1970s- did the playoff format lead to predictable outcomes?

[CSKreager]

From 1971 to 1977, other than the 1972 Redskins and 1977 Broncos, it was essentially the same six NFL teams who were playing for conference titles and the Super Bowl- Miami/Pittsburgh/Oakland in the AFC, Dallas/Minnesota/LA Rams on the other.

In that stretch, the NFL playoff format was 4 teams per conference- division winners, 1 Wild Card.

Considering there were many a quality team that didn't make the playoffs (1975 Dolphins and Oilers, 1976 Cardinals and Bengals, 1977 Dolphins), had there been an extra Wild Card ala the late 70s and 80s, do you think that could have swung the outcome of some playoff years? Could they have maybe gone on a Wild Card run to the Super Bowl ala the '75 Cowboys or '80 Raiders? Or just getting to a conference championship game and winning a playoff game or two could have had a Luv Ya Blue Oilers type affect.

Would have been fun to see a Wild Card game between, say, 11-3 Cincinnati and 10-4 Houston in 1975 instead of Cincy being just another team that lost en route to the annual Oakland-Pittsburgh steel cage match.

There were a lot of good teams that won the division but never got to host a playoff game because of this format (Colts, Cardinals, Bengals).

Not gonna lie, it must have been tough being fans of those teams, having to see the same old same old every postseason if you weren't fans of the Oaklands and Minnesotas of the world.

[Rupert Patrick]

Back then you could pretty much pencil in most of the playoff teams, and the only questions were whether Dallas or Washington would win the NFC East and the other one would be the Wild Card, and who would be the AFC Wild Card, and would there be some sort of dark horse team like Baltimore or Denver.

Growing up in Pittsburgh in the 70's, it was a fun ride, but I can imagine if I had grown up in Detroit or New Orleans or Atlanta in the 70's, there would have been a lot of lean years. It was a case of the haves and have nots, and as much as Pete Rozelle was a supporter of parity, the 70's were anything but that. Back then before the season you could write off 60 percent of the league as having no realistic shot of even making the postseason, while today that percentage is about 15-20 percent.

In the 70's the gap between the best and worst teams was much greater than today. This can easily be analyzed if you look at the percentage of games in which one team beats the other team by more than five TD's; it was a lot higher back then. In the 30's and 40's it used to happen a lot, in the 60's and 70's it happened quite often, now it happens very rarely. That percentage you could call competitive balance (or parity) and it has steadily approached an equilibrium throughout pro football history. You'll never have a league of 32 8-8 teams, but with good management and a little luck it is much easier to rise from the bottom to the top these days than it used to be.

[JWL]

Not gonna lie, it must have been tough being fans of those teams, having to see the same old same old every postseason if you weren't fans of the Oaklands and Minnesotas of the world.

It is similar to the AFC of the past 13 seasons. Based on recent history, there is a good chance we will see good campaigns from Baltimore, New England, Denver, Indianapolis and Pittsburgh this season. The only intrigue is what other team will round out the playoffs. I choose Jacksonville.

[BD Sullivan]

The fact that the powerhouses didn't have to worry about losing any of their key players to free agency helped maintain teams' dominance longer.

As far as the would be-wild cards, I think it's important to look at how each team finished down the stretch (last six games/last four games) to get a sense of their momentum. FWIW, 75 Dallas was 5-1/3-1 (only loss to Cardinals) and 80 Raiders were 4-2/3-1 (losses to Eagles and Cowboys) entering the postseason:

1975 Miami: 3-3/3-1 (loss to Houston, two losses to resurgent Colts)
1975 Houston: 4-2/3-1 (losses to Pittsburgh and Cincinnati)--won last three in a row.
1976 St. Louis: 4-2/2-2 (losses to Washington and Dallas)
1976 Cincinnati: 4-2/2-2 (losses to Pittsburgh--in massive snowstorm; and Oakland on MNF)
1977 Miami: 4-2/3-1 (losses at Cincinnati and New England)
1977 Houston: 4-2/3-1 (losses to Denver and Oakland)
1977 Washington: 5-1/3-1 (loss to Dallas)

[RogerCooper]

All,

The predictability of the individual games and seasons in the 70s outcomes was what got me interested in following the CFL.

Roger

[74_75_78_79_]

At 9-5, the Giants (and also 8-5-1 Cards) STILL wouldn't have gotten in had there been a 2nd wild card in 1970. The 9-4-1 Rams would have gotten in instead and would have played at Detroit who they lost to at home penultimate week.

Both the 9-5 Browns & 9-5 Broncos in '76 would have still missed out as well. The AFC wild card game that year would have been 10-4 Bengals at New England - neither played each other that year.

In '73, THREE above-500 teams in the AFC, all at 7-5-2, would still not have made it - Browns, Chiefs, and Broncos. Bills get in instead for a wild card date at the 'Burgh.

I'm going to assume the '71 Lions would have gotten nod over the also 7-6-1 Falcons because they beat them that year. The same with Bengals instead of Chiefs (both 8-6) a year later for same reason.


How about '78-thru-'89? When if a 6th playoff spot would have already been added in '78 instead of waiting until '90? What #6-vs-#3 matchups would you have liked to have seen during that time period?

I'm sure most of you will first think 11-5 Broncos at 8-8 Browns, '85.

As for '89, going into that Christmas MNF finale, the Steelers & GB would have already been in. It would have been KC rooting for Vikes while WASHINGTON would have been rooting for Cincy. If Bengals win, all four AFC Central teams get in with Steelers finishing in last-place at 9-7 (Pit@Buf, Hou@Cin). If Vikes win as they actually did, then Pack gets the nod over Wash due to better conf record (10-4 to 8-4) and a date at the Met the following Sunday; Chiefs go to Rich.

'84...Cards go straight to Soldier while, across conference, it would have been NE@Pit. Got a funny feeling that Steelers, despite what they actually did at Denver, don't pull it off which opens door wide open for the Elway-Marino AFCC that most wanted to see.

[BD Sullivan]

To make things easier:

1978:
Green Bay at Minnesota
Oakland at Denver
1979
Washington at LA Rams
Cleveland at Miami
1980
Detroit at Minnesota
Pittsburgh at Buffalo
1981
Washington at Tampa Bay***
Denver at San Diego

1983
New Orleans at Detroit
Cleveland at Pittsburgh
1984
St. Louis at Chicago
New England at Pittsburgh
1985
Washington at Dallas
Denver at Cleveland
1986
Minnesota at San Francisco
Seattle at New England***
1987
Dallas at Washington
New England at Indianapolis
1988
NY Giants at Philadelphia
Indianapolis at Seattle
1989
Green Bay at Minnesota
Kansas City at Buffalo

***Fairly certain of the potential matchup.

[74_75_78_79_]

Actually, it would have been Pats@Bills for 1980. That '81 Denver/Charger match would have been quite intriguing! Denver wins, I think, and then they're off to Cincy which may have been pretty good as well.

Excuse adding yet another wrinkle to this thread - best to not start another one - but imagine if a 5th ('78) nor even 6th ('90) playoff spot was never added? To this very day it would have still been just 4 playoff teams per conference. Many of you here said that's what you'd prefer. The differences would have started as early as that very '78 season. The Oilers never get to go to Schaefer to embark on that trip to the AFCC. '85 Pats don't get in at all - Jets at Raiders divisional pretty intriguing. Assuming the rules would be no-two-teams-same-div-can play-til-CC, you would have had Denver go straight to Pitt in '97. Broncos still win, I think, but as much as Steelers lost CCs at home during Cowher Era, they had it quite together at home in the divisionals ('92 - Cowher's first year, and to Bills in midst of their SB-runs, being lone exception). May have made the game more interesting than the CC match that actually was. Carroll's Pats go to Arrowhead. Hard to imagine Chiefs "finding a way" to lose that one; or DO they still? No '05 Steelers, '07 Giants, or '10 Pack doing what they did. Any other examples or thoughts in general?

[CSKreager]

Cleveland in '79? IIRC Seattle would have had head-to-head tiebreaker.

[nicefellow31]

Back then you could pretty much pencil in most of the playoff teams, and the only questions were whether Dallas or Washington would win the NFC East and the other one would be the Wild Card, and who would be the AFC Wild Card, and would there be some sort of dark horse team like Baltimore or Denver.

Growing up in Pittsburgh in the 70's, it was a fun ride, but I can imagine if I had grown up in Detroit or New Orleans or Atlanta in the 70's, there would have been a lot of lean years. It was a case of the haves and have nots, and as much as Pete Rozelle was a supporter of parity, the 70's were anything but that. Back then before the season you could write off 60 percent of the league as having no realistic shot of even making the postseason, while today that percentage is about 15-20 percent.

Exactly. I grew up in the DC area and the Redskins were in the hunt for a playoff spot most years. I never felt we had chance to advance to the Super Bowl however. I recall when Denver got good in '77, ten year old me was like "who are these guys?"