Atlanta Falcons/New Orleans Saints rivalry discussion

[74_75_78_79_]

It's pretty amazing that yesterday's game between both determined who, now, has the All-Time lead in the Series! Falcons are now up, 56-55! There never has been a game resulting in a tie between the two though they did go into overtime eight total times.

I generally assumed all this time that both joined the league the same year. But, of course, its Falcons joining in '66, Saints in '67. And I also thought that both were in the same division from the get-go. Not the case in those three seasons (Capitol, Century, Coastal, Central; 4-4-4-4 format) before the merger. Not just that, but they were in different conferences as well.

In the Western Conference, Atl was joined with the Rams, Forty Niners, and Colts in the Coastal division each of those three seasons. The Saints, however, bounced back and forth within the Eastern Conference. In 1967 NO was with the Redskins, Eagles, and Cowboys in the Capitol. Then in '68, the Giants sensibly (or, at least, "sensible" to those of us who only ever knew the NFL since the '70s or at least the '80s) switched places with the Saints; the Saints now joined the Century with the Cardinals, Steelers, and Browns (yes...weird). But then in '69...NO back to the Cap, NYG back to the Cent (even more weird).

And then came the merger and both were now together with Atl's two 'roommates', SF & Rams - all four staying together through 2001 (Panthers making the NFC West a five-some in '95). I guess it's understandable Falcons & Saints not being in the same division right away. Two very new teams for two others to unfairly 'feast' off of. Both did play against each other in '67 and '69; and sure-enough the seeds were already planted. Without actually researching it, I'm guessing it was already known that they would, indeed, become division-mates upon the merger.

The Colts, I'm guessing, didn't seem like such an odd division rival to the 'new' Falcons as you'd think. Both Baltimore and Atlanta being Southern cities and all. The Falcons were very struggle-some, of course, during that time as the late-'60s Colts were...the late-'60s Colts! Baltimore won every game in all their '60s games vs each other - and they demolished them once in '67 and also once in '68 - but if you look at the other games, including '66, you'll see that FWIW Atlanta didn't really play that bad against them. Makes you wonder if a rivalry could have possibly started to brew between both until being permanently interrupted by the merger. Those of you who were around may have a better take.

But the Saints in either division they were in during those pre-merger years simply wasn't a fit. Despite the NFC West being what its been these more than 20 years now, I still miss Rams, SF, Atl, and NO being together. This despite the obvious geography. And when Carolina entered, they didn't seem as bad a fit. Or at least it seemed that they and San Fran suddenly had a rivalry if only based on the strength of '96/the two fighting for the division title (and maybe Kevin Greene and then George Seifert each making their switch). I think they would have fit into that division more and more in time had there not been that '02 realignment.

Saints won their first meeting between they and Atlanta, and then (starting their next, '69, affair) the Falcons would win their next NINE against them! And Atlanta would put up yet another big streak on NO - a ten game one - in the '90s. The biggest streak the Saints would ever have over their rival would be a six-game one; of course in the '80s under Jim Mora. Very few years when both made the playoffs, or had winning records together, in the same season.

The first of such was in 1991 - first simultaneous playoff years, first simultaneous winning seasons-period! Not only that, but of course both met in the playoffs! "Too Legit" wildcard Falcons beat the division-winner 'Dome Patrol' on the road in the 1st-Rd in a competitive game, 27-20. And like a true rivalry, all three games between both were road victories. First, early on, the Saints won lopsided in Atl. And then in late-November, a Sunday Nighter, Atl would win at the Superdome...in OT! I guess that year would have to be seen, obviously, as the most-significant year of the rivalry.

The next time both would have winning records would be the '02 realignment year. But only the 9-6-1 Falcons got in. The Saints would sadly lose their final three games to drop them to 9-7 (Atl swept them anyway). The next time both would be winners? The Saints' World Championship year, 2009. But Atlanta would be the ones missing out this time at 9-7. The following year, 2010, both would - for the second time ever - make the playoffs again. Falcons 13-3 division winners, Saints in second at 11-5; both one-and-done. 2011, both make it again (3) with NO at 13-3, Atl 10-6. Yep, that's simultaneous Gary Payton/Mike Smith for you.

2017 would be the next, and last, time both achieve winning seasons together (sixth time total), and they both also made the playoffs as well (fourth time total). Each would win their first playoff game thus each be one game, and a total of ten points (5 pts each), shy of meeting in the NFC Championship Game.

Notable games, story-lines, coaches, players, general history, etc to add to this discussion?

To those who are closer-to-the-action/aura, is this indeed an underrated rivalry? Considering that its far from the East or West coast/biggest markets (NY/LA in-particular), does the true spirit of this rivalry get pushed aside by the national media? I'd like to think so. I hear that Falcons/Saints has the same raw Spirit of a college football rivalry (like Arrowhead Stadium, even eons before this current Mahomes Era, has that 'college' feel)!


PS - a little side discussion that we can add here (without starting a new thread)...to those who were around at the time and already following for years, what were your takes on the new, temporary, 'four little divisions' format in the NFL? Or to those who weren't around, your point-of-view by simply knowing the history? To go from two 'big' divisions to that must have been seen as a bit weird. Or something to get used to (times are-a changin').

[ChrisBabcock]

My father would always say... "I always get these two teams mixed up!". As you said, they came into the league at roughly the same time, both out of place southeast teams stuck with two west coast teams in the NFC west. (from 1970-2001 of course). Both playing second fiddle to the strong 49ers and Rams during most of that time.
Also it seems like in the late 80s/early 90s there was a lot of "cross pollination" between rosters. Bobby Hebert, Michael Haynes and Morten Andersen are guys that immediately come to mind.

[Reaser]

early 90s there was a lot of "cross pollination" between rosters. Bobby Hebert, Michael Haynes and Morten Andersen are guys that immediately come to mind.

The '91 Wildcard game is always the first thing that comes to mind when I think "Falcons, Saints" but the next is exactly that, the "cross pollination" during that period.

The three you mentioned. Plus, with the Bears season in-between, Ironhead Saints-to-Falcons. By the end of the 90s Billy Joe was with the Saints. 90s into 00s Ashley Ambrose went from Saints to Falcons then back to the Saints (reverse Michael Haynes.) Even laughed later on when Joe Horn signed with Atlanta -- and ultimately played his last NFL season with them.

Another "connection" is that Michael Vick & Aaron Brooks are cousins.

[74_75_78_79_]

1979 can be mentioned between these two. Coming off their first playoff season, Atlanta looked to return. First, they win their opener against...the Saints in OT at the Superdome, 40-34. Then they prevent wild card revenge against the Eagles at the Vet to make it 2-0, and then they lose their home opener to Denver but do bring them into OT. But then they drop five of their next six with two of those defeats to Detroit & San Fran who, of course, would each finish 2-14! And get slaughtered at Oakland, 50-19, in Wk#7!

But Week #10 they beat 7-2 Tampa Bay to raise their record to 4-6. Given how weak the NFC West was in '79, that was good enough to be just one game behind NO & Rams who were tied atop at 5-5 (SF 1-9). Their rematch vs NO in three weeks had to have been anticipated (same with their game at Rams in two weeks). But they lose lopsided at NYG the following week, then they lose at LA and now were 4-8 as the Saints came to town; NO beat them in the rematch, 37-6!

4-9 they now were yet they go into Jack Murphy and beat San Diego!! Figure that one out. No wonder SD would go on to wallop the Saints at NO the following week, 35-0 (they were mad; and, yes, Saints deflated after that MNF heart-breaker to Oakland)!

Just like the '81 Falcons, you'd think the '79 version would have been good given being sandwiched between two playoff campaigns.

'83 can be mentioned as well. One year removed from Leeman and that 'tournament' berth, Atl had a bit more respectability left in the tank. #8 offense, had the same basic core of players on that side of the ball along with Bailey in his first year as a regular starter and also 'White Shoes' coming onboard, putting up numbers and big moments though not a starting WR (still returned kicks and made the Pro Bowl because). They were in last place after Wk#13, but were only two games out of first at 6-7 just coming off an underrated Classic over Dickey's roller-coaster cardiac Pack, 47-41 OT, and beating San Fran the week before that (Bart-to-'White Shoes' Hail Mary; had replay been around however...).

The Rams were in first at 8-5 just coming off a win over 7-5 Buffalo (Bills also breathing one last breath of respectability one year removed from Knox) and the Forty Niners and Saints were tied for second at 7-6. San Fran lost yet again, at Soldier Field, and the Saints beat Minny who also were 7-5 going in. The Saints already swept Atlanta. Their second game was a 27-10 final, but their first meeting, Wk#6 in Atlanta, could have gone either way. Had Falcons pulled it off, and all that happened after still happened, an even-more suspenseful division race. But Atlanta had to go to RFK and then at Miami who, yes, they did lose to both and that was that.

Let's bring up '82 for the road. Bum's Saints did start 3-1, then lost to Tampa thus their following game at Falcons a battle of 3-2s. Atlanta crushed them, 35-0. Saints wouldn't win again until their finale which was...vs Atlanta! Squashed at home to Green Bay the previous week, 38-7, the Falcons were already in the 'tournament' at 5-3. As for the 3-5 Saints? They had to win and hope for some miracles. W/out George Rogers, the Saints waffle 'em, 35-6, but missed out to other 4-5 teams due to tiebreakers. Damn, what a way for Atl to slide into the tourney! I'm not sure they make the playoffs had '82 gone full. They were quite 'Jekyll/Hyde' inconsistent! Raiders beat them by a lopsided margin as well.

[CSKreager]

1978

If the Saints win both of those ATL games which were decided in the waning seconds (Big Ben and a pass interference in the endzone), they would have gotten a winning record/playoff spot a decade before Mora/Dome Patrol and played the Eagles

How much might that have changed the trajectory for Archie and Nolan?

Conversely ATL wouldn’t have made their playoff debut until 1980 and wouldn’t have gotten a playoff W until 91

[7DnBrnc53]

1978

If the Saints win both of those ATL games which were decided in the waning seconds (Big Ben and a pass interference in the endzone), they would have gotten a winning record/playoff spot a decade before Mora/Dome Patrol and played the Eagles

How much might that have changed the trajectory for Archie and Nolan?

Conversely ATL wouldn’t have made their playoff debut until 1980 and wouldn’t have gotten a playoff W until 91

If they win those Atlanta games, they would have been 8-6 with games against the OIlers and @TB forthcoming.

In reality, they lost to Houston, but with a playoff spot on the line, I can see them winning (however, it doesn't hurt Houston's playoff chances. They still lose to SD on the last day, but they get in at 9-7 despite a four-way tie because of conference record).

Then, after beating TB, they are 10-6, and they host the Eagles. I think they pull that one out at home (Philly had Mike Michel at K, and he probably makes the difference). However, the fun ends the next week at Texas Stadium.

In 79, if they can get off to a better start, and don't lose that Raider MNF game, they win the division, and I think they can get to the Super Bowl (although they lose to the Steelers). That changes everything. Archie and Nolan aren't going anywhere, and you don't see the Aints bag head year the next year.

[74_75_78_79_]

1978

If the Saints win both of those ATL games which were decided in the waning seconds (Big Ben and a pass interference in the endzone), they would have gotten a winning record/playoff spot a decade before Mora/Dome Patrol and played the Eagles

How much might that have changed the trajectory for Archie and Nolan?

Conversely ATL wouldn’t have made their playoff debut until 1980 and wouldn’t have gotten a playoff W until 91

If they win those Atlanta games, they would have been 8-6 with games against the OIlers and @TB forthcoming.

In reality, they lost to Houston, but with a playoff spot on the line, I can see them winning (however, it doesn't hurt Houston's playoff chances. They still lose to SD on the last day, but they get in at 9-7 despite a four-way tie because of conference record).

Then, after beating TB, they are 10-6, and they host the Eagles. I think they pull that one out at home (Philly had Mike Michel at K, and he probably makes the difference). However, the fun ends the next week at Texas Stadium.

In 79, if they can get off to a better start, and don't lose that Raider MNF game, they win the division, and I think they can get to the Super Bowl (although they lose to the Steelers). That changes everything. Archie and Nolan aren't going anywhere, and you don't see the Aints bag head year the next year.

Upon further inspection, the Saints defense wasn't that bad in '78! Middle-of-the-road I see they were. I thought they were quite worse. Perhaps I got them mixed up with the following year's D. They did split with the Rams. Were the first team to beat them that year, actually, and it was in the Coliseum in Wk#8. A 10-3 final score it was! But LA did outplay them. The 6-to-1 turnover ratio in favor of NO was the difference.

Saints played the division champs much better statistically (actually beat them statistically) in the earlier game they lost to them! A few close losses in '78 like the aforementioned two to Atlanta, but a few too many. They did give the Steelers a real good one (Archie vs Terry) at Three Rivers! Beat them statistically at least. Minus-17 PD they were for the season, but positive in yardage both total and Y/P.

No 'Aints' in 1980 had they made the playoffs in '79?

Tough to say as to whether the way '79 ended carried over all the way to the point where they actually belly-up and go 1-15. If anything, they finally getting over the hump (feeling 'satisfied') may have further assured such a bad outing in '80. You can see it either way. Very tough to try figuring out what went all the way wrong that year. Dick Nolan too good a HC to go out like that. Despite how '79 ended, you'd think that this simply being their best outing yet, closest they came to making the playoffs, still hungry for a berth, that they'd be fired-up to finally get there in '80! Archie in the off-season seemed optimistic enough going in.

Either way, their offense improved a few spots in '79 but really fell on D. This is why IMHO I don't see them advance in the event of them actually winning the division instead. Big D, though just "good" in '79, topples NO in the divisional round, I think. Overall the Saints were positive across-the-board in points, yardage, and Y/P though. And then in '80 the D fell all the way down to #28, both yardage AND points!!