I think Ed Podolak was very good to, and what about Tom Matte???

They were excellent , no question. Podolak was an outstanding open field runner ( underrated ) Non however , come close to Foreman. He was extraordinary .@@keithrissolo7437

❤️ Minnesota viking esprcially 1960s //1970s

I know I'll be down-voted for this, but, Tarkenton was the reason or Vikes failures in BIG games. Yes, he was good as an underdog QB, but every time Vikes were faves in a playoff/super Bowl, Tark would come up LAME!

Great comment! I was a little luckier. We lived smack dab in between Chicago and Milwaukee during the 70s and the Bears and Packers were so awful then that between them they must have had a lot of blacked out games, because I remember watching the Vikings just about every week. When we moved back to Minnesota in 1977, we were so far in the sticks that we could only get one channel on tv...an NBC affiliate. How ironic. Finally back in Minnesota and couldn't watch the Vikings.

If Tarkenton had been there earlier, they probably would have won at least one i believe. Tarkenton had absolutely no offensive line, during those few years he spent with the Giants in NY, and yet was amazing to watch. Vikes had great teams in that era, but just had the misfortune of going up in those super bowls against the great teams of Stram, Don Shula, Noll, and Madden. Bud Grant deserves more credit than he's given for those teams.

After reading your comment, I have a little less bile for the Cowboys...just a little. Lifelong Vikings fan and I have a dear friend who claims the Cowboys as her second favorite team after the Vikes. I figure she must have been busy playing with her Christmas Barbies during the Hail Mary game, because NOTHING would have ever gotten me to cheer for the Cowboys after that game, unless they were playing the Steelers in the Super Bowl...of course.

I think Minnesota viking best chance to win a superbowl was against Kansas city chief superbowl:: bud grant should have prepared Minnesota viking team better

ED White ?

@@owhitemule Minnesota viking offensive linemen late 1960s/1970s

elwin38 That's right. And both turned out to be stellar franchises.

elwin38 THANK YOU FOR THE INFORMATION!

that was all part of the AFL NFL war, the NFL did that to try and destroy the AFL, Dallas Cowboys were formed to compete wtih the Dallas Texans and destroy them, Texans moved to Kansas City and became the Chiefs.

elwin38 I did not know that, thanks for posting !

Also, Vikings owner Max WInter almost returned the franchise to the NFL whei it was told at first that, like the Dallas Cowboys, there would not be an expansion draft...just a list of players unwanted by the other teams. Winter's group complained so strongly that the Vikings were finally included in the 1961 draft.

I hear it the Jim marshall low pro bowl games: it very easy to go to pro bowl today ;; nobody want go tonpro bowl; today it easier being a substitute pro bowl player

Was scrolling through the comments to see if anyone would point this out. George Halas and the NFL offered Winters a team simply to screw the AFL over.

@@lesgobrandon2454 They try and did the same to Lamar Hunt by placing the Cowboys in Dallas after he started the Texans before they became the Kansas City Chiefs, even after denying Hunt a Dallas franchise.

Bengals are starting to get into that category

Go Pack!

I know how ya feel. It all started for me in '69. I was 6, too. But to let other's greed separate you from the dream... well, that's a shame that had to happen. I'm also like you, in that all of those heart-breakers still have the sting that they had back then. I've got a truckload of fond memories, especially from the '70's. And it's a damn shame that the players are pretty much, all about the money these days. But hey... it's still Vikings football. Wouldn't trade it for anything. C'mon back. You may not realize what you're about to miss. You know you want to.

The great #44 RB Chuck Foreman belongs in the HOF!

I hear you Nicky, I too loved the Vikes in the seventies and that Hail Mary touchdown against the Cowboys tore my heart out. Tarkenton and Foreman were so exciting back in the day, you couldn't wait for Sunday to watch football and the Purple People Eaters!!!! God, I miss them days!!!!

...I remember that too! Very sad.

❤️ Minnesota viking 1960s/ 1970s ; it like Michigan football fans losing rosebowl 1970s to usc& pac ten football champion:: getting over pretty woman lay one night stand

Karl was a nasty hitter and a great ballhawk.

The vikings couldn't stop the elite running games of Pittsburgh, Miami or oakland in tarkentons super bowls. The KC loss in 70 was kapp. The chiefs were a very good team and deployed a power "I" offense that the vikings had trouble with. The chiefs D roughed up joe kapp pretty good too. Very disappointing since the vikes were a very competitive team from 68-78ish.

It wasn't Kapp who lost SB IV to Kansas City (14-2) (Kapp's two Int's were off receivers hands) but rather, dreadful special teams play (especially punter Bob Lee) creating miserable field position - and it was the 5 total turnovers ruining the day. The Chiefs scored 10 of their points in 4:00 of the 2nd quarter after getting the ball on the Vikes 44 (FG) & 19 (TD). Meanwhile, the Vikings were starting deep in their own territory. Against Miami (14-2), by the time the Vikings figured out how to stop Csonka and Morris, it was 17-0 & deep in the 2nd quarter. Still, with 1:00 left in the 1st half, the Vikings were still alive until Reed fumbled on the Miami 6 (and who can say for certain what a TD and receiving the 2nd half kickoff could have done?) Against Pittsburgh (12-3-1), it was again field position and FIVE total turnovers. A crucial Pitt fumble after a 30 yard gain was recovered by MN but later was declared "no fumble" after a meeting of officials and wasreturned to Pitt at the MN 28 (Pitt later scored a TD.) A Siemon interception was overturned on an "off-sides" penalty and Foreman fumbling on 1st and goal at Pitts 5 yard line were other disasters. Against Oakland (15-1), McClanahan fumbles on the Oakland 2 after a blocked punt and you could almost see the "Oh NO, not again!" coming from the Viking sideline. It was unusual for the Viking "D" that it couldn't get off the field on 3rd down -the down that most of Oakland's "game changer/big plays" occurred. And lest we forget, Oakland was 15-1 coming in - their loss being a 48-17 "what the hell?" loss to the Patriots (who they then beat in the playoffs) so they were the best Raider team that Madden ever had. You lose the turnover and field position battle in football and you lose the game... and the Vikings lost those battles in every single Super Bowl they appeared in. The Viking teams of that era created and lived off of "turnovers." However, in the Super Bowls it was the Vikings who gave the ball away. In 4 games, the Vikings were a MINUS 12 in the turnover department. MINUS 12?!? If you give your opponent that many chances and it won't matter HOW good you are, you're going to lose (see 2009 NFC Championship Vikings). The good news is that the teams the Vikings lost to are now historically considered "Great Teams" of their era, thus showing the Vikings of that era were indeed also an outstanding team (as is shown by their comparative W-L records.) The bad news is that those Super Bowl losses have caused it to take decades for the Bud Grant era Vikings to begin to receive the acclaim that they had always deserved.

Agreed he's gotta be top 50.

purple sword 2 Have no way of knowing ofcourse.But I read somewhere it may have been an inside job??Just gotta wonder what where the conditions he left Minnesota. He proclaimed 40-60 refuses the MVP award then want's more money.?

Kapp Joe Kapp good enough quarterback to take Minnesota viking to a superbowl

​@lloydkline1518 this team was really fun to watch the way the NFL is you never know especially at that team. Coaches really go all out with game plans and can prepare to take away players strengths

That was some hit, think that was Vikings Tom Hall ?

Definitely a great hit, but Karl Kassulke's hit on Greg Landry in 1970 at 17:28 is one I will always remember. Devastating hit, and of course another loss for my Lions.

I just saw this man !

The footage from 61-66 is cool. Loved to see more of it.

Yes mostly,Some into 69 too.

Other than the Bills

Oh man the Vikings totally owned the Lions during the Grant years. Think we beat the 12 straight times at one point.

IMO Tommy and Lenny Moore were the best all-around running backs in the Western Conference for two, three years (pre-Gale Sayers). Tommy did amazing things behind a not-very-good-at-all offensive line. (Same is true of Tarkenton actually.) Bad injury to Tommy, he was still good but didn't have that classic burst between Mick Tingelhoff and Milt Sunde anymore. If I were to rank the best Viking running backs ever (having seen them all in their day) I'd say: 1. Chuck Foreman. 2. Tommy Mason. 3. Adrian Peterson.

Tommy Mason was fun to watch, for a short time he was as good a back as there was in either league.

Noticed that too and was suprised.

@@purplesword2754 That was 1964 they wore white jerseys at home for the entire season and the first quarter against the Lions

Personally, I think that's the best uniform they ever fielded.

It was similar to the George Allen and Sonny Jurgensen situation. Kapp was too much a free spirit and had the respect of the entire team, too much of a leader. Grant most likely thought they could win with their diefense regardless who they'd put under center. With Cuozzo, he had a better chance of getting things done his way.

Because Kapp stunk - he couldn't throw a spiral if his mama's life depended on it. Tough guy, yes, but a CFL reject. Vikes only weakness in those days were QB, no matter who played they all stunk. Bob Lee, Kapp, Cuozzo, Tark.

Kapp wanted a huge contract and played the 69 season without one. Loved Kapp but he really wasn't a very good qb. Career completion rate of only 48.9%. 40 tds and 64 ints. QB rating was 55.1. Vikes made the right call.

The Vikings passing offense ranked 12th out of 16 teams in1969. That's why they wouldn't pay Kapp the money that he was asking for

@@raddmann99 Fran tarkenton is in NFL football 🏈 hall of fame canton; Ohio :: I thinknit more bud grant fault; like Kansas city chief Minnesota viking should prepare for that superbowl:: :: getting replacing Joe Kapp with Gary cuozzo ;; Minnesota viking needs better offensive players running 🏃‍♂️ back offensive linemen other than Ron yary; mick tingelhoff:: etc etc

Alright man, same to you !

Hey bro thanx just updated my phone so i have a diff handle. Go purple.

Won a nba championship with them to

Now that's a useful post. Thank you.

Hey, occasionally my contributions are significant.....world is a better place now ,)

They left for the NFL, their place was taken by the Oakland Raiders

Exactly

Bud grant alway said football players mind should be on the game not how cold it is

@@lloydkline1518 made a lot of money betting the Vikes as as a small fave or dog when a playoff caliber team came to Muni Stadium in cold/snowy weather. Wish I could say the same right now as very few teams play in the cold, at least the type of MINNESOTA cold! PEACE, Lloyd.

Since football went towards the dollar is why we would have never gotten state support if it wasn't indoors since you can make more money hosting other events,i thought they should made usbank retractable roof

Met Stadium would have fallen down sometime before 2023 the place was falling apart before 1981 it's final season

Fran was great, no doubt, but D-linemen of that era were nowhere near as athletic as they were even 10 years later, let alone when Young and Vick played. I'd bet a week's pay that half of them were even smokers.

They didn’t get their “butts kicked” - if you saw the game you’d know they lost because they turned the ball over FIVE TIMES. They certainly weren’t “outsmarted” - if you think that, it’s because that’s how NFL Films “framed” the game in their highlight show. They always wanted to make the winner look like they were one of the best teams ...ever. What else could they say? That “The Chiefs won because the Vikings couldn’t hold onto the ball?” That doesn’t make ANYONE look good - and after the merger, it was all about perception. Remember how the very next game (Opening game - 1970) for both teams was Vikings/Chiefs in Bloomington? Vikings 27 Chiefs 10. No, the Chiefs weren’t better, more complex or smarter...but they won the game that everyone saw.

@J Justice .... As a Viking fan since 1963, the ‘69 team is near and dear to my heart. When people chide me about never being NFL Champs, I always retort, “you’re wrong we were NFL Champions in 1969”. SKOL Vikings. If you’re old enough to remember the game, how did you handle the 1998 NFC Championship Game. I was literally on the phone booking a flight to Miami when Anderson missed, I threw the TV out the window seconds later, much to my poor wife’s dismay.

1970 they were just as good 12-2 just like 1969

@@michaelleroy9281 That is true, and IMO their defense was even stronger than the 69' version, but Cuozzo was not as dynamic as Kapp was, and they got knocked out by SF in the first round, and no one saw that coming....

@@jjustice8825 With all due respect IMO the Chiefs WERE the more complete, better team...They were strong everywhere and had more balance, and there was a reason why they beat the AFL and NFL's best that year....They had a powerful defense all their own....The Chiefs NEVER got the respect that the Raiders or Vikings got, and the Vikings never won a Super Bowl.....The Chiefs absolutely dismantled them---in THAT game, the most important of the season, so I give them their due respect...The Chiefs, really going back to the early years of their league, even when they were the Texans under Stramm, we winners...They could play with and beat the best in either league, barring their first SB loss to Green Bay, but they were even in that game until the 3rd QTR....

You have to wonder how teams like Oakland and Miami would have fared if they had to win a title game in extremely cold weather..

If I recall the Dolphins played in real cold post season games just twice. They lost to Buffalo in 1990 or 91. Then in the 72 AFC Championship game they beat the Steelers.By no means was it Metropolitan stadium cold though. Don't think the Raiders ever did. The Rams lost to Greenbay in 67 and then we know in Minnesota. There was that 49ner game. May have been in the minuses.

It was definitely a factor. I would just tweak your comment in one small way - it was Bud Grant and Jim Finks building the team to win in the Upper Midwest in December. These two guys were the best coach/GM combination of their era. Too bad Max Winter, owner, didn't see fit to pay Finks what he was worth.

Yes, that's true.. I guess what goes around comes around as Jim Finks did the same to Joe Kapp, basically ruining the Vikings SB chances in 70 and 71.

6400az Actually the Raiders beat the Browns, 14-12, in what became known as the Red Right 88 game, in the 1980 AFC Divisional Playoffs on there way to their 2nd franchise SB win (and last SB win in Oakland, 83 team won the SB in L.A.). What's notable about also was that it was the coldest NFL playoff game in 13 years since the famous Ice Bowl between GB and Dallas. Ironically, the very next year, the record was broken in the Freezer Bowl 1981 AFC Championship Game in Cincinnati between Bengals/Chargers. Also ironic at least is that San Deigo played a heart-stopping, classic Epic in Miami game in OT, 41-38 in extreme heat and humidity of South Miami to Kellen Winslow getting frostbite in his big right toe, Dan Fouts growing ice sickles on his beard and mustache and FB Hank Bauer describing the extreme cold wind chill as like a thousand knives stabbing you all at once when you felt it.

Many people felt that way, the ordinarily powerful Colts were 8-5-1 in 1969, for many teams that would have been a fine season, but for the Colts it was like a losing one....Besides the Packers with their dominance in the 60's the Colts ran neck and neck with them in talent and victories, but they always seem to falter in the big dance(s)...The Colts were a powerful team always...

Because he ran the wrong way lol

I hear not enough all star games; Oakland raiders super bowl didn't hurt either

Today it very easy to go to probowl nobody want to go in pro bowl: easy get being substitute football player

Jim Marshall will be there eventually i hope before he dies the guy played at a great level never missed a game

Brett Smallish Shut the fuck up.

johnroosterrod65@gmail.com Yes, Exploding Chickenz, hey brett smallish, SHUT THE FUCK UP!!!

WTF are you talking about ? Tarkenton went to 9 pro bowls and is in the HOF.

@@raddmann99 Thank you! Tark was great and so was Kapp.

He only held every major passing record when he retired. Their downfall was relaxed game planning and their inability to make adjustments on either side of the ball once games started getting away from them. I don't know what kind of input Bud or Burnsie had on a play-by-play basis as far as play calling went, but in the era where QBs called a lot of the offense, when you watch games from the 70s, it's easy to see when Fran's play calling lacked imagination.

@JBSptfn Agree that the Vikes ran into some GREAT teams, The vikes themselves were a GREAT 70's Team(s), but that's my complaint about Tark, yeah, he'd beat a better team occasionally(like most QB's) but The Vikes were never going to beat a team like The 70's Raiders SB squad or any team of that magnitude w/ THAT LITTLE SCRAMBLING gimmick QB.... and rarely on the road.