Professional Football Researchers Association Forum

Keating starts out with the Bills, being a part-time player on one of the best DLs in AFL history. Sent to the Raiders where he becomes a starter, All-Pro, and arguably the best interior pass rusher in the league. The 67 Raiders racked up a huge sack total, and I've read that Keating was the key guy in making that happen. I think Lassiter had the most sacks, but Keating's inside charge is what made everything work. Keating had leg injuries in 1968, regained his starting spot but wasn't really the force that he had been prior to injury, then was traded to the Steelers. He started some games, didn't really do much, and was sent packing to KC for the 1974 season, where he finished his career.

*Why did the Bills get rid of Keating? Their DL (and their entire roster) was getting old in the latter half of the 1960's.
*Why did the Raiders trade Keating to the Steelers of all teams, the team that just knocked them out of the postseason?
*Chuck Noll was typically loathe on trading for players ("you just take on another team's problem"), and the Steelers were set at DL...why did Noll want Keating so badly?
*Why did the Steelers get rid of Keating after just one season?
*If Keating doesn't get hurt in 1968, does he have a HOVG/HOF type career?
*Keating has been linked to an odd four-point stance that allegedly was unique...can anyone (Turney?) verify this?

For the Steelers, I think they picked up Keating due to Ernie Holmes and the helicopter incident. Holmes status was up in the air for 73 season. In the book "A Few Bricks Shy of a Load" the author mentions that Holmes wasn't all that happy with the Keating acquisition and Ernie said something like "man don't think I can do the job" referring to Noll

Why they let him go? Not sure.

Bryan wrote: *Keating has been linked to an odd four-point stance that allegedly was unique...can anyone (Turney?) verify this?

I sure never saw it. Always in a usual right-handed 3-point stance in what I've seen

The Bills traded to get Bo Roberson in October 1965, since they had no real quality receivers and were defending AFL champs. In just eight games, Roberson ended up being their leading receiver with 31 catches for 483 yards and thee touchdowns. In the title game, he had three catches for 88 yards, but the Bills lost him in the expansion draft.

Interestingly, the deal was for to-be-named-later players, with some speculation centered on Daryle Lamonica. in the end, it was Keating and George Flint.

The Steelers got rid of him in the wake of the 1974 NFLPA strike, with Keating being on the negotiating team. He had reported a week after the cooling off period. He was third on the depth chart behind Holmes and rookie Charlie Davis.

Bryan wrote:Keating starts out with the Bills, being a part-time player on one of the best DLs in AFL history. Sent to the Raiders where he becomes a starter, All-Pro, and arguably the best interior pass rusher in the league. The 67 Raiders racked up a huge sack total, and I've read that Keating was the key guy in making that happen. I think Lassiter had the most sacks, but Keating's inside charge is what made everything work. Keating had leg injuries in 1968, regained his starting spot but wasn't really the force that he had been prior to injury, then was traded to the Steelers. He started some games, didn't really do much, and was sent packing to KC for the 1974 season, where he finished his career.

*Why did the Bills get rid of Keating? Their DL (and their entire roster) was getting old in the latter half of the 1960's.
*Why did the Raiders trade Keating to the Steelers of all teams, the team that just knocked them out of the postseason?
*Chuck Noll was typically loathe on trading for players ("you just take on another team's problem"), and the Steelers were set at DL...why did Noll want Keating so badly?
*Why did the Steelers get rid of Keating after just one season?
*If Keating doesn't get hurt in 1968, does he have a HOVG/HOF type career?
*Keating has been linked to an odd four-point stance that allegedly was unique...can anyone (Turney?) verify this?

The Bills defensive tackles weren't that old in 1965. Jim Dunaway was 24. All Pro Tom Sestak was 29, but he had only been playing professional football for 4 years, and figured to play at a high level for the rest of the decade. Sadly, his career would be cut short by knee injuries.

Bryan wrote:Keating starts out with the Bills, being a part-time player on one of the best DLs in AFL history. Sent to the Raiders where he becomes a starter, All-Pro, and arguably the best interior pass rusher in the league. The 67 Raiders racked up a huge sack total, and I've read that Keating was the key guy in making that happen. I think Lassiter had the most sacks, but Keating's inside charge is what made everything work. Keating had leg injuries in 1968, regained his starting spot but wasn't really the force that he had been prior to injury, then was traded to the Steelers. He started some games, didn't really do much, and was sent packing to KC for the 1974 season, where he finished his career.

1. *Why did the Bills get rid of Keating? Their DL (and their entire roster) was getting old in the latter half of the 1960's.
2. *Why did the Raiders trade Keating to the Steelers of all teams, the team that just knocked them out of the postseason?
3. *Chuck Noll was typically loathe on trading for players ("you just take on another team's problem"), and the Steelers were set at DL...why did Noll want Keating so badly?
4. *Why did the Steelers get rid of Keating after just one season?
5. *If Keating doesn't get hurt in 1968, does he have a HOVG/HOF type career?
6. *Keating has been linked to an odd four-point stance that allegedly was unique...can anyone (Turney?) verify this?

Was looking at Keatings Wikipedia profile and saw the four-point stance thing...and remembered this.
numbered the questions
1. It is odd they traded Keating had to be injured twice in 2 years. Also they had Sestak and Dunaway and a big guy to back them up. Dubenion went down so they needed a flanker to fill in. It was a mid-season trade and Keating was a "player to be named later" because he was traded when injured and apparently there was some rule about that.

2. and 3. Again, Keating was getting hurt two years in a row. You raise good questions and don't know the answer. All I can think is Raiders offered a 4th rounder, which may have been the best offer. Their 1972 starter was old and maybe they didn't think Fats Holmes was going to be as good as he was. Maybe Noll looking for some insurance in case Holmes faltered. Noll would have been familiar with what Keating had left in the tank

4. Strike stuff. Keating was the rep and missed time in camp. Steelers cut him. Keating thought he wasn't given a fair chance and later sued and got a shot to be a Steeler in 1976, by a judge's order. He went to camp and got cut.

5. HOF? He had the talent. Back then it was tough, took Henry Jordan a while, a similar player with longer career, but with rings. I think it would have hinged on if he started a string of ALl-Pro seasons. But it would take a lot. I think if he had 3-4 he'd not have made it. It would have also taken a couple of Raiders rings. Would he have been around in 1976? Would they have gotten over the hump with him at left tackle rather than Sistrunk or would that have been a great match and he'd move back to the right and no Art Thoms?
Just don't know, buy IMO he'd have needed to be able to have beaten out guys like Page and Greene for All-pro slots and that would have been atall order...so gun to head? Guessing no to HOF...but it's just a call, not to be taken seriously.

6. As mentioned, saw the Wikipedia entry, then followed the link to an obit where it said four-point stance. Never saw it except for goalline. Not in Buffalo, not in Oakland, not in Pittsburgh, not in KC. Honestly don't know where that came from. Did a search and the first time you can find a reference is in 2012 - when he died.

So that one is weird. Someone is welcome to check, but this just didn't happen.


Keating was a perfect Raider fit, a rebel, a non-conformist . . . probably rubbed Noll wrong. But probably showed enough on film that even after his early 1970s injuries he could still be functional, but not what he was at his peak. When I watch him he's one of the quickest guys off the snap...again, there is enough on YouTube that somone can check to see if they agree . . but when he's on he times the snap well . . .