alternatehistory.com

Yesterday the NFL officially eliminated the infamous "tuck rule." Infamous for its role in helping decide the 2002 AFC Divisional Playoff Game between the New England Patriots and Oakland Raiders, the tuck rule has achieved somewhat mythical status. That call, and that game, have had significant ripple effects in the years since. The Patriots went on to beat the Raiders and start a dynasty, winning three Super Bowls in four years. Meanwhile out west, Oakland looked to be in good shape the next year. New Head Coach Bill Callahan took the Raiders to the Super Bowl before they were destroyed by Tampa Bay. An old (aging would be an understatement) team fell apart, and has yet to make the playoffs since.

So, what would have happened if the tuck rule wasn't invoked, Tom Brady lost the ball, and Oakland made their way to a second straight AFC title game? I'll divide my questions into the short and long-term.

Short Term:
-Who would have won the AFC in 2001-2002?: The title game would have been between Oakland and Pittsburgh. The Steelers were the top AFC team in the regular season with the league's best defense. But with a banged-up Jerome Bettis and an inconsistent QB in Kordell Stewart, this team was very vulnerable. Could Oakland's high-flying West Coast offense score enough points to score a second-straight road win?

-Does the "Greatest Show on Turf" win another?: The St. Louis Rams were arguably the best team in the NFL in 2001. Led by MVP Kurt Warner and Offensive Player of the Year Marshall Faulk, the Rams offense was one of the all-time greats. After winning the Super Bowl in a cinderella season in 1999, St. Louis returned to the big game two years later as the favorites. A Rams-Steelers matchup would be a story of polar opposites, while a showdown with Oakland had the potential for a high-scorring affair.

-Oakland, Tampa Bay, and a crazy coaching carosel: Following the 2001 season, Raiders Head Coach Jon Gruden was essentially traded to the Tampa Bay Buccanneers for draft picks. This was due to Gruden's decision not to accept a contract extension with the Raiders past 2002. Al Davis decided to get what he could and move on. But if the Raiders got past the Pats, and potentially to the Supere Bowl, would Gruden have decided to stick around and finish what he started? If Chucky stays with Oakland, Tampa Bay will have to find someone else after firing Tony Dungy. Two options that were talked about at the time were Bill Parscells and Steve Mariuci. Both were rumored to be offered by the Head Coach and General Manager positions. Parscells turned the job down, but Mariuci was Tampa Bay's fallback-fallback option. If Gruden stays in Oakland, does he take the offer and end up in Tampa? Who do the 49ers hire, and how does it impact the TO-Garcia relationship?

-Tom Who?: The 2001 New England Patriots story is tied directly to the rise of Tom Brady, arguably the greatest quarterback of the past decade. But if the Pats lost in the playoffs in January of 2002, would his legacy have been different? The first question is what to do with Drew Bledsoe? The Patriots ended up trading him to the Bills for a first round pick in that offseason. Do they follow the same course here, or does Belichek decide to head into 2002 with a QB controversy on his hands (I doubt it). Even if Brady is handed the reigns, does he put up the same production? Can he become anything more than a game-manager?

Long-Term
-The Patriots Dynasty: Without their Super Bowl ring in 2002, can the Patriots become an NFL dynasty? Their 2003 and 2004 teams built on the core of 2001, adding and subtracting as necessary to make even better teams. The obvious answer is no, the Patriots wouldn't be a dynasty without that first big win. The team chemisty wouldn't have been the same and they would have been bested by other teams in the AFC. The more nuanced answer is maybe. Unlike some franchises, New England never went for the big-name free agents, who are often attracted to getting a shot at a title. Signings like Roosevelt Colvin and Rodney Harrison still could have happened even if the Patriots weren't the top team in the NFL. My personal opinion is that New England would not have been a dynasty, but still could have won a title during the 2000s.

-Oakland Resurgent: The Raiders were one of the best teams in the AFC when they lost to the Patriots in the playoffs. Jon Gruden and Rich Gannon led a veteran offense that put up big points, while a stout defense always kept them in the game. If Oakland beat New England, they would have reached back-to-back AFC title games. If their 2002 season went a similar way than they could have made three in a row, with the possibility of two Super Bowl appearances. This all came to nought IOTL, as the Raiders age and poor front office management caused them to fall apart. Would this have happened with Gruden at the helm, or with another Super Bowl appearance?

-The Greatest?: Peyton Manning's career has been defined in large part by failing to achieve in the playoffs. The Colts did reach two Super Bowls under Manning, but too many times fell short in the early rounds. This was often at the hands of the Patriots defense and Tom Brady's arm. But if the Colts don't run into those tough New England teams in Foxboro, does Peyton get a ring earlier? Does he get multiple titles? And if Tom Brady doesn't become as great a QB, is the record-breaking, title-winning Manning viewed as the greatest of all-time?

-Filling in the gaps: This may be the toughest question, but if the Patriots don't make that first Super Bowl, and don't become a great dynasty, who win the Lombardi Trophies in the early 2000s? This is an impossible question because of butterflies that involve draft picks, coaching changes, and the very random nature of the NFL. But we can speculate! After all, that's what we do best!
Top