What if...

I started thinking about this today at work and I thought it would make a neat discussion. I was wondering what the 70s Steelers teams would have looked like if the salary cap had existed then. I mean, can you imagine trying to have to decide WHO to keep and who to let walk?! There surely couldn't have been a way to keep Bradshaw, Franco, Webbie, Swann, Stallworth, Lambert, Ham, Blount, Greene, and the rest of the Curtain. So who do you think the "mainstays" would have been and who would have been considered "expendable"? I say Rocky would have been a cap casualty and I would have to say Donnie Shell and Mike Wagoner would have been also. I just can't see Ham and Lambert being let go. So what do you guys say? I know there are people that could speak more to this since really that was "before my time". Here's lookin' at you MAC! LOL!

 

What was a dollar worth then, compared to now?
Times change, and we will never see a reign like that again...
That`s what makes it special!
GO STEELERS!
(P.s.... I would`ve cut the water boy, `cause everyone else was essential!)

 

EXACTLY! How in the world could they have decided who to cut and who to keep?

 

They were the definition of the word "T. E. A. M"....
Wee needed all of those parts to come together perfectly, like they did, to roll off 4 Superbowls, in 5 years...
There wasn`t a weak link on that team.

 

Yea! There was none of this "LOOK AT ME" crap that goes on today!!!!!!!
Back then it was all about the TEAM not about ME!

 

If we had to pick, I'd say they'd probably have let the offense suffer. I could see them letting Bradshaw, Swann, Stallworth and Franco go. I think they would have kept Webster though.

 

You think they would have let THEM go?! WOW! I'm not saying you're wrong. I just would be really surprised if they let ALL of them go. Surely they wouldn't tear the offense up that much. I know we love D but DANG that would be pretty crazy to see all of them let go.

 

Most of them probably wouldn't have finished their careers with the Steelers, as they got older the injuries took their toll.

 

But do you think the "dynasty" team would have been able to stay together if they would have been under the salary cap? When all the guys were at their peak? Would we have been able to keep all those studs on the same roster? I think it would be impossible to do that now. How long has it been since a team has been absolutely loaded with superstars. In the 70s that was par for the course. Other teams would have had a dilemma on their hands as well. Raiders and Cowboys come to mind. Also probably the Vikes and Fins as well huh?

 

I was just thinking of it if they had to do it under the way things are now where guys are getting paid insane amounts. I think the mentality of those guys though would have been more about keeping the team together as opposed to having that one big payday and even playing for a perennial loser to get it. I LIKE to think that anyway. I'm glad we never got to find out. Can you imagine if Jerry Jones had been able to lure Jack Lambert away???

 

In today's NFL, Bradshaw would have been allowed to walk when his rookie contract expired after he threw 38 TDs and 81 INTs his first four years in the league! Can you imagine? The elite QBs now throw 38 TDs in a season and it took Bradshaw 4 years to get there. He would have been Blaine Gabbert if that era required the instant gratification that this era demands. And people want the throw Landry Jones under the bus after a couple of poor preseason performances!

 

That's an inSANE stat! But did you know that Joe Namath had more INTs than TDs in his career and he's in the Hall of Fame? By a vast margin actually. Terry didn't really have any weapons though until Swann and Stallworth. Still that's pretty crazy that his numbers were that bad.

 

This era vs that era Jack...REALLY??? Last I looked 12 won 4...THATS WHAT COUNTS!!!...This era or that!!

As far as "Dirty" Landry goes....Dont get me started!!!

 

LOL! Where you been, Myron? I knew the Landry Jones comment would wake you up.

And you're right, 12 did win 4. And thank God THAT era was not like THIS era in which the expectation on a QB coming in is that they've already achieved All-Pro status. Otherwise, 12 may have won 4 for the Chiefs!

 

The rings the thing Jack be it 1969 or 2014.....Win one you will be remembered. Win more than one..... That my friend is what counts!!!.....RINGS!!!!!!!

 

The money game wasn't there like now. Those dudes still had pride and morale... Money has ruined the sport long before rule changes but it's all interwoven now. Nice thread though.

 

I don't disagree, Myron. But that's not my point. The point I'm trying to make is that TB may not have had the chance to win those rings had the era he played in been like today's. I'm saying it's a good thing he played in the crockpot era instead of the microwave era.

 

And Montana may have never won all his Super Bowls....Emmit may not own the total rush yardage record....Rice would not have many of his rec records he has....Its just how it is Jack...If these guys played today how do you think they would do? They ALL played in the "crockpot" era. Does that make their accomplishments less worthy????

 

Myron, where have I said their accomplishments are less worthy? I'm merely trying to point out that the two eras are different and that I'm very happy that The Blonde Bomber played in an era which was characterized by more patience in developing young players, especially quarterbacks. That was pretty much the norm back then. The QB paid his dues by riding the pine for a few years before he got his chance to start. In Bradshaw's case, he pretty much started from the get go but was benched on occasion. I'm not trying to minimize what Bradshaw or any other great player in eras gone by have done, I'm just pointing out the differences.

 

Montana actually got BENCHED at one point! It's really crazy how NFL Films sorta "glosses over" people's legacies. There are a lot of players who struggled early on and went on to greatness but when we think of guys like Bradshaw or Montana we just think of guys throwing perfect spirals all the time and never having an incompletion or a pick or a fumble or whatever. The way the NFL packages and markets their more legendary players is extremely effective.

 

Yeah it is actually pretty new school for guys to start right out of college. I actually point to Ben as the guy that started the trend of rookies getting to start fairly quickly. I know that he got out there because of an injury but once he had that first great season and was the first qb to win rookie of the year it seemed more teams started getting more comfy with a noob at qb. A couple of years after that Vince Young won rookie of the year. Also it wasn't long until Phillip Rivers was starting and the same goes for Eli. But a guy like Steve Young sat behind Montana forever. Rogers even sat behind Favre for a while too. It just seems now that guys are pretty much given the keys to the kingdom and that used to not happen at all.

 

Thats cool Jack.....Guess I didnt know what you were comparing. All Im saying is let the era speak for itself...The history books will decide who is right and who is wrong.

 

Looking for the thread someone had posted of one of the teams prior to the SB 10? Shot with a bunch of hand film cameras, some by the team members. They showed a few of the wives by a swimming pool talking about salaries and some of those guys were getting $40k and having to work over the offseason.

 

BFT, you raise a great question here and one that I doubt we will ever be able to answer very well. What I do believe is this...If Lambert would have watched one of his own guys flex his muscle or point towards the first down or run his hand over his face after a big play he would have probably threw them to the ground and gave them an ear full. Those guys felt it was their job to win, any way necessary, these guys feel it is their job to get paid, any way necessary. I still love the game but I have had to adjust what I love about it as I have grew into middle age (give or take lol).