Professional Football Researchers Association Forum

Baseball, basketball, and hockey all have championship series. In 1973, Al Davis proposed that the NFL convert the Super Bowl into a best-of-3 series. The Competition Committee declined to present the proposal to the owners.

https://twitter.com/QuirkyResearch/stat ... 3913852929

But since we indulge the alternate universes of football, what if that proposal passes? I mean, let's assume they resolve the logistical, network, and audience issues and that the player's union doesn't go on strike a year ahead of schedule. The earliest they could make the switch is Super Bowl X, since they were approving the hosts of IX and X as a single-game event at that meeting; at least they could have tabled approval on X as a 3-game series.

So the question is, which championship is the most likely to flip under a 3-game series?

Never knew Al ever entertained such a thing! Interesting thing to ponder and get hypothetical about. You know how ‘what-if’-friendly just for fun I can be. Still, I’m simply glad it is the one-game that it is. Yes, one-game upsets happen, but so do best-of-seven upsets in other sports. Baseball, basketball, and even hockey are fine for seven-game series; but football wreaks of one-game with me! However, wasn’t the Grey Cup up North a best-of-three for a bit back in the day? World Series, very briefly, was a best-of-nine! And upsets can happen there as well!

Without thinking of each and every SB from X on, I’d imagine that all winners remainder of century would have still won had it been best-of-three albeit a 2-0 or 2–1 series win. Now Pats over Rams, Giants’ two over Pats, Ravens over SF, Pats over Hawks and, ok, Steelers over Hawks...I’ll leave it for others to argue. But end of day, despite my ‘what-if’-friendliness, the SB has always been just ‘one shot’, both teams knew and prepared going in, so whoever won in this reality/timeline is eternally deserving.

Al Davis got the idea from Johnny Blood, who proposed a Super Bowl Series as early as 1971 and traveled around the country talking to NFL owners about it. John wanted some of the money to go to a pension/medical plan for old-time players.

This presumes, of course, that each team gets a home game with the third game being held in a neutral site as the Super Bowl currently is. That of course would have given us a number of cold-weather Super Bowl games in Pittsburgh, Denver, Buffalo, New England and New York.

74_75_78_79_ wrote:However, wasn’t the Grey Cup up North a best-of-three for a bit back in the day?

Nope. The playoffs leading up to the Grey Cup game had two game total point and best of three setups at various times until the 1972 season but the championship was always a single game.

JohnH19 wrote:

74_75_78_79_ wrote:However, wasn’t the Grey Cup up North a best-of-three for a bit back in the day?

Nope. The playoffs leading up to the Grey Cup game had two game total point and best of three setups at various times until the 1972 season but the championship was always a single game.

Oh, okay. I thought I it was GC as well at one point.

Had this ‘Super Series’ actually went into existence, having Game 3 on a neutral site may have been more problematic. Booking plane tickets and hotel rooms all for a game that may end up never taking place after all. IMO, the most ideal way would be all three possible games being strictly on either opponent’s field; and to save traveling miles, have the ‘road’ team of the series host Game 1. That way if there is a Game 3, everyone can simply stay put after Game 2 being that everything is already situated. As the World Series used to be, have both conferences switching off home-field each year. Example - with Steelers being the ‘home team’ in ’75, have SS ‘Game 1’ at Dallas with 2 and (if necessary) 3 being at Three Rivers. The following year...Vikes at Raiders G1, and at the tundra Met for the remainder.

Bills/Giants and Steelers/GB would have sure been (each game) bitter cold ones! Make that any Giants SS! Pats/GB, Pats/Philly as well amongst others!

I'm curious as to what others think.
Do you think the 2007 Giants could've won 2 out of three games against the Pats?
How about the 1968 "series?" Could the Jets beat the Colts in 2 out of 3 games?

I'm curious as to what others think.
Do you think the 2007 Giants could've won 2 out of three games against the Pats?
How about the 1968 "series?" Could the Jets beat the Colts in 2 out of 3 games?

along similar lines, who would be interested in seeing the Bears & Patriots clash again in 1985 not to mention a second game between San Francisco and Denver in 1989?

Some Guy From Mars wrote:

I'm curious as to what others think.
Do you think the 2007 Giants could've won 2 out of three games against the Pats?
How about the 1968 "series?" Could the Jets beat the Colts in 2 out of 3 games?

along similar lines, who would be interested in seeing the Bears & Patriots clash again in 1985 not to mention a second game between San Francisco and Denver in 1989?

A good point.

JuggernautJ wrote:I'm curious as to what others think.
Do you think the 2007 Giants could've won 2 out of three games against the Pats?
How about the 1968 "series?" Could the Jets beat the Colts in 2 out of 3 games?

Not a chance in hell that the Jets would beat the Colts in a 2 out of 3. Highly unlikely that the Giants would beat the Pats.