Final Moments of Super Bowl IV Chiefs Vikings 1970 RARE

[zoomping1]

If anyone lacked class, it was actually the NFL and their allies in the media - the Chiefs were 13 point underdogs in this game. The AFL was so disrespected in the '60s, yet AFL games were more entertaining then the NFL's 3-yards & a cloud-of-dust brand of football, save for maybe the upstart Cowboys, Colts and Browns - the latter 2 teams running Paul Brown's offensive system.

[lwmson]

This is very interesting. It shows how different the game was, particularly the Super Bowl, and how it's evolved and changed over the last 40 years. Thanks for uploading "melcrago."

[kingfish4242]

@lwmson agreed, I remember the earlier ones having noon kickoffs. The NFL is fine with the primetime kickoffs now,but I think Baseball not having daay games for the world series anymore has hurt the sport greatly.

[lwmson]

Always liked KC.'s unusual huddle. Although it was different and interesting, I believe they were the only team to use it, and it never really caught on with other football teams. But I thought it was very innovative.

[altfactor]

I believe that the whole CBS broadcast of Super Bowl IV exists, but the first half only exists in black-and-white.

[zenmachinefilms]

Outstanding quality! Would love to see the whole game.

[rbvo]

This, and the highlights you've posted elsewhere, are just astonishing. I have not seen the actual CBS telecast since, well, since January 11, 1970 when it aired live.

This truly is RARE! I don't think even NFL Network has this.

[KevinRuetz]

I truly don't like the Vikings, being a Packer fan, but calling Bud Grant classless is one of the most insane things I have ever heard. His teams always lined up at attention for the Anthem, hit hard and none of the mainstays were ever cheap shot artists.

[MisterEvasion]

It will be some time before this game will truly be recognized as the moment modern NFL football began. SB3, the Namath Bowl, because of the fame that has grown over time, erroneously holds that distinction. It must be remembered that SB3 was regarded as a fluke result then and the AFL still had more proving to do. This was the game that ended all that skepticism once and for all. The Chiefs went out and won this game, whereas it was more a case of the Colts losing than a Jets victory in SB3.

[kcbill54]

Been a Chief fan since 65, and never knew Bud Grant walked off without shaking Stram's hand--real class. Grant went on to lose 3 more Super Bowls.

[SuperFirewire1]

@kcbill54 bud grant went to shake hands with hank but the chief player had him on they shoulders right off the bat, when bud grant saw that he then started to walk the other way not wanting to bother his horsey ride. when hank was what happened he told his players to let him down , he felt bad that bud tried to shake hand but couldnt, he tried to chase bud but it was too late. How do i know this- hank told the story many times, i heard him tell it on a ny sports radio station once when asked.

[GialloHorror]

Why did my channel get taken down for posting this game? But this one has been up for a year? I don't understand

[abernam]

Big Cat Ernie Ladd!

[kuwinsitall]

Man, that would be amazing if the Chiefs actually made a Super Bowl in my lifetime. Born in '82, so it hadn't even happened for 12 years when i was born! what futility...

[KevinRuetz]

But yes, it was classless.

[KevinRuetz]

AFL better? How about Super Bowls 1 & 2 and the domination by the Steelers, Browns, and Colts when they were switched in the the AFC (AFL). Lay of the dope, please.

[Ariamaluum]

@KevinRuetz. AFC West was the best division from both leagues. AFC East was the worst.

[scifiradioguy]

Such organized chaos! Today, the handshake in the middle of the field would have been rehearsed!

[graciemaemarie11]

WINNERS WEAR RED

[graciemaemarie11]

screw the 'southern methodist marching band'

[graciemaemarie11]

chiefs were on a crusade, but vikings were a tough team, not to be trifled with, i still believe they could have beaten the steelers in jan 75....

[m1sterhockey]

Boy it didnt take long for the Band to storm the field!!!

[graciemaemarie11]

@m1sterhockey what would you expect?

[firesting81]

3:23-3:30 is Iowa Hawkeye legend and eventual Chief Hall-of-Famer, Ed Podolak as rookie!

[toeazy34]

This is the one Super Bowl the Vikings should have at least made in somewhat of a game. I don't dispute that the Chiefs were better, but in no way should they have dominated. I'm absolutely convinced, this game is a classic example of what an impact coaching in football has. The Chiefs were light years ahead of the Vikings (and the NFL) with their formations and presnap movement on both sides of the ball. In the Vikes other SB's, virtually no chance.

[6400az]

@toeazy34

Agree for the most part, but don't you think they had a bit of a chance against the Steelers. Late in the 4th it was still 9-6. The only way would probably have been a lucky bounce of the ball, but somehow they did end up on the Steelers side a couple of times that day.

Against the Chiefs.Yes, I give them credit. But the Vikings mistakes, you need a calculator.The blocking sucked,no sooner would Kapp set to pass and he had the Chiefs D-line on him.

Washingtons dropped bomb!!

[graciemaemarie11]

@6400az they should have beat pittsburgh, but the other 3, no way

[6400az]

@graciemaemarie11

I think they should have been much more competitive. The teams they lost to where good, no doubt. But it's not like the Vikings were a flash in the pan. Year in and year out, they were one of the winningest teams in the league. If they would have had a QB, their best teams ( and best chance) would have been in 70' and 71' .................despite the absence of Tarkenton, Gilliam and Foreman, all they needed those years was something resembling a QB.

What a waste.

[toeazy34]

@6400az

Obviously when your down 3 with roughly 10 minutes you always have a chance. Having said that, the Vikes were completely dominated that game and were very fortunate (I hate to use the word lucky) to be in that spot. Yardage was roughly 3 to 1, time of possession (which actually mattered in those days) was roughly 2 to 1. Throw in a couple of botched FG attempts by Pitt and a blocked punt for a touch, and you have a game that the score didn't reflect the dominance.

[6400az]

@toeazy34

Agree in part.If the Vikings had capitalized where the opportunity presented itself they would have had a definite chance in SB IX. Steelers themselves where also VERY fortunate, as their winning points came as a result of the bouncing ball.

The 2 half K.O where Gerela slipped,resulting in the Bill Brown fumble wich led to a TD.The Larry Brown play ( either way, it was very close) also led to a TD.

The Gilliam hit and deflected int. in the end zone.These don't show in stats.

[graciemaemarie11]

@6400az the steeler game was a sloppy game, missed fg's, blocked punts, missed exrea points, yes, the steelers defense was great, but, pitt didnt exactly tear up the field either. whats odd, is that two viking fumbles on kickoffs led to tds by the chiefs and steelers, kind of a coincidence

[6400az]

@graciemaemarie11

Yes, sloppy game. A bit like SB V. In SB IX the Vikings actually made plays...at least on defense. Here's the sequence in SB IV. Earsell Mackbee drops a sure int. in the endzone, Stenerud kicks it through. On the ensuing KO Charlie West fumbles, leading to the 65 toss power trap.. Chiefs 16-0 !

Theres a list of the pattern of Vikings SB screw ups. I'm sure you've seen many of my excuses, I'm aware they lost to great teams, but God they where awefull !!

[Ariamaluum]

@6400az. That is due to Bud Grant's philosophy of being concerned of what his team does instead of his opponents. Which is sort of the same thing as Jerry Sloan. Problem is in playoffs, you can get away with it because you do know the opponents somewhat by playing them but in championships like this, you don't. The next year, Minnesota beat Kansas City easily.

[6400az]

@Ariamaluum

Yes, I think your right. The Vikings looked like they where in tarining camp when playing in the Superbowl.

[graciemaemarie11]

so great to see vindication for the afl stram was an innovator, like landry, plus in 69 they had anger, fire, listen, whom did the chiefs defeat in the two playoff games prior? world champion joe namath,healthy... in new york.... then, oakland, a team that had lost 4 games... in three years... in oakland, after oakland had devastated houston, 56-7... so they beat two vastly superior offenses, on the road, to get to tulane stadium...

[ebf1957]

SB IV proved that the AFL victory in SB III was no fluke.

[owenpeterson]

With the Chiefs winning the Super Bowl, the AFL goes out triumphantly. If NFL films were to release a "Greatest Games" DVD set for the Kansas City Chiefs, Super Bowl IV should be one of them.

[graciemaemarie11]

wish the great ray scott announced this game... he was class

[kthburke]

Here is a dubious Super Bowl stat. Vikings of course lost 4 SB's in 8 seasons. Total aggregate number of points scored by Minn in 1st half of ALL 4 games: ZERO. Trailed KC, Mia, Pitt, and Oak 16-0, 17-0, 2-0, and 16-0 respectively. Amazing how a very good team never showed up in the SB. Dal and Min represented the NFL/NFC 8 of 9 yrs fr 69-78. Dal went 2-3 but were so competitive in their 3 losses they lost by a combined 3 game total of 11 points.

[6400az]

@kthburke

They where just God awefull come Super Sunday. Sure they played great teams, but in four games you'd figure they, would at the very minimum, compete. Not even by chance......... they simpley could'nt paly in Jan. To this day, I can't grasp their inesptness.

[MrMatt8204]

@kthburke That's where the Bills differ a bit with their four Super Bowl losses.  They actually led in three of the four games.

[rocketman4403]

I was on the Vikings bandwagon that year. The team captured my imagination - Joe Kapp, the Purple People Eaters. Then, the pregame intros, and my mom, looking in from the kitchen, says that the Chiefs will win. I asked why she thought that KC would win, and she said "look at them, they're so big". She hit the nail on the head. The Vikings couldn't handle the Chiefs on the line of scrimmage.

[6400az]

@rocketman4403

That was pretty much it. Once it was it was determined the Vikings had to play catch up AND could'nt run the ball, the Chiefs linemen went after Kapp. I have the original broadcast and it shows the Vikings O-linemen just strewn all over the place. If they could'nt run around the Vikings then they would easily run through them. Their offensive line would peal back too far, once they'd set the Chiefs would have a running start and crash into them,and there was Kapp to get hit.

[graciemaemarie11]

the real mystery was why the chiefs didn't win more titles, with that talent, my god, that might have been the single best linebacking corps ever...

[GemCan78]

@graciemaemarie11 The 69 Chiefs did have an awesome linebacking corps, with Jim Lynch, and HOFers Bobby Bell and Willie Lanier...correct me if I'm wrong, I think even Lynch played in a couple of Pro Bowls...but in my opinion, the greatest linebacking corps ever, was the Steelers of the mid-1970's...they had Lambert, Ham and Russell, two LBs making the HOF, and Russell should have also been elected...25 Pro Bowls between the three...that is just sick!!!

[MrMatt8204]

Gotta wonder what would have happened if the Vikings had never traded Tarkenton and he was their QB for this game instead of Kapp. Kapp was gritty and gutty, but he simply wasn't as mobile as Tarkenton. Fran's agility may have helped Minnesota in this game, especially in terms of avoiding KC's fierce pass rush.

[6400az]

@MrMatt8204

I've heard of this scenario. Although Tarkenton was in fact more mobile, Kapp could move a lot more than he 's given credit for. The Chiefs D-lin where behind the line of scrimage all day. Maybe Fran could have scrambeled for a while, but when your chased all day, your accuracy and game decreases.

Ofcourse we could debate it for the next month, BUT it's important to recognize that Tarkenton had three chances and on Super Sunday and he simpley did not perform to a high standards

[graciemaemarie11]

so good the afl took it to the nfl. vikings last vanilla team, didn't have any imagination on offense,didn't even use man in motion, basically, the old style tradition losing out, today, all teams use variety, man in motion, etc,etc, this stemmed from the chiefs and dallas cowboys...

[graciemaemarie11]

legandary game

[Dietpepsivanilla]

Pretty classless of Bud Grant not to shake the hand of Hank Stram. I hated the NFL and loved the AFL. The AFL was truly the better league.

[6400az]

@Dietpepsivanilla

As oppose to the total class shown by Hank Stram mocking the Vikings through out the game right.

NOTHING classless about Bud Grant !!

[Dietpepsivanilla]

@6400az He didn't mock the Vikings, he just told the truth. Their defense did look like a Chinese fire drill, and they couldn't solve the multiple stacks or the now famous 65 Toss Power Trap. It did pop wide open. Hey, the NFL mocked the AFL and the Chiefs for so long, it was poetic justice. And it was Minnesota's owners that stabbed the AFL and Lamar Hunt in the back by reneging on the promise to join the AFL and jump to the NFL.

Remember, you can't float those balls in our league.

[6400az]

@Dietpepsivanilla

The truth can be expressed objectively in a non sarcastic or devaluating way.Stram chose ridicule instead, his actions constitute mockery in anyones book.

Grant was in Canada when all that stuff you mention happened. Even then, how does it figure in this ?

Back in the day, it was'nt obligatory for opponents to shake hands at the drop of a hat.Theres more pointing to Strams mockery than to Grant having no class. I say it was poetic justice Grant DID'NT shake hands.

[Dietpepsivanilla]

@6400az Looks like we're going to agree on disagreeing. All the crap the AFL had to endure from the NFL "purists" throughout the years of which Hank had to listen to as he was an AFL lifer. I don't blame him for taking shots as those same purists had the Chiefs as a major underdog. Hey, I doubt that Hank was really slagging off on Bud and the Vikings. He couldn't believe how flat they were playing and thought the Vikings would show a better game. Hank wasn't rubbing their noses in it.

[6400az]

@Dietpepsivanilla

Yeah alright, fair eneugh. The Vikings sugar level must have gone down in the Superbowl, as they just could'nt play. In ANY of them. Wich is not to take anything away from the other teams. But the Vikings just did'nt compete very well come Super Sunday. Saw all of their 4 games and to this day , I still can't understand it. Thanks

[Dietpepsivanilla]

@6400az I would have thought they would have beat Pittsburgh, but it was their tough luck to play four of the greatest teams (IMO) to win the Super Bowl. I have nothing but total respect for them and now sorta idolize Joe Kapp and Fran Tarkenton. I saw another YouTube video to which Fran said because of the losses, it's prevented a lot of talented Vikings from being in the HoF, to which I totally agree.

[6400az]

@Dietpepsivanilla

Losing 4 SB's comes with a price,...no HOF! Pittsburg was there for the taking, I'd run out of room if I'd list there mistakes. In the 1st half alone they gave away at least 12 points. In the 2nd half 15. Again, this is taking nothing from the Steelers, but even then they where in it late in the game. I sometimes thought the Vikings must have felt as tight and nerve wrakced as I was watching from my home.. Who knows ..........maybe I AM the dreaded Vikings curse. !!

[joeman335td]

@6400az Dude, it wasn't like the Vikings could hear Stram throughout the game. He was keeping HIS team UP! This was the last game of the AFL and he intended to win it...and did. Distinct lack of class by Grant, but he was probably ordered to do it by Pete Rozelle. By this point, Rozelle was just glad he had a merger instead of facing another 10 years competing with the AFL, because by now, the AFL was the better league...easily.

[6400az]

@joeman335td

Does'nt matter the Vikings did'nt hear him. It occured did'nt it ?? Grant praised the Chiefs after the game, few if any in the NFL have had the integrity of him.That Rozelle ordered him, where do you get that from ? He was dissppointed and left the field, back then opponents did'nt fawn up to each other like today. How anyone can condem Grants' actions and not utter a thing about Strams own indiscretions is the ULTIMATE white elephant in the living room !!.

[joeman335td]

@6400az Coaches have always shaken hands after a game...no fawning, just plain sportsmanship. Vikings didn't show for the game. Period. They were beaten by a much better team that day. Stram knew what it was like to lose a Super Bowl. He lost to Lombardi's Packers in '67. You seriously think no one ever makes comments about the opposition in the middle of the game? Get real.

[6400az]

@joeman335td

A comment yes,a three hr.monolgue? .....You get real.

Not true at all, coaches always shake hands after a game. Sometimes the dissapointment is such you just wanna leave the field and get out of there. I don't deny the Vikings did'nt show up and where hammered.Nor have I argued that. Period !!

Still, if one is going to come down on Grant for not shaking Strams hand, then in the same sentence you must acknwoledge Hanks three hr. long speech. Fair eneugh right.

[graciemaemarie11]

@joeman335td i agree so much, chiefs were on a crusade, had so much on their shoulders...last game ever, for the AFL... the gambling thing, dawson's knee issues, dawsons' father,and getting even for the first super bowl.... a truly legendary game

[WC3POchannel10A]

@Dietpepsivanilla The American Football League, the greatest league to exist in the history of professional sports.

[tom100tom2]

@Dietpepsivanilla shut the fucking hell up bitch

[Dietpepsivanilla]

@tom100tom2 Aw, what's the matter Tommy? Somebody piss in your corn flakes?

[6400az]

@Dietpepsivanilla

According to Mike Ditka and Bill Parcells on game handshake,it's NOT obligatory ....after you get beaten in a big game one does'nt really want to shake hands. It also depends on the relationship one has with the other coach. Ditka cites Bud Grant in particular, and mentions Grant chatted with opposing coaches before the game. It was there, he let them know if theres going to be a handshake games end.

Once again, NOTHING classless about Bud Grant !!

[publicatdamagnificen]

@6400az If The Vikings would've won, I gurantee you Bud Grant would be all smiles. I used to coach- It hurts like hell to lose a championship game, but if the other team won fair and square, be a man about it and congratulate the other coach. That's part of manhood ya know?

[6400az]

@publicatdamagnificen

So what your saying is one should be respectful, and show good sportsmaship. Let me ask you, when you coached, do you ever rememember going on a three hour self serving monologue, is that respectful? Did you ever see Grant do that?

[publicatdamagnificen]

@6400az "Three hour self serving monologue", when did that happen? I know Stram was a self-promoter, but three hours?

[6400az]

@publicatdamagnificen

Yes...the whole thing on the sidelines when NFL Films miked him up. He did his hooting an hollering through out the entire game.

[GregNoll61]

@Dietpepsivanilla How could Grant shake Stram's hand when the cocky SOB was already riding his players shoulders before the game was even over !?!? Grant wasn't gonna wade into "not so humble" Hank's premature celebration for the obligatory handshake.If anyone lacked class it was the winning coach, not the losing coach; but it's always easier to judge character in hindsight...I'm sure they would both handled the situation differently in retrospect.

[giles422]

THIS IS AWESOME

[vitoduval]

The Chiefs are the champions of Pro Football! - Hasn't happened since.......

[vitoduval]

Today Mike Livinstone would have taken a knee

[robertmastroianni]

@vitoduval Today Hank Stram would have been doused with Gatorade

[6400az]

@robertmastroianni

Maybe not. Players would  have been warned of this action, as it probably would have dislodge his toupee .

[IowaRocker1]

This was the only Super Bowl Jack Buck ever called on CBS for TV

[vitoduval]

@IowaRocker1 Jack and Joe Buck - only father and son ever to announce the Super Bowl?