I think that Gene Fekete and Bob Steuber were originally expected to be starters in the backfield of Cleveland's 1946 entry in the new All-America Conference, Fekete at fullback and Steuber at halfback.
Fekete was a big star in high school in multiple sports and played on Paul Browns' national champion Ohio State team in 1942. Fekete's undoing was knee problems that pretty much ended his career in pro football and limited his play in 1946. Gene Fekete retired after the 1946 season and spent much of the rest of his life as a high school teacher and football coach.
Steuber played for Missouri in college and was 2nd leading rusher in the country in 1942 with over 1,000 yards rushing. Drafted in the first round by the Chicago Bears in 1943, Steuber played in only one game before joining the U.S. Navy to help out with the war effort. In the navy, Steuber went back to colleges DePauw and Marquette in a navy program to train pilots (V-5 or something like that). Steuber played college football at the two colleges and was the only football player that I know of that was allowed to play college football after first playing professional football. Steuber starred in football at both colleges.
Steuber signed with the Cleveland Browns in 1946, but like Gene Fekete, knee injuries kept him from playing very much in 1946, or in 1947 with the Los Angeles Dons. Steuber did play pretty well in 1948 for the Buffalo Bills gaining 437 yards in 9 games and averaging 6.3 yards per carry that year for Buffalo. Unfortunately, Bob Steuber suffered a broken back near the end of the 1948 season, and that ended his football career.
How good would Bob Steuber have been without his various injuries? No way to really tell, but I think that he would have been very good.
1946 Super Bowl: Browns vs Bears
Re: 1946 Super Bowl: Browns vs Bears
One reason that the Cleveland Browns started out so good in 1946 was because there was no draft in the AAFC that year. Teams could go out and sign anyone who was not yet signed with another team. Paul Brown remembered the best players that played for him and against him at Ohio State and Great Lakes, and Brown was great at evaluating football talent. An example of this was Otto Graham, who was a single wing tailback in college. Brown saw him as his future T-formation quarterback.
Anyway, Paul Brown and his staff signed the best players that they could, as did all the AAFC teams, but the Browns did it better than anyone else. The Yankees and 49ers did pretty well too. John Woudenberg, a very good tackle for the 49ers, said that if not for the Cleveland Browns, we (the 49ers) would have been the greatest thing since sliced bread. The Yankees may have said the same thing for the first couple of years of the AAFC.
Unfortunately, other teams did not do so well. One team, the Miami Seahawks, filled their team up mostly with players from the south. Their thinking evidently was that players from southern schools were generally superior to players from the north or other parts of the country. That franchise only lasted a year and then folded.
Because of Cleveland's domination of the All-America Conference, the AFL in 1960 did have a draft right away and strived to have equality with the teams. Of course. certain teams did dominate, like Houston and San Diego the first few years and Oakland, Kansas City, and the New York Jets during the last years of the AFL before the merger in 1970. Some teams always end up dominating.
So, how would the Cleveland Browns have fared if there was a draft in 1946. I think pretty well. It is possible that Otto Graham would have been taken by someone else before Cleveland got it's first pick, but Paul Brown did say that the Browns would have been OK without Graham because Cliff Lewis would have been a good quarterback for Cleveland. Besides, playing for anyone else, Graham probably would have played defensive back, but not quarterback. Brown may have traded for him anyway. In 1948, Cleveland signed Y.A. Tittle, and I think that the Browns would have done pretty well with Y.A. too.
Other players, like Lavelli, Groza, Motley, and Willis might have been picked up in later rounds because they were not so well known yet in 1946. Of course, we will never know the answer to this, but with Paul Brown and guys like Blanton Collier and Fritz Heisler and later Weeb Ewbank, etc. on the coaching staff, I believe that the Cleveland Browns still would have done pretty well, draft or no draft.
Anyway, Paul Brown and his staff signed the best players that they could, as did all the AAFC teams, but the Browns did it better than anyone else. The Yankees and 49ers did pretty well too. John Woudenberg, a very good tackle for the 49ers, said that if not for the Cleveland Browns, we (the 49ers) would have been the greatest thing since sliced bread. The Yankees may have said the same thing for the first couple of years of the AAFC.
Unfortunately, other teams did not do so well. One team, the Miami Seahawks, filled their team up mostly with players from the south. Their thinking evidently was that players from southern schools were generally superior to players from the north or other parts of the country. That franchise only lasted a year and then folded.
Because of Cleveland's domination of the All-America Conference, the AFL in 1960 did have a draft right away and strived to have equality with the teams. Of course. certain teams did dominate, like Houston and San Diego the first few years and Oakland, Kansas City, and the New York Jets during the last years of the AFL before the merger in 1970. Some teams always end up dominating.
So, how would the Cleveland Browns have fared if there was a draft in 1946. I think pretty well. It is possible that Otto Graham would have been taken by someone else before Cleveland got it's first pick, but Paul Brown did say that the Browns would have been OK without Graham because Cliff Lewis would have been a good quarterback for Cleveland. Besides, playing for anyone else, Graham probably would have played defensive back, but not quarterback. Brown may have traded for him anyway. In 1948, Cleveland signed Y.A. Tittle, and I think that the Browns would have done pretty well with Y.A. too.
Other players, like Lavelli, Groza, Motley, and Willis might have been picked up in later rounds because they were not so well known yet in 1946. Of course, we will never know the answer to this, but with Paul Brown and guys like Blanton Collier and Fritz Heisler and later Weeb Ewbank, etc. on the coaching staff, I believe that the Cleveland Browns still would have done pretty well, draft or no draft.
Re: 1946 Super Bowl: Browns vs Bears
I never did buy into the premise that the domination of the All-America Conference by the Cleveland Browns is what ruined the league. IMO, the AAFC would have folded even if Cleveland was a bad or mediocre team. About the only difference is that there probably would have been one less AAFC team going over to the NFL in the 1950 merger, if there even was a merger.
Apparently, Lamar Hunt, founder of the AFL in 1960, did believe that Cleveland's domination did ruin the AAFC, because he did all that he could to try to make sure that the teams in the 1960 AFL would be equal, at least at the start. This seemed to be more important to Hunt than even his own team, the Dallas Texans, be a top team.
The 1960 AFL draft was criticized by some, probably mostly NFL people. Lamar Hunt responded with, "We feel that we accomplished exactly what we wanted. We were striving primarily for equalization, and we feel like we did a good job in that respect." Hunt went on to explain why the league did not try to find sleepers in remote colleges, like a Harlon Hill.
Despite this, the AFL did end up having their weak franchises like the Oakland Raiders, New York Titans, and Denver Broncos, much like the AAFC had with teams like the Miami Seahawks, Brooklyn Dodgers, and Chicago Rockets. Lamar Hunt even moved his own team, the Dallas Texans, to Kansas City, even though his Texans won the AFL Championship in 1962. What really saved the AFL as opposed to the AAFC was TV revenue, something the AAFC did not have.
Despite having TV revenue from the ABC network, the New York Titans folded after the 1962 season. Sonny Werblin bought the franchise and changed the name to the Jets. In 1964 (I think), the AFL signed a very lucrative contract with the NBC network and the AFL was then all set. Cleveland Browns owner Art Modell upon reading about the AFL's deal with NBC remarked something like, "Well, It looks like the AFL is here to stay." Art was right.
Apparently, Lamar Hunt, founder of the AFL in 1960, did believe that Cleveland's domination did ruin the AAFC, because he did all that he could to try to make sure that the teams in the 1960 AFL would be equal, at least at the start. This seemed to be more important to Hunt than even his own team, the Dallas Texans, be a top team.
The 1960 AFL draft was criticized by some, probably mostly NFL people. Lamar Hunt responded with, "We feel that we accomplished exactly what we wanted. We were striving primarily for equalization, and we feel like we did a good job in that respect." Hunt went on to explain why the league did not try to find sleepers in remote colleges, like a Harlon Hill.
Despite this, the AFL did end up having their weak franchises like the Oakland Raiders, New York Titans, and Denver Broncos, much like the AAFC had with teams like the Miami Seahawks, Brooklyn Dodgers, and Chicago Rockets. Lamar Hunt even moved his own team, the Dallas Texans, to Kansas City, even though his Texans won the AFL Championship in 1962. What really saved the AFL as opposed to the AAFC was TV revenue, something the AAFC did not have.
Despite having TV revenue from the ABC network, the New York Titans folded after the 1962 season. Sonny Werblin bought the franchise and changed the name to the Jets. In 1964 (I think), the AFL signed a very lucrative contract with the NBC network and the AFL was then all set. Cleveland Browns owner Art Modell upon reading about the AFL's deal with NBC remarked something like, "Well, It looks like the AFL is here to stay." Art was right.
Re: 1946 Super Bowl: Browns vs Bears
Saban wrote:I never did buy into the premise that the domination of the All-America Conference by the Cleveland Browns is what ruined the league. IMO, the AAFC would have folded even if Cleveland was a bad or mediocre team. About the only difference is that there probably would have been one less AAFC team going over to the NFL in the 1950 merger, if there even was a merger.
Apparently, Lamar Hunt, founder of the AFL in 1960, did believe that Cleveland's domination did ruin the AAFC, because he did all that he could to try to make sure that the teams in the 1960 AFL would be equal, at least at the start. This seemed to be more important to Hunt than even his own team, the Dallas Texans, be a top team.
The 1960 AFL draft was criticized by some, probably mostly NFL people. Lamar Hunt responded with, "We feel that we accomplished exactly what we wanted. We were striving primarily for equalization, and we feel like we did a good job in that respect." Hunt went on to explain why the league did not try to find sleepers in remote colleges, like a Harlon Hill.
Despite this, the AFL did end up having their weak franchises like the Oakland Raiders, New York Titans, and Denver Broncos, much like the AAFC had with teams like the Miami Seahawks, Brooklyn Dodgers, and Chicago Rockets. Lamar Hunt even moved his own team, the Dallas Texans, to Kansas City, even though his Texans won the AFL Championship in 1962. What really saved the AFL as opposed to the AAFC was TV revenue, something the AAFC did not have.
Despite having TV revenue from the ABC network, the New York Titans folded after the 1962 season. Sonny Werblin bought the franchise and changed the name to the Jets. In 1964 (I think), the AFL signed a very lucrative contract with the NBC network and the AFL was then all set. Cleveland Browns owner Art Modell upon reading about the AFL's deal with NBC remarked something like, "Well, It looks like the AFL is here to stay." Art was right.
It was in 1964 that the AFL signed their lucrative TV contract with NBC. It went into effect in 1965.
The Houston Oilers were the first AFL championship team and with a few breaks, may have equaled what the Cleveland Browns had done in the AAFC, with four league championships in the first four years of the AFL, as the Cleveland Browns had done in the AAFC (1946-49). I don't believe that the Houston Oilers of 1960-62 were nearly as strong a team as the Cleveland Browns of the All-America Conference of the 1940's, but Houston did play in the first three AFL championship games, winning the first two and just missing a third straight win. This was despite having three different head coaches during the first three seasons.
The Oilers kind of had a collapse in the fourth AFL season, finishing with a 6 and 8 record and losing 5 of their last 6 games. A couple of reasons for the late season collapse were injuries and playing the toughest part of their schedule then (Two games with San Diego, two with Boston, and one with Oakland). Still, how could Houston fall so far and so fast (11 and 3 in 1962 and 6 and 8 in 1963)?
Changing head coaches so much probably did not help. George Blanda had one of his best years passing in 1963, even though he was 36 years old at the time. Injuries to Billy Cannon and defensive end Don Floyd didn't help. Other than the injuries, there wasn't that much difference in the team, personnel wise. However, for some reason the Oilers defense slipped badly in 1963, giving up 372 points. It may have helped if their second head coach, Wally Lemm, had stayed on with the Oilers instead of moving on to the NFL's St. Louis Cardinals in 1962.
My point here is that the Houston Oilers could have been as dominant in the AFL as the Cleveland Browns had been in the AAFC if things had been a little bit different, despite having a draft to try to insure that the league had more balance than the earlier All-America Conference. Besides, who is to say that the Cleveland Browns would not still have dominated the earlier league even if the AAFC had a draft in 1946.
The USFL (1983-85) also had a draft to start their league, but the Philadelphia/Baltimore Stars played in that league's three championship games, winning two of them and losing the other title game by two points. That is despite George Allen being the head coach of one of the other franchises for two years.
-
SixtiesFan
- Posts: 891
- Joined: Sat Oct 11, 2014 8:04 pm
Re: 1946 Super Bowl: Browns vs Bears
Yes it was in 1964. By the way, the AFL had this contract in hand prior to signing Joe Namath, contrary to what some myth-makers have said over the years.Saban wrote:I never did buy into the premise that the domination of the All-America Conference by the Cleveland Browns is what ruined the league. IMO, the AAFC would have folded even if Cleveland was a bad or mediocre team. About the only difference is that there probably would have been one less AAFC team going over to the NFL in the 1950 merger, if there even was a merger.
Apparently, Lamar Hunt, founder of the AFL in 1960, did believe that Cleveland's domination did ruin the AAFC, because he did all that he could to try to make sure that the teams in the 1960 AFL would be equal, at least at the start. This seemed to be more important to Hunt than even his own team, the Dallas Texans, be a top team.
The 1960 AFL draft was criticized by some, probably mostly NFL people. Lamar Hunt responded with, "We feel that we accomplished exactly what we wanted. We were striving primarily for equalization, and we feel like we did a good job in that respect." Hunt went on to explain why the league did not try to find sleepers in remote colleges, like a Harlon Hill.
Despite this, the AFL did end up having their weak franchises like the Oakland Raiders, New York Titans, and Denver Broncos, much like the AAFC had with teams like the Miami Seahawks, Brooklyn Dodgers, and Chicago Rockets. Lamar Hunt even moved his own team, the Dallas Texans, to Kansas City, even though his Texans won the AFL Championship in 1962. What really saved the AFL as opposed to the AAFC was TV revenue, something the AAFC did not have.
Despite having TV revenue from the ABC network, the New York Titans folded after the 1962 season. Sonny Werblin bought the franchise and changed the name to the Jets. In 1964 (I think), the AFL signed a very lucrative contract with the NBC network and the AFL was then all set. Cleveland Browns owner Art Modell upon reading about the AFL's deal with NBC remarked something like, "Well, It looks like the AFL is here to stay." Art was right.
Re: 1946 Super Bowl: Browns vs Bears
SixtiesFan wrote:Yes it was in 1964. By the way, the AFL had this contract in hand prior to signing Joe Namath, contrary to what some myth-makers have said over the years.Saban wrote:I never did buy into the premise that the domination of the All-America Conference by the Cleveland Browns is what ruined the league. IMO, the AAFC would have folded even if Cleveland was a bad or mediocre team. About the only difference is that there probably would have been one less AAFC team going over to the NFL in the 1950 merger, if there even was a merger.
Apparently, Lamar Hunt, founder of the AFL in 1960, did believe that Cleveland's domination did ruin the AAFC, because he did all that he could to try to make sure that the teams in the 1960 AFL would be equal, at least at the start. This seemed to be more important to Hunt than even his own team, the Dallas Texans, be a top team.
The 1960 AFL draft was criticized by some, probably mostly NFL people. Lamar Hunt responded with, "We feel that we accomplished exactly what we wanted. We were striving primarily for equalization, and we feel like we did a good job in that respect." Hunt went on to explain why the league did not try to find sleepers in remote colleges, like a Harlon Hill.
Despite this, the AFL did end up having their weak franchises like the Oakland Raiders, New York Titans, and Denver Broncos, much like the AAFC had with teams like the Miami Seahawks, Brooklyn Dodgers, and Chicago Rockets. Lamar Hunt even moved his own team, the Dallas Texans, to Kansas City, even though his Texans won the AFL Championship in 1962. What really saved the AFL as opposed to the AAFC was TV revenue, something the AAFC did not have.
Despite having TV revenue from the ABC network, the New York Titans folded after the 1962 season. Sonny Werblin bought the franchise and changed the name to the Jets. In 1964 (I think), the AFL signed a very lucrative contract with the NBC network and the AFL was then all set. Cleveland Browns owner Art Modell upon reading about the AFL's deal with NBC remarked something like, "Well, It looks like the AFL is here to stay." Art was right.
That is true. Once the AFL had the contract with NBC, they could be more aggressive with going after and signing players.
-
BD Sullivan
- Posts: 2318
- Joined: Mon Oct 13, 2014 1:30 pm
Re: 1946 Super Bowl: Browns vs Bears
Allen's Chicago team blew a 21-point lead in their first playoff game to Philadelphia in 1983. The following year, after the Chicago and Arizona franchises switched almost completely, Allen's Arizona team reached the 1984 title game--but was dominated by Philly.Saban wrote:The USFL (1983-85) also had a draft to start their league, but the Philadelphia/Baltimore Stars played in that league's three championship games, winning two of them and losing the other title game by two points. That is despite George Allen being the head coach of one of the other franchises for two years.
Re: 1946 Super Bowl: Browns vs Bears
BD Sullivan wrote:Allen's Chicago team blew a 21-point lead in their first playoff game to Philadelphia in 1983. The following year, after the Chicago and Arizona franchises switched almost completely, Allen's Arizona team reached the 1984 title game--but was dominated by Philly.Saban wrote:The USFL (1983-85) also had a draft to start their league, but the Philadelphia/Baltimore Stars played in that league's three championship games, winning two of them and losing the other title game by two points. That is despite George Allen being the head coach of one of the other franchises for two years.
When I heard about the new league (1983 USFL), I thought that Allen's teams would dominate. I was surprised when they didn't, although they were a couple of the better teams in that league.
In 1985, Allen was asked to take a pay cut. I guess that is why Allen did not coach in the USFL in 1985.
-
BD Sullivan
- Posts: 2318
- Joined: Mon Oct 13, 2014 1:30 pm
Re: 1946 Super Bowl: Browns vs Bears
Ironically, Chicago's 1983 team was considered the odds-on favorite, with fears that Allen's team could be a replay of the AAFC Browns.Saban wrote:BD Sullivan wrote:Allen's Chicago team blew a 21-point lead in their first playoff game to Philadelphia in 1983. The following year, after the Chicago and Arizona franchises switched almost completely, Allen's Arizona team reached the 1984 title game--but was dominated by Philly.Saban wrote:The USFL (1983-85) also had a draft to start their league, but the Philadelphia/Baltimore Stars played in that league's three championship games, winning two of them and losing the other title game by two points. That is despite George Allen being the head coach of one of the other franchises for two years.
When I heard about the new league (1983 USFL), I thought that Allen's teams would dominate. I was surprised when they didn't, although they were a couple of the better teams in that league.
Re: 1946 Super Bowl: Browns vs Bears
Maybe Allen didn't have an unlimited budget (which he exceeded) in Chicago.
The Chicago Blitz didn't dominate the USFL, but the Philadelphia/Baltimore Stars did, winning 2 out of 3 championships and having the best record (easily) in 2 of the USFL's 3 years.
The Philly/Baltimore Stars didn't have any big name players that I know of like Herschel Walker, Brian Sipe, Steve Young, or Jim Kelly, but they did turn out to be the USFL's best team. I have wondered how they would have done if they were put into the NFL in 1986. I doubt that they would have gone to the Super Bowl, but it would have been interesting to see how they would have done against some of the NFL teams.
The Chicago Blitz didn't dominate the USFL, but the Philadelphia/Baltimore Stars did, winning 2 out of 3 championships and having the best record (easily) in 2 of the USFL's 3 years.
The Philly/Baltimore Stars didn't have any big name players that I know of like Herschel Walker, Brian Sipe, Steve Young, or Jim Kelly, but they did turn out to be the USFL's best team. I have wondered how they would have done if they were put into the NFL in 1986. I doubt that they would have gone to the Super Bowl, but it would have been interesting to see how they would have done against some of the NFL teams.