Professional Football Researchers Association Forum

Minny preventing the Hail Mary, then beating the Rams as always, and they instead of Dallas meeting the Steelers in what would have been a rematch from the year before has been a hypothetical mentioned here. Raiders/Dallas as well.

But how about if Minny takes care of that very biz in their conference but instead of it being the Steelers showing up, Oakland plays just a little bit better in the bad Three Rivers elements two weeks earlier and they get there instead, one year earlier with same SB-opponent as the following year IRL (they in their black jerseys though, Vikings in white)?

As great as the Raiders were in '75, they weren't what they'd be the following year. As for the Vikings, were they better in '75 than '76? 12-2, historic defensive stats, but sadly a real soft schedule. Their 11-2-1 installment of '76 is their last SB-appearance, everyone yet another year older, but still a great true SB-team team just the same.

To those who feel that Minny was indeed better in '75 than '76, soft schedule or not (can only play who's in front of you), how much thinner do you think the gap was between both they and Oakland, and could it be that they were actually better than them?

In the actual Super Bowl between the two teams, XI, the Vikings made an effort to feature Chuck Foreman, both in the running and passing game, and try to take advantage of Sammy White vs. Skip Thomas. Foreman didn't run the ball well, did better in receiving passes. White didn't get much going against Thomas until the game was decided. Rashad also did not do much against Willie Brown.

Willie Brown was hurt for the 1975 AFC Championship Game, replaced by Neal Colzie. This was a downgrade, as Colzie was victimized on both touchdowns, by failing to contain Franco Harris on an end run, and by slipping on a pass to John Stallworth. So Thomas, probably having his best season, and Colzie should have been easier to exploit than Brown and Thomas.

On the other hand, I think Rashad and White '76 was better than John Gilliam and Jim Lash '75. Gilliam was productive, but yards per catch were down. Lash was just a guy. So, maybe, maybe the Vikings can get a favorable matchup on Gilliam vs. Colzie. I don't know if they actually would have, if Gilliam usually lined up on the left side or they would have tried to do more of that. I'd have to look at the film. Also, Mark Washington was nothing special, but the Vikings couldn't get much going to Gilliam and Lash in that playoff game either.

The Raiders also had Fred Biletnikoff and probably Bob Moore hurt as well. But Siani was a pretty good replacement, and Dave Casper was an upgrade over Moore.

I think most likely the Vikings best offense is a bunch of dump offs to Foreman and Marinaro, and it works about as well as it did against the Cowboys, which is to say not very well.

I watched the full hail mary game back around 2015 and what a tough hard physical rock gut game, just a battle through and through. Were the Vikings that tough and physical in 1976? They looked like a total different team than the one that got beat up in XI a year later.

In 1975 also the Raiders still didn't have John Matuszak, and Dave Rowe wasn't a starter (he came from the Chargers during the season). By 1976, the Raiders moved to the 3-4 defense and Otis Sistrunk replaced Horace Jones at RDE.

Some (maybe many) Vikings, including Bud Grant, said the 1975 team was their best. Take that for what it's worth.

Raiders -- 1975 defense better than 1976 but offense -Stabler threw a pile of INTs in 1975. So that is hard to tell.
In 1975 Raiders were a great pass defense, used 5 DBs as much as anyone ... maybe the most, no way to really know
and they would bring in Ted Hendricks in on that

If you had 1976 offense paired with 1975 defense ... would have been fun to see.