Sports What Ifs.

1) What if the Saints draft Lawrence Taylor with the first overall pick in '81 and focus on defense for Archie Manning

I thought about this one a few days ago, and did a search on it. Apparently, Bum Phillips wanted South Carolina RB George Rogers really bad because he wanted what he had when he was at Houston (with Earl Campbell). However, his son Wade Phillips (who was with NO at the time) begged Bum to take LT. If he was able to convince him, that D would have been super fierce for years with him and Rickey Jackson on opposite sides (and Sam Mills and Vaughan Johnson in the middle later in the decade when Mora takes over for a retiring Bum after 1985).

Then, if they commit to Archie (and don't draft Dave Wilson in the 81 Supp draft), they have their 82 #1, and they take Marcus Allen to give Bum his workhorse RB.

They could have had QB Jim Kelly if they didn't trade their 83 first-rounder for Bruce Clark. However, I would leave that alone. Clark was a beast. Marcus Allen and that D probably gets them into the playoffs in 83 (Archie finally makes it).

In reality, they traded for QB Richard Todd. However, in this world, they keep Archie at QB for another year or two, and decide to draft Boomer Esiason in the first round of the 84 draft. After barely missing the playoffs in 84 and 85, Bum and Archie retire, and Jim Mora takes over as HC. With him come LB's Sam Mills and Vaughan Johnson.

With the new Dome Patrol, along with Boomer at QB and Marcus Allen at RB, the Saints make the playoffs six times from 1987-93, but aren't able to get over the 49ers, Giants, Redskins, and Cowboy powerhouses in the playoffs.
 
I thought about this one a few days ago, and did a search on it. Apparently, Bum Phillips wanted South Carolina RB George Rogers really bad because he wanted what he had when he was at Houston (with Earl Campbell). However, his son Wade Phillips (who was with NO at the time) begged Bum to take LT. If he was able to convince him, that D would have been super fierce for years with him and Rickey Jackson on opposite sides (and Sam Mills and Vaughan Johnson in the middle later in the decade when Mora takes over for a retiring Bum after 1985).

Then, if they commit to Archie (and don't draft Dave Wilson in the 81 Supp draft), they have their 82 #1, and they take Marcus Allen to give Bum his workhorse RB.

They could have had QB Jim Kelly if they didn't trade their 83 first-rounder for Bruce Clark. However, I would leave that alone. Clark was a beast. Marcus Allen and that D probably gets them into the playoffs in 83 (Archie finally makes it).

In reality, they traded for QB Richard Todd. However, in this world, they keep Archie at QB for another year or two, and decide to draft Boomer Esiason in the first round of the 84 draft. After barely missing the playoffs in 84 and 85, Bum and Archie retire, and Jim Mora takes over as HC. With him come LB's Sam Mills and Vaughan Johnson.

With the new Dome Patrol, along with Boomer at QB and Marcus Allen at RB, the Saints make the playoffs six times from 1987-93, but aren't able to get over the 49ers, Giants, Redskins, and Cowboy powerhouses in the playoffs.

So, on the one hand, Saints rise from the ashes of the Aints years to become playoff visitors. OTOH, they are stopped short from advancing. Sounds

Any way they would improve with Mike Singletary or Howie Long in the place of? And with 1993, could they improve with, say, Strahan or, if Boomer ends up leaving or retiring by 1993, Mark Brunell?
 
I thought about this one a few days ago, and did a search on it. Apparently, Bum Phillips wanted South Carolina RB George Rogers really bad because he wanted what he had when he was at Houston (with Earl Campbell). However, his son Wade Phillips (who was with NO at the time) begged Bum to take LT. If he was able to convince him, that D would have been super fierce for years with him and Rickey Jackson on opposite sides (and Sam Mills and Vaughan Johnson in the middle later in the decade when Mora takes over for a retiring Bum after 1985).

Then, if they commit to Archie (and don't draft Dave Wilson in the 81 Supp draft), they have their 82 #1, and they take Marcus Allen to give Bum his workhorse RB.

They could have had QB Jim Kelly if they didn't trade their 83 first-rounder for Bruce Clark. However, I would leave that alone. Clark was a beast. Marcus Allen and that D probably gets them into the playoffs in 83 (Archie finally makes it).

In reality, they traded for QB Richard Todd. However, in this world, they keep Archie at QB for another year or two, and decide to draft Boomer Esiason in the first round of the 84 draft. After barely missing the playoffs in 84 and 85, Bum and Archie retire, and Jim Mora takes over as HC. With him come LB's Sam Mills and Vaughan Johnson.

With the new Dome Patrol, along with Boomer at QB and Marcus Allen at RB, the Saints make the playoffs six times from 1987-93, but aren't able to get over the 49ers, Giants, Redskins, and Cowboy powerhouses in the playoffs.

If LT is taking Swilling's spot in the Dome Patrol then they might be better for a longer stretch of time, but by the time we see the prime of Boomer and the other three linebackers, Swilling is arguably better than a declining Taylor. Still that period from 1986-89 they might be the best team in the NFL. The Giants certainly aren't winning two Super Bowls without LT. I think the Saints and the Niners are the clear two best teams in the 80's with the Redskins inconsistently trailing behind. I do think the lack of real good corners would catch up with the Saints when they played San Francisco, assuming they have more or less the same pieces. Until Allen and LT declined and the Cowboys Dynasty stared up, assuming that it happens as it did in real life, then I really think for most years the Saints have a really good shot at making the Super Bowl, and probably get there at least once. However, I think most of the improvement comes from replacing Bobby Hebert with Boomer Esiason and Dalton Hilliard with Marcus Allen, not necessarily trading Pat Swilling for LT. The real difference I think of putting LT on the Giants is taking New York out of the picture as a serious contender. He did so much for that team on defense, they aren't the same team without him
 
A few that I can think of:

1) What if the Saints draft Lawrence Taylor with the first overall pick in '81 and focus on defense for Archie Manning
2) What if the Saints draft Jim Kelly in '83?

3) What if the inclusion of the PCL and ML into the majors was successful?

4) What if the Pirates were successful in their move to the Superdome?

5) What if the Raiders were able to move to New Orleans in 1961?

6) What if the Redskins were relocated in order to change the name?

7) What if the Los Angeles Buccaneers were able to play in the stadium?

8) What if there was a settlement with the former Federal League and MLB before SCOTUS hearing (ASB if needed)?

9) What if the retention of team names in relocations were the norm?

10) What if baseball was a successful international sport?

Baseball is pretty popular in North America, Japan, Korea, china

Baseball teams, besides those moving to and from DC have except.

Senetors one changed to retain name for Senetors 2

Senetors 2 became rangers

Expos became nationals (one of the original names, for the Senetors)

1901 brewers became browns who became orioles

1901 orioles became the highlanders/yankees

Seattle piolts became the brewers

Certain regions had historic names for teams already.

Teams to retain name:
Giants
dodgers
Braves
Athletics

I would digress to say that more generic names are more retainable
 
A few that I can think of:

1) What if the Saints draft Lawrence Taylor with the first overall pick in '81 and focus on defense for Archie Manning
2) What if the Saints draft Jim Kelly in '83?

3) What if the inclusion of the PCL and ML into the majors was successful?

4) What if the Pirates were successful in their move to the Superdome?

5) What if the Raiders were able to move to New Orleans in 1961?

6) What if the Redskins were relocated in order to change the name?

7) What if the Los Angeles Buccaneers were able to play in the stadium?

8) What if there was a settlement with the former Federal League and MLB before SCOTUS hearing (ASB if needed)?

9) What if the retention of team names in relocations were the norm?

10) What if baseball was a successful international sport?

1. Saints have a great defense that doesn’t get them over the hump but does manage to trip up the 49ers a couple of times.

2. The Saints break through in the early 90s, and they win one over a weakened Bills or Broncos team.

3. With the PCL, divisions split earlier and teams abandon two-team cities for places like Minnesota, KC, Texas and maybe New Orleans. Maybe Denver. If it works, expect to see MLB at 32 teams by the 90s and probably 36 by now. Imagine that lineup.

4. The New Orleans Pirates stink the place up unless someone else buys them, and by now they move somewhere else especially after Katrina. Since the Expos beat them to DC, they end up somewhere like, I dunno, Charlotte.

5. The NFL goes to Tampa sooner. The NFC puts the Cowboys and Cardinals in the West while the East gets the Falcons and Bucs. The Saints go to the Central while the Oilers go West. Expansion is Seattle and...ugh. Memphis and it doesn’t work out. They tool around there for a while, and they beat the Colts to Indy while the Colts dabble with Phoenix and can’t pull it off, Irsay is out on his ass, and the Colts get sold to a local buyer like Angelos. The Browns never move. The Oilers still do. Expansion is still Carolina and Jacksonville first, then probably Houston and LA both. The Rams move to San Antonio.

6. They would have been relocated back in the late 1950s when Marshall decides to sell. Lamar Hunt is the obvious buyer and he moves them to KC and we get the Kansas City Chiefs. DC gets an expansion team later that is not called the Redskins. Possibly the Nationals.

7. Sooner West Coast expansion and possibly more of a chance for other leagues to do the same, although expect the NFL to have California to themselves until after WWII.

8. The Baltimore Terrapins owner is compensated in a satisfactory way, like, say, the ability to buy the Senators. He doesn’t fuck it up and the Senators don’t suck, and they stay in DC. The case never comes to pass and baseball is still, I suppose, subject to the Antitrust Act. The PCL later brings suit and wins, and the eight PCL teams join MLB OR become a competing league, and yet another league joins to make it an even four.

9. It kind of is with some exceptions - Dodgers and Giants originated in NYC, Jazz is a New Orleans name, and Cardinals has been passed through four different cities in football. The only time teams change their names is if the other one no longer works, like the Browns or the Hornets.

10. It is, but a true World Series would be awesome.
 
Baseball is pretty popular in North America, Japan, Korea, china

Baseball teams, besides those moving to and from DC have except.

Senetors one changed to retain name for Senetors 2

Senetors 2 became rangers

Expos became nationals (one of the original names, for the Senetors)

1901 brewers became browns who became orioles

1901 orioles became the highlanders/yankees

Seattle piolts became the brewers

Certain regions had historic names for teams already.

Teams to retain name:
Giants
dodgers
Braves
Athletics

I would digress to say that more generic names are more retainable

What I mean by the whole "If baseball was an international sport" is the fact that, while China, South Korea, Japan, and Taiwan all have baseball, it's not as huge as, say, basketball and soccer (association football for long) where there is a wide international appeal and a whole international event like the Olympics or World Cup. More a "What if Baseball was more international by post-WW2 US efforts?"

3. With the PCL, divisions split earlier and teams abandon two-team cities for places like Minnesota, KC, Texas and maybe New Orleans. Maybe Denver. If it works, expect to see MLB at 32 teams by the 90s and probably 36 by now. Imagine that lineup.

8. The Baltimore Terrapins owner is compensated in a satisfactory way, like, say, the ability to buy the Senators. He doesn’t fuck it up and the Senators don’t suck, and they stay in DC. The case never comes to pass and baseball is still, I suppose, subject to the Antitrust Act. The PCL later brings suit and wins, and the eight PCL teams join MLB OR become a competing league, and yet another league joins to make it an even four.

Which, with the Mexican League doing just that around the same time as the PCL...I wonder if that would actually help baseball in two fronts; the growing rise of gridiron football and a more gradual expansion with the inclusion of the MBL. New Orleans potentially getting to upgrade the Pelicans to the majors (if not adopting the Saints name or the Chevaliers, Rougaroux, etc.) is a sweet deal, but I would wonder if there was an effort by the two major leagues to push expansion with the former FL teams down the road from the lawsuit (opening up those spots earlier).

4. The New Orleans Pirates stink the place up unless someone else buys them, and by now they move somewhere else especially after Katrina. Since the Expos beat them to DC, they end up somewhere like, I dunno, Charlotte.

Same to say with the Oakland A's? Because I am wondering if, with a more successful Saints team, the latter gets a good deal on a new stadium in Algiers and either of the baseball teams get the Superdome (complete with a more baseball-oriented configuration). Now, Katrina, I will concede, could likely move the team to Charlotte (unless Benson somehow gets the idea to buy the team in some ASB method)

5. The NFL goes to Tampa sooner. The NFC puts the Cowboys and Cardinals in the West while the East gets the Falcons and Bucs. The Saints go to the Central while the Oilers go West. Expansion is Seattle and...ugh. Memphis and it doesn’t work out. They tool around there for a while, and they beat the Colts to Indy while the Colts dabble with Phoenix and can’t pull it off, Irsay is out on his ass, and the Colts get sold to a local buyer like Angelos. The Browns never move. The Oilers still do. Expansion is still Carolina and Jacksonville first, then probably Houston and LA both. The Rams move to San Antonio.

Dolphins as an NFL/NFC team, Saints in the AFL/AFC, Colts stay in Baltimore, and the...Indianapolis Oilers? With the Browns never moving, I wonder if that Sadness Factory era still hits them (if not Indy or Houston). Now, that makes me want to wonder about the same ATL Saints team in the opposite league/conference

9. It kind of is with some exceptions - Dodgers and Giants originated in NYC, Jazz is a New Orleans name, and Cardinals has been passed through four different cities in football. The only time teams change their names is if the other one no longer works, like the Browns or the Hornets.

The question I am getting at with this is what if the method of keeping team names with the team moving (a la Browns-Ravens) was the norm? A team could relocate, so long as they have a new name and the city willing to keep the name and colors pending an expansion team/sell off. To that end, the Jazz remain in New Orleans (pending an expansion team), the Utah team retakes the ABA Stars name, etc.

10. It is, but a true World Series would be awesome.

Agreed!
 
5) What if the Raiders were able to move to New Orleans in 1961?

Here is an article that talks about what almost happened:

https://crescentcitysports.com/befo...iders-and-chiefs-almost-moved-to-new-orleans/

If Dixon (the future USFL founder) was able to buy the Raiders and move them to New Orleans (it would have been in 1963, not 61), he probably re-names them the Saints (they were going to do that to the Texans if they moved there).

Here's the first big potential butterfly: Al Davis may not have been hired as HC. This organization without Davis is probably worse than it was with him. He did suck as owner his last decade and a half, but he was also the one that made the Raiders great and iconic.

Also, since Madden isn't working with Davis, where does he become a HC, if anywhere? If he doesn't, Madden probably doesn't have a video game named after him.

In addition, another team that would have been affected would have been the 49ers. In 1976, Al Davis recommended to the Morabito's that they sell to Ed DeBartolo and his son. The rest is history. If Davis isn't in position to do that (and nobody else does), the 49ers probably don't become the Team of the 80's.
 
The question I am getting at with this is what if the method of keeping team names with the team moving (a la Browns-Ravens) was the norm? A team could relocate, so long as they have a new name and the city willing to keep the name and colors pending an expansion team/sell off. To that end, the Jazz remain in New Orleans (pending an expansion team), the Utah team retakes the ABA Stars name, etc.

So LA wouldn't get the Lakers name, and Minnesota could have a Basketball team AND an NFL team in purple & yellow? Hmm.. all they'd need then is for the Twins to join suit & you'd have another Pittsburgh.... another city with a unified sports colour-scheme.
 
So LA wouldn't get the Lakers name, and Minnesota could have a Basketball team AND an NFL team in purple & yellow? Hmm.. all they'd need then is for the Twins to join suit & you'd have another Pittsburgh.... another city with a unified sports colour-scheme.
Nice plus make sense as there no lakes on LA this another name would be better, So the Mets would be either Giants or Dodgers in this scenario?
 
Well if the Dodgers go to LA and Giants to SF, if the Phillies move to the West Coast (assuming the A’s shove them out) then...hmm. The Senators to KC instead of Minnesota has merit, and I see no reason the name “Royals” wouldn’t stick.

This means someone has to go to the West Coast in the AL. And assuming that the AL has the same mindset O’Malley has, it means they put two teams out there and Congress can just go to hell and wait for the next expansion (which may mean the team actually sticks around instead of packing up for Arlington, Texas.)

So the AL, with no teams west of Chicago (let’s see here...Boston, NY, Philly, Baltimore, DC, Cleveland, Detroit and Chicago) moves the Senators to KC and expands to LA (Angels) and Oakland (I dunno...Seals?) Meanwhile the NL goes to NY and Minnesota, sensing trouble in Houston (the original Astros stadium, when they were the Colt .45s, was a nightmare.) At that point, the Braves are in Milwaukee, so the “West” is LA, SD, SF, Milwaukee, and Minnesota along with Chicago and STL to make up the East with Cincy, Pittsburgh and NY.

So with the Braves moving to Atlanta, the next expansion is...hmm. Next cities up are DC, Houston, Seattle and Montreal. You almost have to put Houston and Seattle in the AL - they along with the two West Coast teams, KC and Chicago make up the West. The Cubs and Cardinals still probably bitch and moan about being in the West, but once the Pilots move to Milwaukee, it should work.

How about the red sox leave Boston, the braves stay
 
Saints got their name because the franchise was awarded on All Saints Day, and Archbishop Hannan signed off on the name not being offensive to Catholics. Raiders would have worked just fine in NOLA (Jean Lafitte).

Algiers wouldn't work for the A's or Pirates. Algiers Point has a lot of historic architecture similar to the French Quarter. Further down DeGaulle wouldn't be able to handle game day traffic. Upriver near the old Mardi Gras World site would have the same issue, plus parking.

Have to share the Dome or build just upriver from the Convention Center, or on the site of the Iberville project (which would be highly controversial and might not go through).
 
Saints got their name because the franchise was awarded on All Saints Day, and Archbishop Hannan signed off on the name not being offensive to Catholics. Raiders would have worked just fine in NOLA (Jean Lafitte).

Algiers wouldn't work for the A's or Pirates. Algiers Point has a lot of historic architecture similar to the French Quarter. Further down DeGaulle wouldn't be able to handle game day traffic. Upriver near the old Mardi Gras World site would have the same issue, plus parking.

Have to share the Dome or build just upriver from the Convention Center, or on the site of the Iberville project (which would be highly controversial and might not go through).

What about just across Claiborne/I-10 in Mid-City?
 
In the 1960s, the then-Dallas Texans challenged the Dallas Cowboys to a loser-leaves-town match, but the owner of the Cowboys, Clint Murchinson, declined, IIRC. As we all know IOTL, the Texans moved to Kansas City and became the Kansas City Chiefs.

WI he'd accepted the offer? At the time, the Texans were the better team than the Cowboys, so, if the Cowboys lose, where do they move?
 
In the 1960s, the then-Dallas Texans challenged the Dallas Cowboys to a loser-leaves-town match, but the owner of the Cowboys, Clint Murchinson, declined, IIRC. As we all know IOTL, the Texans moved to Kansas City and became the Kansas City Chiefs.

WI he'd accepted the offer? At the time, the Texans were the better team than the Cowboys, so, if the Cowboys lose, where do they move?

My Guess is the Dallas Cowboys move when the Dallas Texans stay in the AFL past 1962, It will be Kansas City, MO so we can call the Kansas City Cowboys, but I have a feeling the Dallas Texans could win Super Bowl I over the Green Bay Packers.
 
Top