1967 Blues for the Browns

Saban1
Posts: 718
Joined: Sun Oct 12, 2014 9:14 pm

Re: 1967 Blues for the Browns

Post by Saban1 »

Watching the highlights film of the Vikings game, I see that you are right. It was a clothesline rather than a grabbed face mask and a yank. It still was a dirty play by Hackbart. If Collins retaliated, then the refs may have called it offsetting penalties.

Leroy Kelly did return a punt for a TD, but it was called back due to a clipping penalty.

The Browns were fortunate to win that game, and it was a tough one. They could have easily lost.

Ryan was sacked eight times in that game. One of the times, he fell down. The Vikings already had a very good pass rush.
BD Sullivan
Posts: 2318
Joined: Mon Oct 13, 2014 1:30 pm

Re: 1967 Blues for the Browns

Post by BD Sullivan »

Another game that they should have lost was the first game against the Cardinals in Cleveland, which they won 20-16. All 20 of the Browns' points came off four of the five St. Louis turnovers and the Cardinals came close to taking 20-17 lead in the fourth quarter. They had 1st-and-10 at the Browns 13, but the Browns held them to a FG.
Saban1
Posts: 718
Joined: Sun Oct 12, 2014 9:14 pm

Re: 1967 Blues for the Browns

Post by Saban1 »

I think that the luckiest thing to happen to the Cleveland Browns in 1967 was Cards quarterback Charley Johnson being drafted into the army. St. Louis had to go with second year man Jim Hart at quarterback that year, and Hart hardly played at all in his rookie year of 1966. Hart was to become a good quarterback in the NFL and had a long playing career, but he led the NFL in interceptions in 1967 with 30, including three against the Browns in their first game that year that was played in Cleveland.
JohnH19
Posts: 910
Joined: Mon Oct 13, 2014 6:18 pm

Re: 1967 Blues for the Browns

Post by JohnH19 »

In Hart’s defence, even though he was somewhat inconsistent he did throw for 19 TDs and over 3,000 yards. The Cardinals offence was quite good but the defence was not.

It really is unfortunate for Johnson and the Cardinals that he had to serve army duty. He had a terrific start to his career but he wasn’t quite the same when he returned to the Cards in 1969 (despite his six TD pass game against New Orleans) and then the next two years in Houston were a disaster. He found his game again in 1972 with Denver. He had three very good years there before tailing off in 1975, his final season.
Saban1
Posts: 718
Joined: Sun Oct 12, 2014 9:14 pm

Re: 1967 Blues for the Browns

Post by Saban1 »

JohnH19 wrote:In Hart’s defence, even though he was somewhat inconsistent he did throw for 19 TDs and over 3,000 yards. The Cardinals offence was quite good but the defence was not.

It really is unfortunate for Johnson and the Cardinals that he had to serve army duty. He had a terrific start to his career but he wasn’t quite the same when he returned to the Cards in 1969 (despite his six TD pass game against New Orleans) and then the next two years in Houston were a disaster. He found his game again in 1972 with Denver. He had three very good years there before tailing off in 1975, his final season.


Jim Hart had a strong arm and had a lot of talent, but in 1967, he was kind of a raw talent. He did a very good job considering how much experience he had at the time. Cleveland was lucky to beat the Cards in 1967 in both of their games.

Also hurting St. Louis that year and through much of the 60's is their continuing problems with the New York Giants. The Cards had trouble with the Giants even when the Giants had bad seasons and lost twice to that New York team in 1967. I am not sure that even Charley Johnson would have made a difference in those two games.

As far as Johnson goes, I always thought that he was a good quarterback.
Saban1
Posts: 718
Joined: Sun Oct 12, 2014 9:14 pm

Re: 1967 Blues for the Browns

Post by Saban1 »

In Cleveland's second game with the Cards in 1967, the Browns were in the same situation that they were in 1964 when they played St. Louis in the second last regular season game of the season. They could clinch with a win over the Cards both years, but if they lost, then they still had another game that they could clinch a playoff spot with a win.

In 1964, they lost their second St.Louis game, but beat the Giants the next week to win the Eastern Conference title. In 1967, they barely beat the Cards 20 to 16 in their second game with St. Louis, and then did not have to beat the Philadelphia Eagles in their regular season final game.

In the Eagles game, Cleveland played many of their reserves including Gary Lane at quarterback instead of Frank Ryan, who was rested to help get over some of his injuries. Ernie Green sat out the game as well and I think that Gary Collins only played in the first half. Just about every reserve Browns player got to play in that game, and Cleveland lost that Philadelphia game that they did not need to win.

If Cleveland had lost their second game with the Cards, then they probably would have beaten the Eagles if they needed to. They may have needed to win in that Eagles game if they had lost to St. Louis because in that case, the Cards would have had more incentive to beat the Giants in their last game in 1967 and if they won that one too, then the Cards would have finished the season with a record of 8 wins, 5 losses, and one tie. Cleveland then would have had to beat Philadelphia to finish with a 9 and 5 record.
BD Sullivan
Posts: 2318
Joined: Mon Oct 13, 2014 1:30 pm

Re: 1967 Blues for the Browns

Post by BD Sullivan »

Saban wrote:If Cleveland had lost their second game with the Cards, then they probably would have beaten the Eagles if they needed to. They may have needed to win in that Eagles game if they had lost to St. Louis because in that case, the Cards would have had more incentive to beat the Giants in their last game in 1967 and if they won that one too, then the Cards would have finished the season with a record of 8 wins, 5 losses, and one tie. Cleveland then would have had to beat Philadelphia to finish with a 9 and 5 record.
Had they lost the Cardinals game, Ryan would have presumably started. That's because Dick Shiner, who was supposed to start that Eagles game, slipped on the ice rolling out and broke his left leg in the final practice the day before. How effective Ryan would have been is debatable, considering his left shoulder was severely banged up amid a myriad of other ailments.
Saban1
Posts: 718
Joined: Sun Oct 12, 2014 9:14 pm

Re: 1967 Blues for the Browns

Post by Saban1 »

BD Sullivan wrote:
Saban wrote:If Cleveland had lost their second game with the Cards, then they probably would have beaten the Eagles if they needed to. They may have needed to win in that Eagles game if they had lost to St. Louis because in that case, the Cards would have had more incentive to beat the Giants in their last game in 1967 and if they won that one too, then the Cards would have finished the season with a record of 8 wins, 5 losses, and one tie. Cleveland then would have had to beat Philadelphia to finish with a 9 and 5 record.
Had they lost the Cardinals game, Ryan would have presumably started. That's because Dick Shiner, who was supposed to start that Eagles game, slipped on the ice rolling out and broke his left leg in the final practice the day before. How effective Ryan would have been is debatable, considering his left shoulder was severely banged up amid a myriad of other ailments.

I think that Ryan would have started in the 1967 Philadelphia game if they had lost the week before to the Cards. They would have had to win that game against Philly to get in the playoffs. I believe that Cleveland would have won despite all their problems that year, not so much because they were good, but more because the Eagles were so bad (they lost to the Giants 44 to 7).

As far as Shiner was concerned, I don't think that the Browns had him in mind for any future plans and would have much preferred to have Ninowski as their backup quarterback, but Ninowski didn't show up in the Browns training camp that year. 1967 was the one year that they really could have used Nino, but that's the breaks.
Saban1
Posts: 718
Joined: Sun Oct 12, 2014 9:14 pm

Re: 1967 Blues for the Browns

Post by Saban1 »

Cleveland lost to the Giants in New York, 38 to 34, in the first game between the two teams in 1967. Cleveland had 4 turnovers in that game including 3 fumbles lost. I know that Giants punter Ernie Koy shanked a punt and it hit a Browns player, George Youngblood, as he was running down the field to try to block for a return. The Giants recovered for Cleveland's first turnover in that game.

Carl Ward fumbled a kickoff and the Giants recovered for the Browns second lost fumble. I don't remember the third lost fumble that Cleveland had even though I saw the game at the time. I believe that the fumble was by Leroy Kelly, but don't know for sure. Anyone know?

There was also an interception by Vince Costello and a Gary Collins punt blocked by the Giants rookie Ken Avery.
Saban1
Posts: 718
Joined: Sun Oct 12, 2014 9:14 pm

Re: 1967 Blues for the Browns

Post by Saban1 »

Saban wrote:Cleveland lost to the Giants in New York, 38 to 34, in the first game between the two teams in 1967. Cleveland had 4 turnovers in that game including 3 fumbles lost. I know that Giants punter Ernie Koy shanked a punt and it hit a Browns player, George Youngblood, as he was running down the field to try to block for a return. The Giants recovered for Cleveland's first turnover in that game.

Carl Ward fumbled a kickoff and the Giants recovered for the Browns second lost fumble. I don't remember the third lost fumble that Cleveland had even though I saw the game at the time. I believe that the fumble was by Leroy Kelly, but don't know for sure. Anyone know?

There was also an interception by Vince Costello and a Gary Collins punt blocked by the Giants rookie Ken Avery.


I think it must have been Leroy Kelly that lost the third fumble to the Giants in Cleveland's first game with them in 1967. I read where Cleveland fumbled five times that day and lost three of them. I read that Kelly fumbled twice and Youngblood, Ward, and Ben Davis each fumbled once. I remember Davis, Ward, and Youngblood's fumbles. For some reason, I don't remember Kelly's, even though I did watch that game at the time. Davis recovered his own fumble, but Youngblood and Ward didn't. So, by process of elimination, Kelly must have recovered one of his fumbles and the Giants must have recovered the other one.

I was always reminded in 1967 of how lucky that the Browns were that year, and i guess that they were in the Cardinal games and maybe a couple of others, but they certainly were not in that Giants 38 to 34 loss. They had four turnovers including three lost fumbles and a blocked punt that turned into an easy six points for the Giants. Ward fumbled a kickoff that turned into another easy six points for the New York Giants. The first turnover was a Giants' shanked punt that hit George Youngblood's leg as he was running down the field to try to help set up a return for Cleveland.

So, the Giants certainly got the breaks in that game. Ironically, Frank Ryan had one of his best games passing in that Giants game, but I guess that it was a wasted effort.
Post Reply