PDA

View Full Version : 1974 AFCCG: was this the most important game in PG Steelers History?


Lyn
07-03-2006, 06:08 PM
Many believe it was. Prior to the game, Chuck Noll gave his one and probably only inspirational speech, telling the guys that the Raiders and John Madden believed they had played the SB the week prior, defeating the Miami Dolphins in dramatic fashion. Joe Green went beserk during that team meeting and the team was fired up like never before. Years later, Joe Greene rated his own defense a 10 of 10 in that game in terms of how they came together and played with controlled rage.

It led to the first and only championship of the Steelers after 42 seasons. Many don't recall that future hall of famer Mel Blount was benched after being burned by Cliff Branch early in the game. The Steelers trailed 10-3 after 3 quarters, but the most dangerous QB in history, Terry Bradshaw, made the Raiders pay, and Jack Ham showedwhy he is considered the greatest outside linebacker in history, intercepting "Snake" Stabler in key situations. Meanwhile the Steelers exerted their "smashmouth" identity, holding the Raiders, who were a good running team, to 29 yards, while both Rocky and Franco gained over 100 yards! Playing our best football when we had to, it's no wonder Dan Rooney compared the 05 Steelers to the 74 Steelers. Don't forget that the 74 Steelers had a QB controversy into the middle of the season, and Joe Greene, the most important player in the history of the team (IMO), was ready to leave the team and go home after a late season loss to the Oilers. What a game!!!

The Steelers have a history that is interesting to put it mildly. The Raider/Steeler rivalry is without a doubt a most interesting and hate filled experience. If you have not read the Steeler history on the Raider games, do yourself a favor and check them out.

klick81
07-03-2006, 06:25 PM
Wow...i've never seen this game (wasn't even born then!). Is there a dvd/vhs collection somewhere that I can check out?

nicesteel4life
07-03-2006, 06:34 PM
Go on ebay and buy a copy on dvd of the game
It was a true classic, I was a youngster then but remember watching it with my grandpa.

DIESELMAN
07-03-2006, 07:23 PM
The date was Dec. 29, 1974 and the Raiders’ ground game was averaging about 160 yards per game during the regular season. Pittsburgh tore it to shreds, it was the first true masterpiece of the Steel Curtain, an act of total devastation. All lanes of retreat were cut off. The Steelers won 24-13...........ALWAYS remember these names — Mad Dog White … Lambert … Joe Greene … Ham … Blount … Holmes.....

BlackNGold203
07-03-2006, 07:32 PM
Many believe this game was the turning point for the franchise...

The Raiders had just beaten the Dolphins...in a game many said was the "real AFC Championship"....Noll used these quotes as motivation...and the rest..as they say...is history...

silver & black
07-03-2006, 08:06 PM
Yep, I was 15 when that game was played. The Steelers handed us our ass that day! It was one of many memorable games between our two teams in the 70's. No one played games like the Steelers and Raiders in that decade!...................I sure would love to see it again!

BlackNGold203
07-03-2006, 10:31 PM
Yep, I was 15 when that game was played. The Steelers handed us our ass that day! It was one of many memorable games between our two teams in the 70's. No one played games like the Steelers and Raiders in that decade!...................I sure would love to see it again!

Amen to that....

the 70's....real football..no holds barred.....it was SO SWEET

Black@Gold Forever32
07-03-2006, 11:05 PM
Yep, I was 15 when that game was played. The Steelers handed us our ass that day! It was one of many memorable games between our two teams in the 70's. No one played games like the Steelers and Raiders in that decade!...................I sure would love to see it again!

I was five years from being born yet when this game was played. But I have heard and read about it many times.

BlacknGold Bleeder
07-04-2006, 12:59 AM
The Steelers and Raiders truly hated each other in those years!! Those Steeler defenses played with such intensity that the rules had to be changed to give other offenses a chance. That rivalry makes today's Bunghole rivalry look pathetic, then again it was 2 great teams playing "smash mouth football"!! Well maybe if the Ben'sgals ever learn how to play with any heart it could be another great rivalry! :bouncy:

LambertLunatic
07-04-2006, 01:47 AM
The Raiders were an awesome team back then. IMO, they were the 2nd best team of all time. They just had the misfortune of playing at the same time as the greatest team of all time. If not for the Steelers, the Raiders would have won 5 Super Bowls in the 70's. Is it any wonder that they hated us so much?

silver & black
07-04-2006, 10:10 AM
The Raiders were an awesome team back then. IMO, they were the 2nd best team of all time. They just had the misfortune of playing at the same time as the greatest team of all time. If not for the Steelers, the Raiders would have won 5 Super Bowls in the 70's. Is it any wonder that they hated us so much?

As much as I would like to disagree with you, I can't. The 70's Steelers were the best football team that has ever played... period. some argue that the 85 Bears were the best team ever... maybe, but, the Steelers dominated almost a whole decade. No other team has done that.

I know the 49ers of the 80's and the Cowboys of the 90's were very good but, they were nothing even close to what the Steelers were in the 70's... or the Raiders, for that matter.

The Raiders do have one thing over every other team in the NFL... they have been to a Superbowl in 4 out of the last 5 decades... no other team has done that.

The 70's, in my opinion, were the golden years for the NFL. We will never see teams like the Steelers and Raiders of that era again, unfortunately:frown:. The Steelers and the Raiders didn't play games.................. they had wars!

clevestinks
07-04-2006, 10:38 AM
That was a huge turning point in Steelers history. But history is written everyday. In the modern era bens game saving tackle will go down like the Immaculate reception.

silver & black
07-04-2006, 11:12 AM
That was a huge turning point in Steelers history. But history is written everyday. In the modern era bens game saving tackle will go down like the Immaculate reception.
Ahem... you mean Immaculate Deception, right?:smile: :bouncy:

LambertLunatic
07-04-2006, 12:39 PM
Ahem... you mean Immaculate Deception, right?

Still whining about that, huh? :smile:

SteelersFanInSeattle
07-04-2006, 12:58 PM
The intensity of the Raiders/Steelers games from then makes it sad to see the Raiders without their mystique. I can think of at least 6 teams I'd rather see in the cellar. Maybe Art Shell will bring them back to glory.

HometownGal
07-04-2006, 01:07 PM
ALWAYS remember these names ? Mad Dog White ? Lambert ? Joe Greene ? Ham ? Blount ? Holmes.....

Oh absolutely! Can't forget Donnie Shell, Andy Russell and Mike Wagner either. They weren't in the limelight as much as the other Steelers D players, but were all excellent at their positions, hard hitting as tough as nails.

Anyone remember Andy Russell's fumble recovery in the 1975 playoff game at TRS against the Baltimore Colts? LOL - he ran 93 yards and collapsed in the endzone all out of breath but grinning from ear to ear! :smile:

I loved the Steelers-Raiders rivalry as a kid. I hated them, admittedly, but so enjoyed the intense battles between the teams. Kenny "The Snake" Stabler, Fred Biletnikoff (with his stickum on his uniform- LOL!), Cliff Branch, the old guy, George Blanda, Art Shell, Bubba Smith, Jack Tatum. I strongly disliked Phil Villapiano back then - I thought he was a big meanie -:sofunny: I really miss that fierce rivalry and the intensity of which both teams played whenever they were on the same field. The rivalry with the Bengals pales in comparison.

SteelShooter
07-04-2006, 01:10 PM
The Raiders were an awesome team back then. IMO, they were the 2nd best team of all time. They just had the misfortune of playing at the same time as the greatest team of all time. If not for the Steelers, the Raiders would have won 5 Super Bowls in the 70's. Is it any wonder that they hated us so much?


I hear that!!! They really were something back then.

Unfortunately, I was alive at that time and remember, somewhat, these games. But that was the year that inspired me to play on the STEELERS team in little league. I almost threw a fit because they were originally going to put me on the VIKINGS. ....and I was going to have NONE of it! I wanted my Black helmet and black jersey and nothing else...

silver & black
07-04-2006, 02:54 PM
Still whining about that, huh? :smile:
Nah, just thought I'd have a little fun with it.:smile:

3 to be 4
07-04-2006, 04:01 PM
there may have never been a better collection of 3 teams in one year than the 1974 Steelers,Dolphins, and Raiders. there was one year in late 60's when the Packers,Cowboys,Rams, and Colts were all excellent too.
growing up there was a stretch when you always knew the Dolphins,Steelers,Raiders,Cowboys, Vikings ,and Rams would be winning their divisions.
kind of like now with the Patriots!

SteelerFanInCA
07-05-2006, 12:42 PM
I remembered Mel Blount that day. I remembered watching as they benched him. It was probably the right thing to do at the time. It helped keep the defense on their toes. Knoll left little margin for error.

GoFor6
07-05-2006, 12:52 PM
Ok - this is forcing me to raise my expectations for Nate - I now predict 32 catches for Nate in 2006.

LambertIsGod58
07-05-2006, 03:28 PM
'74 AFCCG was definately the most important in my opinion....Some people say that the Immaculate Reception in '72 was. It was the draft of 1974 that was the final piece of the puzzle for the Steelers Dynasty. Lambert was the centerpiece.

Stlrs4Life
07-05-2006, 07:40 PM
What a game it was. I remember sitting directly in front of the TV only to be yelled at by mom to back up or else I was going to go blind from sitting too close to the TV. And I agree, it probably was the most important game in Steeler history.

Lyn
07-05-2006, 08:56 PM
That was an awesome team and an awesome dynasty. It's hard to believe it took 20+ years to win another SB. I can only hope that today's team can shine like the Steel Curtain teams of the 70s.

Will we remember names like Ham, Greene, Greenwood, Blount, Harris, Bleier, and Bradshaw 20 years from now and be able to compare Hope, Ward, Polamalu, Bettis and Rothlisberger to these greats? I hope so.

silver & black
07-06-2006, 04:23 PM
Funny thing is, Madden has always said he is the one who convinced Chuck to play Bradshaw :dang: .
That is not really true. It was Al Davis.

Terry talked to Al Davis about trying to arrange a trade for him because he was so miserable in Pittsburgh. Al convinced him to stay and prove all the nay sayers wrong. At that time, we had Ken Stabler and really didn't have a place for him in Oakland. The rest, as they say, is history.

Al says it is one the dumbest things he has ever done!:dang: :smile:

BlackNGold203
07-06-2006, 04:28 PM
That is not really true. It was Al Davis.

Terry talked to Al Davis about trying to arrange a trade for him because he was so miserable in Pittsburgh. Al convinced him to stay and prove all the nay sayers wrong. At that time, we had Ken Stabler and really didn't have a place for him in Oakland. The rest, as they say, is history.

Al says it is one the dumbest things he has ever done!:dang: :smile:

I'll be damned....I never heard that one!!

Great story....Brad had some tough years here before he hit paydirt starting in 1972....

silver & black
07-06-2006, 07:19 PM
I'll be damned....I never heard that one!!

Great story....Brad had some tough years here before he hit paydirt starting in 1972....

Even though I am a die hard Raiders fan, I love Terry Bradshaw. The guy was just an amazing football player. It's hard to believe that he had such a hard time in his early years with the Steelers.

I would take Bradshaw over any QB that has played to date... even Montana.

clevestinks
07-06-2006, 08:02 PM
Ahem... you mean Immaculate Deception, right?:smile: :bouncy:
Read the history books! Al Davis will try and brain wash you all. Franco caught the ball, I have proof on a Coors light can

silver & black
07-06-2006, 08:34 PM
Read the history books! Al Davis will try and brain wash you all. Franco caught the ball, I have proof on a Coors light can
Lol, I'm sure you do!

If recall correctly, the question wasn't if Franco caught the ball or not... it was if the ball hit Frenchy Fuqua or not.

Either way, it's football lore now. Can't change a thing, so, might as well enjoy the fact that the Raiders are in the history books as being a part of one the greatest plays in the history of the game!:smile:

Stlrs4Life
07-06-2006, 08:51 PM
That was a huge turning point in Steelers history. But history is written everyday. In the modern era bens game saving tackle will go down like the Immaculate reception.


Sorry clevestinks, the plays don't even come as close in importance. The Immaculate Reception was the Start of the dynasty. The Tackle, saved a game.

Livinginthe past
07-06-2006, 08:53 PM
Lol, I'm sure you do!

If recall correctly, the question wasn't if Franco caught the ball or not... it was if the ball hit Frenchy Fuqua or not.

Either way, it's football lore now. Can't change a thing, so, might as well enjoy the fact that the Raiders are in the history books as being a part of one the greatest plays in the history of the game!:smile:

Im sure I have seen a clip of that somewhere.

Ball hit Fuqua or possibly Tatum - Tatum denies he touched the ball and fuqua won't say...hell, I know where my money sits.

A decision like that...surely has to go the way of the D doesn't it?

I would have thought 'if in doubt - rule it out' - perhaps the 3-rivers setting affected the decision to give the TD.

NM

BBC
07-06-2006, 08:55 PM
Im sure I have seen a clip of that somewhere.

Ball hit Fuqua or possibly Tatum - Tatum denies he touched the ball and fuqua won't say...hell, I know where my money sits.

A decision like that...surely has to go the way of the D doesn't it?

I would have thought 'if in doubt - rule it out' - perhaps the 3-rivers setting affected the decision to give the TD.

NM

Look at the way the ball deflected off of the two, it couldn't have been Frenchy.

Livinginthe past
07-06-2006, 08:58 PM
Sorry clevestinks, the plays don't even come as close in importance. The Immaculate Reception was the Start of the dynasty. The Tackle, saved a game.

You cannot say that for sure until another 4-5 years has passed.

Bens tackle could well be a large part of a (gulp) Steelers Dynasty in the 2000's * - who knows?

NM

* Any reference made to a potential Steelers Dynasty, that is not the 70's version is wholly theoretical - and unlikely....in this Patriots fans unbiased mind. :muhaha:

BBC
07-06-2006, 08:59 PM
Sorry clevestinks, the plays don't even come as close in importance. The Immaculate Reception was the Start of the dynasty. The Tackle, saved a game.

I don't know about that. The Steelers didn't even go to the Super Bowl after the Immaculate Reception. They lost to the Dolphins in the AFC Championship. The Tackle, on the other hand, not only saved a game, but an entire season. That play did launch the Steelers to a Super Bowl Title.

tony hipchest
07-06-2006, 09:03 PM
You cannot say that for sure until another 4-5 years has passed.

Bens tackle could well be a large part of a (gulp) Steelers Dynasty in the 2000's * - who knows?

NM

* Any reference made to a potential Steelers Dynasty, that is not the 70's version is wholly theoretical - and unlikely....in this Patriots fans unbiased mind. :muhaha: if the steelers win 1 more sb in the next 3 years we can finally declare a modern day dynasty and finally put that "patriots dynasty" rubbish to rest. :smoker:

Livinginthe past
07-06-2006, 09:14 PM
Look at the way the ball deflected off of the two, it couldn't have been Frenchy.

You know where you can find that clip?

All the links to various servers with it on are apparently dead now.

NM

Livinginthe past
07-06-2006, 09:17 PM
if the steelers win 1 more sb in the next 3 years we can finally declare a modern day dynasty and finally put that "patriots dynasty" rubbish to rest. :smoker:

So...2 out of 4 is now the requirement for a 'modern day dynasty' eh Tony?

1 out of the next 3 is certainly not beyond this team - I really dont think they will repeat this year while they are relying on Fast Willie - but if they pick up a powerback in next years draft and re-sign Ben and troy - then they have a great shot.

NM

tony hipchest
07-06-2006, 09:29 PM
So...2 out of 4 is now the requirement for a 'modern day dynasty' eh Tony?

1 out of the next 3 is certainly not beyond this team - I really dont think they will repeat this year while they are relying on Fast Willie - but if they pick up a powerback in next years draft and re-sign Ben and troy - then they have a great shot.

NM if willie and the lack of a power running game is the only setback to the steelers repeating, then im feeling pretty good. personally, i'd like to look at w. parkers sb record run as the most important play in a modern day dynasty.

Livinginthe past
07-06-2006, 09:38 PM
if willie and the lack of a power running game is the only setback to the steelers repeating, then im feeling pretty good. personally, i'd like to look at w. parkers sb record run as the most important play in a modern day dynasty.

Maybe it will be so Tony.

You have to wonder when them NFC teams are going to wake up and start producing some dominant teams instead of just good ones.

NM

tony hipchest
07-06-2006, 09:42 PM
Maybe it will be so Tony.

You have to wonder when them NFC teams are going to wake up and start producing some dominant teams instead of just good ones.

NM well th nfc had a dominant run for about 15-17 years (redskins, 49 ers, cowboys, giants)

the afc still has a while to go.

BBC
07-06-2006, 10:47 PM
You know where you can find that clip?

All the links to various servers with it on are apparently dead now.

NM

Nope, but I'm sure you've seen a clip of it sometime in the past.

Livinginthe past
07-07-2006, 03:13 AM
well th nfc had a dominant run for about 15-17 years (redskins, 49 ers, cowboys, giants)

the afc still has a while to go.

Sure I remember when the Redskins and 49ers were dominant - I just meant that this current cycle shouldnt last too long - what with the parity of the salary cap.

At the moment, the AFC contender is going to be a hot favourite for the SB which bodes well for potential Steeler/Patriot Dynasties - but if that dynamic alters then its going to make things more difficult.

NM

Livinginthe past
07-07-2006, 03:15 AM
Nope, but I'm sure you've seen a clip of it sometime in the past.

I did, but it was a long time ago.

At the grand age of 30, I have found that my memory will play tricks on me.

NM

HometownGal
07-07-2006, 09:39 AM
I did, but it was a long time ago.

At the grand age of 30, I have found that my memory will play tricks on me.

NM

Just wait until you hit 40. It goes from playing tricks on you to wreaking havoc! :whistle:

BlackNGold203
07-07-2006, 09:48 AM
Just wait until you hit 40. It goes from playing tricks on you to wreaking havoc! :whistle:

I'm 45 HometownGal...and I'm here to reply to your post.....

Ummm....

your post....ummmmm.....

OHHHH...right!!!....replying to your post.......

well the way I see it...ummm.....

What did you post again???

:dang: :dang: :dang:

Mosca
07-07-2006, 09:48 AM
As a Steelers fan from that area, I agree wholeheartedley with the belief that the '70s Raiders were one of the best teams of all time; I'd go as far as to say they were as good as the Steelers, but lost some crucial games and therefore the mantle.

Player for player, man for man, though, and remember I'm black and gold right to the heart, for almost every great Steeler from that era you can name a great Raider. Stabler. Branch. Biletnikoff. Shell. Upshaw. Tatum. Casper. Blanda. Otto. Guy. Hendricks. Atkinson. Colzie. "Stickum" Hayes. Madden.

Maybe some of these guys didn't have as long careers as their Steelers counterparts; but a case could be equally made that with two more big game wins over the Black & Gold ('74 and '75 season AFC Championship games), some of these guys would be HOFers instead of some Steelers. But as we know it didn't happen that way.

Those of us who are old enough to remember, the Raiders were at once our most hated team and equally our most favorite non-Steelers team of that era. (Not counting the Cowboys, who weren't hated but despised, which is a different emotion entirely. There was never any respect towards the Cowboys of the '70s.) Steelers/Raiders matchups were ALWAYS hotly anticipated not just in those cities but by football fans nationwide, and were easily some of the best football games of that era and some of them, of all time.


Tom

Mosca
07-07-2006, 10:18 AM
Even though I am a die hard Raiders fan, I love Terry Bradshaw. The guy was just an amazing football player. It's hard to believe that he had such a hard time in his early years with the Steelers.

(Caution, minor thread drift ahead)


Weeeeeelllllll......

Bradshaw's early stats:


1970, 6 TDs and 24 Int, 38% completion
1971, 13 TDs and 22 Int, 54%
1972, 12 and 12, 47%
1973, 10 and 15, 49%
1974, 7 and 8 (injured), 45%

He didn't really catch on until '75, when he went 18 TD and only 9 Int and 57.7% completion. But it was really those first two years that laid the groundwork for his bad early rep, which in retrospect was harsh and undeserved. He was tossed into the starting lineup as a rookie during an era when QBs typically held the clipboard for 3 or 4 years before taking the reins, and in an era when a lot of them called the plays in the huddle. I don't know that he called the plays early in his career, I doubt it. But he still takes great pride in being one of the last QBs to have done that; he matured during the period when it became common for the plays to be shuttled in from the head coach or the offensive coordinator.


Go to Pro Football Reference (http://www.pro-football-reference.com) and compare the lifetime stats of Bradshaw (HOF) and Stabler (non HOF). Brad went to 3 Pro Bowls, Stabler to 4; Brad finished with 27,989 yards passing, Stabler with 27,938; Stabler's TD/INT ratio was 194/222, Brad's was 212/210; Stabler averaged 7.9 yds/att and 59% completion, Brad averaged 7.1 and 51%. And BOTH guys had a reputation of big game players, with Stabler being one of the best clutch players of that era. If anyone from that mid '70s Raiders team is undeservedly not in the HOF, Snake is the guy.


Tom

silver & black
07-07-2006, 12:03 PM
(Caution, minor thread drift ahead)


Weeeeeelllllll......

Bradshaw's early stats:


1970, 6 TDs and 24 Int, 38% completion
1971, 13 TDs and 22 Int, 54%
1972, 12 and 12, 47%
1973, 10 and 15, 49%
1974, 7 and 8 (injured), 45%

He didn't really catch on until '75, when he went 18 TD and only 9 Int and 57.7% completion. But it was really those first two years that laid the groundwork for his bad early rep, which in retrospect was harsh and undeserved. He was tossed into the starting lineup as a rookie during an era when QBs typically held the clipboard for 3 or 4 years before taking the reins, and in an era when a lot of them called the plays in the huddle. I don't know that he called the plays early in his career, I doubt it. But he still takes great pride in being one of the last QBs to have done that; he matured during the period when it became common for the plays to be shuttled in from the head coach or the offensive coordinator.


Go to Pro Football Reference (http://www.pro-football-reference.com) and compare the lifetime stats of Bradshaw (HOF) and Stabler (non HOF). Brad went to 3 Pro Bowls, Stabler to 4; Brad finished with 27,989 yards passing, Stabler with 27,938; Stabler's TD/INT ratio was 194/222, Brad's was 212/210; Stabler averaged 7.9 yds/att and 59% completion, Brad averaged 7.1 and 51%. And BOTH guys had a reputation of big game players, with Stabler being one of the best clutch players of that era. If anyone from that mid '70s Raiders team is undeservedly not in the HOF, Snake is the guy.


Tom
Thanks for that info. I didn't realize that Stabler and Bradshaw were so close in stats.

It kind of sticks in the craw of Raider Nation that Snake isn't in the HOF. The deserving Steelers and Raiders that should be in the Hall needs to be rectified.

Big D
07-07-2006, 12:09 PM
Thanks for that info. I didn't realize that Stabler and Bradshaw were so close in stats.

It kind of sticks in the craw of Raider Nation that Snake isn't in the HOF. The deserving Steelers and Raiders that should be in the Hall needs to be rectified.
what sticks in the craw of this steeler fan is that bradshaw wanted to get traded to the raiders

Mosca
07-07-2006, 01:14 PM
what sticks in the craw of this steeler fan is that bradshaw wanted to get traded to the raiders

Eh, he was a callow yout'. I'm not sure he ever did lose that chip on his shoulder though. Brad's a different sort of guy, I guess.


Tom

LambertIsGod58
07-23-2006, 12:33 PM
[QUOTE=silver & black]Even though I am a die hard Raiders fan, I love Terry Bradshaw. The guy was just an amazing football player. It's hard to believe that he had such a hard time in his early years with the Steelers.

I would take Bradshaw over any QB that has played to date... even Montana.[/QUOTe


You love Bradshaw....so do I. But, I would not take him over Montana. It was the Steelers ground game and defense that created that dynasty of the 70's. If you look at Bradshaw's numbers, he was average at best. What he excelled at was playing well in the big games. If the Steelers of the 70's had Montana as their QB, that would have won more than 4 titles IMO.

silver & black
07-23-2006, 04:15 PM
[QUOTE=silver & black]Even though I am a die hard Raiders fan, I love Terry Bradshaw. The guy was just an amazing football player. It's hard to believe that he had such a hard time in his early years with the Steelers.

I would take Bradshaw over any QB that has played to date... even Montana.[/QUOTe


You love Bradshaw....so do I. But, I would not take him over Montana. It was the Steelers ground game and defense that created that dynasty of the 70's. If you look at Bradshaw's numbers, he was average at best. What he excelled at was playing well in the big games. If the Steelers of the 70's had Montana as their QB, that would have won more than 4 titles IMO.
You might be right about that.

While I can't argue that Montana wasn't great, I think a lot of what he was has to be attributed to the fact that he had such an outstanding cast around him.

What would Dan Fouts or Dan Marino have been able to do with the 70's Steelers or the 80's 49ers?... or even the 70's Raiders?

tony hipchest
07-23-2006, 04:24 PM
bradshaw himself had said he would do fine and have great numbers if he only had to dink and dunk for 5-20 yards per pass. bradshaw was the blond bomber and taking shots deep downfield became the steelers specialty. of course he was gonna have a lower completion %. if montana were asked to do the same things in the steelers offense his comp % woulda been about 40-45%. montana would fail in the steelers offense. bradshaw coulda dont the west coast with his eyes closed.

LambertIsGod58
07-23-2006, 06:00 PM
Bradshaw wasn't great because of his decision making....he has as TD's as Int's for his career. We haven't even talked about fumbles yet. Hell, Bradshaw had never thrown for 300yds in a game until 1978 or 1979. He was a rookie in 1970. And on top of that, he consistently start until 1975. Constantly being pulled for "Jefferson Street" Joe Gilliam and Terry Hanratty.

LambertIsGod58
07-23-2006, 06:04 PM
Don't get me wrong....I love Brad as much as anyone. He's just not as great as people try and give him credit for. With the running game and defense they had, Trent Dilfer could have won four Super Bowl titles. That's my opinion. The sad fact is that we didn't really do anything with Swann & Stallworth until '78. It was more of result of rule changes. So, I guess we'll never really know how great Bradshaw was. Looking at stats and keeping in mind that the game was different then, he wasn't great. He was great in the big games. And that's all that matters.....He was a great QB in the big games.

Atlanta Dan
07-23-2006, 09:51 PM
Bradshaw played within the system that worked at the time - when the Steelers ran the ball for the 1974-75 SB championships, that was how the game was played at the championship level (see, e.g. - Green Bay SB I & II and Miami SB VII & VIII). The Raiders were more fun to watch but until 1976 the Raiders always flamed out in the playoffs (and would have lost to the ball control Steelers that year if Harris & Bleier had not been injured).

To Bradshaw's credit, when the rules changes occurred he immediately had the skills (and, I admit, 2 Hall of Fame WRs) to take advantage. If you ever have a chance to see tapes of the the complete XIII and XIV Super Bowl wins and Bradshaw's throws, his performance compares favorably to anything Montana, Marino, Young & Elway were able to do.

Montana arguably is the best QB of the post-rules change era, but you cannot separate his success from having a coach who designed an offense that is still being run almost 20 years after Walsh retired. In terms of physical talent I am willing to match up Bradshaw with anyone. As far as stats, it is unrealistic to compare pre-rules change and post-rules change QBs by that measure - they are 2 different games.