Smasher_Sloan
Active Member
DanOregon said:How many owners benefitted from his actions against the NFL. Think about where the NFL was in 1978 and where it is now.
And how was his selfishness responsible for growing the league?
DanOregon said:How many owners benefitted from his actions against the NFL. Think about where the NFL was in 1978 and where it is now.
Drip said:A true visionary and pioneer of professional football. RIP
Smasher_Sloan said:DanOregon said:How many owners benefitted from his actions against the NFL. Think about where the NFL was in 1978 and where it is now.
And how was his selfishness responsible for growing the league?
LongTimeListener said:Maybe the best example ever of a guy who stayed too long and tarnished his legacy. Up through about 1990, though, what a legacy it was.
jr/shotglass said:Smasher_Sloan said:DanOregon said:How many owners benefitted from his actions against the NFL. Think about where the NFL was in 1978 and where it is now.
And how was his selfishness responsible for growing the league?
<b>The fact that he took on the NFL old school was significant in leading the league into its current status.</b>
And don't think that his bidding wars didn't hasten the AFL-NFL merger. It would have happened eventually anyway. It happened quicker because of Al Davis.
His lack of tact doesn't make him any less a visionary.
playthrough said:The NFL got a little less interesting today. Anyone hung up on Davis' demeanor or weirdness or anything else is missing the point. MLB became a lot less interesting when Steinbrenner faded away.
DanOregon said:Didn't realize Steve Sabol wrote that - someone else did the music.
But make no mistake: he was a son of a *****.Chef2 said:Like it or not, the son of a ***** did things his way: Good, bad, or indifferent.
LongTimeListener said:patchs said:So who will coach, err, own the Raiders now?
There's a very interesting question to be explored about just how much of the Raiders he still owned -- he has had to sell off parts in recent years -- and who will own it in the future. He has always said his share will go to his son, but his son has not been involved in running the team and would be much better off selling.
Could put the Raiders back in play for L.A., or a shared Bay Area stadium with 49ers, possibilities that probably wouldn't be on the table if Al and his litigious ways were still around ...