The 72 Dolphins werent that great

[ginscpy]

Probably would have been beaten by the Raiders if Oakland had not been knocked out of the playoffs by the Immaculate Reception against Pitt (WHICH WAS AN ILLEGAL PLAY which would have been overturned by Instant Replay had it existed back then) )

So let the old farts/greybeards uncork another one - they were slow then -the are even slower now.............................

 

[deaddogseye]

First Im not a dolphins fan at all - but they are the only team to go undefeated. Im just wondering if you are reacting more to the fact that they werent very spectacular - they didnt have a lot of superstars if any and certainly none at the skill positions. But they were very good and solid. They ran the ball down your throat. You knew it was coimng and they knew you knew but it didnt matter. the approach seemed to be stop it if you can and no one could. The defense was excellent but again very unspectacular -- although the secondary was especially good and maybe one of the better units ever. So to each his own opinion but they do have the undefeated thing -- and some of them are as annoying as they were unspectacular about never seeing it broken, that is also indisputable.

As for the Immaculate Reception -- the great weight of analysis seems to be that Tatum touched it making it a legal catch. From wikipedia:

The critical question was: whom did the football touch in the Fuqua/Tatum collision? If it bounced off Fuqua without ever touching Tatum, then Harris's reception was illegal. If the ball bounced off only Tatum, or if it bounced off both Fuqua and Tatum (in any order), then the reception was legal. The rule stated in pertinent part that once an offensive player touches a pass, he is the only offensive player eligible to catch the pass. However, if a defensive player touches the pass "first, or simultaneously with or subsequent to its having been touched by only one [offensive] player, then all [offensive] players become and remain eligible" to catch the pass.[3][4] (This rule was later rescinded in 1978.) If the reception were illegal, the Raiders would have gained possession (via a turnover on downs), clinching a victory.

One official, Back Judge Adrian Burk, signaled that the play was a touchdown, but the other game officials did not immediately make any signal.[2] When the officials huddled, Burk and another official, Umpire Pat Harder, thought that the play was a touchdown because Tatum and Fuqua had both touched the ball, while three others said that they were not in a position to rule.[5][6] Referee Fred Swearingen approached Steelers sideline official Jim Boston and asked to be taken to a telephone. Boston took Swearingen to a baseball dugout in the stadium. There was a video monitor in the dugout, but it was not used by Swearingen.[5] (Terry Bradshaw's assertion that a special television was rigged up on the sideline so that Swearingen could watch the replay[7] is not supported by other accounts.) From the dugout telephone Boston put in a call to the press box to reach the NFL's supervisor of officials, Art McNally. Before the call McNally had "an opinion from the get-go" that the ball had hit Tatum's chest, which he confirmed by looking "at one shot on instant replay."[4] In the press box the telephone was answered either by Dan Rooney, son of Steelers owner Art Rooney, or by Steelers public relations director Joe Gordon (reports vary), and McNally was put on the line.[5][8][9] According to McNally, Swearingen "never asked me about the rule, and never asked what I saw. All he said was, 'Two of my men say that opposing players touched the ball.' And I said, 'everything's fine then, go ahead.'"[5][10] After Swearingen hung up the phone Boston asked, "What do we got?" "We got a touchdown,"[5][11] answered Swearingen, who then went back onto the field to signal the ruling to the crowd. Fans immediately rushed the field, and it took 15 minutes to clear them so that the point-after conversion could be kicked to give the Steelers what turned out to be their final margin of victory, 13-7.

Although this has been described as the first known use of television replay to confirm a call[12][13] (there was no instant replay review then), at the time the NFL denied that the decision was made in the press box or using a television replay.[14] An Oakland Tribune article two days after the game reported that Steelers publicist Joe Gordon told reporters in the press box that the decision had been made using the replay.[15] Gordon has dismissed this as "a total fabrication."[9] NFL officials Jim Kensil and Val Pinchbeck, who were in the press box with McNally, also deny that replay was used in making the decision on the play.[15][16]

The play is still disputed by those involved, particularly by living personnel from the Raiders and their fans, who insist the Raiders should have won (in an NFL Films production about the play years later, Raider guard Gene Upshaw theorized that the real purpose of Swearingen's phone conversation was to see if there were enough police on hand to ensure the players' safety if the play was ruled incomplete, and was then called in the Steelers' favor out of fear). Tatum said that the ball did not bounce off him, both immediately after the game[13] as well as later;[2] however, in his memoirs, Tatum equivocated, stating that he couldn't honestly say if the ball hit him.[17] Raiders linebacker Phil Villapiano, who was covering Harris at the time, maintains that the ball hit Fuqua.[18] Fuqua has been coy, supposedly saying he knows exactly what happened that day but will never tell.[19]

John Madden, coach of the 1972 Raiders, has said that he will never get over the play, and has indicated that he's bothered more by the delay between the end of the play and the final signal of touchdown than by which player the ball truly hit. After the game he indicated that from his view the football had indeed touched Tatum.[13] Although a few days later Madden indicated that the Raiders game films showed that the ball hit Fuqua's shoulder pads,[15] Jack Tatum has conceded that "even after we viewed the game films with stop action, nobody could tell who the ball hit on that moment of impact."[17] Years later Madden wrote, "No matter how many times I watch the films of the 'immaculate reception' play, I never know for sure what happened."[20]

In 1998, during halftime of the AFC Championship game, NBC showed a replay from its original broadcast. The replay presented a different angle than the NFL Films clip that is most often shown. According to a writer for the New York Daily News, "NBC's replay showed the ball clearly hit one and only one man[:] Oakland DB Jack Tatum."[21]

Pittsburgh sportscaster Myron Cope, in a 1997 article[9] and in his 2002 book Double Yoi!,[22] related that two days after the game he reviewed film taken by local Pittsburgh TV station WTAE-TV, and that the film showed "[n]o question about it -- Bradshaw's pass struck Tatum squarely on his right shoulder." Cope stated that the local film would be next to impossible to find again, because of inadequate filing procedures.

In 2004 John Fetkovich, an emeritus professor of physics at Carnegie Mellon University, analyzed the NFL Films clip of the play. He came to the conclusion, based on the trajectory of the bounced ball and conservation of momentum, that the ball must have bounced off Tatum, who was running upfield at the time, rather than Fuqua, who was running across and down the field.[23] Fetkovich also performed experiments by throwing a football against a brick wall at a velocity greater than 60 feet per second, twice the speed that Fetkovich calculated that Bradshaw's pass was traveling when it reached Tatum and Fuqua. Fetkovitch achieved a maximum rebound of 10 feet when the ball hit point first, and 15 feet when the ball hit belly first, both less than the 24 feet that the ball actually rebounded during the play. Timothy Gay, a physics professor and a longtime fan of the Raiders,[24] cited Fetkovich's work with approval in his book The Physics of Football, and concluded that "the referees made the right call in the Immaculate Reception."[25]

Terry Bradshaw himself had made points similar to those of Fetkovich 15 years earlier, stating that he did not think that he had thrown the ball hard enough for it to bounce that far back off Fuqua, and that since Fuqua was running across the field, the ball would have veered to the right if it had hit him. Bradshaw opined that the ball must have bounced off the upfield-moving Tatum – if that had happened then "Tatum's momentum carries the ball backward."[26]

Another widely held point of contention to the play was whether the ball had hit the ground before Harris snatched it and ran with it. The sideline views of both film and video gave no answer, as Harris had caught the ball out of frame, and came running into frame from the right side on his path to the end zone. The only other known NBC video was an end zone shot from above and behind the goalposts and, in keeping with the mystery of the play, one of the posts was exactly in the line of sight of Harris' hands and the ball. The best NFL Films shot of the play, from ground level, which is probably the most-often seen clip (along with audio of an excited Jack Fleming, the Steelers' radio announcer at the time) is a tight shot from the end zone of Harris snaring the ball, with his feet and the ground just out of frame below.

Villapiano has also stated that he was illegally blocked by Steelers tight end John McMakin as he was pursuing Harris following the reception.[2][18] Raiders coach Madden echoed this complaint.[15]

 

[zzzz]

The fact of the matter is that they are the only team to go through the regular season and playoffs and win an NFL Championship without losing a game. Then the next year they won again losing just 2 games proving they were not a fluke.

 

[Ravi]

negged

 

[rightwinger]

The fact of the matter is that they are the only team to go through the regular season and playoffs and win an NFL Championship without losing a game. Then the next year they won again losing just 2 games proving they were not a fluke.

Those Dolphin teams were a very good team. Griese, Csonka, Kick, Morris, Warfield, Buonoconti, Scott

But I think both the Steelers and Raiders had better teams in the 70s

 

[deaddogseye]

The fact of the matter is that they are the only team to go through the regular season and playoffs and win an NFL Championship without losing a game. Then the next year they won again losing just 2 games proving they were not a fluke.

A lack of respect for them was common back then too -- people probably forget who was favord in that first super bowl -- the redskins. and they really were dominant in both those super bowl wins. the score of their first win doesnt look lopsided but football was different back then. they could have played the first one for a week and the redskins would never have scored against them (and they got their 7 points only on that goofy garo yepremian play). 24- 7 over the vikings was a blowout back then. and they had also made the super bowl the year before the undefeated season even though the cowboys beat them easily. but you are right that team was no fluke

 

[ginscpy]

First Im not a dolphins fan at all - but they are the only team to go undefeated. Im just wondering if you are reacting more to the fact that they werent very spectacular - they didnt have a lot of superstars if any and certainly none at the skill positions. But they were very good and solid. They ran the ball down your throat. You knew it was coimng and they knew you knew but it didnt matter. the approach seemed to be stop it if you can and no one could. The defense was excellent but again very unspectacular -- although the secondary was especially good and maybe one of the better units ever. So to each his own opinion but they do have the undefeated thing -- and some of them are as annoying as they were unspectacular about never seeing it broken, that is also indisputable.

As for the Immaculate Reception -- the great weight of analysis seems to be that Tatum touched it making it a legal catch. From wikipedia:

The critical question was: whom did the football touch in the Fuqua/Tatum collision? If it bounced off Fuqua without ever touching Tatum, then Harris's reception was illegal. If the ball bounced off only Tatum, or if it bounced off both Fuqua and Tatum (in any order), then the reception was legal. The rule stated in pertinent part that once an offensive player touches a pass, he is the only offensive player eligible to catch the pass. However, if a defensive player touches the pass "first, or simultaneously with or subsequent to its having been touched by only one [offensive] player, then all [offensive] players become and remain eligible" to catch the pass.[3][4] (This rule was later rescinded in 1978.) If the reception were illegal, the Raiders would have gained possession (via a turnover on downs), clinching a victory.

One official, Back Judge Adrian Burk, signaled that the play was a touchdown, but the other game officials did not immediately make any signal.[2] When the officials huddled, Burk and another official, Umpire Pat Harder, thought that the play was a touchdown because Tatum and Fuqua had both touched the ball, while three others said that they were not in a position to rule.[5][6] Referee Fred Swearingen approached Steelers sideline official Jim Boston and asked to be taken to a telephone. Boston took Swearingen to a baseball dugout in the stadium. There was a video monitor in the dugout, but it was not used by Swearingen.[5] (Terry Bradshaw's assertion that a special television was rigged up on the sideline so that Swearingen could watch the replay[7] is not supported by other accounts.) From the dugout telephone Boston put in a call to the press box to reach the NFL's supervisor of officials, Art McNally. Before the call McNally had "an opinion from the get-go" that the ball had hit Tatum's chest, which he confirmed by looking "at one shot on instant replay."[4] In the press box the telephone was answered either by Dan Rooney, son of Steelers owner Art Rooney, or by Steelers public relations director Joe Gordon (reports vary), and McNally was put on the line.[5][8][9] According to McNally, Swearingen "never asked me about the rule, and never asked what I saw. All he said was, 'Two of my men say that opposing players touched the ball.' And I said, 'everything's fine then, go ahead.'"[5][10] After Swearingen hung up the phone Boston asked, "What do we got?" "We got a touchdown,"[5][11] answered Swearingen, who then went back onto the field to signal the ruling to the crowd. Fans immediately rushed the field, and it took 15 minutes to clear them so that the point-after conversion could be kicked to give the Steelers what turned out to be their final margin of victory, 13-7.

Although this has been described as the first known use of television replay to confirm a call[12][13] (there was no instant replay review then), at the time the NFL denied that the decision was made in the press box or using a television replay.[14] An Oakland Tribune article two days after the game reported that Steelers publicist Joe Gordon told reporters in the press box that the decision had been made using the replay.[15] Gordon has dismissed this as "a total fabrication."[9] NFL officials Jim Kensil and Val Pinchbeck, who were in the press box with McNally, also deny that replay was used in making the decision on the play.[15][16]

The play is still disputed by those involved, particularly by living personnel from the Raiders and their fans, who insist the Raiders should have won (in an NFL Films production about the play years later, Raider guard Gene Upshaw theorized that the real purpose of Swearingen's phone conversation was to see if there were enough police on hand to ensure the players' safety if the play was ruled incomplete, and was then called in the Steelers' favor out of fear). Tatum said that the ball did not bounce off him, both immediately after the game[13] as well as later;[2] however, in his memoirs, Tatum equivocated, stating that he couldn't honestly say if the ball hit him.[17] Raiders linebacker Phil Villapiano, who was covering Harris at the time, maintains that the ball hit Fuqua.[18] Fuqua has been coy, supposedly saying he knows exactly what happened that day but will never tell.[19]

John Madden, coach of the 1972 Raiders, has said that he will never get over the play, and has indicated that he's bothered more by the delay between the end of the play and the final signal of touchdown than by which player the ball truly hit. After the game he indicated that from his view the football had indeed touched Tatum.[13] Although a few days later Madden indicated that the Raiders game films showed that the ball hit Fuqua's shoulder pads,[15] Jack Tatum has conceded that "even after we viewed the game films with stop action, nobody could tell who the ball hit on that moment of impact."[17] Years later Madden wrote, "No matter how many times I watch the films of the 'immaculate reception' play, I never know for sure what happened."[20]

In 1998, during halftime of the AFC Championship game, NBC showed a replay from its original broadcast. The replay presented a different angle than the NFL Films clip that is most often shown. According to a writer for the New York Daily News, "NBC's replay showed the ball clearly hit one and only one man[:] Oakland DB Jack Tatum."[21]

Pittsburgh sportscaster Myron Cope, in a 1997 article[9] and in his 2002 book Double Yoi!,[22] related that two days after the game he reviewed film taken by local Pittsburgh TV station WTAE-TV, and that the film showed "[n]o question about it -- Bradshaw's pass struck Tatum squarely on his right shoulder." Cope stated that the local film would be next to impossible to find again, because of inadequate filing procedures.

In 2004 John Fetkovich, an emeritus professor of physics at Carnegie Mellon University, analyzed the NFL Films clip of the play. He came to the conclusion, based on the trajectory of the bounced ball and conservation of momentum, that the ball must have bounced off Tatum, who was running upfield at the time, rather than Fuqua, who was running across and down the field.[23] Fetkovich also performed experiments by throwing a football against a brick wall at a velocity greater than 60 feet per second, twice the speed that Fetkovich calculated that Bradshaw's pass was traveling when it reached Tatum and Fuqua. Fetkovitch achieved a maximum rebound of 10 feet when the ball hit point first, and 15 feet when the ball hit belly first, both less than the 24 feet that the ball actually rebounded during the play. Timothy Gay, a physics professor and a longtime fan of the Raiders,[24] cited Fetkovich's work with approval in his book The Physics of Football, and concluded that "the referees made the right call in the Immaculate Reception."[25]

Terry Bradshaw himself had made points similar to those of Fetkovich 15 years earlier, stating that he did not think that he had thrown the ball hard enough for it to bounce that far back off Fuqua, and that since Fuqua was running across the field, the ball would have veered to the right if it had hit him. Bradshaw opined that the ball must have bounced off the upfield-moving Tatum – if that had happened then "Tatum's momentum carries the ball backward."[26]

Another widely held point of contention to the play was whether the ball had hit the ground before Harris snatched it and ran with it. The sideline views of both film and video gave no answer, as Harris had caught the ball out of frame, and came running into frame from the right side on his path to the end zone. The only other known NBC video was an end zone shot from above and behind the goalposts and, in keeping with the mystery of the play, one of the posts was exactly in the line of sight of Harris' hands and the ball. The best NFL Films shot of the play, from ground level, which is probably the most-often seen clip (along with audio of an excited Jack Fleming, the Steelers' radio announcer at the time) is a tight shot from the end zone of Harris snaring the ball, with his feet and the ground just out of frame below.

Villapiano has also stated that he was illegally blocked by Steelers tight end John McMakin as he was pursuing Harris following the reception.[2][18] Raiders coach Madden echoed this complaint.[15]

More analysis on that play than in the JFK shooting.

I was a huge Raiders fan at the time.

 

[ginscpy]

The 72 Dolphins beat a team in the SB that was even older and slower than they were - the Over-the-Hill Redskins. Won 14-7.

Should have called it the Geritol Bowl.

Their win over the Vikings in the next SB was a little better - but the Vikes were eternal losers anyways...........................................

 

[deaddogseye]

The 72 Dolphins beat a team in the SB that was even older and slower than they were - the Over-the-Hill Redskins. Won 14-7.

Should have called it the Geritol Bowl.

Their win over the Vikings in the next SB was a little better - but the Vikes were eternal losers anyways...........................................

I dont disagree with you on this. What I think had happened is that the AFC / AFL had quickly become dominant and this was the start of it and people didnt fully appreciate it yet - it was a wave that would last most of the decade. And it wasnt just the super bowls -- look at the inter conferecne records back then. the afc dominated that too. They were just much better for some time just as the nfc dominate the super bowl in the 90s (i dont think they acheived the same level of dominance iner conference that the old afc had though)

 

[bayoubill]

lol... when I saw the title "The 72 Dolphins werent that great" in the list, I said to myself, "bet that's another ginskippy thread..."

and sure enough... ;-)

 

[bayoubill]

I was a huge Raiders fan at the time.

I was a huge fan of several teams back then... Chiefs, Dolphins, Steelers, Raiders, among others...

but mainly I was a huge fan of any team that gave the Cowboys fits... still am...

 

[rightwinger]

The fact of the matter is that they are the only team to go through the regular season and playoffs and win an NFL Championship without losing a game. Then the next year they won again losing just 2 games proving they were not a fluke.

A lack of respect for them was common back then too -- people probably forget who was favord in that first super bowl -- the redskins. and they really were dominant in both those super bowl wins. the score of their first win doesnt look lopsided but football was different back then. they could have played the first one for a week and the redskins would never have scored against them (and they got their 7 points only on that goofy garo yepremian play). 24- 7 over the vikings was a blowout back then. and they had also made the super bowl the year before the undefeated season even though the cowboys beat them easily. but you are right that team was no fluke

In their first Superbowl, the Dolphins got their butts kicked by the Cowboys. The Redskins and Vikings were weak teams compared to the AFC at the time. Dolphins were one of the best teams of the 70s. Not as good as the Steelers or the Raiders.

They are just not an all time great team

 

[deaddogseye]

I was a huge Raiders fan at the time.

I was a huge fan of several teams back then... Chiefs, Dolphins, Steelers, Raiders, among others...

but mainly I was a huge fan of any team that gave the Cowboys fits... still am...

Well go Giants this weekend!!!

 

[bayoubill]

I was a huge Raiders fan at the time.

I was a huge fan of several teams back then... Chiefs, Dolphins, Steelers, Raiders, among others...

but mainly I was a huge fan of any team that gave the Cowboys fits... still am...

Well go Giants this weekend!!!

lol... yeah that...

always liked the Giants too... ever since the days of YA Tittle...

plus, imho, they also have some of the best team colors in the league...

love the deep metallic-blue helmets...

 

[deaddogseye]

I was a huge fan of several teams back then... Chiefs, Dolphins, Steelers, Raiders, among others...

but mainly I was a huge fan of any team that gave the Cowboys fits... still am...

Well go Giants this weekend!!!

lol... yeah that...

always liked the Giants too... ever since the days of YA Tittle...

plus, imho, they also have some of the best team colors in the league...

love the deep metallic-blue helmets...

I was a HUGE fan of Title and those Giants teams back then . I lived on Long Island and was just the right age as I was just begining to follow football so some of my most vivid memories are of them. It killed me that they couldnt beat the Packers or the Bears. I hated Lombardi for years becaause of that and only recently have come to respect him. I later becamse a Jets fans as we had season tickets at Shea Stadium but dont follow them as closely anymore -- plus Rex Ryan is the ultimate blowhard IMO. Cant stand him.

Saints?

 

[ginscpy]

I'll tell you what.

Kenny The Snake Stabler deserves to be in th HOF more than Bob Griese and some others that made it.

Never even been nominated.......................................

 

[HenryBHough]

Bumped because the thread is more interesting that the latest Obamantics.

Fun to read this stuff from the vantage point of time.

 

[NoNukes]

Probably would have been beaten by the Raiders if Oakland had not been knocked out of the playoffs by the Immaculate Reception against Pitt (WHICH WAS AN ILLEGAL PLAY which would have been overturned by Instant Replay had it existed back then) )

So let the old farts/greybeards uncork another one - they were slow then -the are even slower now.............................

How was it an illegal play?

 

[LA RAM FAN]

First Im not a dolphins fan at all - but they are the only team to go undefeated. Im just wondering if you are reacting more to the fact that they werent very spectacular - they didnt have a lot of superstars if any and certainly none at the skill positions. But they were very good and solid. They ran the ball down your throat. You knew it was coimng and they knew you knew but it didnt matter. the approach seemed to be stop it if you can and no one could. The defense was excellent but again very unspectacular -- although the secondary was especially good and maybe one of the better units ever. So to each his own opinion but they do have the undefeated thing -- and some of them are as annoying as they were unspectacular about never seeing it broken, that is also indisputable.

As for the Immaculate Reception -- the great weight of analysis seems to be that Tatum touched it making it a legal catch. From wikipedia:

The critical question was: whom did the football touch in the Fuqua/Tatum collision? If it bounced off Fuqua without ever touching Tatum, then Harris's reception was illegal. If the ball bounced off only Tatum, or if it bounced off both Fuqua and Tatum (in any order), then the reception was legal. The rule stated in pertinent part that once an offensive player touches a pass, he is the only offensive player eligible to catch the pass. However, if a defensive player touches the pass "first, or simultaneously with or subsequent to its having been touched by only one [offensive] player, then all [offensive] players become and remain eligible" to catch the pass.[3][4] (This rule was later rescinded in 1978.) If the reception were illegal, the Raiders would have gained possession (via a turnover on downs), clinching a victory.

One official, Back Judge Adrian Burk, signaled that the play was a touchdown, but the other game officials did not immediately make any signal.[2] When the officials huddled, Burk and another official, Umpire Pat Harder, thought that the play was a touchdown because Tatum and Fuqua had both touched the ball, while three others said that they were not in a position to rule.[5][6] Referee Fred Swearingen approached Steelers sideline official Jim Boston and asked to be taken to a telephone. Boston took Swearingen to a baseball dugout in the stadium. There was a video monitor in the dugout, but it was not used by Swearingen.[5] (Terry Bradshaw's assertion that a special television was rigged up on the sideline so that Swearingen could watch the replay[7] is not supported by other accounts.) From the dugout telephone Boston put in a call to the press box to reach the NFL's supervisor of officials, Art McNally. Before the call McNally had "an opinion from the get-go" that the ball had hit Tatum's chest, which he confirmed by looking "at one shot on instant replay."[4] In the press box the telephone was answered either by Dan Rooney, son of Steelers owner Art Rooney, or by Steelers public relations director Joe Gordon (reports vary), and McNally was put on the line.[5][8][9] According to McNally, Swearingen "never asked me about the rule, and never asked what I saw. All he said was, 'Two of my men say that opposing players touched the ball.' And I said, 'everything's fine then, go ahead.'"[5][10] After Swearingen hung up the phone Boston asked, "What do we got?" "We got a touchdown,"[5][11] answered Swearingen, who then went back onto the field to signal the ruling to the crowd. Fans immediately rushed the field, and it took 15 minutes to clear them so that the point-after conversion could be kicked to give the Steelers what turned out to be their final margin of victory, 13-7.

Although this has been described as the first known use of television replay to confirm a call[12][13] (there was no instant replay review then), at the time the NFL denied that the decision was made in the press box or using a television replay.[14] An Oakland Tribune article two days after the game reported that Steelers publicist Joe Gordon told reporters in the press box that the decision had been made using the replay.[15] Gordon has dismissed this as "a total fabrication."[9] NFL officials Jim Kensil and Val Pinchbeck, who were in the press box with McNally, also deny that replay was used in making the decision on the play.[15][16]

The play is still disputed by those involved, particularly by living personnel from the Raiders and their fans, who insist the Raiders should have won (in an NFL Films production about the play years later, Raider guard Gene Upshaw theorized that the real purpose of Swearingen's phone conversation was to see if there were enough police on hand to ensure the players' safety if the play was ruled incomplete, and was then called in the Steelers' favor out of fear). Tatum said that the ball did not bounce off him, both immediately after the game[13] as well as later;[2] however, in his memoirs, Tatum equivocated, stating that he couldn't honestly say if the ball hit him.[17] Raiders linebacker Phil Villapiano, who was covering Harris at the time, maintains that the ball hit Fuqua.[18] Fuqua has been coy, supposedly saying he knows exactly what happened that day but will never tell.[19]

John Madden, coach of the 1972 Raiders, has said that he will never get over the play, and has indicated that he's bothered more by the delay between the end of the play and the final signal of touchdown than by which player the ball truly hit. After the game he indicated that from his view the football had indeed touched Tatum.[13] Although a few days later Madden indicated that the Raiders game films showed that the ball hit Fuqua's shoulder pads,[15] Jack Tatum has conceded that "even after we viewed the game films with stop action, nobody could tell who the ball hit on that moment of impact."[17] Years later Madden wrote, "No matter how many times I watch the films of the 'immaculate reception' play, I never know for sure what happened."[20]

In 1998, during halftime of the AFC Championship game, NBC showed a replay from its original broadcast. The replay presented a different angle than the NFL Films clip that is most often shown. According to a writer for the New York Daily News, "NBC's replay showed the ball clearly hit one and only one man[:] Oakland DB Jack Tatum."[21]

Pittsburgh sportscaster Myron Cope, in a 1997 article[9] and in his 2002 book Double Yoi!,[22] related that two days after the game he reviewed film taken by local Pittsburgh TV station WTAE-TV, and that the film showed "[n]o question about it -- Bradshaw's pass struck Tatum squarely on his right shoulder." Cope stated that the local film would be next to impossible to find again, because of inadequate filing procedures.

In 2004 John Fetkovich, an emeritus professor of physics at Carnegie Mellon University, analyzed the NFL Films clip of the play. He came to the conclusion, based on the trajectory of the bounced ball and conservation of momentum, that the ball must have bounced off Tatum, who was running upfield at the time, rather than Fuqua, who was running across and down the field.[23] Fetkovich also performed experiments by throwing a football against a brick wall at a velocity greater than 60 feet per second, twice the speed that Fetkovich calculated that Bradshaw's pass was traveling when it reached Tatum and Fuqua. Fetkovitch achieved a maximum rebound of 10 feet when the ball hit point first, and 15 feet when the ball hit belly first, both less than the 24 feet that the ball actually rebounded during the play. Timothy Gay, a physics professor and a longtime fan of the Raiders,[24] cited Fetkovich's work with approval in his book The Physics of Football, and concluded that "the referees made the right call in the Immaculate Reception."[25]

Terry Bradshaw himself had made points similar to those of Fetkovich 15 years earlier, stating that he did not think that he had thrown the ball hard enough for it to bounce that far back off Fuqua, and that since Fuqua was running across the field, the ball would have veered to the right if it had hit him. Bradshaw opined that the ball must have bounced off the upfield-moving Tatum – if that had happened then "Tatum's momentum carries the ball backward."[26]

Another widely held point of contention to the play was whether the ball had hit the ground before Harris snatched it and ran with it. The sideline views of both film and video gave no answer, as Harris had caught the ball out of frame, and came running into frame from the right side on his path to the end zone. The only other known NBC video was an end zone shot from above and behind the goalposts and, in keeping with the mystery of the play, one of the posts was exactly in the line of sight of Harris' hands and the ball. The best NFL Films shot of the play, from ground level, which is probably the most-often seen clip (along with audio of an excited Jack Fleming, the Steelers' radio announcer at the time) is a tight shot from the end zone of Harris snaring the ball, with his feet and the ground just out of frame below.

Villapiano has also stated that he was illegally blocked by Steelers tight end John McMakin as he was pursuing Harris following the reception.[2][18] Raiders coach Madden echoed this complaint.[15]

More analysis on that play than in the JFK shooting.

I was a huge Raiders fan at the time.

thats our wonderful LAMESTREAM media for ya.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

The fact of the matter is that they are the only team to go through the regular season and playoffs and win an NFL Championship without losing a game. Then the next year they won again losing just 2 games proving they were not a fluke.

The fact of the matter is that they are the only team to go through the regular season and playoffs and win an NFL Championship without losing a game. Then the next year they won again losing just 2 games proving they were not a fluke.

Good point.They were no fluke for sure.Not to take anything away from that great achivement of going undefeated that season but what most people dont know is they got extremely lucky in a couple of those games to achieve that.No surprise because to do that,luck does come into play.

The cheats did it in the regular season with the benefit of the refs making bad calls against the ravens on a monday night game so they could achieve that.

I still remember watching that game how there were a couple of bad costly calls that went against the Ravens that night that helped the cheats win.The Ravens called it correctly the next day saying the officials wanted them to have an undefeated season so they made those bad calls.

Thats nothing new,the cheats are the spolied rich brats of the NFL.they get special treatment other teams do not get.Remember the tuck rule,the biggest bullshit call in NFL playoff history invented so they could go to the superbowl?

If you watch that game,the refs ALSO made three horrible costly calls against the raiders in that game that helped them win as well.meanwhile not ONE SINGLE BAD CALL went against the cheats. doesnt take a genuis to see the refs rigged that game.

so luck indeed played a huge role for them that year.