would have been the favorite here as well.

Question I have, if Broncos do win in this hypo-SBXXII match, does their title get looked back upon as being...'tainted'?? A championship is a championship but, man...those powerhouses that were knocked out of the NFC for them! I'm guessing that only the '11 Giants would be seen as a lesser SB-champ.

It wouldn't have just been San Fran & Wash who Denver would have,,,"avoided". Despite they beating Chicago in their home MNF game against them, even the Bears - I think - would have beaten them in a hypo-SBXXII rematch had they actually, somehow got there. A bit paper-tiger-looking, especially with that late MNF blowout at Candlestick followed by the home convincer to Seattle, but I think they pull it off. Again, if they actually...get there. Especially if a healthy McMahon plays. Bears already having the experience of winning-it-all, just two years removed, Dan Reeves obvious not being at his best in SBs, and of course the "win it for Sweetness" factor with this being his final game...

I haven't mentioned the Saints yet. It's tough for me to invite them into this hypothetical with that 44-10 egg they laid in that Wild Card game. A great 10-2 non-scab regular season they had in that inaugural playoff year of theirs. Despite '87 being another strike year, I was excited over their surge, going into the playoffs on such high momentum. Nice enough stats though they really weren't quite dynamic, and posted some quality non-scab wins as well! I really wanted them to beat Minny! They force an early turnover deep in Vikings territory which they immediately turned into a TD to go up 7-0; but that's as good as it got. And then that cruel backbreaking TD bomb just before the half!

It, sadly, was a harbinger of their obvious post-season struggles to come as well as, perhaps, also being a sign that it would take them another three years just to get to that second (8-8) playoff berth! They should have beaten MInny going by what they did compared to them during the regular season. But if Saints do advance, I'm not sure they beat San Fran despite splitting with them or beat Joe Gibbs either. Honestly, I'm not even sure they would have beaten Chicago had they played them (both played in the final scab week). But if they, somehow, do make it to SBXXII, I don't see a reason for me to think Denver actually beats them, but who knows?

[CSKreager]

I haven't mentioned the Saints yet. It's tough for me to invite them into this hypothetical with that 44-10 egg they laid in that Wild Card game. A great 10-2 non-scab regular season they had in that inaugural playoff year of theirs. Despite '87 being another strike year, I was excited over their surge, going into the playoffs on such high momentum. Nice enough stats though they really weren't quite dynamic, and posted some quality non-scab wins as well! I really wanted them to beat Minny! They force an early turnover deep in Vikings territory which they immediately turned into a TD to go up 7-0; but that's as good as it got. And then that cruel backbreaking TD bomb just before the half!

In regards to the Saints, the real hypothetical with them is what if Minnesota MISSED the playoffs (ie Dallas doesn't knock out the Cardinals)?

I highly doubt St. Louis beats them 44-10

[74_75_78_79_]

I haven't mentioned the Saints yet. It's tough for me to invite them into this hypothetical with that 44-10 egg they laid in that Wild Card game. A great 10-2 non-scab regular season they had in that inaugural playoff year of theirs. Despite '87 being another strike year, I was excited over their surge, going into the playoffs on such high momentum. Nice enough stats though they really weren't quite dynamic, and posted some quality non-scab wins as well! I really wanted them to beat Minny! They force an early turnover deep in Vikings territory which they immediately turned into a TD to go up 7-0; but that's as good as it got. And then that cruel backbreaking TD bomb just before the half!

In regards to the Saints, the real hypothetical with them is what if Minnesota MISSED the playoffs (ie Dallas doesn't knock out the Cardinals)?

I highly doubt St. Louis beats them 44-10

There was no reason at all for the Cards, with playoffs on the line, to have lost to Dallas. A big closing underachievement on StL's part.

However, had they gotten in, that would have been quite an injustice for Minny considering that those three scab defeats would have been the reason for them staying home. The Cards, 6-6 non-scab record as opposed to 8-4, were not at all as good as Minny nor as good as they'd be the following year, 'Year One' in the desert, during that 7-4 start.

Despite actually laying down, 44-10, in real-time to the Vikings, it's still difficult to see the Saints finding a way to not advance against StL. The Cards really didn't seem like they could have offered NO all that much. That should have to be seen as the Saints very best shot during that time to win a playoff game (then off to Chicago the following week).


1987...Minnesota beats St. Louis in the World Series, and in the NFL, Minnesota gets in the playoffs instead of St. Louis.

[7DnBrnc53]

In regards to the Saints, the real hypothetical with them is what if Minnesota MISSED the playoffs (ie Dallas doesn't knock out the Cardinals)?

I highly doubt St. Louis beats them 44-10

Agreed. I think the Saints win, but lose at Chicago. Then, I think the Redskins actually beat SF and Chicago on the road the next two weeks before winning the SB.

Also (and here's the biggy), if the Vikings don't make the playoffs, are they feeling squirly enough to trade for Herschel two years later? Or do the Cowboys have to settle for a lesser package from Cleveland? The Cowboys may have been playing for their future during the last week of the 1987 regular season.

[CSKreager]

I haven't mentioned the Saints yet. It's tough for me to invite them into this hypothetical with that 44-10 egg they laid in that Wild Card game. A great 10-2 non-scab regular season they had in that inaugural playoff year of theirs. Despite '87 being another strike year, I was excited over their surge, going into the playoffs on such high momentum. Nice enough stats though they really weren't quite dynamic, and posted some quality non-scab wins as well! I really wanted them to beat Minny! They force an early turnover deep in Vikings territory which they immediately turned into a TD to go up 7-0; but that's as good as it got. And then that cruel backbreaking TD bomb just before the half!

In regards to the Saints, the real hypothetical with them is what if Minnesota MISSED the playoffs (ie Dallas doesn't knock out the Cardinals)?

I highly doubt St. Louis beats them 44-10

There was no reason at all for the Cards, with playoffs on the line, to have lost to Dallas. A big closing underachievement on StL's part.

However, had they gotten in, that would have been quite an injustice for Minny considering that those three scab defeats would have been the reason for them staying home. The Cards, 6-6 non-scab record as opposed to 8-4, were not at all as good as Minny nor as good as they'd be the following year, 'Year One' in the desert, during that 7-4 start.

Despite actually laying down, 44-10, in real-time to the Vikings, it's still difficult to see the Saints finding a way to not advance against StL. The Cards really didn't seem like they could have offered NO all that much. That should have to be seen as the Saints very best shot during that time to win a playoff game (then off to Chicago the following week).

Another long term effect- if the Saints won a playoff game off the bat, they don't have the 'can't win in the postseason' bugaboo that carried over into their 1991/1992 home losses to ATL/PHI

Maybe they win one of those without that albatross hanging over them?

[7DnBrnc53]

Maybe they win one of those without that albatross hanging over them?

Maybe. Also, maybe they don't choke the next year when they got off to a real good start.

[74_75_78_79_]

Maybe they win one of those without that albatross hanging over them?

Maybe. Also, maybe they don't choke the next year when they got off to a real good start.

If anything, you'd think the Saints would not have started 7-1 in '88 due to a possible bad taste in their mouths from that Viking blowout. However, their only win in that stretch against a team that would finish above-500 was against Seattle who'd finish 9-7, winning a mediocre AFC West. Other than splitting with the Rams, the Saints lost to every playoff team they met following that 7-1 start; and they also lost to the Redskins while they were still above-500 competing for the NFC East.

Just a simple playoff win in 1990, and they possibly don't go one-and-done in '91 & '92. Yes, they and Atlanta are a rivalry - and the Falcons also won at NO in the '91 regular season - but 'Too Legit' was not a strong playoff team; a one-year-wonder. And then they lose at home to a core of Eagles players, now under Kotite, who were still ISO their first playoff win.

Jim Mora a real good coach to me. I respect him. But, man, those big under-achievements in the post-season! What's the explanation? Perhaps NO, despite solid fundamentals from Mora, weren't quite dynamic. Too 'Dome Patrol'/special teams-heavy, I guess. Three home playoff losses in the Big Easy, and then one playoff loss in Indy - and with a dynamic offense this time (and not too bad a defense). I guess the explanation for that one was that they ran into a Titans team that was 13-3, and swept the Jags, along with being more-balanced along with simply being...better than them anyway which I'll agree to (and this being Peyton's, and other teammates of his, first ever playoff game; the COLTS' first-ever home playoff game in Indy-period).

The next time the Saints played the Vikings after that '87 elimination/demolition was late the following year when they were in free-fall mode, Week #14 at the Met. They get blown-out again, 45-3! The next time after that was Week #2 in 1990, also at Minny. Saints lose big yet again, 32-3 - ouch!!