NFL Throwback YouTube channel ranks every Super Bowl winner, and loser in two seperate videos.

[Brian wolf]

I can remember watching the 2000/01 NFC Championship game at home for the Giants against the Vikings ... It was obvious the Vikings layed down but they showed shots of Cris Carter, who was upset and embarrassed for the Vikings fans, knowing he might not ever get another chance at a championship.

[SeahawkFever]

Good discussion SeahawksFever, but the Chiefs would have shut down Tarkenton in SB IV just like they shut down Kapp, who had a stronger arm and tried to loosen their secondary in the game.

Thats what I was saying about the Dolphins blowing them out in the 73/74 SB; once the Vikings lost their second SB, doubt would creep into their heads, which made it easier for the Steelers and Raiders to beat them later. The Bills went through the same thing after losing their second SB to Washington. They couldnt overcome a certain mentality, and pressed more against the Cowboys, who didnt have their experience.

Awhile back I pondered what would have happened if Fran Tarkenton spent his entire career in Minnesota.

I have a different thought now:

The Vikings may still lose in 1969 because of the matchup with the Chiefs (though they go at least 13-1, if not undefeated in the regular season as one of those losses was to the Giants).

But I think the Vikings could’ve won it all in 1970 with Tarkenton instead of Gary Cuozzo at quarterback.

At face value, sure, the 1970 Vikings went one and done in the playoffs losing to the 49ers with MVP John Brodie (one of the most overlooked seasons there is in my book but that’s for another day).

But consider that the Viking defense held that top ranked 49ers offense to 17 points, and while one of their touchdowns was defensive, the Vikings still lost by only three points.

I think they could’ve won that game with a better quarterback.

If so, they are then facing the Cowboys who were good in 1970, but were starting Craig Morton instead of Roger Staubach. A team they beat in week five of the 1970 season 54-13, and in a game where Staubach attempted more passes than Morton interestingly.

Not saying they blow out Dallas, but I think they could’ve won.

And waiting for them out of the AFC would be the team that barely beat Dallas in Super Bowl V: The 1970 Colts.

A team that appears to be solid, but along with the 2011 Giants, is sometimes referred to as one of the worst Super Bowl champions.

I revise my old opinion, if Fran Tarkenton doesn’t play for the Giants, I think the 1969 Vikings potentially go down as the 2007 Patriots of their generation, and could’ve won it all in 1970.

What’s unfortunate for the Vikings is that the Purple People Eaters were arguably at their best in 1969, 70, and 71, and those were the last three years Tarkenton was in New York. Their defense was still very good in the mid 70’s, but arguably wasn’t as dominant as that three year period.

[JuggernautJ]

But I think the Vikings could’ve won it all in 1970 with Tarkenton instead of Gary Cuozzo at quarterback.

Not that it has any bearing on real life but I played the 1970 Vikings in a Strat-O-Matic Football league.
We were allowed one "draft pick" to add to the team and I took Fran Tarkenton (I forget from what year his card was but it was one in which he played for the Giants).

I won my Conference with that team and then, of course, lost the "Super Bowl" to the Chiefs (on a last second punt return for a TD).
Talk about mirroring real life...

And yes, it was more than forty years ago... and yes, it still ticks me off...

[7DnBrnc53]

The 1984 49ers are WAY too high

They played a very weak schedule

89 OTOH had to navigate a much more rugged NFC

Not in the playoffs, they didn't. The Vikings and Rams turned out to be roadkill, and then they ran into a team with a sick QB and a coach running the wrong defense in the Super Bowl.

Most of those 84-96 NFC teams are overrated to some degree, anyway. They get more credit than they deserve because of how they won the Super Bowl (by big scores over average opponents, with some exceptions, like SB 23, 25, and 30).

[SeahawkFever]

The 1984 49ers are WAY too high

They played a very weak schedule

89 OTOH had to navigate a much more rugged NFC

Not in the playoffs, they didn't. The Vikings and Rams turned out to be roadkill, and then they ran into a team with a sick QB and a coach running the wrong defense in the Super Bowl.

Most of those 84-96 NFC teams are overrated to some degree, anyway. They get more credit than they deserve because of how they won the Super Bowl (by big scores over average opponents, with some exceptions, like SB 23, 25, and 30).

John Elway was sick in Super Bowl 24? What did he have?

As for those teams, the Super Bowls most of them won were definitely indicative of the conferences being imbalanced, but credit the teams that won it all for getting through the tougher conference if so.

At least that’s what I’d say. What say you?

[7DnBrnc53]

John Elway was sick in Super Bowl 24? What did he have?

A bad cold and a cough. He wouldn't have played if it wasn't the Super Bowl.

[CSKreager]

The 1984 49ers are WAY too high

They played a very weak schedule

89 OTOH had to navigate a much more rugged NFC

Not in the playoffs, they didn't. The Vikings and Rams turned out to be roadkill, and then they ran into a team with a sick QB and a coach running the wrong defense in the Super Bowl. .

And beating the 9-7 Giants/Steve Fuller is supposed to impress me?

[7DnBrnc53]

The 1984 49ers are WAY too high

They played a very weak schedule

89 OTOH had to navigate a much more rugged NFC

Not in the playoffs, they didn't. The Vikings and Rams turned out to be roadkill, and then they ran into a team with a sick QB and a coach running the wrong defense in the Super Bowl. .

And beating the 9-7 Giants/Steve Fuller is supposed to impress me?

No, it's not. I am saying that both teams didn't really play anyone in the playoffs. I am a hard-core 49er hater, dude.

[Bryan]

I revise my old opinion, if Fran Tarkenton doesn’t play for the Giants, I think the 1969 Vikings potentially go down as the 2007 Patriots of their generation, and could’ve won it all in 1970.

But if hypothetically Tarkenton never goes to the Giants, then the Vikings don't have Ron Yary at RT (or Clint Jones or Bob Grim).

[Bryan]

No, it's not. I am saying that both teams didn't really play anyone in the playoffs.

That 84 Super Bowl had a Clash of the Titans buildup. It was viewed as a coin toss between Marino and Montana. The 89 Super Bowl was a joke. The Broncos had already been blown out twice in the Super Bowl, and here comes the 89 Niners. No one gave the Broncos a chance, there was a 13 point spread, and the game wasn't ever competitive.