Sports What Ifs.

In SB II? I would have to go with the Cowboys on that one.
I think people are selling Short mr Davis and forgetting how efficient was Mr lombardi in shutting him down, if anything I can see the raiders beating them, making the upset a year early, Superbowl III would be a close affair, either team could pull it
 
That is the pre free agency era, maybe if the Culverhouse didn't screwed Bo that is a bonus, but Bucs were competitive even after 2-26 so might slowly getting better
We made the NFC Conference Finals in 79. We had a hell of a Offensive Line and Defense. We just needed a little more seasoning on the offensive side of the ball before we really could make noise in the post-season. But Culverhouse pissed off everyone and they all left. Well that and John McKay wasn't the best coach for the job, but still we could had done so much better if the owner wasn't a cheap piece of shit who only cared about making a dime
 
We made the NFC Conference Finals in 79. We had a hell of a Offensive Line and Defense. We just needed a little more seasoning on the offensive side of the ball before we really could make noise in the post-season. But Culverhouse pissed off everyone and they all left. Well that and John McKay wasn't the best coach for the job, but still we could had done so much better if the owner wasn't a cheap piece of shit who only cared about making a dime
So no Culverhouse, give the franchise to someone that cares, that is a start.
 
Regarding the Americans, in the circumstances of the 1930s they probably would not have been able to survive unless the Rangers folded but I don't see why that could not have happened... How they would have turned out later on is unclear but it is worth nothing that, with only four titles in around 95 years of existence, and only one since 1940, the Rangers have been the least successfull team of the Original Six by a descent margin. By the law of probabilities ods are the ''Early NHL New York team'' of ITTL that the Americans would be would wound up have more victories under their belt, which would obviously change the history of the NHL in a pretty significant way...
The New York/ Brooklyn Americans makes a huge what if case. With two NHL teams in NY, there wouldn't be a case for the Islanders to exist. Probably the New Jersey Devils as well but that's another story. I honestly have sympathy for the NY Americans due to being second banana to the Rangers during their existence.

If Hockey stayed in Brooklyn (if the team got their arena in Brooklyn) there would be a strong chance they could have stayed somehow to this day. I'm actually curious about that now...
 
The New York/ Brooklyn Americans makes a huge what if case. With two NHL teams in NY, there wouldn't be a case for the Islanders to exist. Probably the New Jersey Devils as well but that's another story. I honestly have sympathy for the NY Americans due to being second banana to the Rangers during their existence.

If Hockey stayed in Brooklyn (if the team got their arena in Brooklyn) there would be a strong chance they could have stayed somehow to this day. I'm actually curious about that now...
Honestly, I can't see NY making two teams work during the great depression. I'd say the Americans making it through doom the Rangers.

Thinking of hockey PODs, you could have a world where the Montreal Canadiens moved to Cleveland, like they were planning to.
*shudders* Now that's dark timeline :p More seriously, this one was a terrible idea and the NHL dodged a bullet when they didn't do it, Montreal is just a massively superior Hockey market to Cleveland. I would expect Cleveland to go under soon enough (Great Depression plus not terrible but also not great Hockey market) and MTL making it back to the NHL sooner or later. I also feel that how close it came to happen is probably overestimated sometimes, as the rumours happened when the Maroons where about at the peak of their popularity when the rumours happened, which was not really sustainable for the cultural reasons I mentionned earlier in the thread.
 
Honestly, I can't see NY making two teams work during the great depression. I'd say the Americans making it through doom the Rangers.
The team didn't officially cease till 1946. It possible that the Rangers and the Amerks could survive after the Great Depression and World War II. The thing I been toying with is due to the Rangers winning the cup in 1940 but have the worst seasons of existence during the war period. Brooklyn would sit out but if they got the financial support they needed (thanks to the Rangers being pretty bad) and a arena in Brooklyn. The "Original Six" would never happen. Instead it would be the "Magnificent Seven" era.
 
They already committed money to bledsoe and Romo was the backup, QB were more expensive back them in the draft too, I doubt parcell would pass a need for a luxury
OK, then, here's an alternative: WI the Saints had drafted him instead of OT Jammal Brown? The Saints did need a QB at that time--that's the reason they got Drew Brees when he became a free agent a year later (after the Chargers released him in one of those "Well, it seemed like a good idea at the time." decisions)...

OTOH, Brees, without New Orleans, probably goes to Miami in TTL...
 
OTOH, Brees, without New Orleans, probably goes to Miami in TTL...
That if Miami doesn't trade for daunte Culpeper first, if not he would goes to check notes... Texans or lions.

Rodgers is Rodgers but he is going to have a rough rookie year till he gets Sean Payton next year
 
Here's a WI: WI, instead of DeMarcus Ware, the Dallas Cowboys drafted Cal QB Aaron Rodgers?

They already committed money to bledsoe and Romo was the backup, QB were more expensive back them in the draft too, I doubt parcell would pass a need for a luxury
While rookie contracts were larger (in relation to the salary cap) in 2005 than they have been since 2011, contracts for guys taken a little further down the first round weren't too expensive - Ware signed a 5-year, $13m deal as the 11th pick, with the cap being $85.5m in 2005. The contract for a QB may have been a bit more expensive at that pick, but unlikely to be a major issue from a cap point of view. The need for a QB over other positions is a reasonable point.

A question related to this - how good would Aaron Rodgers have been if he hadn't had those three years behind Favre before becoming the starter? The obvious alternative scenario is that Rodgers goes first overall to the 49ers (instead of Alex Smith), and is thrown in as the starter straight away on a bad team... (This also means that Smith ends up with a different team, and most likely in a better situation for his development.)
 
A question related to this - how good would Aaron Rodgers have been if he hadn't had those three years behind Favre before becoming the starter? The obvious alternative scenario is that Rodgers goes first overall to the 49ers (instead of Alex Smith), and is thrown in as the starter straight away on a bad team... (This also means that Smith ends up with a different team, and most likely in a better situation for his development.)
Anyone in a shitty team is going to suffer, even Payton manning started with losing record, but Rodgers is Rodgers meaning some rough start but he will be fine, smith is either took by BUCS or redskins
 
The team didn't officially cease till 1946. It possible that the Rangers and the Amerks could survive after the Great Depression and World War II. The thing I been toying with is due to the Rangers winning the cup in 1940 but have the worst seasons of existence during the war period. Brooklyn would sit out but if they got the financial support they needed (thanks to the Rangers being pretty bad) and a arena in Brooklyn. The "Original Six" would never happen. Instead it would be the "Magnificent Seven" era.
Yes but they ceased hockey operations in 42. I am sceptical TBH, what allowed the Rangers to survive was that they got ''market shares'' that the Americans themselves needed to survive and get Brooklyns to sign on so these two were very much two sides of a balance, so to speak.

IMO the better options for a larger league during an ITTL (insert number) era would be Pittsburgh, Ottawa or Hamilton.
 
Yes but they ceased hockey operations in 42. I am sceptical TBH, what allowed the Rangers to survive was that they got ''market shares'' that the Americans themselves needed to survive and get Brooklyns to sign on so these two were very much two sides of a balance, so to speak.

IMO the better options for a larger league during an ITTL (insert number) era would be Pittsburgh, Ottawa or Hamilton.
Could move the Americans to Pittsburgh and become the Pittsburgh Americans instead? Later changing their name to the Hornets like the OTL Hornets of the AHL.
 
Honestly, I can't see NY making two teams work during the great depression. I'd say the Americans making it through doom the Rangers.


*shudders* Now that's dark timeline :p More seriously, this one was a terrible idea and the NHL dodged a bullet when they didn't do it, Montreal is just a massively superior Hockey market to Cleveland. I would expect Cleveland to go under soon enough (Great Depression plus not terrible but also not great Hockey market) and MTL making it back to the NHL sooner or later. I also feel that how close it came to happen is probably overestimated sometimes, as the rumours happened when the Maroons where about at the peak of their popularity when the rumours happened, which was not really sustainable for the cultural reasons I mentionned earlier in the thread.
To be fair New York supported three MLB teams during the Great Depression. Though the popularity is radically different.
 
Top