Professional Football Researchers Association Forum

No, not allowing '32 in the mix. Otherwise, that Bears team who won 6-of-13 games going into Chicago Stadium would be the unanimous choice. It simply should have been Green Bay being awarded in that year before League Championship Games thus no one winning a championship game indoors at all until 45 years later!

Three teams come to mind as the top candidates if not the only candidates: two teams each of the same franchise who won wearing sneakers as each opponent - also of the same franchise - didn't wear them, and a team who won seven games as a team in their own division won eight games as well as winning two of the three games both played against each other; but because ties didn't count at the time...

I used to look at the 'just' 8-4 Rams of '51 in lower regard, but not at all now thanks to some of you!

The 1960 Eagles seem to get some Historic gruff. No, not a candidate with me either.

Who do you pick?

I might say the Rams in 1945. They did go 9-1 (I think), but the war had just ended and I think things were still a bit unsettled in the NFL. Waterfield was just a rookie, though a really good one; and they didn't contend for the division title in 1946, '47 or '48. Also, in the championship game, they benefited from the fact that Baugh was hurt and hardly played, plus of course that pass that hit the goal post for a safety, and a fluke extra point kick that landed on the crossbar and managed to fall forward. (It must have been blocked or something, right? I can't imagine an extra-point kick almost falling short any other way.)

Now that I've typed all that out, yes, I'd definitely vote for the Rams.

Bob Gill wrote: ↑Sat Oct 04, 2025 9:30 pm I might say the Rams in 1945. They did go 9-1 (I think), but the war had just ended and I think things were still a bit unsettled in the NFL. Waterfield was just a rookie, though a really good one; and they didn't contend for the division title in 1946, '47 or '48. Also, in the championship game, they benefited from the fact that Baugh was hurt and hardly played, plus of course that pass that hit the goal post for a safety, and a fluke extra point kick that landed on the crossbar and managed to fall forward. (It must have been blocked or something, right? I can't imagine an extra-point kick almost falling short any other way.)

Now that I've typed all that out, yes, I'd definitely vote for the Rams.

I was going to suggest in the OP if any WWII champs should be included but forgot.

On an old thread I opined ’45 being the best Rams team ever for their time but have backed off more and more as of late with what some of you have opined, this latest post, here, giving even more distance. Yeah, I’d think ’51 and especially ’99 are better now. May also go for a few non-championship Rams squads (and maybe one or two that didn’t even win a playoff game).

However, if we’re talking of that watered-down time, what do you think of Curly’s last championship team a year earlier? Possibly ’43 Bears? Both those seasons more in the ‘thick’ of the War.

Eyebrows at least raised to the ’45 Rams with what you said but still for now, at least, the two ‘sneakers’ teams are standing out. I wouldn’t want it to be a Lombardi/Landry team so I’ll have to cross ’56 out.

Probably 12-15 years ago I started a huge project that was never finished where I ranked the top 100 NFL teams of all time. I did a ton of research and came to the conclusion that I just could not rank a team that fell short of the title above teams that won it all. So it basically turned into a top 100 NFL/AFL Champions team list. For this time period I think I had the 1935 Detroit Lions the lowest ranked team of this era. They went 7-3-2 with a loss to a not very good Brooklyn Dodgers team early in the season, two ties with the Chicago teams the Cardinals and Bears. The big deal was that they played Green Bay 3 times and went 1-2 in those. Green Bay lost a critical game late in the season to fall to 8-4 finish. So if ties were calculated into win percentage the right way back then both teams finished with identical win percentage, with Green Bay having the head to head advantage they should have been the division winner that year. That Detroit team got their stuff together at just the right time that year and planets kind of aligned for them with some heavyweight teams of that era having down years. To their credit that was a really tough division that year they played in and that was a great win over the best team in the NFL in the title game so I found a spot on my countdown in the low 90's for them.

74_75_78_79_ wrote: ↑Sat Oct 04, 2025 10:05 pm However, if we’re talking of that watered-down time, what do you think of Curly’s last championship team a year earlier? Possibly ’43 Bears? Both those seasons more in the ‘thick’ of the War.

Eyebrows at least raised to the ’45 Rams with what you said but still for now, at least, the two ‘sneakers’ teams are standing out. I wouldn’t want it to be a Lombardi/Landry team so I’ll have to cross ’56 out.

I wouldn't consider the 1943 Bears, because they still had a lot of the guys who had played in the title game from 1940-42, including Sid Luckman especially. And in the championship game they beat the Redskins, who still had Baugh, Andy Farkas and others. But the Packers in 1944 might have a case, despite the presence of Hutson. Was it Irv Comp or Tony Canadeo who was doing their passing that year? Either way, a far cry from Herber and Isbell. Still, they were the Packers, and it was their fourth trip to the title game since 1936, not to mention the 1941 team that lost only one game but fell to the Bears in a western division playoff, so I'd still rank them above the 1945 Rams, I think.

I agree about the Giants in 1956; besides the presence of Landry and Lombardi, they beat the Bears by 40 points, and it seems like a stretch to give their shoes THAT much credit.

ShinobiMusashi wrote: ↑Sat Oct 04, 2025 10:45 pm I think I had the 1935 Detroit Lions the lowest ranked team of this era. They went 7-3-2 with a loss to a not very good Brooklyn Dodgers team early in the season, two ties with the Chicago teams the Cardinals and Bears. The big deal was that they played Green Bay 3 times and went 1-2 in those. Green Bay lost a critical game late in the season to fall to 8-4 finish. So if ties were calculated into win percentage the right way back then both teams finished with identical win percentage, with Green Bay having the head to head advantage they should have been the division winner that year.

Well, of course there were no tie-breakers in those days, and wouldn't be until 1970. So if the Packers and Lions had wound up tied for first, they wouldn't have decided the issue based on head-to-head records or point spreads or anything else. They would've had a playoff game.

Tough thread, because no matter how strong or weak a champion for any season, they still won it all. The 42' Redskins had a great year but had to prove it to keep the Bears from three-peating. Sammy Baugh and the defense had a great championship game.

I agree above on the 1935 Lions. 44 Packers, 45 Rams and 56 Giants are also contenders. Yes, the Giants had a great game against Chicago but the Lions would have went without the Layne injury. The Giants were tough, especially on defense but the offense still had no speed--despite the skills of Gifford, Rote and Webster--with Conerly and Lombardi trying to be creative with their time of possession, while letting Heinrich start many of the games.

I know it sounds crazy, with all the talent the 1957 Lions had, but they were lucky to win their championship. It could have easily been the Colts year, but they lost winnable games against Detroit and SF and the Niners had one of their worst halves of football in the playoff game against the Lions.

Brian wolf wrote: ↑Sun Oct 05, 2025 12:19 pm ....I know it sounds crazy, with all the talent the 1957 Lions had, but they were lucky to win their championship. It could have easily been the Colts year, but they lost winnable games against Detroit and SF and the Niners had one of their worst halves of football in the playoff game against the Lions.

I had the same thought.
I'm a fan of both those 49ers and Lions teams but I'm not sure the "best" team won the championship in 1957.

The Lions had the 6th ranked offense and the 7th ranked defense (by points scored) out of 12 teams, in the regular season.
The 49ers were 4th and 9th, respectively.
The Colts were 2nd and 8th and the Rams 1st and 10th.

The Browns were 3rd and 1st.
The Giants 5th and 3rd and even the "lowly" Steelers were 12th and 2nd.

I'm not sure how the Lions pulled it off (Tobin Rote??) but they did...
I wouldn't say they're the "worst" Champion (due to the talent you mentioned) but they almost certainly aren't among the best.

JuggernautJ wrote: ↑Mon Oct 06, 2025 6:06 am

Brian wolf wrote: ↑Sun Oct 05, 2025 12:19 pm ....I know it sounds crazy, with all the talent the 1957 Lions had, but they were lucky to win their championship. It could have easily been the Colts year, but they lost winnable games against Detroit and SF and the Niners had one of their worst halves of football in the playoff game against the Lions.

I had the same thought.
I'm a fan of both those 49ers and Lions teams but I'm not sure the "best" team won the championship in 1957.

The Lions had the 6th ranked offense and the 7th ranked defense (by points scored) out of 12 teams, in the regular season.
The 49ers were 4th and 9th, respectively.
The Colts were 2nd and 8th and the Rams 1st and 10th.

The Browns were 3rd and 1st.
The Giants 5th and 3rd and even the "lowly" Steelers were 12th and 2nd.

I'm not sure how the Lions pulled it off (Tobin Rote??) but they did...
I wouldn't say they're the "worst" Champion (due to the talent you mentioned) but they almost certainly aren't among the best.

Could the ’57 Lions possibly be seen in the same vein as the 1990 Edmonton Oilers?

Think about it. Each squad a few years distant from their last Title thus the ‘bulk’/‘heart’ of their Dynasty. Neither quite as solid as any of those previous recent championships. But not the “worst” champ-ever either. No more Layne nor Parker, no more Gretzky nor Sather (not as coach, that is; he was still their GM though).

They did have Schmidt and Messier.

Could the ’57 Lions possibly be seen in the same vein as the 1990 Edmonton Oilers?

Think about it. Each squad a few years distant from their last Title thus the ‘bulk’/‘heart’ of their Dynasty. Neither quite as solid as any of those previous recent championships. But not the “worst” champ-ever either. No more Layne nor Parker, no more Gretzky nor Sather (not as coach, that is; he was still their GM though).

They did have Schmidt and Messier.

Yes. However, the 1991 and 92 Oilers got to the Conference Finals the next two years (even though the 92 Oilers were a fluke).

The 1958 Lions were 4-7-1, and the 59 Lions were 3-8-1. They didn't contend again until 1960, when they finished a game behind the 8-4 Pack in the West.