88Comrade2000 Posted February 14, 2018 Share Posted February 14, 2018 On 12/11/2017 at 3:38 PM, carex said: I think if the Skins move then we have an AFL team in a couple years. Because the NFL didn't quite take off in the 60s so much as football did. If the NFL took off they wouldn't have needed to merge with the rival league I agree Washington would've gotten an AFL team but not as soon as you mention. My guess, when the AFL-NFL agreed to merge and expanded teams in the Late 60's; that's when Washington would've gotten a franchise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebluefood Posted February 14, 2018 Author Share Posted February 14, 2018 12 hours ago, Rdskns2000 said: I agree Washington would've gotten an AFL team but not as soon as you mention. My guess, when the AFL-NFL agreed to merge and expanded teams in the Late 60's; that's when Washington would've gotten a franchise. Kind of like what happened with the Bengals? Interesting. Why do you say that, though? I'd imagine both leagues would be eager to swoop in and secure the Washington market. Even in the late 1950s when the team was awful and losing money, they still sold tickets. https://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/1958/attendance.htm They weren't all sell outs, mind you but Griffith Stadium wasn't a ghost town on game day. Plus, you have the prospect of a new team in a new, state of the art stadium - the first of its kind. That and a built in fanbase across the south that might not necessarily move with the team to Dallas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
88Comrade2000 Posted February 14, 2018 Share Posted February 14, 2018 6 minutes ago, thebluefood said: Kind of like what happened with the Bengals? Interesting. Why do you say that, though? I'd imagine both leagues would be eager to swoop in and secure the Washington market. Even in the late 1950s when the team was awful and losing money, they still sold tickets. https://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/1958/attendance.htm They weren't all sell outs, mind you but Griffith Stadium wasn't a ghost town on game day. Plus, you have the prospect of a new team in a new, state of the art stadium - the first of its kind. That and a built in fanbase across the south that might not necessarily move with the team to Dallas. My guess, in 1960; they wouldn't want to compete against the Baltimore market. Especially, when the Washington market would've just failed, in this scenario. A new league, as the AFL was in 1960; wouldn't go into a just failed NFL market. When they added teams in the late 1960's: Miami and Cincinnati for the AFL/AFC and New Orleans and Atlanta for the NFL/NFC; they went into new places. My guess, one of those cities would've been the 8th AFL franchise in 1960. Probably Cincinnati. Washington would've been one the late 1960's expansion franchises. Just think, our rivals wouid've been the Pats, Jets, Dolphins and one other team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebluefood Posted February 15, 2018 Author Share Posted February 15, 2018 19 hours ago, Rdskns2000 said: My guess, in 1960; they wouldn't want to compete against the Baltimore market. Especially, when the Washington market would've just failed, in this scenario. A new league, as the AFL was in 1960; wouldn't go into a just failed NFL market. When they added teams in the late 1960's: Miami and Cincinnati for the AFL/AFC and New Orleans and Atlanta for the NFL/NFC; they went into new places. My guess, one of those cities would've been the 8th AFL franchise in 1960. Probably Cincinnati. Washington would've been one the late 1960's expansion franchises. Just think, our rivals wouid've been the Pats, Jets, Dolphins and one other team. This is why alternative history is one of my favorite genres of conversation but something I'm kind of afraid of writing about because if that deal goes through, the ripple effect is tremendous. The NFL Network recently did a "Top 10 'What If' Scenarios" show and a glaring omission was this deal between Marshall and Murchison. This changes the entire landscape of professional football and the culture at large and it should be considered more because 1.) It happened at a pivotal point in pro football (the AFL's creation and the NFL's corresponding expansion, something Marshall opposed), D.C. (the city becoming the first majority-minority city in America), and U.S. history ("white flight" sending people to the suburbs and the Sunbelt). 2.) It almost happened. If Marshall just got out of his own way and let sleeping dogs lie, the sale would have gone through. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RVAskins Posted February 15, 2018 Share Posted February 15, 2018 On 12/12/2017 at 11:57 AM, pjfootballer said: I hate the name Clint: Clint Murchison Clint Longley I like the name Clint: Clint Didier Clinton Portis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carex Posted February 15, 2018 Share Posted February 15, 2018 On 2/14/2018 at 2:21 PM, Rdskns2000 said: My guess, in 1960; they wouldn't want to compete against the Baltimore market. Especially, when the Washington market would've just failed, in this scenario. A new league, as the AFL was in 1960; wouldn't go into a just failed NFL market. When they added teams in the late 1960's: Miami and Cincinnati for the AFL/AFC and New Orleans and Atlanta for the NFL/NFC; they went into new places. My guess, one of those cities would've been the 8th AFL franchise in 1960. Probably Cincinnati. Washington would've been one the late 1960's expansion franchises. Just think, our rivals wouid've been the Pats, Jets, Dolphins and one other team. they went up against the New York Giants and Oakland was just across the bridge from the 49ers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrcaniac Posted February 16, 2018 Share Posted February 16, 2018 On 12/12/2017 at 2:25 PM, pjfootballer said: That's true. There were 5 separate plans and 4 of them had Dallas in other divisions. I was trying to look to see why they didn't put them geographically at the time (1970) and I think the problem was, was the NFC only had 2 "true west" teams in the Rams and 49ers. But, it could have gone like this: NFCE- Washington, NY Giants, Philadelphia, Atlanta NFCC- Green Bay, Minnesota, Detroit, Chicago, New Orleans NFCW- LA Rams, San Francisco, Dallas, St. Louis Cards I heard the first thing pulled out of the hat was 6 7/8ths IIRC, the Cardinals were in the East because St Louis was the beer capital of the US, and the NFL wanted to make sure that the execs back in St Louis were kept happy by having the team on TV in DC, NYC, PHI and Dal for half of the games every season. 6 hours ago, carex said: they went up against the New York Giants and Oakland was just across the bridge from the 49ers Also against the Rams in LA with the Chargers before they moved to San Diego. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.