Sports What Ifs.

[mello man 59]

By the 86-87 season, the Celtics front court wasn't old, but it wasn't young either. Bird was 30, McHale was 29, and Robert Parish was 33. Each played a lot of minutes per games that season: Bird 40.6, McHale 39.7, and Parrish 37.4. There are minutes to spread around to a rookie Bias, probably to get him into the low 20s per game. Anymore than that and the veterans are going to start bitching big time. Reasonable to suggest the Celtics have an excellent shot at winning the Championship. But no guarantee, the Pistons took them to 7 games in the Eastern Conference Finals, and that only happened because of the miracle steal by Bird at the end of game #5. And the Lakers weren't exactly slouches.

What do the Celtics do in 87-88. Will Bias stay as the super sub? Will one of the veterans give up even more minutes to Bias? Will the veterans bitch to managment/media about reduced playing time? Can the Celtics afford to pay everyone? Does management trade McHale or Parrish to free up room for Bias to be a starter? Parrish is the oldest. McHale would bring more value back in trade. But trading Parrish forces McHale to become the fulltime center, how does that impact his play? Regardless of who gets traded, the other two front court veterans aren't getting any younger. And neither is 33 year old point guard Dennis Johnson.

Does Larry Bird's back still go in the 88-89 season? IOTL he only played 6 games that year. The man played a lot of minutes per game in his career up till that point.

Ainge left after the 88-89 season. Dennis Johnson after the 89-90 season. Is Reggie Lewis being available in the 87 draft for the Celtics butterflied away? If they get Lewis, does he still tragically die in the summer of 93, or does that get butterflied sooner or later? Are Brian Shaw and Dee Brown still the not too exciting replacements for Dennis Johnson at point guard?

Having a live Bias who played up to his apparent potential (Hall of Famer, Top 50 ever) would only be a postive result toward the Celtic's chances of winning. But there are a lot of roster possibilities to take into consideration about a Bias-ed Celtics team. And the Lakers, Pistons, Bulls, Cavaliers, Jazz, and Trail Blazers were all high, high quality teams at points during an ATL Bias-ed Celtics. A slam dunk multiple repeat championship team is far from an automatic.

High Plains Drifter: Thank you for your response. That was very imformative.
I was stationed in the military in Washington D.C. in 1986 and it was a SHOCK to hear the news, no doubt. I have always wondered what impact Bias would have made in the NBA. Thanks again.

 

[Sigma7]

By the 86-87 season, the Celtics front court wasn't old, but it wasn't young either. Bird was 30, McHale was 29, and Robert Parish was 33. Each played a lot of minutes per games that season: Bird 40.6, McHale 39.7, and Parrish 37.4. There are minutes to spread around to a rookie Bias, probably to get him into the low 20s per game. Anymore than that and the veterans are going to start bitching big time. Reasonable to suggest the Celtics have an excellent shot at winning the Championship. But no guarantee, the Pistons took them to 7 games in the Eastern Conference Finals, and that only happened because of the miracle steal by Bird at the end of game #5. And the Lakers weren't exactly slouches.

What do the Celtics do in 87-88. Will Bias stay as the super sub? Will one of the veterans give up even more minutes to Bias? Will the veterans bitch to managment/media about reduced playing time? Can the Celtics afford to pay everyone? Does management trade McHale or Parrish to free up room for Bias to be a starter? Parrish is the oldest. McHale would bring more value back in trade. But trading Parrish forces McHale to become the fulltime center, how does that impact his play? Regardless of who gets traded, the other two front court veterans aren't getting any younger. And neither is 33 year old point guard Dennis Johnson.

The bolded part raises an interesting question in my mind, although so did your thoughts on trading either Parrish or McHale, but I think Johnson could have been the key here.

Depends on one thing:

Is it possible the Celtics viewed Bias as a potential Magic Johnson type super talent that could play both the point OR small forward and be used during games in both capacities?

Basically, the idea here is:

They draft Bias to play the point (most of his minutes) but can also spell Bird at small forward during games, reducing the load for the aging Bird in hopes of prolonging the career of the guy that was currently carrying the team's Franchise Player tag?

I freely admit to never really having seen Bias play or knowing much about how adaptable he would be, but could the Celtics have been looking at Bias in a slightly different way than most people thought they were when they drafted him?

Could Bias have played such a role if that was what the Celtics had in mind and did he have not just the skills (from everything I've ever heard about him, it was clear he had an incredible skill set) but also the maturity to change positions (for now, at least, unless he actually developed into Magic 2.0) and work a system like that?

 

[The Dude Bro]

Here's a what if I've been mulling in my head so far: in 1976 the Patriots were in the playoffs for the first time since the AFL - NFL merger, and in the superstitious Boston sports scene many felt it was their year to win it all since it was the Bicentennial (the nickname of the team being suitably... patriotic). They finished the season with an 11-3 record, barely losing out the division title to Baltimore. They were second-best in the league in rushing yards (2,957; also the fifth-best in league history until that time) and in points (363). They outright led the league in runs per carry (5.0) and takeaways (50). Before the Patriots dynasty of the last decade, this was the best team in Patriots history.

In the first round of the playoffs, they matched off against the Oakland Raiders, whom they had beaten earlier in the season in a blowout (48-17; also the only loss Oakland sustained that year). They were leading them late 21-17 in the playoff game before a controversial roughing the passer call (so controversial the NFL never let the head referee supervise another game involving the Patriots) gave the Raiders the chance to score and win, 24-21. But let's say the call never happens and the Patriots win, 21-17.

This doesn't change the Pittsburgh Steelers victory over the Baltimore Colts, 40-14. So, next week, the Patriots travel to the Steel City to square off against the Team of the 70s. But this Steelers team was having a bit of an off year, having barely won their division from the Cincinnati Bengals in the last week of the season. The Patriots had a better record, had a better rushing attack, and, dare I say, a better defense.

Defense dominates the day at the AFC Championship, but in overtime star Patriots running back Sam "Bam" Cunningham manages to break some Steeler tackles and streaks into the endzone, winning the game 12-6. This sends the Patriots into the superbowl against the Purple People Eaters of the Minnesota Vikings. The superbowl is much closer than the actual superbowl was, but, as time runs out in regulation, Patriots kicker John Smith kicks a field goal to give the Patriots their first Super Bowl, 16-13.

I am unsure of how to proceed from here, but any suggestions, especially when it comes to offseason stuff, would be nice.

 

[Enigmajones]

Here's a what if I've been mulling in my head so far: in 1976 the Patriots were in the playoffs for the first time since the AFL - NFL merger, and in the superstitious Boston sports scene many felt it was their year to win it all since it was the Bicentennial (the nickname of the team being suitably... patriotic). They finished the season with an 11-3 record, barely losing out the division title to Baltimore. They were second-best in the league in rushing yards (2,957; also the fifth-best in league history until that time) and in points (363). They outright led the league in runs per carry (5.0) and takeaways (50). Before the Patriots dynasty of the last decade, this was the best team in Patriots history.

In the first round of the playoffs, they matched off against the Oakland Raiders, whom they had beaten earlier in the season in a blowout (48-17; also the only loss Oakland sustained that year). They were leading them late 21-17 in the playoff game before a controversial roughing the passer call (so controversial the NFL never let the head referee supervise another game involving the Patriots) gave the Raiders the chance to score and win, 24-21. But let's say the call never happens and the Patriots win, 21-17.

This doesn't change the Pittsburgh Steelers victory over the Baltimore Colts, 40-14. So, next week, the Patriots travel to the Steel City to square off against the Team of the 70s. But this Steelers team was having a bit of an off year, having barely won their division from the Cincinnati Bengals in the last week of the season. The Patriots had a better record, had a better rushing attack, and, dare I say, a better defense.

Defense dominates the day at the AFC Championship, but in overtime star Patriots running back Sam "Bam" Cunningham manages to break some Steeler tackles and streaks into the endzone, winning the game 12-6. This sends the Patriots into the superbowl against the Purple People Eaters of the Minnesota Vikings. The superbowl is much closer than the actual superbowl was, but, as time runs out in regulation, Patriots kicker John Smith kicks a field goal to give the Patriots their first Super Bowl, 16-13.

I am unsure of how to proceed from here, but any suggestions, especially when it comes to offseason stuff, would be nice.

The Pats may have been able to squeak out a win against the Steelers, even though the only reason they had a better record was that they played in a far worse division, the Colts dominated along with the Pats pretty equally in the division, but the Purple People Eaters would have finally gotten that ring, if they were to play against the Patriots.

 

[The Dude Bro]

I would like to note in response that the Patriots played the Steelers during the regular season. They forced 6 fumbles and came back from a 20-9 deficit to win 30-27. In their defeat of the Raiders they sacked Ken Stabler four times. Their defense is better than you are giving them credit for. I still say they would beat the Vikings, but it would be close.

Also, if it weren't for the Bills of the early 90s, the Vikings would stand as the standard for futility and Super Bowl choking. 4 appearances in the span of a decade, four losses in the span of a decade against four different franchises.

 

[AltSptHst]

Rams-Pats SB XI

The Pats may have been able to squeak out a win against the Steelers, even though the only reason they had a better record was that they played in a far worse division, the Colts dominated along with the Pats pretty equally in the division, but the Purple People Eaters would have finally gotten that ring, if they were to play against the Patriots.

I don't think that the Vikes would have defeated the Pats that year. They shouldn't have been there.

Which leads me to another what if: What if the Rams defeat the Vikes in the NFC Title Game that year like they should have?

With the Pats pulling out a tough AFC Title Game in the Steel City over a worn-out and banged-up Steeler team, we have a very intriguing matchup on our hands.

The Pats would be favored by 4, but the Rams have home field in Pasadena's Rose Bowl, so that would play in their favor.

In the first half of SB XI, New England controls the game. Sam Cunningham scores on a 20-yard TD in the first quarter, capping a 5-minute drive to open the game. New England's D shuts down Haden and McCutcheon, and eventually builds a 20-3 lead by the middle of the second quarter, when Sugar Bear Hamilton knocks out Haden. Jaws comes in, and leads the Rams to a FG drive to end the first half at 20-6, Bostonians.

In the second half, the Rams come out firing. Jaworski hits TE Terry Nelson for 20 yards, Ron Jessie for 25, and Harold Jackson for 35 and a TD to cut the deficit to 7. After that, the third quarter tightens up, but the Pats manage to end it with a Smith FG to make it a 10-point game. Then, LA goes on a 6-minute drive which is capped off by a Cullen Bryant TD to cut the deficit to three.

The Pats storm down the field on the running of Sam Bam Cunningham and Andy Johnson. However, Fred Dryer and Jack Youngblood bust in, sack Grogan, and strip him of the ball. Youngblood returns it for a TD, and the Rams take the lead, 24-23. After that, a final NE drive is thwarted by a Dave Elmendorf INT, and the Rams win their first Super Bowl, and first NFL Title in 25 years.

 

[The Dude Bro]

Whether or not the Patriots win or lose the game, this could have huge effects on the AFC. With at least a super bowl appearance to attract/drive them, along with butterflies, the Patriots could avoid the spate of contractual problems, injuries, and late-season choking that turned what should have been a dynasty (or at least a regular contender) into an also-ran and something of a sad punchline. The late-70s and early-80s in the AFC could turn into a three-way battle between the Steelers, Raiders, and Patriots that could get incredibly nasty. John Hannah, Stanley Morgan, Andre Tippett, Sam Cunningham, and Steve Grogan will become household names alongside the stars of the Raiders and Steelers.

 

[Metalicon]

As an Oakland Raiders fan 2002 is still a sore spot for me and I still nurture a special place of hatred in my heart for Gruden. So, proposal: if John Gruden stays with the Raiders in 2002, assuming all other variables constant, do they win the Super Bowl?

As a Raider fan myself, I would have to say this is actually quite ASB unless somebody else was running the team by that point like Mark Davis for example. This would probably be due to either Al relinquishing control (unlikely) or passing away before that time (slightly more likely).

That being said, I think Oakland's best chance at a SB title was actually in 2001. In this scenario, the tuck rule doesn't go into effect and the Raiders win 13-10 which might butterfly the Patriots dynasty. Oakland then goes into Pittsburgh the following week and the Rich Gannon Raiders beat the Kordell Stewart Steelers as the latter were known for choking in Conference Championship games at that point. This leads to a Raiders vs. Rams SB in which the Rams are heavy favorites although not as heavy as against the Patriots since NE was seen as a fluke team that year. Even though I see it as unlikely that the Raiders win or win easily, it's not beyond the realm of possibility since the Raiders have had a history of winning Super Bowls in an underdog role. Let's say in this scenario they do beat the Rams. Rich Gannon has an absolutely brilliant game and is named SB MVP, the CB tandem of Charles Woodson and Eric Allen effectively shut down the Rams' deep passing game which forces them to use Marshall Faulk and a much more conservative gameplan which goes against their strengths. Still, it is a close game and the Raiders ultimately win on a Sebastian Janikowski FG and we see an older Al Davis on the Lombardi Trophy presentation doing the "Just Win Baby" mantra. Of course this whole sequence of events leads to the following:

1. Rich Gannon retires because he has accomplished everything he wanted to do in his career.

2. Tim Brown retires because he has accomplished everything he wanted to do in his career.

3. Most of all, Al Davis becomes the first owner to trade a SB winning head coach to a different team and for much more than he got ITTL. This happens because Gruden was looking to get out of Oakland regardless and the SB victory will reinforce that Al Davis, not the Head Coach, is the main reason for the Raiders' success (Well, according to Al anyways).

With all these events happening, this doesn't actually change things drastically except that the Raiders go into perpetual rebuild mode a year earlier and SB 37 features Tampa Bay versus Tennessee with Jon Gruden becoming the first head coach ( I think) to appear in a Super Bowl with an AFC team and then with an NFC team the following year.

 

[The Dude Bro]

Interesting what if I've been mulling related to playoffs: what if, instead of instituting the wild card best-of-four format, the NFL instead goes for a best-of-six format in 1970, with the first and second place teams in each division facing off in the first round (with a crossing over rule in case there is a better third place team in another division than the second place team). The best seeded team after that week is given a bye week while the second and third place teams face off for the right to face the first seed in the conference championship.

So the 1970 playoffs would start out like this:

AFC:

Miami Dolphins @ Baltimore Colts

Cleveland Browns @ Cincinnati Bengals

Kansas City Chiefs @ Oakland Raiders

NFC:

New York Giants @ Dallas Cowboys

Detroit Lions @ Minnesota Vikings

Los Angeles Rams @ San Francisco 49ers

Any thoughts?

 

[AltSptHst]

Interesting what if I've been mulling related to playoffs: what if, instead of instituting the wild card best-of-four format, the NFL instead goes for a best-of-six format in 1970, with the first and second place teams in each division facing off in the first round (with a crossing over rule in case there is a better third place team in another division than the second place team). The best seeded team after that week is given a bye week while the second and third place teams face off for the right to face the first seed in the conference championship.

So the 1970 playoffs would start out like this:

AFC:

Miami Dolphins @ Baltimore Colts

Cleveland Browns @ Cincinnati Bengals

Kansas City Chiefs @ Oakland Raiders

NFC:

New York Giants @ Dallas Cowboys

Detroit Lions @ Minnesota Vikings

Los Angeles Rams @ San Francisco 49ers

Any thoughts?

Interesting format. If they did that, here's what I think would have happened:

AFC: When you look at the records, Baltimore is the one seed. They would beat Miami, and go automatically to the title game. In the other two games, the Browns would beat the inexperienced Bengals, and KC would beat the Raiders in a rematch. They were too good to lose to Oakland again.

The next week, KC would host the Browns and defeat them, and they would go to Baltimore and knock them off as well. They defeated the Colts earlier that year in Baltimore.

NFC: Minnesota would be the one seed. They had the best record in the NFL. They would beat the Lions and advance to the title game. In the other two games, Dallas would beat the Giants, and the 49ers would beat the Rams.

Then, Dallas would beat the Niners on the road, but the cold of Minny would catch up to them, and the Vikes would beat them and advance to SB V.

Super Bowl: Earlier that year, the Vikes beat the Chiefs at home. However, this is a different Chief team that got a new lease on life with this playoff format, and they beat Minnesota for the second straight year.

 

[mello man 59]

How about this format: The number one seeds in both conferences play the number two seeds with the winners getting byes in the second week. The winners would then host their conference championship games.

Then the NFL playoffs starting tomorrow would be:

AFC: New England at Denver (winner gets bye week on Jan. 12-13).
Cincinnati at Houston
Indianapolis at Baltimore

Bengals/Texans winner plays Colts/Ravens winner on Jan. 12-13.

Winner plays at Patriots/Broncos winner on January 20.

NFC: San Francisco at Atlanta (winner gets bye week on Jan. 12-13.
Minnesota at Green Bay
Seattle at Washington

Vikings/Packers winner plays Seahawks/Redskins winner on Jan. 12-13.
Winner plays at 49ers/Falcons winner on January 20.

On February 3, the AFC Champions will play the NFC Champions in the Super Bowl in New Orleans.

 

[The Dude Bro]

Under this system this year's playoffs would be:

AFC:

Pittsburgh Steelers @ New England Patriots

Cincinnati Bengals @ Baltimore Ravens

Indianapolis Colts @ Houston Texans

San Diego Chargers (or Dallas Cowboys) @ Denver Broncos

The AFC is interesting because two second place teams finish with sub-.500 records - the Miami Dolphins and San Diego Chargers. However, only one team qualifies to cross over - the Pittsburgh Steelers, with their 8-8 record. In this case, the San Diego Chargers win out due to having a better conference record (4-2 to 2-4) and Miami is disqualified.

However, to throw a wrench in this system, the Dallas Cowboys finished with an 8-8 record, which would qualify them for the playoffs under the "crossing over" rules. But, they are in the NFC, so this depends on whether the NFL would allow teams to cross conferences in addition to divisions.

NFC:

New York Giants @ Washington Redskins

Minnesota Vikings @ Green Bay Packers

Chicago Bears @ Atlanta Falcons

Seattle Seahawks @ San Francisco 49ers

Chicago Bears cross over to play the NFC South Atlanta Falcons due to second place Carolina finishing 7-9 (the Chicago Bears are 10-6).

I'm going to develop this further and look into posting a season-by-season playoff list sometime soon.

 

[The Dude Bro]

Also, would anyone be opposed to either stickying a sports what ifs thread at the top to go with the pop culture thread, or splitting the thread according to sport (such as football what ifs, soccer what ifs, etc. etc.)

 

[AltSptHst]

Also, would anyone be opposed to either stickying a sports what ifs thread at the top to go with the pop culture thread, or splitting the thread according to sport (such as football what ifs, soccer what ifs, etc. etc.)

Maybe we should save the 5 most recent pages of this thread, delete the rest, and then make this a sticky thread at the top.

 

[AltSptHst]

As a Raider fan myself, I would have to say this is actually quite ASB unless somebody else was running the team by that point like Mark Davis for example. This would probably be due to either Al relinquishing control (unlikely) or passing away before that time (slightly more likely).

That being said, I think Oakland's best chance at a SB title was actually in 2001. In this scenario, the tuck rule doesn't go into effect and the Raiders win 13-10 which might butterfly the Patriots dynasty. Oakland then goes into Pittsburgh the following week and the Rich Gannon Raiders beat the Kordell Stewart Steelers as the latter were known for choking in Conference Championship games at that point. This leads to a Raiders vs. Rams SB in which the Rams are heavy favorites although not as heavy as against the Patriots since NE was seen as a fluke team that year. Even though I see it as unlikely that the Raiders win or win easily, it's not beyond the realm of possibility since the Raiders have had a history of winning Super Bowls in an underdog role. Let's say in this scenario they do beat the Rams. Rich Gannon has an absolutely brilliant game and is named SB MVP, the CB tandem of Charles Woodson and Eric Allen effectively shut down the Rams' deep passing game which forces them to use Marshall Faulk and a much more conservative gameplan which goes against their strengths. Still, it is a close game and the Raiders ultimately win on a Sebastian Janikowski FG and we see an older Al Davis on the Lombardi Trophy presentation doing the "Just Win Baby" mantra. Of course this whole sequence of events leads to the following:

1. Rich Gannon retires because he has accomplished everything he wanted to do in his career.

2. Tim Brown retires because he has accomplished everything he wanted to do in his career.

3. Most of all, Al Davis becomes the first owner to trade a SB winning head coach to a different team and for much more than he got ITTL. This happens because Gruden was looking to get out of Oakland regardless and the SB victory will reinforce that Al Davis, not the Head Coach, is the main reason for the Raiders' success (Well, according to Al anyways).

With all these events happening, this doesn't actually change things drastically except that the Raiders go into perpetual rebuild mode a year earlier and SB 37 features Tampa Bay versus Tennessee with Jon Gruden becoming the first head coach ( I think) to appear in a Super Bowl with an AFC team and then with an NFC team the following year.

Do you think that Gannon and Tim Brown would have actually retired in that scenario? I am not sure about that. I could also see Gruden coming back again, and those three going for a repeat that they would have gotten.

After that, I maybe could see each of them retiring (or leaving in Gruden's case)

If Jon leaves one year later, though, where does he go?

 

[fb111a]

A baseball what-if:

Two trades in the 1979 offseason:

Milwaukee sends OF Larry Hisle to Atlanta for RP Steve Bedrosian and C/OF/1B Dale Murphy

Milwaukee trades 3B Sal Bando to Oakland for OF Rickey Henderson

 

[AltSptHst]

A baseball what-if:

Two trades in the 1979 offseason:

Milwaukee sends OF Larry Hisle to Atlanta for RP Steve Bedrosian and C/OF/1B Dale Murphy

Milwaukee trades 3B Sal Bando to Oakland for OF Rickey Henderson

If they make those trades, and if they still get C Ted Simmons and closer Rollie Fingers a few years later, I see them winning two straight World Series titles in 1981 and 82.

However, what happens next depends on how they keep that team together. Also, the AL East was tough, with the 83 Orioles, 84 Tigers, the Yankees, the upstart Blue Jays, and the 86 Sox.

 

[High Plains Drifter]

A baseball what-if:

Two trades in the 1979 offseason:

Milwaukee sends OF Larry Hisle to Atlanta for RP Steve Bedrosian and C/OF/1B Dale Murphy

Milwaukee trades 3B Sal Bando to Oakland for OF Rickey Henderson

1980:
- Rickey Henderson becomes the everyday leftfielder.
- Dale Murphy splits catching duties with Charlie Moore. He occasionally DHs and plays 1B.
- Ben Oglivie shifted from left to primary DH.
- Jim Ganter becomes the everyday Thirdbaseman.
- Steve Bedrosian spends year in minors as starting pitcher.
- The Brewers finish in 3rd place in the AL East with a 94-68 record (8 more wins than IOTL).

1981:
- Brewers do NOT make IOTL trade with Cardinals for Ted Simmons, Rollie Fingers, and Pete Vuckovich.
- Dale Murphy becomes the primary catcher getting 80 starts, with occasional DHing.
- Opposite of OTL, Ganter stays at 3B and Molitor stays at 2B.
- Steve Bedrosian gets his first taste of the majors in September working out of the bullpen.
- Strike shortened season with extra round of playoffs still occurs.
- Brewers win both half seasons of the AL East and face the Baltimore Orioles in the first round of the playoffs. The O's win in 5 games.

1982:
- Steve Bedrosian takes the long reliever/part time starter role which Bob McClure had IOTL 1982.
- Brewers win the World Series defeating the Cardinals in 6 games.

1983:
- Steve Bedrosian is full time starter for the entire season.
- With a 94-68 record, the Brewers finish in 2nd place in the AL East to the Orioles.

1984:
- Brewers do NOT make IOTL trade with Rangers for Jim Sundberg.
- Dale Murphy injures his knee and misses half the season.
- Brewers finish in 6th place with a 75-87 record.

1985:
- By the end of the season Dale Murphy has taken the everyday right fielder position from Sixto Lezcvano.
- Robin Yount plays his first season as the everyday centerfielder.
- Ernest Riles is now the shortstop.
- Bill Schroeder is now the regular catcher.
- Bedrosian heads a rotation that includes Danny Darwin, Teddy Higuera, and Moose Haas.
- Rickey Henderson wins the MVP.
- Dale Murphy wins comeback player of the year with a .275 batting average and 30 home runs.
- Brewers finish in 4th place with a 81-81 record.

1986:
- Rickey Henderson signs with the New York Yankees as a Free Agent.
- Brewers acquire Rob Deer from the SF Giants and he becomes the regular left fielder.
- Bedrosian is traded to the Phillies for Pete Smith and Ozzie Virgil. Virgil replaces Schroeder as the regular catcher.
- Brewers finish in 6th place with an 80-82 record.

1987:
- Brewers trade Dale Murphy to the Chicago Cubs for Rafael Palmiero.
- Cecil Cooper replaces the retiring Ben Oglivie as the regular DH.
- Palmiero becomes the everyday firstbaseman.
- Glen Braggs replaces Dale Murphy as the rightfielder.
- Brewers finish in 3rd place with a 91-71 record. Thus ends the first season without any of the ATL players on the Brewers roster.

 

[fb111a]

If they make those trades, and if they still get C Ted Simmons and closer Rollie Fingers a few years later, I see them winning two straight World Series titles in 1981 and 82.

However, what happens next depends on how they keep that team together. Also, the AL East was tough, with the 83 Orioles, 84 Tigers, the Yankees, the upstart Blue Jays, and the 86 Sox.

Don't see it happening. The Brewers don't have that big a need for Simmons. Bedrosian would obviate the need for Fingers, and as a closer, probably dominates from 1981-1989. From 1986-1989, he and Dan Plesac shut down opponents of the Brewers after the 7th inning.

Murphy also solves the question of "who bats fourth?" - Molitor (2B), Yount (SS), Cooper (1B), Murphy (RF), Oglivie (LF) (figure his playing time increases with Hisle gone - in @, he emerged due to Hisle's injury, in this case, he emerges due to the trade), Thomas (DH), and Money (3B) becomes potent from 1-7. Henderson is in center, and bats ninth. So, at catcher, the Brewer may stick with Charlie Moore at catcher.

Note - in the 1979 offseason, the Brewers trade IF Lenn Sakata to the Orioles for RHP John Flinn. Now, imagine, with their lineup settled, that trade gets bigger: IF Lenn Sakata, OF/1B David Green, and OF Sixto Lezcano (who is shunted aside due to a surplus of outfielders) to the Orioles for Flinn and SS/3B Cal Ripken.

 

[The Dude Bro]

Here's a question that might have been discussed already, but what if the CFL kept by it's originally plan for "CFL USA", focusing on cities near the border ignored by the NFL instead of cities in the Deep South of the United States?

The cities originally planned for expansion were:

- Columbus, Ohio

- Rochester, New York

- Hartford, Connecticut

- Milwaukee, Wisconsin

- Boise, Idaho

- Portland, Oregon

With the ultimate plan for 10 Canadian and 10 American teams. As there were nine teams at the time, I guess the 10th team for Canada is the long-though about Halifax/Atlantic Schooners.