I concur!!! This show used to come on every Saturday night/Sunday morning at like 1:30 am. I would stay up to watch GOW & TWIPF. It would be an hour and half long for the two, for a sports junkie like me and no ESPN this was my fix at the time. I loved Christmas break when we had Saturday NFL games, Pat Summeral & Tom Brookshire were awesome and Dry humor funny and broke up when they started party'n too much. Than you had Curt Gowdy and John Brodie, the way Gowdy called a game was just classic. Than you would have a Saturday night game by the MNF crew of Gifford, Meredith, and Good Ole Howard Cosell. He was just one big shit stirrer and would constantly put Giff and Dandy Don down because they were ex athletes and he felt they didnt work for their jobs. Those Announcing crews were absolutely the best in my time!!!
I wish the Rams would have won this game, although they didn't have much of a shot on that kind of a day in Minnesota. An LA Rams vs. Oakland Super Bowl would have been much more intriguing than watching the Vikings gag on it and get blown out for the fourth time in a row.
You'll almost never see four teams playing on Championship Sunday with as much talent as the Rams vs Vikings, and Steelers at Raiders games presented on this day. And this game, the NFC Title game, had more huge plays in it than most weekends would dream of. A Blocked FG for a TD after a Goal line stand. A fumble leading to a FG. A bomb to end the half to Ron Jessie. A 62 yard run by Chuck Foreman. Two amazing scrambles and strikes by Pat Haden. A strip sack by Fred Dreyer. A huge INT by Bobby Bryant (Two INTS and a blocked FG return for a TD!!!)....and then one huge play by Fran Tarkenton after a bad afternoon, hitting Foreman for the clinching 3rd down conversion for 57 yards. This game had it all.
I remember virtually all of the starters on both teams and I wasn't even a fan of either of them. Nowadays I couldn't tell you a single player on most NFL teams!
I remember this game like it was yesterday. I was 13 years old watching at home with a childhood friend who was a rams fan. When Foreman made that catch for 57 yards Rodney went running out the house. I looked out the window and saw him at railroad tracks running home. What a good game this was.
Me Too! I was 12. .. Let's Have Sex! .... Oh?! I Take That Back. I thought you were a Lady.. just forget that ever happened, and continue with your day.
@Fries Bryant must have weighed 160 soaking wet. But he was a big play guy. Krause was a great center field ballhawk. But here was the problem with the Vikings secondary for many years. Almost all of them were lousy tacklers. Bryant, Mackbee, Nate Wright, Sharockman and especially Krause. They were embarrassingly bad, and they were exposed in all 4 SB. The Mackbee and Kassulke missed tackles on Otis Taylor's simple down and out TD that clinched SB 4 still pisses me off. Larry Csonka pulverizing Krause as he ran right over him in SB 8 etc. None of our DBs were hitters or intimidators, they were finesse guys.
@Fries Warwick, Winston and Hilgenberg were decent tacklers but none of them were all pro caliber. They all were somewhat slow. Vikes never had guys like Dave Robinson of Packers or Bobby Bell of Chiefs. Not until Seimon and Matt Blair did it get better
I was at this game. I was a little kid and knew absolutely nothing about football. I think the big brothers sent us down there.I remember freezing my my feet
Awesome! . . . I was only three years old at the time. This was three years before I knew anything about the game of football and becoming a Rams fan. I AM a true scholar of the game and love watching clips such as this. Besides the cold that afternoon, what do you remember most about this game? DB Bobby Bryant saved the game for the Vikings, for If Jessie catches that ball, the game might have had a different ending.
@Randy Montgomery--not ruling that Ron Jessie had scored in the first quarter was also crucial. A shame, Rams were the better team, but unfortunately drew another freak cold day in Minnesota. Rams vs. Raiders would have been a much more intriguing SB than watching the Vikings gag on it once again.
true...but don't forget , the L.A Rams have actually had pretty good success against Dallas in the post season..Rams have 5 post season wins against Dallas, which i believe are the most post season losses Dallas has against any opponent.. check it out...mcubed.net/nfl/mfpm.shtml
Incorrect. They didn't belong in those games, that's why they were always blown out. They were there because they had a ridiculous home field advantage, which they stupidly forfeited in the early 80's. Not a very smart franchise.
@@jms1963 I'll always wonder about KC. No question they had great players, especially on defense, but watch the Missing Rings vid on the '69 Vikings... till the end, as brutal as it is. My best guess (it's a guess, admittedly) is that, coming off two emotional wins over the Rams and Browns, followed by the week off, and with most fans/media still believing the NFL was vastly superior to the AFL, it was the perfect storm and the Vikings just weren't ready. But the last three Super Bowls, Miami, Pittsburgh and the Raiders were stellar. Vikings had no shot in those games.
@@bitterangrydrunk Don't get me wrong, I liked those teams and loved watching playoff games played at the old Met. Their defense was Super Bowl quality, but other than Chuck Foreman and maybe Sammy White, they lacked impact players on offense. Tarkenton had big career stats, mostly because he played for 50 years, but he was not capable of carrying a team. I'll never understand giving up that kind of home field advantage to move into a hideous dome.
@@jms1963 Part of that advantage was that the rest of the Division sucked and Grant built an undersized team that was faster than bad teams and could take advantage of poor footing in big home playoff games.
@@jms1963 Sorry dipniblets, but wrong again. The Vikings BELONGED in all those Super Bowls because they WON 4 championships to GET to those Super Bowls. They BELONGED because they were NFL/NFC CHAMPIONS 4 times in an 8 year period. See nits, that means they were the BEST team in the NFL/NFC 5 TIMES (including 75 when they were robbed by the refs due to the infamous Hail Pushoff Call). The Ewes were perennial also rans who couldn't even GET to the Super Bowl, lmfao. James Harris, Pattycakes Haden? Lmfao.
Bryant actually had TWO interceptions in this game. But let's face it: Nate Allen deserves the credit for the 90-yard blocked FG TD. Bryant was just standing there, and the ball bounced right to him. However, it doesn't detract from Bryant's longstanding big play potential..
Fact: Minnesota has not been to a SB since this game. Playing outdoors in the cold and snow and on natural grass was an advantage. Since becoming a dome team they've become soft and finesse.
that's faulty logic, buddy... most NFL players come from warm weather climates..California, Texas and Florida produce 50% of all NFL players...for most NFL players , playing in the cold is something they have to adapt to...i'll bet you most of the Vikings players came from weather states...
@@conni70 Actually, a good number came from cold-weather states--Minnesota, Wisconsin, Iowa, Ohio, Michigan, Nebraska, etc. I can think of players from all of these states. They did like to get OTs from USC, though ( Ron Yary, Steve Riley)
@@massvt3821 ...it's a big country, so naturally you have guys in the pros represented from almost every state...but again, the majority of NFL players come from California, Texas , Florida and the deep South...those are all warm weather regions, when compared to the upper Midwest...and when you get even more specific, the two geographic regions that produce the most NFL talent are warm weather regions, Southern California & South Florida..
@@conni70 Not disagreeing, but at that time, the Vikings had a number of players from Big 10/upper midwestern colleges. Of the top of my head: Eller/Jeff Wright/Milt Sunde from Minnesota ( The Ue's also a tendency for an NFL tesm ), Voight from Wisconsin, Krause/Hilgenberg from Iowa, Tinglehoff from Nebraska, Osborn from North Dakota, Bill Brown from Illinois, Marshall from Ohio State, Page from Notre Dame, Sutherland from UW-Superior, Larsen from Moorhead State (MN), etc. There's also a tendency for an NFL team to draft at least a few players from neighboring states, so this wasn't unusual then..
Always remembered as the Bobby Bryant game. Bryant played in all 4 Vikings SBs and is arguably a HOFer, Wally Hilgenberg should have gotten HOF consideration as well. Alan Page was the young man of the group at 31, Tarkenton was 37, Marshall was 37, Eller was 34. The oldest core of players ever to reach a SB. 16 blocked kicks in a season; Allen, McNeil, Matt Blair, Bobby Bryant; later they had Terry McCount. Vikings special teams were really amazing in the mid 70s. And Chuck Foreman was a beast. But the Rams would have presented matchup problems for Oakland in SB 11 that the older vikes couldn’t pose.
The player not in the HOF who has a case is Matt Blair. He was a Pro Bowl and/or All-Pro for 6 consecutive seasons and played in 3 Super Bowls. In his first 10 seasons, he missed just 2 games. 2. He also played in all 13 playoff games in those 10 seasons. He was as reliable as anyone.
I guess it's safe to say that going for a field goal from the half yard line, and having it not only blocked, but returned for a td was the turning point of this game. Wow! A decision Knox would like back obviously.
Steve Choppy I am a fan, albeit a miserable fan. I am tired of losing; and I am sick and tired of the franchise celebrating “plays”, the Diggs catch, and individual accomplishments, all-pro list, a top defense and 2000 yard rusher. None of that means anything. I am tired of Speilman stats - all of it is ridiculous. Going indoors was because Minnesota is soft. Soft and acceptable losers. I wish that I could quit them.
How about the cheerleaders at 1:12? Cute, fresh-faced, they look like high school cheerleaders. Today--strippers gyrating to auto-tune garbage. Can we just freeze the NFL the way it was in the 70's? I won't even care if the obnoxious Steelers are good again, I just miss that era.
I was almost a 1-year-old when this game was played. The Vikings' last SB was Jan. 9, 1977. I turned 1 that same day. After all these years, what I wouldn't give for a Super Bowl win!
They were an older team at that point, but they were very smart and intelligent players with a lot of playoff experience and could always come up with big plays.
@@markmerzweiler909 Bud Grant was quoted that during those playoff runs in the 70s that he didn't really need to coach up that defense, they pretty much knew what to do and how to match up against an opposing offense. Must have been a great luxury for coach Grant to have players like that.
FUN FACT: Tom Dempsey insisted Steve Preece be his holder. Preece was Dempsey's holder in New Orleans in 1969 and again in Philadelphia in 1971 and '72.
I felt bad for these Rams. '73-79! During this era, it wasn't that LA was chokers, it was that they were missing something. That something was that one game breaker that had to be accounted for each and every possession. They had that game breaker, his name was Harold Jackson. Back then, because the Rams were such a run oriented team, they never explored the option of using Jackson in the slot. Had they done that it takes eithet Bobby Bryant or Paul Krause out of position and open the running game up even more. The Cjargers who had similar personel took full advantage of Charlie Joiner in the slot as they put Kellen Winslow wide. Chuck Muncie had breakout years, Dan Fouts lit up Secondaries like Christmas Trees, but their defense (once a top 10 unit) eas reduced to bottom status. Back to 1976, and Ground Chuck. He later won COTY with Buffalo and Seattle. Suffering similar fates because of the refusal to change.
The 11th straight loss by a California team in a Super Bowl qualifying game, which dated back to 1968. That streak would end 3 hours later when the Raiders beat the Steelers in Oakland, 24-7 in the AFC Championship Game.
being that your into obscure facts, i'm sure you know a California based team went to 3 consecutive Super Bowls...Rams in 79, Raiders in 80, 49ers in 81...and the Chargers went to 2 consecutive AFC title games in 80 & 81...and during the Redskins run to the Super Bowl in 1983, they played all California teams in the post season..Rams , 49ers, Raiders...
Um...how do I say this? (1) Minnesota beat Dallas and (2) Neither Minnesota nor Dallas are in California. If you meant consecutive seasons, well, Oakland lost to Miami in the '73 AFC title game.
the first 20 seasons of the super bowl era the state of California completely dominated the title game with the most appearances...the L.A Rams with 7 appearances and 49ers with 8 ...the Raiders went 9 times, and the Chargers twice...that's 26 title game appearances for all 4 California based teams in 20 seasons....highly impressive...
Harold Jackson was totally underrated. Not a Hall of Famer, but he would have gotten some recognition had he played for Minnesota or Dallas or Pittsburgh. I feared him big time.
I miss those shows. I can't stand the all the shit they do now with all the rap, punk, electro, and shit rock.... I miss the beauty of a perfectly thrown spiral in slow motion to horns and trumpets.... Why can't they just do that anymore?.
I hated that Dome. I grew up 5 miles from the Met, my parents were original season tix holders and I grew up as a kid watching outdoor football in ice cold and snow at the Met. Never the same after they moved indoors.
I love when matt blair was goin crazy at the end , the great jim marshall gave him the stare down, from the bench , too tell him not to get out of control in celebrating , even though the game was almost over .
@@jms1963 The Vikings didn't "belong" in the 1998 season NFC Title game, when they had a 15-1 record, and the best offense in NFL history? They were the "greatest show on turf" before the StL Rams were. They lost the NFC Champ because of a missed FG, causing game vs Atl to go to OT. The Vikes didn't belong in the 1987 NFC Champ after destroying the Montana 49ers on the ROAD? They were 1 yard from getting to the SB in the loss to Wash. The Vikes didn't belong in the 2009 NFC Champ game vs NO after destroying the Cowgirls 34-3? In the NFC Champ they had the game won until Favre had a brain fart and threw an interception instead of just throwing the ball away, causing the game to go into OT again. They lost the coin flip and never got the ball under the old OT rules, and lost on an OT FG. That was the Saints bountygate game btw on top of it. Next time you spout off more incorrect drivel, you might want to spit out that load of manure first tinkerbell.
@@kbrewski1 Congratulations, you now hold the record for most excuses for one team in a single YT comment. I'd call you a whining loser, but you make whining losers seem rational. You are flat out fetal-postion-thumb-in-mouth-mommy-get-me-my-vikings-blankee pathetic. You're trying too hard, dude. Get a life at some point, huh?
Growing up a Vikes fan, watching this game, every ounce of my ten year old being was convinced the Rams were going to win this game. Thanks to Nate Allen, Chuck Foreman, and Bobby Bryant, thank God, I was wrong.
The Rams DID win a playoff game in cold weather prior to this one...the 1945 NFL championship game in Cleveland. Of course, that was their last game as the Cleveland Rams. The LA Rams' first postseason win in the cold was the 1983 wild card game at Dallas, where it was below freezing and sleeting. That game was seven years to the day after this one.
Rams got screwed a bunch of times because of that idiotic pre determined playoff rotation system Rozelle thought was a good idea...1967, 73 & 74 Rams earned home field advantage by today's standards, yet still had to go on the road for the post season...1967 & 74 in particular, would have been one of those cold games the Rams lost, you're referring to..
The LOS ANGELES RAMS have still NEVER WON A COLD WEATHER PLAYOFF GAME IN A NORTHERN CITY. Beating Dallas in a virtual closed roof dome because you might have needed a sweater doesn't count tinkerbell. The LOS ANGELES RAMS still have never won a Super Bowl either.
@@bconni2 Lmfao. I consider a "cold weather playoff game" to be one in which the actual temp is at least below freezing, so sorry, 34 and 39 degrees doesn't cut it.
@@bconni2 Rams and Vikings had the exact same record in 1974. What is their excuse for 1977 Div playoffs? Let me guess..... Waaaaaaahhhhh, coach da ball was all wet. Waaaaaahhhhhh, coach, my pants got real muddy. Waaaaaaaahhhh!!!
Look that era with Vikings & Cowboys from SBVI to SBXIV...unreal & my Rams shoulda been there more than once! Although we played very well in a loss 31-19 SBXIV. the only time in that era that LA even made the Super Bowl ....Knox = Schottenheimer #wtf
As a long time LA Rams fan-born in 67-my first real glimpse of what the Rams were like was this 73 team. Those years in LA(73-79)we owned the NFC West and would win the division title every year. Just could not get the job done in the playoffs or the NFC Championship Game.
Rams are a great team still and as a Vikings fan I was pulling hard for LA to beat the Steelers and they were even leading at halftime; Your team put up a great effort!
I was a major Viking homer but I felt bad Merlin never got to play in a Super Bowl. The Rams should have won this game. They were clearly better in 76 probably would have been a better team against Oakland but I still think the Raiders would have beat LA that year too.
Rams would have been a much better game for Oakland. The Vikings were not the better team and it showed in the SB as the raiders demolished then. Same thing in 1974 when the Steelers manhandled Minnesota. Both games came down to the rams failure to convert a first and goal inside the 1. The rams finally got to the SB in 1979 with probably their weakest team during the 74-79 span.
Yeah on defense not as good as the earlier teams but Ferragamo was a better QB and the Rams always had a pretty good running game. Rams wouldn't have run on ptts in 74 or Oakland in 76.
@@danyluk1 I'm thinking about writing a book about the NFL from 1966-69, when it transformed into 4 divisions, but still debating...not entirely sure about potential fan interest. Incidentally, I really don't watch the modern day NFL anymore--just lost interest..
@4:04 classic footage 👀🌈. That was awesome to my 13 year old eyes when I saw it in real time ! What a truly wonderful time it was to be young.during these now bygone times 😘
Look at how high Matt Blair jumped. If Allen didnt block it Blair would have. Grant practiced those special teams blocks incessantly which is why the Vikes were so good at it.
Lifelong Vikings fan... this game was utter sorcery. Vikings had NO business winning. If you believe in karma, maybe this is why this was the last time the Vikings advanced to the Super Bowl. But I'll never forget this game, or Joe McConnell's call of the Allen block/Bryant return. RIP Ron Jessie.
Vikings won comfortably 24-13. Game wasn't even really that close. With an 11 point lead, for the Rams to win they had to score 2 TDs--a TD and a FG doesn't even get you to OT. The Vikings OWNED the Rams from 1969 through 1977 season.
@@kbrewski1 It was 17-13 in the final two minutes. The Rams had come back from 17-0 down. LA was doomed by QB play, officiating and Chuck Knox's conservatism. But the Vikings literally made, I guess, six plays this game. They got 24 points off of a couple picks, the blocked FG, the deflected punt and Chuck Foreman being awesome, and won. I watched it start to finish. They were DOMINATED otherwise. All the credit to Nate Allen, Bobby Bryant and Foreman, but the Vikings did NOT win this game comfortably. Tarkenton was rendered completely ineffectual. The Rams had great players on both sides of the ball (save QB). Do not argue with me about this.
@@bitterangrydrunk Neither QB played well, but you had 2 tough defenses. By comfortably, I meant that the Vikes got out to that big lead forcing LA to play catch up. Yes, LA then made a game of it late, and I had forgotten how late in the game the final TD was, but I remember watching this game and with Ground Chuck calling the plays, and Haden the QB, I never really thought LA was going to win. The Vikes created the necessary turnovers and big plays to win. That's what usually decides Champ games.
Special teams have really changed through the years. The Vikings had 14 blocked kicks that year. In todays game teams are lucky to get more than 1 in a season. I think the dedicated long snapper has made a big difference in giving that extra bit of time.
Mikey' Michael Because of the rules players careers of been extended and being being able to do what they couldn’t do before and saying someone’s the greatest of all time if they played in a different era they wouldn’t have lasted 10 years
Ram fans I truly feel for you. I was a Vikings fan, and let me just say it was NO walk in the park for us either. It will however, do no one any good to make excuses and some how twist the truth to favor our respective positions. Ron Jessie clearly was tackled before crossing, once down he then yanked the ball over. There where two refs. right there one in front and back of Jessie. In the original broadcast game, that is the way Brent Musberger describes the play. There is a dark shadow, but slow it down and you can see it. He WAS down 2:25
Yep, once his elbow hits the ground, clearly before the goal line, he's down. No debate. Rams lost to Vikes in playoffs in 69, 74, 76, 77. Vikes OWNED Rams. But they will keep coming up with silly excuses.
@@OBESPRING1982 Some dope is a foot or 2 off the sideline cheering on a clear easy TD and that's what you're going to cry about? Want some whine with that cheese? Vikes OWNED Rams from 69 through 1977. Get over it and dry your tears tinkerbell.
Watched a documentary on Jim Marshall- he said Bud Grant wouldn't allow heaters on the sidelines, as cold was just a state of mind. Marshall joked that the veterans would run directly to the sidelines, just so they could then pass by the visitors' heaters as they made their way back to their own end of the field.....
The Rams still haven't won a championship in a cold weather game as Los Angeles Rams (1945 as Cleveland Rams 15-14vs Redskins)Minnesota hasn't been to a SB since!
It seemed like every year in the 70s either the cowboys, rams, Vikings played in the nfc championship game and usually 2 of them faced off with one of them having beat the 3rd team in the divisional round!
Poor Rams; Couldn't beat Mother Nature.Beat my Steelers twice in the regular season where Steelers won SBs.1975 and 1978.Rams after the Steelers had the best defense of the 70s,Vikes and Oilers were good too.Great time to grow up.
Vikings had a better defense than the Rams. Give me a frickin break. The Vikings OWNED the Rams from 1969 through 1977. The Rams vaunted "Fearsome Foursome" were more a product of the high profile LA media machine. They never won ANY championships or title games, and never even played in a Super Bowl. Give me the Purple People Eaters any day of the week. Alan Page so dominant that he is STILL the only Defensive lineman to win the NFL MVP award.
@@danbev9313 Wrong Beavis. 1974 SB vs Pitt, 2-0 at halftime, defensive struggle. 9-6 in the 4th Q. Vikes recovered a fumble to stop Steelers drive, and refs took ball away from Vikes and gifted Steelers claiming that a quick whistle ended play. If replay in effect, overturned. Steelers then score late in game to win 16-6. 10 points is not a blowout nits. SB 4 also not a blowout, score was 16-7 late in game and Vikes had some momentum until blown tackle on a simple down and out pass to Otis Taylor. Kapp then literally knocked out of game. Not a blowout like all the 80s and 90s SBs (see Denver, Buffalo etc). Get your facts straight.
@@kbrewski1 Lol, sounds like there is a little Myron geek Vikings fan in the house. You make every excuse, woulda coulda, if only and the refs robbed us. Lame Myron! Vikings pathetic Superbowl losers along with the 90's Bills and the 80's Broncos. Today your team still sucks and will not make another SB in your life time. OOOOHHHHHH FEEL THE BURN Myron in your purple feety Viking pajamas. Lmao
@@danbev9313 Is that metal plate in your head acting up again? Obviously you know nothing about the Minn-Pitt SB if you call a game that was 9-6 in the 4thQ lopsided or a blowout. Btw, I've got chunks of punks like you in my stool.
@@jms1963 Ifs and buts and candy and nuts. If only your creepy uncle was a girl he'd be your aunt. The Ewes were MORE pathetic because they could never beat the Vikings from 69 to 77 in the playoffs, which is why the Vikes deservedly went to 4 SB. You aren't the sharpest tool in the shed are you?
Jack Youngblood #85 of the Los Angeles Rams Career Accomplishments Los Angeles Rams (1971-84) 7x Pro Bowl selection 5x First Team All-Pro selection 3x Second Team All-Pro selection 1975 and 1976 NFC Defensive Player of the Year (United Press International) 1975 NFL Defensive Lineman of the Year (Pro Football Weekly) 151.5 sacks 10 fumble recoveries Played in 201 consecutive games while missing only 1 game Defensive captain from 1977-1984 Pro Football Hall of Fame selection
@@kbrewski1 Page was a DT. Youngblood was a DE. Both are all time greats. As I previously stated, Page is in Youngbloods' class. Youngblood, better than Eller and Marshall. Deacon Jones, better than Eller and Marshall. Merlin Olsen, better than Page.The purple People Eaters were great. The FEARSOME FOURSOME was better!
@@seveglider8406 Lmao. How many championships did Deacon Jones and Merlin Olson win? Let me help you. ZERO. NADA. ZILCH. Marshall, Page, Eller were CHAMPIONS, 4 times in 8 years. Boooya!
He made a bad decision on the QB sneak too. He tried to go over the top being only 5 feet something inches instead of diving it in between center-guard
@@howardcosell2022 he was definitely the weak link for the Rams. Felt so sorry for guys like Dryer, Brooks, young blood, and all those stalwart defensive players who played their hearts out and getting no offensive support. I lived n died with the Rams back then even though I was just a kid. Ah man good old days
@@kevinharrissr5255 Don't forget McCutcheon, Jackson, Mack, and other great offensive players. Some really terrific teams but no QB really hurt their Super Bowl chances
@@kevinharrissr5255 Oscar Goldman and 6 million dollars worth of bionics could not put Namath back together. He was damaged goods when he came to LA and the Rams bought themselves a real lemon
Pointless but I believe with all my heart as a life long Rams fan, we had a better roster a better team, blocked field 4 turnovers rookie Qb but still had a chance to win, heartbreaking
from the inception of the SB era in 1966, to the end of the 1980's, the L.A Rams had the 3rd highest win total in all of football...they went to the NFC title game 7 times in that quarter century and only made the SB once...probably one of the greatest runs by an organization in a 25 year period who didn't win a SB...
@conni70--In the 10 year period from 1967 to 1976, Rams were one of the best teams in the NFL, probably should have won at least one or two championships. It's a shame, they kept having to go to cold weather cities, because of the rotation thing they did back then, when they had the better record. They were a much better team than the Packers in 1967, but had to go to Green Bay for the playoffs. They were at least the equal of the Vikings in 1969, but had to play in Minnesota. 1974 and 1976, excellent teams that again had to go to Minnesota. When they got a chance at home in 1975 vs. Dallas, they blew it, got pummeled. The lack of a great starting QB probably killed them more than anything, Gabriel, Harris, and Haden were all good, but not great.
@@jms1963 The Vikings not only had the best record in the NFL in 1969 at 12-2, to the Rams 11-3, the Vikings BEAT the Rams in LA near the end of the season. So regardless of the rotation, Vikes deserved home field and beat the Rams TWICE in 69. In 1973, the Vikings had a better record than the Cowboys but had to play NFC Champ at Dallas yet blasted them 27-10. In 1974, both teams were 10-4, so the Rams weren't a better team. In 1976, the Vikings had a better record than LA, and thus again deserved home field in the NFC Champ game. In 1977, the Rams hosted the Div playoff game in LA, and STILL lost to the Vikings in the playoffs. So what exactly are you whining about? Grow a pair and overcome adversity and win a game on the road once in awhile. The Rams of the 60s and 70s were soft. The Vikings owned them from 69 through 77. And the Packers in 67 laughably destroyed the Rams in Milwaukee (not Lambeau) 28-7. Not even close. There is no way you can claim a team is "much better" when you get completely dominated 28-7. You Sheep fans are completely delusional. Think of all the excuses you want Tinkerbell, the Vikes (and Packers) were simply better and they proved it over and over on the field of play.
@@conni70 Zzzzz. Vikings completely OWNED and dominated the Sheep from 69 through 1977. The Vikings played in 6 NFL/NFC Championship games from 1969 to 1989, and WON 4 of them, meaning they went to 4 SB. That is a MUCH better track record than the Rams who only won 1 conf championship.
Rams VS. Raiders in the Rose Bowl would have been a better Super Bowl matchup than Vikings VS. Raiders. The Vikings were aging and were physically outmatched by the Raiders. The Rams had the muscle to slug it out with the Raiders but Bud Grant always outcoached the Rams in big games.
@@howardcosell2022 Kind of a non sequitur since the Raiders and Steelers were in the same conference. The only way Lambert would have ever played the Raiders in the Super Bowl would have been to be on a different team. The Vikings played better against the Steelers in SB9 than they did in SB11 but they got dominated in both games. Mostly it would have been cool to see those 2 CA teams go at it in the Rose Bowl. Better than watching an aging, overmatched team get their noses rubbed in it...again.
@@Stacie45 After losing the 1976 AFC Championship, Lambert was quoted as saying he would play the Raiders again for a six pack or a case of beer in the parking lot. Jack was referencing to the fact the Steelers played the AFC Championship without their two 1000 yard rushers that season
@@Stacie45 The Vikings didn't necessarily play better against Pittsburgh. The Steelers didn't have the passing attack they developed later on in the seventies. The Raiders on the other hand were the best passing team in football which resulted in their 32 points vs Pittsburgh's 16
Vikes continue their playoff domination of the Rams. 1969 NFL West Conf Playoff 23-20 Vikes 1974 NFC Champ 14-10 Vikes 1976 NFC Champ 24-13 Vikes 1977 NFC Div playoff 14-7 Vikes in LA Rams have still never won a cold weather playoff game in a northern city (GB, Chi, Minn) I wonder if we have the Rams to blame for not preparing us for the Super Bowl..... Deacon Jones, Merlin Olsen and the Fearsome Foursome---no SB trips at all, no championships at all. Vikes at least had 1 NFL Champ, 3 NFC Champ and 4 SB appearances in 8 years.
@@seveglider8406 The ST LOUIS Rams won a Super Bowl. The LOS ANGELES Rams have never won a Super Bowl. Duuuuhhhh. From 69 to 77, the Vikes DOMINATED the Ewes. Facts don't lie. Now go get your shinebox.
@@kbrewski1 The Rams have won 1 Super Bowl. The viQUEENS have set the standard for ultimate Super Bowl FAILURE! 4 appearances and they were BLOWN OUT 4 times! Now get your dirty handkerchief and wipe away your tears!
@@seveglider8406 You must have a metal plate in your head. The ST LOUIS Rams won a Super Bowl. The LOS ANGELES Rams have NEVER won a Super Bowl. Now, get off your mommys computer before you make another incorrect moronic statement.
Lance Link: Agreed. But at least the Rams would have made a *game* out of it. The Raiders gained 266 yards on the ground against the Vikes. It's unlikely they would have gained even half that much on the ground against the Rams.
@@SingleTax Rams of the 70s were very stout against the run. They could've handled the Raider offense. Maybe Haden would've been more comfortable in the Rose Bowl ( his home territory) than at the Met. I'm glad the the Purple made the Super Bowl, but they were just too old, and too light in the defensive line, to stop the churning Raider ground game...
The Rams would’ve given the Raiders a run for their money. In fact I believe the Rams would’ve won. Maddens Raiders were tough though. Madden was smart enough to know that you kept running the same play if it was working. Damn Landry never got that through his head. Bud Grant would but didn’t have the d-line to stop the run. He tried to get page to gain weight but Page wanted to remain at his current weight.
Good catch. That NO vs NE game was played the same weekend as MN's last regular season home game. So they didn't change it for the Vikings first playoff game against the Redskins, either.
McKenzie Man: If you can play corner, they'll let you play corner. The color of your skin is the last thing they care about.All those jobs out there are earned.
Thats what I used to think. Do some research on what it took for Jason Sehorn even to get a shot at competing for a corner spot with the Giants. His college coach Dennis Thurman who was a cb with Dallas for years, had to argue with the Giants coaches to not switch him to safety. They refused to even work him out at cb despite Thurman telling them he broke on the ball quicker than anyone he ever coached or played with. Tony Dungey has talked about the racial slotting (his phrase) that goes on e.g whites blocked from rb/cb blacks from qb etc.
@@mckman6700 Yeah,I like Seahorn and saw that. The first instance I'm referring to is the old kind of racism, where a black man had to be twice as good to earn a position. Used to happen to black quarterbacks all the time. For lack of a better term, Seahorn suffered from "reverse racism", where we've become so used to seeing "brothers" playing certain positions, it's hard to imagine a white player doing it. Running back is another one of those positions where it's stereotyped to a black position now.
at 7:47, i hear the word "sacked". was it official then or not? harvey martin had 23 sacks in '77. but people keep telling me it wasn't official. what gives?
Sacks became an official statistic in 1982. They were still counted before that, but were not labeled an official statistical category. Would love to know how many sacks Deacon Jones piled up.
This game showed a couple things. One was yet another reminder of how many ways the Rams could shoot themselves in the foot in the playoffs in the 1960's and 70's. The other was a demonstration of the ways the Vikings were vulnerable against a true championship team. The Rams ability to move the ball against the Vikings and the ability of their defense to throttle Tarkenton's offense had all been seen in a couple earlier Super Bowls and the Raiders proceeded to put on a clinic. Pity the Rams couldn't get out of their own way, SB11 would have been a lot of fun as a California championship with the Rams against the Raiders in the Rose Bowl.
@@kbrewski1 The Vikings were the better team when it mattered. Not fake news or revisionist history but you are correct as a matter of fact. Potential does not matter, what matters is what you actually do when it counts.
In my circle of friends, no one cared about this game because we knew the winner of the SB would be the winner of the AFC Championship. We were therefore outside playing football while this game was going on and came in when the Raider-Steeler started.
It didn't matter who won this game, the Raiders would have defeated either team in Super Bowl XI...But the way the Vikings played on offense the Rams should have won this game if it weren't for the blocked kicks. I think the Rams would have given the Raiders more of a challenge...
Lmfao. More silly revisionist history. I suppose next you're going to claim Pat Haden was a better QB than Tarkenton, and Chuck Knox was a better coach than Bud Grant.
A little bit of history: The Vikings and Rams met earlier in 1976 , and played to a 10-10 OT tie. In that game, the Rams were on the Viking goal line twice, and couldn't put in it. In this title game, they didn't want to ho away empty-handed, so they tried a FG.As you know, it backfired tremendously. The Ram kicking game had numerous problems ( the week before, the Cowboys blocked TWO of the Ram's punts), and Dempsey was a bit erratic..
Not just one of them---all of them! Those fresh faces & natural reactions when realizing they are on camera---How refreshing! And no tattoos, makeup-laden faces, and boobs bursting out of the blouses, [of today's game], while mugging shamelessly to the lackey cameramen who are under orders to "get all the T & A that you can!" :-(
Rams with Chuck Knox couldn't win the Big One. Their Special Ed Team doomed them in this game. And Vikings would be embarrassed 2 weeks later in Pasadena by the superior Oakland Raiders, 32-14.
It wasn't Pat Haden that had the kick blocked, botched punt or 2 fumbles. However, he did have 2 interceptions. The Rams special teams and penalties were a bigger reason, imo.
@@kbrewski1 The score was 17-13 going to the 4th quarter, I would say the Vikings "got by" but won nonetheless. I was a huge Rams fan back in the day, and I can honestly say the Rams played poorly when it came to the conference championship games, but that's when teams need to step up, not out.
@@gdobie1west988 My comment was in response to anthony above who said the Rams outplayed the Vikes yet lost by in essence 2 TDs (11 points so a TD and a FG can't even tie the game), not yours. Lets face it, the Vikes had a psychological advantage over the Rams from 1969 through 1977 season. The Rams could not deal with cold weather and let the cold weather seep into their psyche. (See also Rams playoff losses in cold northern cities Mil vs GB in 67, Bears in Chi 85; and at the Met in 69, 74, 76). Meanwhile the Vikings weren't allowed to have heaters on the sideline. Grant made them mentally tougher, just like Lombardi had made an older fading Packer dynasty mentally tougher in 1967 to win the Ice Bowl over the supposedly more talented Cowboys (Next Years Champions). A sport like football isn't just all about talent and fancy plays and razzle dazzle, it was primarily about execution, toughness, will and desire to win, and creating and taking advantage of opportunities and turnovers. Especially in playoff games. By 1976, the Rams just dreaded coming north to the Met to play the Vikes. Psychological advantage Vikes. Right from the outset the Vikes set the tone by 1) having such a tough nasty defense and front 4 that Chuck Knox feared and thus did not go on 4th down, and instead kicked the FG and 2) blocking the FG attempt perfectly and being in position to take advantage and run it back for an easy 6. The Vikes PRACTICED kick blocks under Grant relentlessly, and those 70s teams were always known for that. Toughness, execution, creating turnover and opportunity. And I don't buy the "Rams were more talented than Vikes" spin I see many posted here. Haden over Tark, who by then had broken every one of Unitas' passing records,? No. McCutcheon over Foreman? No. Jessie over Rashad? No. Rams front 4 over the Purple People Eaters? No. Knox over Grant? Lmao, you're kidding me. Vikings, like the Packers before them, learned to accept the elements and ignore them and play through them. Which is why, even when the Rams finally got a home playoff game against Minn the following year, the Vikes STILL beat the Rams in a downpour quagmire--the Vikes were mentally tougher and disciplined. The Rams of that era were softer and not as mentally tough. Thats the essence of football.
@@kbrewski1 I understand it was for the other comment. Tarkenton had very average stats in the '74 playoff, 10-20-1 123 yards, Harris was 13-23 248 yards. In '76 playoff 12-27-1 143 yards, hardly what I would call stellar. Haden was 9-22 for 161 yards. In '74 Foreman did out gain McCutcheon 80 yards--to 32 yards but had 10 more attempts. In 76, Foreman had 118 yards, McCutcheon 128 yards, with McCutcheon having 11 more attempts. Receiving in '74, Voight had 4-43 yards, Harold Jackson 3-139 yards. In '76, receiving Foreman 5-81 yards, Rashad 3-28, Harold Jackson 4-70 yards, Jessie 2-60 yards. Rams defense was just as good as Vikings. but I will say Chuck Knox played too conservative, which is what his own players have said over the years. Of course the Rams did beat Minnesota at home in '78 in the divisional round. Yes the Vikings had the edge at home in the cold, and that proved true against the Cardinals and Redskins. The Rams surely underachieved, but they still were a very good team during the 70's. As far as the '85 Rams, they were not very good really, with Deiter Brock?? All they had was Dickerson, and they shut him down. The Bears that year destroyed everyone, so no shame there. So tell me, what happened to this mental toughness in the 4 Super Bowls?? Seemed like they used it all up on the Rams. Interesting.
This is when football was football, so glad i grew up as a young kid watching football played the way it was meant to be played.
I concur!!! This show used to come on every Saturday night/Sunday morning at like 1:30 am. I would stay up to watch GOW & TWIPF. It would be an hour and half long for the two, for a sports junkie like me and no ESPN this was my fix at the time. I loved Christmas break when we had Saturday NFL games, Pat Summeral & Tom Brookshire were awesome and Dry humor funny and broke up when they started party'n too much. Than you had Curt Gowdy and John Brodie, the way Gowdy called a game was just classic. Than you would have a Saturday night game by the MNF crew of Gifford, Meredith, and Good Ole Howard Cosell. He was just one big shit stirrer and would constantly put Giff and Dandy Don down because they were ex athletes and he felt they didnt work for their jobs. Those Announcing crews were absolutely the best in my time!!!
I wish the Rams would have won this game, although they didn't have much of a shot on that kind of a day in Minnesota. An LA Rams vs. Oakland Super Bowl would have been much more intriguing than watching the Vikings gag on it and get blown out for the fourth time in a row.
It was absolutely the best!!!!
❤ NFL 1970s football especially playoffs
Me too.
You'll almost never see four teams playing on Championship Sunday with as much talent as the Rams vs Vikings, and Steelers at Raiders games presented on this day. And this game, the NFC Title game, had more huge plays in it than most weekends would dream of. A Blocked FG for a TD after a Goal line stand. A fumble leading to a FG. A bomb to end the half to Ron Jessie. A 62 yard run by Chuck Foreman. Two amazing scrambles and strikes by Pat Haden. A strip sack by Fred Dreyer. A huge INT by Bobby Bryant (Two INTS and a blocked FG return for a TD!!!)....and then one huge play by Fran Tarkenton after a bad afternoon, hitting Foreman for the clinching 3rd down conversion for 57 yards. This game had it all.
Jack Kitchen Fred Dryer as Sgt Rick Hunter
I remember virtually all of the starters on both teams and I wasn't even a fan of either of them. Nowadays I couldn't tell you a single player on most NFL teams!
@@USCHO67 same here. Lions fan
Jack Kitchen Absolutely ⭐️🌈
a lot of people don't know this, but for a 6 year stretch the Los Angeles Rams had the highest reg season win total in football , from 1973 to 1978...
I remember this game like it was yesterday. I was 13 years old watching at home with a childhood friend who was a rams fan. When Foreman made that catch for 57 yards Rodney went running out the house. I looked out the window and saw him at railroad tracks running home. What a good game this was.
So many memories , the mud bowl, all these old Viking games , Jim Marshall Hall of fame
This was when the Vikings had a real home field advantage! ⛄
Bud Grant did not believe in outside heater
JayDogTitan 1464 My Vikes ! 🌈⭐️💪. I’m almost 57 and these were the days indeed !
I like the Minnesota viking new 🏟 stadium better , green bay packer can keep their freezer winter stadium 🏟
Vikings moving indoors. Doesn't make sense. Hate the packers and bears. Respect their toughness
@@mikehanzal9562 You forget the Lions , they moved indoors too
I watched this game live as a ten year old. I went crazy when the Vikings blocked that FG in the first quarter. What a game.
So did all of Met Stadium!
As a 16 year old Rams fan at the time, it just killed me of course. I knew right then the game was over.
Me Too! I was 12. .. Let's Have Sex! .... Oh?! I Take That Back. I thought you were a Lady.. just forget that ever happened, and continue with your day.
Became a Viking fan for life when I saw the blocked kick and score. What a dramatic turn of events!
Now they have to win a Superbowl
Bobby Bryant made so many big plays in his career with Minnesota..
One of he best big play men in the NFL . Remember the 63 yard back breaker pick six in the 73 Championship game
@Fries
Bryant must have weighed 160 soaking wet. But he was a big play guy. Krause was a great center field ballhawk. But here was the problem with the Vikings secondary for many years. Almost all of them were lousy tacklers. Bryant, Mackbee, Nate Wright, Sharockman and especially Krause. They were embarrassingly bad, and they were exposed in all 4 SB. The Mackbee and Kassulke missed tackles on Otis Taylor's simple down and out TD that clinched SB 4 still pisses me off. Larry Csonka pulverizing Krause as he ran right over him in SB 8 etc. None of our DBs were hitters or intimidators, they were finesse guys.
@Fries
Warwick, Winston and Hilgenberg were decent tacklers but none of them were all pro caliber. They all were somewhat slow. Vikes never had guys like Dave Robinson of Packers or Bobby Bell of Chiefs.
Not until Seimon and Matt Blair did it get better
I was at this game. I was a little kid and knew absolutely nothing about football.
I think the big brothers sent us down there.I remember freezing my my feet
I was at this game, still remember most of it!🏈🏈🏈
Awesome! . . . I was only three years old at the time. This was three years before I knew anything about the game of football and becoming a Rams fan. I AM a true scholar of the game and love watching clips such as this. Besides the cold that afternoon, what do you remember most about this game? DB Bobby Bryant saved the game for the Vikings, for If Jessie catches that ball, the game might have had a different ending.
Don E. Pretty cool.
I too was there! Awesome day. The Vikings strategy was to let them get to the 1.
@Randy Montgomery--not ruling that Ron Jessie had scored in the first quarter was also crucial. A shame, Rams were the better team, but unfortunately drew another freak cold day in Minnesota. Rams vs. Raiders would have been a much more intriguing SB than watching the Vikings gag on it once again.
...that being said, Chuck Foreman was one of my favorite players.
Between Minnesota and Dallas it was tuff being a rams fan.
true...but don't forget , the L.A Rams have actually had pretty good success against Dallas in the post season..Rams have 5 post season wins against Dallas, which i believe are the most post season losses Dallas has against any opponent.. check it out...mcubed.net/nfl/mfpm.shtml
My heart was broken every year
Still Love our uniforms.
If the Vikings had one just one of these damn Superbowls they'd be considered one of the great dynasties of the game
Incorrect. They didn't belong in those games, that's why they were always blown out. They were there because they had a ridiculous home field advantage, which they stupidly forfeited in the early 80's. Not a very smart franchise.
@@jms1963 I'll always wonder about KC. No question they had great players, especially on defense, but watch the Missing Rings vid on the '69 Vikings... till the end, as brutal as it is. My best guess (it's a guess, admittedly) is that, coming off two emotional wins over the Rams and Browns, followed by the week off, and with most fans/media still believing the NFL was vastly superior to the AFL, it was the perfect storm and the Vikings just weren't ready. But the last three Super Bowls, Miami, Pittsburgh and the Raiders were stellar. Vikings had no shot in those games.
@@bitterangrydrunk Don't get me wrong, I liked those teams and loved watching playoff games played at the old Met. Their defense was Super Bowl quality, but other than Chuck Foreman and maybe Sammy White, they lacked impact players on offense. Tarkenton had big career stats, mostly because he played for 50 years, but he was not capable of carrying a team. I'll never understand giving up that kind of home field advantage to move into a hideous dome.
@@jms1963
Part of that advantage was that the rest of the Division sucked and Grant built an undersized team that
was faster than bad teams and could take advantage of poor footing in big home playoff games.
@@jms1963
Sorry dipniblets, but wrong again. The Vikings BELONGED in all those Super Bowls because they WON 4 championships to GET to those Super Bowls. They BELONGED because they were NFL/NFC CHAMPIONS 4 times in an 8 year period. See nits, that means they were the BEST team in the NFL/NFC 5 TIMES (including 75 when they were robbed by the refs due to the infamous Hail Pushoff Call). The Ewes were perennial also rans who couldn't even GET to the Super Bowl, lmfao. James Harris, Pattycakes Haden? Lmfao.
Bryant actually had TWO interceptions in this game. But let's face it: Nate Allen deserves the credit for the 90-yard blocked FG TD. Bryant was just standing there, and the ball bounced right to him. However, it doesn't detract from Bryant's longstanding big play potential..
The Vikings and Cowboys always seemed to have the Rams' number in those days.
Seems like the Rams beat themselves
9:30 Notice Foreman's elaborate, choreographed TD celebration!!! Over the top!
R.I.P.: Metropolitan Stadium
Fact: Minnesota has not been to a SB since
this game.
Playing outdoors in the cold and snow and on natural grass was an advantage.
Since becoming a dome team they've become soft and finesse.
Absolutely !!
that's faulty logic, buddy... most NFL players come from warm weather climates..California, Texas and Florida produce 50% of all NFL players...for most NFL players , playing in the cold is something they have to adapt to...i'll bet you most of the Vikings players came from weather states...
@@conni70 Actually, a good number came from cold-weather states--Minnesota, Wisconsin, Iowa, Ohio, Michigan, Nebraska, etc. I can think of players from all of these states. They did like to get OTs from USC, though ( Ron Yary, Steve Riley)
@@massvt3821 ...it's a big country, so naturally you have guys in the pros represented from almost every state...but again, the majority of NFL players come from California, Texas , Florida and the deep South...those are all warm weather regions, when compared to the upper Midwest...and when you get even more specific, the two geographic regions that produce the most NFL talent are warm weather regions, Southern California & South Florida..
@@conni70 Not disagreeing, but at that time, the Vikings had a number of players from Big 10/upper midwestern colleges. Of the top of my head: Eller/Jeff Wright/Milt Sunde from Minnesota ( The Ue's also a tendency for an NFL tesm ), Voight from Wisconsin, Krause/Hilgenberg from Iowa, Tinglehoff from Nebraska, Osborn from North Dakota, Bill Brown from Illinois, Marshall from Ohio State, Page from Notre Dame, Sutherland from UW-Superior, Larsen from Moorhead State (MN), etc. There's also a tendency for an NFL team to draft at least a few players from neighboring states, so this wasn't unusual then..
Always remembered as the Bobby Bryant game. Bryant played in all 4 Vikings SBs and is arguably a HOFer, Wally Hilgenberg should have gotten HOF consideration as well. Alan Page was the young man of the group at 31, Tarkenton was 37, Marshall was 37, Eller was 34. The oldest core of players ever to reach a SB. 16 blocked kicks in a season; Allen, McNeil, Matt Blair, Bobby Bryant; later they had Terry McCount. Vikings special teams were really amazing in the mid 70s. And Chuck Foreman was a beast. But the Rams would have presented matchup problems for Oakland in SB 11 that the older vikes couldn’t pose.
The player not in the HOF who has a case is Matt Blair. He was a Pro Bowl and/or All-Pro for 6 consecutive seasons and played in 3 Super Bowls. In his first 10 seasons, he missed just 2 games. 2. He also played in all 13 playoff games in those 10 seasons. He was as reliable as anyone.
It was Terry LeCount, not McCount.
Matt Blair and Sammy White had the misfortune of playing for Les Steckel.
Luke Enno Even Chuck Foreman. If Floyd Little deserves it so does Chuck.
"Block that Kick" Matt Blair should be in with those stats!
Too bad he didn't teach Krause how to tackle.
I guess it's safe to say that going for a field goal from the half yard line, and having it not only blocked, but returned for a td was the turning point of this game. Wow! A decision Knox would like back obviously.
Outdoors in the cold...In those days you feared going to Minnesota for the playoffs...Now the fans are soft
Soft. The Vikings have NO home field advantage. The cry babies.
Steve Choppy I am a fan, albeit a miserable fan. I am tired of losing; and I am sick and tired of the franchise celebrating “plays”, the Diggs catch, and individual accomplishments, all-pro list, a top defense and 2000 yard rusher. None of that means anything. I am tired of Speilman stats - all of it is ridiculous. Going indoors was because Minnesota is soft. Soft and acceptable losers. I wish that I could quit them.
How about the cheerleaders at 1:12? Cute, fresh-faced, they look like high school cheerleaders. Today--strippers gyrating to auto-tune garbage. Can we just freeze the NFL the way it was in the 70's? I won't even care if the obnoxious Steelers are good again, I just miss that era.
@@jms1963
They WERE high school cheerleaders.
The Rams definitely hated playing in Minn in Dec/Jan>>>they never won a playoff game at the Met.
I was almost a 1-year-old when this game was played. The Vikings' last SB was Jan. 9, 1977. I turned 1 that same day. After all these years, what I wouldn't give for a Super Bowl win!
Vikings had the Rams number. I was at the
Game.
Rams finally beat the Vikings in the post season in 1978..crushed them in L.A..
Weather.
@@mcdonoghrahloh459 Beat them in the rain in LA with a back up quarterback
@@pigurine Not in Bloomington.Thanx for the reply
@@conni70 also in the 70s the Dallas Cowboys beat the Minnesota Vikings
The Vikings Defense was so old and yet played so well.
They were an older team at that point, but they were very smart and intelligent players with a lot of playoff experience and could always come up with big plays.
@@deanladue3151 Really amazing how many of those guys played for more than ten years. Page, Eller, Marshall, Hilgenberg, Winston, Krauss...
@@markmerzweiler909 Bud Grant was quoted that during those playoff runs in the 70s that he didn't really need to coach up that defense, they pretty much knew what to do and how to match up against an opposing offense. Must have been a great luxury for coach Grant to have players like that.
When football was really football
FUN FACT: Tom Dempsey insisted Steve Preece be his holder. Preece was Dempsey's holder in New Orleans in 1969 and again in Philadelphia in 1971 and '72.
If this kick would've been a 60 yarder, Dempsey would've made it...lol
I noticed on the blocked kick the laces were facing the kicker.
Dempsey was a stiff. He got a pass because he had half of a foot and the one long field goal, but he was a terrible kicker.
@@jms1963 His kicking shoe was a steel boot. It was like swinging a sledge hammer when he would kick
@@howardcosell2022 Right? And he was still awful. If it wasn't for one freak kick in 1970 he wouldn't even have been kicking in this game.
Heartbreaking loss for my Rams....Game still haunts me...
This was almost like another" ICE BOWL" it was damn cold there
I felt bad for these Rams. '73-79! During this era, it wasn't that LA was chokers, it was that they were missing something. That something was that one game breaker that had to be accounted for each and every possession. They had that game breaker, his name was Harold Jackson. Back then, because the Rams were such a run oriented team, they never explored the option of using Jackson in the slot. Had they done that it takes eithet Bobby Bryant or Paul Krause out of position and open the running game up even more. The Cjargers who had similar personel took full advantage of Charlie Joiner in the slot as they put Kellen Winslow wide. Chuck Muncie had breakout years, Dan Fouts lit up Secondaries like Christmas Trees, but their defense (once a top 10 unit) eas reduced to bottom status.
Back to 1976, and Ground Chuck. He later won COTY with Buffalo and Seattle. Suffering similar fates because of the refusal to change.
i think bobby bryant and sammy white should be in the vikes ring of honor
The 11th straight loss by a California team in a Super Bowl qualifying game, which dated back to 1968. That streak would end 3 hours later when the Raiders beat the Steelers in Oakland, 24-7 in the AFC Championship Game.
being that your into obscure facts, i'm sure you know a California based team went to 3 consecutive Super Bowls...Rams in 79, Raiders in 80, 49ers in 81...and the Chargers went to 2 consecutive AFC title games in 80 & 81...and during the Redskins run to the Super Bowl in 1983, they played all California teams in the post season..Rams , 49ers, Raiders...
Wrong it was the 6th consecutive loss. Minnesota beat Dallas in the 1973 nfc championship game
Um...how do I say this? (1) Minnesota beat Dallas and (2) Neither Minnesota nor Dallas are in California. If you meant consecutive seasons, well, Oakland lost to Miami in the '73 AFC title game.
the first 20 seasons of the super bowl era the state of California completely dominated the title game with the most appearances...the L.A Rams with 7 appearances and 49ers with 8 ...the Raiders went 9 times, and the Chargers twice...that's 26 title game appearances for all 4 California based teams in 20 seasons....highly impressive...
Lord Beasley That was back before California moved to Dallas.
The rams player i feared the most during the 73-77 era was Harold Jackson..
A monster player for the Eagles in 1972.
Harold Jackson was totally underrated. Not a Hall of Famer, but he would have gotten some recognition had he played for Minnesota or Dallas or Pittsburgh. I feared him big time.
Jackson should be in the HOF. He was a game changer
A speedster.
@@jasintosamora1103 very good WR..
Merlin Olsen's last game
Decided he'd rather sell flowers for a living.
Or being a surrogate father to Melissa Gilbert
I got his autograph. Only autograph I ever got. He was one big dude!
Love this broadcaster legendary; Minnesota Vikings my favorite NFL football team
@@DNSKansas No, he had to be Michael Landon's big buddy while Mr. Edwards was away. Garvey and Edwards were never in the same episodes. Hmmm.......
Walter William "Wally" Hilgenberg (September 19, 1942 - September 23, 2008). RIP.
I remember Wally. He talked about his faith in GOD during his sickness. Sounded like a good Christian man. He's now with the LORD.
I miss those shows. I can't stand the all the shit they do now with all the rap, punk, electro, and shit rock.... I miss the beauty of a perfectly thrown spiral in slow motion to horns and trumpets.... Why can't they just do that anymore?.
I miss these highlights too. I miss Harry Kalas voice and the music they played. As much as I love football. It sucks ass now.
These idiots that got playing now have fucked up the game big-time. It sucks period!
It's like they are playing flag football or some street ball. They play soft ass shit too. Fuck the nfl now.
Harry Kalas passed a few years ago. As for music, it's aimed at a younger audience.
@@scifiradioguy yeah I know. I'm just getting old lol.
Thank you!
Thank you from LA for building a Dome stadium in Minnesota. Don't have to deal with weather like this anymore.
It was like 30 degrees that day. Weather was no factor
I hated that Dome. I grew up 5 miles from the Met, my parents were original season tix holders and I grew up as a kid watching outdoor football in ice cold and snow at the Met. Never the same after they moved indoors.
I love when matt blair was goin crazy at the end , the great jim marshall gave him the stare down, from the bench , too tell him not to get out of control in celebrating , even though the game was almost over .
This would be the last NFC Championship the Minnesota Vikings would ever win(As of 2019).
...or belonged in.
They need to get over that hump. Eventually they will but when is the question?
Andre Mallett
If the Boston Red Sox and the Chicago Cubs can both Win a World Series, I guess then anything is possible.
@@jms1963
The Vikings didn't "belong" in the 1998 season NFC Title game, when they had a 15-1 record, and the best offense in NFL history? They were the "greatest show on turf" before the StL Rams were. They lost the NFC Champ because of a missed FG, causing game vs Atl to go to OT.
The Vikes didn't belong in the 1987 NFC Champ after destroying the Montana 49ers on the ROAD? They were 1 yard from getting to the SB in the loss to Wash. The Vikes didn't belong in the 2009 NFC Champ game vs NO after destroying the Cowgirls 34-3? In the NFC Champ they had the game won until Favre had a brain fart and threw an interception instead of just throwing the ball away, causing the game to go into OT again. They lost the coin flip and never got the ball under the old OT rules, and lost on an OT FG. That was the Saints bountygate game btw on top of it.
Next time you spout off more incorrect drivel, you might want to spit out that load of manure first tinkerbell.
@@kbrewski1 Congratulations, you now hold the record for most excuses for one team in a single YT comment. I'd call you a whining loser, but you make whining losers seem rational. You are flat out fetal-postion-thumb-in-mouth-mommy-get-me-my-vikings-blankee pathetic. You're trying too hard, dude. Get a life at some point, huh?
Minnesota did have an NFL championship in 1969, before the merger.
Growing up a Vikes fan, watching this game, every ounce of my ten year old being was convinced the Rams were going to win this game. Thanks to Nate Allen, Chuck Foreman, and Bobby Bryant, thank God, I was wrong.
Ed White with that great cross block on the big run. He was great.
The Rams DID win a playoff game in cold weather prior to this one...the 1945 NFL championship game in Cleveland. Of course, that was their last game as the Cleveland Rams. The LA Rams' first postseason win in the cold was the 1983 wild card game at Dallas, where it was below freezing and sleeting. That game was seven years to the day after this one.
Rams got screwed a bunch of times because of that idiotic pre determined playoff rotation system Rozelle thought was a good idea...1967, 73 & 74 Rams earned home field advantage by today's standards, yet still had to go on the road for the post season...1967 & 74 in particular, would have been one of those cold games the Rams lost, you're referring to..
The LOS ANGELES RAMS have still NEVER WON A COLD WEATHER PLAYOFF GAME IN A NORTHERN CITY. Beating Dallas in a virtual closed roof dome because you might have needed a sweater doesn't count tinkerbell.
The LOS ANGELES RAMS still have never won a Super Bowl either.
@@kbrewski1 ...1989, Eagles and Giants, back to back weeks on the road....there's your answer....but why you screaming..?
@@bconni2
Lmfao. I consider a "cold weather playoff game" to be one in which the actual temp is at least below freezing, so sorry, 34 and 39 degrees doesn't cut it.
@@bconni2
Rams and Vikings had the exact same record in 1974.
What is their excuse for 1977 Div playoffs? Let me guess.....
Waaaaaaahhhhh, coach da ball was all wet.
Waaaaaahhhhhh, coach, my pants got real muddy.
Waaaaaaaahhhh!!!
Coughing up the Football 4 times in First Half didn't help the Los Angeles Rams any.
Should’ve never put the Vikings a the dome. The cold weather made them tougher!!
Look that era with Vikings & Cowboys from SBVI to SBXIV...unreal & my Rams shoulda been there more than once! Although we played very well in a loss 31-19 SBXIV. the only time in that era that LA even made the Super Bowl ....Knox = Schottenheimer #wtf
As a long time LA Rams fan-born in 67-my first real glimpse of what the Rams were like was this 73 team. Those years in LA(73-79)we owned the NFC West and would win the division title every year. Just could not get the job done in the playoffs or the NFC Championship Game.
Rams are a great team still and as a Vikings fan I was pulling hard for LA to beat the Steelers and they were even leading at halftime; Your team put up a great effort!
I was a major Viking homer but I felt bad Merlin never got to play in a Super Bowl. The Rams should have won this game. They were clearly better in 76 probably would have been a better team against Oakland but I still think the Raiders would have beat LA that year too.
Rams would have been a much better game for Oakland. The Vikings were not the better team and it showed in the SB as the raiders demolished then. Same thing in 1974 when the Steelers manhandled Minnesota. Both games came down to the rams failure to convert a first and goal inside the 1. The rams finally got to the SB in 1979 with probably their weakest team during the 74-79 span.
Yeah on defense not as good as the earlier teams but Ferragamo was a better QB and the Rams always had a pretty good running game. Rams wouldn't have run on ptts in 74 or Oakland in 76.
No NFL franchise ever did so little with so much as the Rams of the 1970S
Stardaddyo9: Well put.
lousy quarterbacking...
@@danyluk1 Enjoyed your book...if this actually is who I think it is..prpbably the best NFL compilation of the 1970s as I've ever read..
@@massvt3821 thanks brother! working on a 1980s version as we speak...little different format however
@@danyluk1 I'm thinking about writing a book about the NFL from 1966-69, when it transformed into 4 divisions, but still debating...not entirely sure about potential fan interest. Incidentally, I really don't watch the modern day NFL anymore--just lost interest..
No doubt the Raiders must have taken notice of the success the Rams had with those fullback lead plays.
@4:04 classic footage 👀🌈. That was awesome to my 13 year old eyes when I saw it in real time ! What a truly wonderful time it was to be young.during these now bygone times 😘
Look at how high Matt Blair jumped. If Allen didnt block it Blair would have. Grant practiced those special teams blocks incessantly which is why the Vikes were so good at it.
I remember watching this game & Ron Jessie was definitely in for a TD Rams got screwed again nothing changes in the NFL
He did score
1:14 babes!
Lifelong Vikings fan... this game was utter sorcery. Vikings had NO business winning. If you believe in karma, maybe this is why this was the last time the Vikings advanced to the Super Bowl. But I'll never forget this game, or Joe McConnell's call of the Allen block/Bryant return. RIP Ron Jessie.
Vikings won comfortably 24-13. Game wasn't even really that close. With an 11 point lead, for the Rams to win they had to score 2 TDs--a TD and a FG doesn't even get you to OT. The Vikings OWNED the Rams from 1969 through 1977 season.
@@kbrewski1 It was 17-13 in the final two minutes. The Rams had come back from 17-0 down. LA was doomed by QB play, officiating and Chuck Knox's conservatism. But the Vikings literally made, I guess, six plays this game. They got 24 points off of a couple picks, the blocked FG, the deflected punt and Chuck Foreman being awesome, and won. I watched it start to finish. They were DOMINATED otherwise. All the credit to Nate Allen, Bobby Bryant and Foreman, but the Vikings did NOT win this game comfortably. Tarkenton was rendered completely ineffectual. The Rams had great players on both sides of the ball (save QB). Do not argue with me about this.
@@bitterangrydrunk
Neither QB played well, but you had 2 tough defenses. By comfortably, I meant that the Vikes got out to that big lead forcing LA to play catch up. Yes, LA then made a game of it late, and I had forgotten how late in the game the final TD was, but I remember watching this game and with Ground Chuck calling the plays, and Haden the QB, I never really thought LA was going to win. The Vikes created the necessary turnovers and big plays to win. That's what usually decides Champ games.
Special teams have really changed through the years. The Vikings had 14 blocked kicks that year. In todays game teams are lucky to get more than 1 in a season. I think the dedicated long snapper has made a big difference in giving that extra bit of time.
Don't forget there have been rule changes also.
Bud Grant practiced kick blocks religiously which is why the Vikes were so well known for it.
Seems like when Rams played the Vikings in a big game, the Rams always had a series of bad breaks and silly mistakes to lose.
When the NFL was americas game ...now the NFL just sucks
I think (reply interrupted by another commercial break)...
Then why do you watch?
@harold mccoy--relax, take your medication, and try to pass fourth grade English while you're at it.
Mikey' Michael Because of the rules players careers of been extended and being being able to do what they couldn’t do before and saying someone’s the greatest of all time if they played in a different era they wouldn’t have lasted 10 years
Vikings and rams played to a 10-10 tie in Minnesota in 1976 Vikings blocked what would have been a game winning FG by LA very late in the game .
Ram fans I truly feel for you. I was a Vikings fan, and let me just say it was NO walk in the park for us either. It will however, do no one any good to make excuses and some how twist the truth to favor our respective positions. Ron Jessie clearly was tackled before crossing, once down he then yanked the ball over. There where two refs. right there one in front and back of Jessie. In the original broadcast game, that is the way Brent Musberger describes the play. There is a dark shadow, but slow it down and you can see it. He WAS down 2:25
And what do we see at 3:41? Oh, one of your non-participants out on the field. I've seen TDs called back for less than that.
Yep, once his elbow hits the ground, clearly before the goal line, he's down. No debate.
Rams lost to Vikes in playoffs in 69, 74, 76, 77. Vikes OWNED Rams. But they will keep coming up with silly excuses.
@@OBESPRING1982
Some dope is a foot or 2 off the sideline cheering on a clear easy TD and that's what you're going to cry about? Want some whine with that cheese? Vikes OWNED Rams from 69 through 1977. Get over it and dry your tears tinkerbell.
Wait, the teams shared the same side of the sidelines?
@Matt Pizzano ahhh ok
Watched a documentary on Jim Marshall- he said Bud Grant wouldn't allow heaters on the sidelines, as cold was just a state of mind. Marshall joked that the veterans would run directly to the sidelines, just so they could then pass by the visitors' heaters as they made their way back to their own end of the field.....
Vikings always had the Rams number back then.
The Rams still haven't won a championship in a cold weather game as Los Angeles Rams (1945 as Cleveland Rams 15-14vs Redskins)Minnesota hasn't been to a SB since!
Bobby Bryant THE RAM KILLER
Vin Scully with the call on CBS
They would of almost had home field in the SB if they won since it was in Pasadena.
Super Bowl XIV January 20 , 1980 the Rams made it to Pasadena
nice
in 6 seasons, from 1974 to 1979, the Rams went to the NFC title game 5 times, losing to the Cowboys and Vikings twice each
It seemed like every year in the 70s either the cowboys, rams, Vikings played in the nfc championship game and usually 2 of them faced off with one of them having beat the 3rd team in the divisional round!
Special teams in those games always was our weak link.
Poor Rams; Couldn't beat Mother Nature.Beat my Steelers twice in the regular season where Steelers won SBs.1975 and 1978.Rams after the Steelers had the best defense of the 70s,Vikes and Oilers were good too.Great time to grow up.
Vikings had a better defense than the Rams. Give me a frickin break. The Vikings OWNED the Rams from 1969 through 1977. The Rams vaunted "Fearsome Foursome" were more a product of the high profile LA media machine. They never won ANY championships or title games, and never even played in a Super Bowl. Give me the Purple People Eaters any day of the week. Alan Page so dominant that he is STILL the only Defensive lineman to win the NFL MVP award.
@@kbrewski1
Yet when competing with the AFC in the Superbowl, the Vikings taken behind the wood shed each time and beaten like a red headed step child
@@danbev9313
Wrong Beavis. 1974 SB vs Pitt, 2-0 at halftime, defensive struggle. 9-6 in the 4th Q. Vikes recovered a fumble to stop Steelers drive, and refs took ball away from Vikes and gifted Steelers claiming that a quick whistle ended play. If replay in effect, overturned. Steelers then score late in game to win 16-6. 10 points is not a blowout nits. SB 4 also not a blowout, score was 16-7 late in game and Vikes had some momentum until blown tackle on a simple down and out pass to Otis Taylor. Kapp then literally knocked out of game. Not a blowout like all the 80s and 90s SBs (see Denver, Buffalo etc). Get your facts straight.
@@kbrewski1
Lol, sounds like there is a little Myron geek Vikings fan in the house. You make every excuse, woulda coulda, if only and the refs robbed us. Lame Myron!
Vikings pathetic Superbowl losers along with the 90's Bills and the 80's Broncos.
Today your team still sucks and will not make another SB in your life time. OOOOHHHHHH FEEL THE BURN Myron in your purple feety Viking pajamas. Lmao
@@danbev9313
Is that metal plate in your head acting up again? Obviously you know nothing about the Minn-Pitt SB if you call a game that was 9-6 in the 4thQ lopsided or a blowout. Btw, I've got chunks of punks like you in my stool.
If it wasn’t Facenda,it’s Harry Kalis
The rams had a great defense in those days. Knox was too conservative as a coach & haden sucked!
still love Merlin Olsen #74
Merlin Olsen is 1 of the all time greats! He was an All Pro every season he played!
I remember watching this on TV as a Lions & Rams(at that time) fan i Hated the Vikings. I am STILL a Lions fan.
no Dallas in this highlight
The Rams blew a chance to play for the super bowl in their own home town...but they would have lost to the Raiders anyway.
You're probably right. But it would have been a much more intriguing game than watching the pathetic Vikings gag it up for the fourth time in a row.
@@jms1963
Ifs and buts and candy and nuts. If only your creepy uncle was a girl he'd be your aunt. The Ewes were MORE pathetic because they could never beat the Vikings from 69 to 77 in the playoffs, which is why the Vikes deservedly went to 4 SB. You aren't the sharpest tool in the shed are you?
Jack Youngblood #85 of the Los Angeles Rams
Career Accomplishments
Los Angeles Rams (1971-84)
7x Pro Bowl selection
5x First Team All-Pro selection
3x Second Team All-Pro selection
1975 and 1976 NFC Defensive Player of the Year (United Press International)
1975 NFL Defensive Lineman of the Year (Pro Football Weekly)
151.5 sacks
10 fumble recoveries
Played in 201 consecutive games while missing only 1 game
Defensive captain from 1977-1984
Pro Football Hall of Fame selection
Us Vikings fans are all real impressed. (See Alan Page, Carl Eller, Jim Marshall).
@@kbrewski1 Youngblood was better than Marshall and Eller! Page is in Youngblood's class!
@@seveglider8406
Wrong again nits. Page was superior in every way.
Purple People Eaters>>Fearful 4some
@@kbrewski1 Page was a DT. Youngblood was a DE. Both are all time greats. As I previously stated, Page is in Youngbloods' class. Youngblood, better than Eller and Marshall. Deacon Jones, better than Eller and Marshall. Merlin Olsen, better than Page.The purple People Eaters were great. The FEARSOME FOURSOME was better!
@@seveglider8406
Lmao. How many championships did Deacon Jones and Merlin Olson win? Let me help you. ZERO. NADA. ZILCH.
Marshall, Page, Eller were CHAMPIONS, 4 times in 8 years. Boooya!
At 1:54 Pat haden sat there and waited for the lineman to sack him. He was just waaaaaaaaaay to small to play the position
He made a bad decision on the QB sneak too. He tried to go over the top being only 5 feet something inches instead of diving it in between center-guard
@@howardcosell2022 he was definitely the weak link for the Rams. Felt so sorry for guys like Dryer, Brooks, young blood, and all those stalwart defensive players who played their hearts out and getting no offensive support. I lived n died with the Rams back then even though I was just a kid. Ah man good old days
@@kevinharrissr5255 Don't forget McCutcheon, Jackson, Mack, and other great offensive players. Some really terrific teams but no QB really hurt their Super Bowl chances
@@howardcosell2022 we had Joe Namath. Lol
@@kevinharrissr5255 Oscar Goldman and 6 million dollars worth of bionics could not put Namath back together. He was damaged goods when he came to LA and the Rams bought themselves a real lemon
Pointless but I believe with all my heart as a life long Rams fan, we had a better roster a better team, blocked field 4 turnovers rookie Qb but still had a chance to win, heartbreaking
from the inception of the SB era in 1966, to the end of the 1980's, the L.A Rams had the 3rd highest win total in all of football...they went to the NFC title game 7 times in that quarter century and only made the SB once...probably one of the greatest runs by an organization in a 25 year period who didn't win a SB...
@conni70--In the 10 year period from 1967 to 1976, Rams were one of the best teams in the NFL, probably should have won at least one or two championships. It's a shame, they kept having to go to cold weather cities, because of the rotation thing they did back then, when they had the better record. They were a much better team than the Packers in 1967, but had to go to Green Bay for the playoffs. They were at least the equal of the Vikings in 1969, but had to play in Minnesota. 1974 and 1976, excellent teams that again had to go to Minnesota. When they got a chance at home in 1975 vs. Dallas, they blew it, got pummeled. The lack of a great starting QB probably killed them more than anything, Gabriel, Harris, and Haden were all good, but not great.
@@jms1963
The Vikings not only had the best record in the NFL in 1969 at 12-2, to the Rams 11-3, the Vikings BEAT the Rams in LA near the end of the season. So regardless of the rotation, Vikes deserved home field and beat the Rams TWICE in 69.
In 1973, the Vikings had a better record than the Cowboys but had to play NFC Champ at Dallas yet blasted them 27-10.
In 1974, both teams were 10-4, so the Rams weren't a better team.
In 1976, the Vikings had a better record than LA, and thus again deserved home field in the NFC Champ game.
In 1977, the Rams hosted the Div playoff game in LA, and STILL lost to the Vikings in the playoffs.
So what exactly are you whining about? Grow a pair and overcome adversity and win a game on the road once in awhile. The Rams of the 60s and 70s were soft. The Vikings owned them from 69 through 77. And the Packers in 67 laughably destroyed the Rams in Milwaukee (not Lambeau) 28-7. Not even close. There is no way you can claim a team is "much better" when you get completely dominated 28-7. You Sheep fans are completely delusional.
Think of all the excuses you want Tinkerbell, the Vikes (and Packers) were simply better and they proved it over and over on the field of play.
@@conni70
Zzzzz. Vikings completely OWNED and dominated the Sheep from 69 through 1977. The Vikings played in 6 NFL/NFC Championship games from 1969 to 1989, and WON 4 of them, meaning they went to 4 SB. That is a MUCH better track record than the Rams who only won 1 conf championship.
@@kbrewski1 Uh, yeah. You're strange, dude. Stick to Dungeons and Dragons.
Than the Snake carved them up in the rose bowl!!
Rams VS. Raiders in the Rose Bowl would have been a better Super Bowl matchup than Vikings VS. Raiders. The Vikings were aging and were physically outmatched by the Raiders. The Rams had the muscle to slug it out with the Raiders but Bud Grant always outcoached the Rams in big games.
Jack Lambert would have played the Raiders in the Rose Bowl parking lot for a six pack of Bud
@@howardcosell2022 Kind of a non sequitur since the Raiders and Steelers were in the same conference. The only way Lambert would have ever played the Raiders in the Super Bowl would have been to be on a different team. The Vikings played better against the Steelers in SB9 than they did in SB11 but they got dominated in both games. Mostly it would have been cool to see those 2 CA teams go at it in the Rose Bowl. Better than watching an aging, overmatched team get their noses rubbed in it...again.
@@Stacie45 After losing the 1976 AFC Championship, Lambert was quoted as saying he would play the Raiders again for a six pack or a case of beer in the parking lot. Jack was referencing to the fact the Steelers played the AFC Championship without their two 1000 yard rushers that season
@@Stacie45 The Vikings didn't necessarily play better against Pittsburgh. The Steelers didn't have the passing attack they developed later on in the seventies. The Raiders on the other hand were the best passing team in football which resulted in their 32 points vs Pittsburgh's 16
01:15 says "oh my god"
Vikes continue their playoff domination of the Rams.
1969 NFL West Conf Playoff 23-20 Vikes
1974 NFC Champ 14-10 Vikes
1976 NFC Champ 24-13 Vikes
1977 NFC Div playoff 14-7 Vikes in LA
Rams have still never won a cold weather playoff game in a northern city (GB, Chi, Minn)
I wonder if we have the Rams to blame for not preparing us for the Super Bowl.....
Deacon Jones, Merlin Olsen and the Fearsome Foursome---no SB trips at all, no championships at all. Vikes at least had 1 NFL Champ, 3 NFC Champ and 4 SB appearances in 8 years.
The Rams have won 1 Super Bowl! How many have the Vikings won?
@@seveglider8406
The ST LOUIS Rams won a Super Bowl. The LOS ANGELES Rams have never won a Super Bowl. Duuuuhhhh. From 69 to 77, the Vikes DOMINATED the Ewes. Facts don't lie. Now go get your shinebox.
@@kbrewski1 The Rams have won 1 Super Bowl. The viQUEENS have set the standard for ultimate Super Bowl FAILURE! 4 appearances and they were BLOWN OUT 4 times! Now get your dirty handkerchief and wipe away your tears!
@@seveglider8406
You must have a metal plate in your head. The ST LOUIS Rams won a Super Bowl. The LOS ANGELES Rams have NEVER won a Super Bowl. Now, get off your mommys computer before you make another incorrect moronic statement.
Bobby Bryant MVP
I guarantee that most if not all Oakland Raider fans were *cheering* for the Vikings in this game.
Indeed. The Vikes looked so poor in this game, they must have known they would blow them out. The Vikings were also very old that year.
The Raiders were going to beat Whoever they played in the Superbowl
Lance Link: Agreed. But at least the Rams would have made a *game* out of it. The Raiders gained 266 yards on the ground against the Vikes. It's unlikely they would have gained even half that much on the ground against the Rams.
@@SingleTax Rams of the 70s were very stout against the run. They could've handled the Raider offense. Maybe Haden would've been more comfortable in the Rose Bowl ( his home territory) than at the Met. I'm glad the the Purple made the Super Bowl, but they were just too old, and too light in the defensive line, to stop the churning Raider ground game...
The Rams would’ve given the Raiders a run for their money. In fact I believe the Rams would’ve won. Maddens Raiders were tough though. Madden was smart enough to know that you kept running the same play if it was working. Damn Landry never got that through his head. Bud Grant would but didn’t have the d-line to stop the run. He tried to get page to gain weight but Page wanted to remain at his current weight.
Todays "NFL" wouldn't even take the field for this game.
8:57 they didn’t update the stadium scoreboard. New Orleans at New England?!??
Good catch. That NO vs NE game was played the same weekend as MN's last regular season home game. So they didn't change it for the Vikings first playoff game against the Redskins, either.
BTW the Vikings won that home game vs the Packers.
CB Bobby Bryant was a damn good player …back when the NFL allowed white men to play corner. Played at least 15 years I believe
McKenzie Man: If you can play corner, they'll let you play corner. The color of your skin is the last thing they care about.All those jobs out there are earned.
Thats what I used to think. Do some research on what it took for Jason Sehorn even to get a shot at competing for a corner spot with the Giants. His college coach Dennis Thurman who was a cb with Dallas for years, had to argue with the Giants coaches to not switch him to safety. They refused to even work him out at cb despite Thurman telling them he broke on the ball quicker than anyone he ever coached or played with. Tony Dungey has talked about the racial slotting (his phrase) that goes on e.g whites blocked from rb/cb blacks from qb etc.
@@mckman6700 Yeah,I like Seahorn and saw that. The first instance I'm referring to is the old kind of racism, where a black man had to be twice as good to earn a position. Used to happen to black quarterbacks all the time. For lack of a better term, Seahorn suffered from "reverse racism", where we've become so used to seeing "brothers" playing certain positions, it's hard to imagine a white player doing it. Running back is another one of those positions where it's stereotyped to a black position now.
@@erikthorsen240 Just sayin...its shameful that kind of thing goes on today especially in the "socially conscious" NFL
When football was football. The National Football League is now the Drama Queen Football League. Its terrible.
the rams loved to choke
at 7:47, i hear the word "sacked". was it official then or not? harvey martin had 23 sacks in '77. but people keep telling me it wasn't official. what gives?
Sacks became an official statistic in 1982.
They were still counted before that, but were not labeled an official statistical category.
Would love to know how many sacks Deacon Jones piled up.
They weren't official but were still documented. Per Wiki Harvey Martin had 114 career sacks. Deacon Jones had 173.5.
@@Deucealive75 Deacon reportedly had 26 in a season
This game showed a couple things. One was yet another reminder of how many ways the Rams could shoot themselves in the foot in the playoffs in the 1960's and 70's. The other was a demonstration of the ways the Vikings were vulnerable against a true championship team. The Rams ability to move the ball against the Vikings and the ability of their defense to throttle Tarkenton's offense had all been seen in a couple earlier Super Bowls and the Raiders proceeded to put on a clinic. Pity the Rams couldn't get out of their own way, SB11 would have been a lot of fun as a California championship with the Rams against the Raiders in the Rose Bowl.
Great fake news and revisionist history. The Vikings OWNED the Rams from 1969 through the 1977 season. Because....the Vikings were the better team.
@@kbrewski1 The Vikings were the better team when it mattered. Not fake news or revisionist history but you are correct as a matter of fact. Potential does not matter, what matters is what you actually do when it counts.
In my circle of friends, no one cared about this game because we knew the winner of the SB would be the winner of the AFC Championship. We were therefore outside playing football while this game was going on and came in when the Raider-Steeler started.
What a tool
It didn't matter who won this game, the Raiders would have defeated either team in Super Bowl XI...But the way the Vikings played on offense the Rams should have won this game if it weren't for the blocked kicks. I think the Rams would have given the Raiders more of a challenge...
Lmfao. More silly revisionist history. I suppose next you're going to claim Pat Haden was a better QB than Tarkenton, and Chuck Knox was a better coach than Bud Grant.
Why didn't the Rams have the balls to go for it from the half yard line?????????????
Because the Vikings were pretty tough
You should still have the confidence to go for it.
A little bit of history: The Vikings and Rams met earlier in 1976 , and played to a 10-10 OT tie. In that game, the Rams were on the Viking goal line twice, and couldn't put in it. In this title game, they didn't want to ho away empty-handed, so they tried a FG.As you know, it backfired tremendously. The Ram kicking game had numerous problems ( the week before, the Cowboys blocked TWO of the Ram's punts), and Dempsey was a bit erratic..
Because Ground Chuck and Patsy Haden had no balls.
Because Knox was too conservative!
Nobody's is miked for sound
At 1:16...prettiest woman in history.
Not just one of them---all of them! Those fresh faces & natural reactions when realizing they are on camera---How refreshing! And no tattoos, makeup-laden faces, and boobs bursting out of the blouses, [of today's game], while mugging shamelessly to the lackey cameramen who are under orders to "get all the T & A that you can!" :-(
She is a High School cheerleader, not an adult woman, lol.
Rams with Chuck Knox couldn't win the Big One.
Their Special Ed Team doomed them in this game.
And Vikings would be embarrassed 2 weeks later in Pasadena by the superior Oakland Raiders, 32-14.
Superior physically due to steroids that's a fact. The Steelers also were on steroids the whole team, Terry Bradshaw admitted it is true.
Vikes won 4 NFL/NFC Championships in 8 years, 4 SB appearances. Raiders won 1 AFC Champ and the 1 SB in that time frame. Cool your jets skeezix.
Monolithic Football
Chuck Knox could never get the Rams to the Superbowl to conservative, and Pat Haden was very inconsistent
the rams were chokers
texas forever no quarterback that was the problem
sad but true...Chuck Knox! Bills were beyond hope, but he never won anything for Seattle either
Chuck was just too conservative and predictable.
The zebras were gutless.
@@oldiesgeek1 I agree but Grant was also conservative - I've heard many viking fans from that era complain about that even Joe Kapp felt that way.
Pat Haden was a weak link........
Rams outplayed these guys in the cold all day........
It wasn't Pat Haden that had the kick blocked, botched punt or 2 fumbles. However, he did have 2 interceptions. The Rams special teams and penalties were a bigger reason, imo.
The Vikings won comfortably 24-13 and the Rams outplayed them huh? You don't watch much football do you?
@@kbrewski1 The score was 17-13 going to the 4th quarter, I would say the Vikings "got by" but won nonetheless. I was a huge Rams fan back in the day, and I can honestly say the Rams played poorly when it came to the conference championship games, but that's when teams need to step up, not out.
@@gdobie1west988
My comment was in response to anthony above who said the Rams outplayed the Vikes yet lost by in essence 2 TDs (11 points so a TD and a FG can't even tie the game), not yours. Lets face it, the Vikes had a psychological advantage over the Rams from 1969 through 1977 season. The Rams could not deal with cold weather and let the cold weather seep into their psyche. (See also Rams playoff losses in cold northern cities Mil vs GB in 67, Bears in Chi 85; and at the Met in 69, 74, 76). Meanwhile the Vikings weren't allowed to have heaters on the sideline. Grant made them mentally tougher, just like Lombardi had made an older fading Packer dynasty mentally tougher in 1967 to win the Ice Bowl over the supposedly more talented Cowboys (Next Years Champions). A sport like football isn't just all about talent and fancy plays and razzle dazzle, it was primarily about execution, toughness, will and desire to win, and creating and taking advantage of opportunities and turnovers. Especially in playoff games. By 1976, the Rams just dreaded coming north to the Met to play the Vikes. Psychological advantage Vikes. Right from the outset the Vikes set the tone by 1) having such a tough nasty defense and front 4 that Chuck Knox feared and thus did not go on 4th down, and instead kicked the FG and 2) blocking the FG attempt perfectly and being in position to take advantage and run it back for an easy 6. The Vikes PRACTICED kick blocks under Grant relentlessly, and those 70s teams were always known for that. Toughness, execution, creating turnover and opportunity.
And I don't buy the "Rams were more talented than Vikes" spin I see many posted here. Haden over Tark, who by then had broken every one of Unitas' passing records,? No. McCutcheon over Foreman? No. Jessie over Rashad? No. Rams front 4 over the Purple People Eaters? No. Knox over Grant? Lmao, you're kidding me.
Vikings, like the Packers before them, learned to accept the elements and ignore them and play through them. Which is why, even when the Rams finally got a home playoff game against Minn the following year, the Vikes STILL beat the Rams in a downpour quagmire--the Vikes were mentally tougher and disciplined. The Rams of that era were softer and not as mentally tough. Thats the essence of football.
@@kbrewski1 I understand it was for the other comment. Tarkenton had very average stats in the '74 playoff, 10-20-1 123 yards, Harris was 13-23 248 yards. In '76 playoff 12-27-1 143 yards, hardly what I would call stellar. Haden was 9-22 for 161 yards. In '74 Foreman did out gain McCutcheon 80 yards--to 32 yards but had 10 more attempts. In 76, Foreman had 118 yards, McCutcheon 128 yards, with McCutcheon having 11 more attempts. Receiving in '74, Voight had 4-43 yards, Harold Jackson 3-139 yards. In '76, receiving Foreman 5-81 yards, Rashad 3-28, Harold Jackson 4-70 yards, Jessie 2-60 yards. Rams defense was just as good as Vikings. but I will say Chuck Knox played too conservative, which is what his own players have said over the years. Of course the Rams did beat Minnesota at home in '78 in the divisional round. Yes the Vikings had the edge at home in the cold, and that proved true against the Cardinals and Redskins. The Rams surely underachieved, but they still were a very good team during the 70's. As far as the '85 Rams, they were not very good really, with Deiter Brock?? All they had was Dickerson, and they shut him down. The Bears that year destroyed everyone, so no shame there. So tell me, what happened to this mental toughness in the 4 Super Bowls?? Seemed like they used it all up on the Rams. Interesting.
Rams and Raiders would have been a much better game.
Prove it dipniblets