Cleveland (9 and 5) ended up 2 games ahead of the New York Giants (7 and 7) in the 1967 Century Division. The difference turned out to be their games with their Western Conference, Central Division foes as Cleveland split the 4 games, winning and losing 2 each. The Giants lost all 4 games in their games against teams from the west.
In their games with teams from the Eastern Conference, the Browns and Giants both had the same record including a split in their games against each other. So, if the Giants could have gotten a split in their games with the Central Division teams of Green Bay, Detroit, Chicago, and Minnesota, then their record would have been 9 and 5, which is the same as the Browns. I wonder who would have gotten the tie breaker in that case?
1967 Blues for the Browns
Re: 1967 Blues for the Browns
I don't know if the Browns playoff bowl (runner up bowl) game after the 1967 playoff game with the Cowboys would count as a post Dallas game letdown. The game was called by some a glorified exhibition game and a noted head coach as a hinky dinky game in a hinky dinky town between...etc. The winning team players got about $500 more than the losing team players, so that may have given them some incentive to win.
Anyway, after Cleveland lost to Dallas, 52 to 14 in the 1st round of the playoffs, they were required to play in the playoff bowl against the Rams, which they lost by the score of 30 to 6.
Prior to the game, Gary Collins was interviewed and said that due to Cleveland's poor season and terrible playoff game, they had to stay with the Rams. That meant that the Browns had to at least give the Rams a good game. They didn't. Of course, you would never hear a player say that the players did not give a darn about that game. If a player said that, he would probably be fined or worse.
A local newspaper had a headline in the sports section the day after the game saying, "Rams Toy With Browns 30 To 6"
Anyway, after Cleveland lost to Dallas, 52 to 14 in the 1st round of the playoffs, they were required to play in the playoff bowl against the Rams, which they lost by the score of 30 to 6.
Prior to the game, Gary Collins was interviewed and said that due to Cleveland's poor season and terrible playoff game, they had to stay with the Rams. That meant that the Browns had to at least give the Rams a good game. They didn't. Of course, you would never hear a player say that the players did not give a darn about that game. If a player said that, he would probably be fined or worse.
A local newspaper had a headline in the sports section the day after the game saying, "Rams Toy With Browns 30 To 6"
Re: 1967 Blues for the Browns
Saban wrote:I don't know if the Browns playoff bowl (runner up bowl) game after the 1967 playoff game with the Cowboys would count as a post Dallas game letdown. The game was called by some a glorified exhibition game and a noted head coach as a hinky dinky game in a hinky dinky town between...etc. The winning team players got about $500 more than the losing team players, so that may have given them some incentive to win.
Anyway, after Cleveland lost to Dallas, 52 to 14 in the 1st round of the playoffs, they were required to play in the playoff bowl against the Rams, which they lost by the score of 30 to 6.
Prior to the game, Gary Collins was interviewed and said that due to Cleveland's poor season and terrible playoff game, they had to stay with the Rams. That meant that the Browns had to at least give the Rams a good game. They didn't. Of course, you would never hear a player say that the players did not give a darn about that game. If a player said that, he would probably be fined or worse.
A local newspaper had a headline in the sports section the day after the game saying, "Rams Toy With Browns 30 To 6"
I think that the Rams played that Playoff Bowl game like a regular season game playing their regulars for almost the entire game and maybe playing some reserves at the end of the game, but I don't know about that. Cleveland, on the other hand, played the game more like a preseason game, giving some of their reserves a good deal of playing time. Not saying here that the Browns would have won the game if they played all of their starters for the entire game. I am sure that the Rams would have won anyway, but it might have been a little closer.
Some of the reserves that seemed to play quite a bit for Cleveland were DE Jack Gregory, QB Gary Lane, WR Clifton McNeil, RB Larry Conjar, and DT Frank Parker. I didn't see Ernie Green, Gary Collins, or Paul Wiggin in the game at all, so Conjar, McNeil, and Gregory may have played the entire game. I think that Lane played most or all of the second half at quarterback whereas Frank Ryan played the first half. Frank Parker seemed to alternate with Jim Kanicki at right defensive tackle.
Apparently, the Browns coaching staff wanted to take a last look at those reserves to see more what they could do, because they all except Gregory were traded before the 1968 season. Gregory played left defensive end in the Rams game probably because Wiggin was to retire after the 1967 season, and they probably wanted to get Gregory some more playing experience and also see more what he could do. Cleveland made a trade in the off season bringing defensive end Ron Snidow to Cleveland from Washington. Snidow became the starting left defensive end in 1968 and Jack Gregory eventually replaced right defensive end Bill Glass that year.
Lane went to the Giants in 1968, Conjar to Philadelphia, Parker to Pittsburgh, and McNeil to the 49ers. Trading McNeil turned out to be a mistake. Not only did he play well for the 49ers, but Gary Collins was injured in 1968 and missed most of the season. McNeil would have replaced him if he was still at Cleveland, and I am sure would have done a good job.
Re: 1967 Blues for the Browns
Saban wrote:Saban wrote:I don't know if the Browns playoff bowl (runner up bowl) game after the 1967 playoff game with the Cowboys would count as a post Dallas game letdown. The game was called by some a glorified exhibition game and a noted head coach as a hinky dinky game in a hinky dinky town between...etc. The winning team players got about $500 more than the losing team players, so that may have given them some incentive to win.
Anyway, after Cleveland lost to Dallas, 52 to 14 in the 1st round of the playoffs, they were required to play in the playoff bowl against the Rams, which they lost by the score of 30 to 6.
Prior to the game, Gary Collins was interviewed and said that due to Cleveland's poor season and terrible playoff game, they had to stay with the Rams. That meant that the Browns had to at least give the Rams a good game. They didn't. Of course, you would never hear a player say that the players did not give a darn about that game. If a player said that, he would probably be fined or worse.
A local newspaper had a headline in the sports section the day after the game saying, "Rams Toy With Browns 30 To 6"
I think that the Rams played that Playoff Bowl game like a regular season game playing their regulars for almost the entire game and maybe playing some reserves at the end of the game, but I don't know about that. Cleveland, on the other hand, played the game more like a preseason game, giving some of their reserves a good deal of playing time. Not saying here that the Browns would have won the game if they played all of their starters for the entire game. I am sure that the Rams would have won anyway, but it might have been a little closer.
Some of the reserves that seemed to play quite a bit for Cleveland were DE Jack Gregory, QB Gary Lane, WR Clifton McNeil, RB Larry Conjar, and DT Frank Parker. I didn't see Ernie Green, Gary Collins, or Paul Wiggin in the game at all, so Conjar, McNeil, and Gregory may have played the entire game. I think that Lane played most or all of the second half at quarterback whereas Frank Ryan played the first half. Frank Parker seemed to alternate with Jim Kanicki at right defensive tackle.
Apparently, the Browns coaching staff wanted to take a last look at those reserves to see more what they could do, because they all except Gregory were traded before the 1968 season. Gregory played left defensive end in the Rams game probably because Wiggin was to retire after the 1967 season, and they probably wanted to get Gregory some more playing experience and also see more what he could do. Cleveland made a trade in the off season bringing defensive end Ron Snidow to Cleveland from Washington. Snidow became the starting left defensive end in 1968 and Jack Gregory eventually replaced right defensive end Bill Glass that year.
Lane went to the Giants in 1968, Conjar to Philadelphia, Parker to Pittsburgh, and McNeil to the 49ers. Trading McNeil turned out to be a mistake. Not only did he play well for the 49ers, but Gary Collins was injured in 1968 and missed most of the season. McNeil would have replaced him if he was still at Cleveland, and I am sure would have done a good job.
I was wrong. Gary Collins and Paul Wiggin did play in that game (the 1967 playoff bowl), but I think in only the first half. The rest of the previous post is right, as far as I know.
The second place Giants in the Century Division lost 30 to 7 in their game against Detroit in the 13th week. Tarkenton had his worst day of the year, but now I think that I know why. When the Giants lost to the Browns the previous week, it killed any chance for the Giants to make the playoffs. I doubt that Tarkenton would have had such a bad day if they still had a chance to win the division. Earl Morrall replaced Fran in that game and led the Giants to their only touchdown. Giants quarterbacks, mostly Tarkenton, were sacked eight times in the Detroit game.
So, the Cleveland Browns were not really that much better than the New York Giants in 1967, even though the 1966 Giants were the worst team in the NFL and maybe all of pro football that year. The 1966 Giants record was 1 win, 12 losses, and 1 tie, and allowed their opponents 501 points that year, which was a record until sometime after the NFL went to a 16 game season.
Cleveland beat the Cardinals twice in 1967, both by the score of 20 to 16. The Giants beat the Cards 37 to 14 and 37 to 20. The Browns beat the Vikings 14 to 10. The Vikings beat the Giants that year, 27 to 24. Cleveland lost to the Pack, 55 to 7 while the Giants lost to Green Bay, 48 to 21. The Giants lost to the Cowboys in Dallas, 38 to 24, while the Browns lost to Dallas at home, 21 to 14 and 52 to 14 in the playoff game at Dallas. Detroit beat the Giants 30 to 7 and Cleveland 31 to 14.
It doesn't seem like the Giants should have been as close to being as good as Cleveland after being so bad the year before. The New York Giants had a turnover of 20 or 21 players in 1967 from 1966.
thatRe: 1967 Blues for the Browns
Regarding the 1967 Giants 48 to 21 loss to the champion Packers, New York was leading at halftime, 14 to 10. In the 2nd half, Green Bay outscored the Giants, 38 to 7, with the Pack scoring 28 points in the 4th quarter.
Vince Lombardi was questioned by New York reporters after the game and said that the Giants had a good offense. A reporter asked about the Giants defense. Lombardi said that the Giants had a good offense and said that was all he was going to say. I guess that it would be hypocritical to say the New York team had a good defense after scoring 38 points in the second half against them.
The Giants did have a good offense with Tarkenton at quarterback and receivers like Homer Jones, Aaron Thomas, and Joe Morrison. Running back Ernie Koy had a very good season averaging 4.8 yards per rush. So, in 1967, the Giants offense was hitting on all cylinders.
So, even though Cleveland's offense had running backs like Leroy Kelly and Ernie Green and receivers like Paul Warfield and Gary Collins, they did not match the New York' Giants offense in 1967. The difference was at quarterback when Fran Tarkenton was having a fantastic year and the Browns Frank Ryan was having a bad year due to injuries and/or whatever. Cleveland quarterbacks (mostly Ryan) were sacked 44 times that year. Frank Ryan didn't have his usual mobility in 1967 due to ankle and other injuries.
Vince Lombardi was questioned by New York reporters after the game and said that the Giants had a good offense. A reporter asked about the Giants defense. Lombardi said that the Giants had a good offense and said that was all he was going to say. I guess that it would be hypocritical to say the New York team had a good defense after scoring 38 points in the second half against them.
The Giants did have a good offense with Tarkenton at quarterback and receivers like Homer Jones, Aaron Thomas, and Joe Morrison. Running back Ernie Koy had a very good season averaging 4.8 yards per rush. So, in 1967, the Giants offense was hitting on all cylinders.
So, even though Cleveland's offense had running backs like Leroy Kelly and Ernie Green and receivers like Paul Warfield and Gary Collins, they did not match the New York' Giants offense in 1967. The difference was at quarterback when Fran Tarkenton was having a fantastic year and the Browns Frank Ryan was having a bad year due to injuries and/or whatever. Cleveland quarterbacks (mostly Ryan) were sacked 44 times that year. Frank Ryan didn't have his usual mobility in 1967 due to ankle and other injuries.
Re: 1967 Blues for the Browns
The Cleveland Browns may have lost some games by big scores, but they certainly are not the only team. I would say that every team has had some embarrassments, Here are just some off the top of my head:
The Green Bay Packers lost a game to Baltimore in 1958 by the score of 56 to 0.
Detroit lost to Cleveland in the 1954 championship game, 56 to 10. and lost a game to Dallas, 59 to 13 in 1968, and lost one, 65 to 24 in 1950 to the Rams.
The Baltimore Colts lost to the Bears, 57 to 0 in 1962, but Baltimore beat Chicago, 52 to 0 for some payback in 1964.
Atlanta lost to Green Bay, 56 to 3 in 1966.
Philadelphia lost to Dallas, 56 to 7 in 1966.
Washington lost to Cleveland, 62 to 3 in 1954, and 53 to 0 in 1961 to the Giants.
The Giants lost to Pittsburgh, 63 to 7 in 1952 and 62 to 14 to Cleveland in 1953, and in 1966 alone, 52 to 7 to Dallas, 55 to 14 to the Rams, and 72 to 41 to the Washington Redskins.
I am sure that there are plenty more. Most are teams that were totally outclassed like new franchise Atlanta's 56 to 3 loss to the champion Packers in 1966, but not all.
In the case of the 1967 Browns, they lost big to the Packers 55 to 7 and Dallas 52 to 14. So, even though they were a playoff team, they got slaughtered by top teams twice in that one year with the opponents scoring over 50 points. Has that ever happened before or since?
The Green Bay Packers lost a game to Baltimore in 1958 by the score of 56 to 0.
Detroit lost to Cleveland in the 1954 championship game, 56 to 10. and lost a game to Dallas, 59 to 13 in 1968, and lost one, 65 to 24 in 1950 to the Rams.
The Baltimore Colts lost to the Bears, 57 to 0 in 1962, but Baltimore beat Chicago, 52 to 0 for some payback in 1964.
Atlanta lost to Green Bay, 56 to 3 in 1966.
Philadelphia lost to Dallas, 56 to 7 in 1966.
Washington lost to Cleveland, 62 to 3 in 1954, and 53 to 0 in 1961 to the Giants.
The Giants lost to Pittsburgh, 63 to 7 in 1952 and 62 to 14 to Cleveland in 1953, and in 1966 alone, 52 to 7 to Dallas, 55 to 14 to the Rams, and 72 to 41 to the Washington Redskins.
I am sure that there are plenty more. Most are teams that were totally outclassed like new franchise Atlanta's 56 to 3 loss to the champion Packers in 1966, but not all.
In the case of the 1967 Browns, they lost big to the Packers 55 to 7 and Dallas 52 to 14. So, even though they were a playoff team, they got slaughtered by top teams twice in that one year with the opponents scoring over 50 points. Has that ever happened before or since?
Re: 1967 Blues for the Browns
The Pro Football Archives website is gone now, so I don't know of any way that I can prove this about preseason games. Anyone know where one can look up the scores of preseason games of any particular year?
From memory, seven days before the 1967 Cleveland Browns played Dallas in their opener, the Browns beat the Vikings in their last preseason game in 1967, 42 to 14.
Dallas played in their last exhibition game eight days before that opening game in Cleveland, and I believe that they lost it to some team, but can't remember the score.
Probably reaching for an excuse here, but Dallas may have had a slight advantage here by getting an extra day to get ready for that opening game with Cleveland, which they won, 21 to 14. It was the only time that Dallas beat the Browns at Cleveland in 9 games during the 1960's.
Also, winning big against the Vikings in their last preseason game (the only preseason win for the Browns that year after 5 losses) may have made Cleveland a little too self satisfied going into their regular season game with the Cowboys.
Like when I play golf, it's always good to have an excuse handy when the game doesn't go the way I want, which is often. So, maybe I can manufacture some kind of excuse for the Cleveland Browns here.
Dallas did have an extra day to prepare, and were undoubtedly more rested than Cleveland. Also, the Browns might have been a little overconfident going into that game due to their big exhibition win over Minnesota.
So, would the Cleveland Browns have won that opening game against the Cowboys if Dallas had none of those "advantages?" Probably not, but anything is possible.
From memory, seven days before the 1967 Cleveland Browns played Dallas in their opener, the Browns beat the Vikings in their last preseason game in 1967, 42 to 14.
Dallas played in their last exhibition game eight days before that opening game in Cleveland, and I believe that they lost it to some team, but can't remember the score.
Probably reaching for an excuse here, but Dallas may have had a slight advantage here by getting an extra day to get ready for that opening game with Cleveland, which they won, 21 to 14. It was the only time that Dallas beat the Browns at Cleveland in 9 games during the 1960's.
Also, winning big against the Vikings in their last preseason game (the only preseason win for the Browns that year after 5 losses) may have made Cleveland a little too self satisfied going into their regular season game with the Cowboys.
Like when I play golf, it's always good to have an excuse handy when the game doesn't go the way I want, which is often. So, maybe I can manufacture some kind of excuse for the Cleveland Browns here.
Dallas did have an extra day to prepare, and were undoubtedly more rested than Cleveland. Also, the Browns might have been a little overconfident going into that game due to their big exhibition win over Minnesota.
So, would the Cleveland Browns have won that opening game against the Cowboys if Dallas had none of those "advantages?" Probably not, but anything is possible.
-
BD Sullivan
- Posts: 2318
- Joined: Mon Oct 13, 2014 1:30 pm
Re: 1967 Blues for the Browns
The Cowboys got blasted 33-7 on 9/9 by the Colts in their last 1967 exhibition game.
Re: 1967 Blues for the Browns
BD Sullivan wrote:The Cowboys got blasted 33-7 on 9/9 by the Colts in their last 1967 exhibition game.
Thanks, so that probably got Dallas in the right frame of mind for the Cleveland game.
Re: 1967 Blues for the Browns
The Browns were not a good road team in 1967, but they did play very well in a couple away games. One was in the Saints game won by Cleveland 42 to 7. Cleveland was coming off of losses in their first two games against Dallas and Detroit and could not afford to lose to the new franchise New Orleans team. That turned out to be the worst loss for the Saints that year, who were better than most new franchise teams in their first year.
They beat the Steelers in Pittsburgh, 34 to 14, after being upset by the improved New York Giants, 38 to 34. It was another case that Cleveland could not afford to lose after the loss to the New York team and having to play Green Bay the week after the Steelers game.
At home, the Browns played almost as well as usual, only losing one game to Dallas, 21 to 14, in their opener. It was Cleveland's first and only home loss to Dallas during the 1960's. The Browns did struggle to beat the Cardinals, Vikings, and Redskins at home that year, but those teams were up for their games with Cleveland. The Cards were always up for the Browns in their games in Cleveland and beat them in that game in 1963, 1965, 1966, and 1968 in home games for the Browns and they had a tie in 1964 at Cleveland.
Cleveland struggled to beat Minnesota, 14 to 10 in a home game for the Browns. The Vikings were up for that game due to some bulletin board material that some Cleveland players said after their 55 to 7 embarrassment at Milwaukee against the Packers. The Vikings sacked Cleveland quarterbacks (mostly or all Frank Ryan) 8 times in that game, but the Browns managed to pull the bitterly fought game out due to some heroics by Leroy Kelly.
Cleveland beat Washington 42 to 37 at Cleveland where the Browns led for most of the time, but could not seem to put the game away. The Redskins were up, probably because Washington had not beaten the Browns since 1962 (8 straight wins for Cleveland). The Redskins were driving for the winning TD at the end of the game, but were stopped by the Browns defense as time ran out.
Those three close home wins saved Cleveland's season that year, but the Browns did kind of give away their final regular season game at Philadelphia playing a lot of their reserves including 3rd string quarterback Gary Lane for the entire game. I am sure that Cleveland could have won that game against the Eagles if they needed it, so they could have afforded to lose one of those close home wins, but not sure about two or all three of them in order to win the NFL Century Division.
They beat the Steelers in Pittsburgh, 34 to 14, after being upset by the improved New York Giants, 38 to 34. It was another case that Cleveland could not afford to lose after the loss to the New York team and having to play Green Bay the week after the Steelers game.
At home, the Browns played almost as well as usual, only losing one game to Dallas, 21 to 14, in their opener. It was Cleveland's first and only home loss to Dallas during the 1960's. The Browns did struggle to beat the Cardinals, Vikings, and Redskins at home that year, but those teams were up for their games with Cleveland. The Cards were always up for the Browns in their games in Cleveland and beat them in that game in 1963, 1965, 1966, and 1968 in home games for the Browns and they had a tie in 1964 at Cleveland.
Cleveland struggled to beat Minnesota, 14 to 10 in a home game for the Browns. The Vikings were up for that game due to some bulletin board material that some Cleveland players said after their 55 to 7 embarrassment at Milwaukee against the Packers. The Vikings sacked Cleveland quarterbacks (mostly or all Frank Ryan) 8 times in that game, but the Browns managed to pull the bitterly fought game out due to some heroics by Leroy Kelly.
Cleveland beat Washington 42 to 37 at Cleveland where the Browns led for most of the time, but could not seem to put the game away. The Redskins were up, probably because Washington had not beaten the Browns since 1962 (8 straight wins for Cleveland). The Redskins were driving for the winning TD at the end of the game, but were stopped by the Browns defense as time ran out.
Those three close home wins saved Cleveland's season that year, but the Browns did kind of give away their final regular season game at Philadelphia playing a lot of their reserves including 3rd string quarterback Gary Lane for the entire game. I am sure that Cleveland could have won that game against the Eagles if they needed it, so they could have afforded to lose one of those close home wins, but not sure about two or all three of them in order to win the NFL Century Division.