U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Sports > Pro Football
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-19-2017, 12:27 PM
 
Location: Type 0.7 Kardashev
10,577 posts, read 7,283,539 times
Reputation: 37479

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Labonte18 View Post
This is a very hard question and obviously will be subjective.. But it's hard to find a Super Bowl where BOTH teams are 'bad'.. I mean, my vote would probably go to the Giants/Ravens in 35. The Giants were not really all that good, even with a 12-4 record... The Ravens offense wasn't very good, but that defense was one of the greats..
That's putting it mildly. Games the Ravens played in October 2000: Five
Total touchdowns scored by the Ravens in October 2000: Zero

They did manage a lot of field goals that month - 14 - but 42 points over five games is still bad, especially with that stifling defense keeping the other team's offense off the field and routinely giving the Ravens' O good field position. And on the flip side, the NFC as a whole really had no very good teams that year - the Giants were the best of a mediocre bunch.

I think this is a difficult question, because the worst teams to make the Super Bowl - '79 Rams, '85 Patriots, '94 Chargers, '08 Cardinals, '11 Giants, and a few others - generally went up against really good teams. There is no clear-cut answer, and yours is as good any others, I think.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-19-2017, 12:37 PM
 
16,531 posts, read 20,989,157 times
Reputation: 47986
Quote:
Originally Posted by Labonte18 View Post
I'd say the above is the reason Gibbs is in the HoF.

But, I don't agree with that being the worst teams. And, honestly, Gibbs never had to rebuild the entire roster.. He had to fill in pieces. Remember that Art Monk was there for all 4 appearances. Gary Clark and Ricky Sanders for the last 2.

The OL.. Russ Grimm was there for all 3.. Dave Butz and Mark May for 2 of the 3.. On the DL side.. Dexter Manley was there for 2, Charles Mann for all 3.

Sorry.. I jumped between appearances and wins there. But, you get the point.

The pieces he did have to replace.. He made quality replacements.. Now, I would agree that '87 team was the worst of the 3.. that being mainly due to the patchwork running game. Also, remember, he won all three replacement games. The last one being against many of the Dallas regulars. I was actually there for the first game against the Cardinals. Anthony Allen to this day holds the single game receiving record.. Something like 287 yards.

The quality replacements.. Sending Jay Schroeder and getting Jim Lachey.. That wound up being a steal. Was it Lohmiller who was hurt in 87 and they signed Ali Haji-Sheik to replace him for the Super Bowl run.. No.. Who was the kicker.. Jess Atkinson? Yeah.. and after the first Super Bowl win, they got Darrell Green as the last pick in the first round.

You want more amazing through that? In the 1980's the Redskins had THREE first round draft choices.. who were the three? The aforementioned Darrell Green.. Another HoFer in Art Monk and Mark May. So, he did all this pretty much without the benefit of first round draft picks.

This is a very hard question and obviously will be subjective.. But it's hard to find a Super Bowl where BOTH teams are 'bad'.. I mean, my vote would probably go to the Giants/Ravens in 35. The Giants were not really all that good, even with a 12-4 record... The Ravens offense wasn't very good, but that defense was one of the greats..
Solid post! And this is what I wanted, was solid input from the D.C. side!

I probably should have meant "always improving" instead of remaking the squad. At least I didn't say "overhaul" the squad. San Diego lost a little bit when Joe Gibbs went to the Redskins as head coach in 1981. I do remember them getting off to a rough start his first season in 1981. IIRC the Skins started 0-5. Well, it didn't take long for Gibbs to straighten out the club. Because the next year D.C. became Super Bowl champs with an 8-1 record. Miami finished 7-2, and THAT NFL strike season proved to be a bigger distraction than the 1987 season by far.

The reason I rated the Redskins as a "good" team is that they were the #3 seed in the NFC that year. New Orleans was rated #4 but had a better record than D.C., but it was the 49ers who had the #1 seed. And what happened to them? An 8-7 Viking team pasted them 36-24 in the divisional playoff round. Strange how all that stuff works!

IIRC Denver was a 2 point pick in SB-XXII. Didn't matter to me, I saw problems with Denver's defense. Remember, Cleveland put 33 points up on the board against the Broncos in the AFC Championship game, with Denver putting up 37.

And you can bet the Redskins defensive coaching staff broke down that film to find out how the Browns were about to come back after being down 21-3 at the half. And they found ways. I always knew Richie Petibon was one of the best defensive.coordinators in the NFL, that was one of Gibbs first hires, after all.

Anyhoo, good commentary from the Redskins standpoint!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-19-2017, 02:35 PM
 
4,292 posts, read 1,860,902 times
Reputation: 2353
Quote:
Originally Posted by Labonte18 View Post
I mean, my vote would probably go to the Giants/Ravens in 35. The Giants were not really all that good, even with a 12-4 record... The Ravens offense wasn't very good, but that defense was one of the greats..
These were the teams I first thought of as well. That Giants team didn't seem that special and they got routed in the super bowl by a team that had hardly any offense at all. That defense was fantastic though.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-19-2017, 03:55 PM
 
9,426 posts, read 7,101,948 times
Reputation: 12202
Quote:
Originally Posted by Unsettomati View Post
That's putting it mildly. Games the Ravens played in October 2000: Five
Total touchdowns scored by the Ravens in October 2000: Zero

They did manage a lot of field goals that month - 14 - but 42 points over five games is still bad, especially with that stifling defense keeping the other team's offense off the field and routinely giving the Ravens' O good field position. And on the flip side, the NFC as a whole really had no very good teams that year - the Giants were the best of a mediocre bunch.

I think this is a difficult question, because the worst teams to make the Super Bowl - '79 Rams, '85 Patriots, '94 Chargers, '08 Cardinals, '11 Giants, and a few others - generally went up against really good teams. There is no clear-cut answer, and yours is as good any others, I think.
And Dilfer gets most of the blame for that for some reason.. He only started that last game in that streak. The damndest thing, they didn't score a TD, still went 2-3 and the largest margin of loss was 8 points.. one score. the offense got a LOT better after Dilfer started. I mean, it still wasn't great.. Or even 'good'.. It was passable.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DOUBLE H View Post
Solid post! And this is what I wanted, was solid input from the D.C. side!

I probably should have meant "always improving" instead of remaking the squad. At least I didn't say "overhaul" the squad. San Diego lost a little bit when Joe Gibbs went to the Redskins as head coach in 1981. I do remember them getting off to a rough start his first season in 1981. IIRC the Skins started 0-5. Well, it didn't take long for Gibbs to straighten out the club. Because the next year D.C. became Super Bowl champs with an 8-1 record. Miami finished 7-2, and THAT NFL strike season proved to be a bigger distraction than the 1987 season by far.

The reason I rated the Redskins as a "good" team is that they were the #3 seed in the NFC that year. New Orleans was rated #4 but had a better record than D.C., but it was the 49ers who had the #1 seed. And what happened to them? An 8-7 Viking team pasted them 36-24 in the divisional playoff round. Strange how all that stuff works!

IIRC Denver was a 2 point pick in SB-XXII. Didn't matter to me, I saw problems with Denver's defense. Remember, Cleveland put 33 points up on the board against the Broncos in the AFC Championship game, with Denver putting up 37.

And you can bet the Redskins defensive coaching staff broke down that film to find out how the Browns were about to come back after being down 21-3 at the half. And they found ways. I always knew Richie Petibon was one of the best defensive.coordinators in the NFL, that was one of Gibbs first hires, after all.

Anyhoo, good commentary from the Redskins standpoint!
The best Redskins teams.. It'd be a close call between the '83 squad (That actually lost the Super Bowl) and the '91..

Denver was a favorite.. Yes, Washington was a #3 seed, but.. A #3 seed at 11-4. They beat the Bears, who were coming down but were still a very good team at Soldier Field.. That game, matter of fact, Darrell Green scored the winning TD on a punt return.. There's likely still Youtube video of that.. Him hurdling a tackle and running into the endzone holding his ribs.. He pulled a muscle during that return.. Minnesota was something of a surprise that year.. One of their few successes in the pre-Denny Green days

Denver didn't have problems with defense.. they just didn't have one. Much of the talk was about their "Three Amigos", Jackson, Johnson and Nattiel. I think they were averaging putting up about 30 points a game that year.

Washington did have all the pieces come together to win that year, again, my opinion, a testament to the preparation of Joe Gibbs and his staff.

Speaking of Petitbon.. A very undeserved firing. Perhaps necessary, because the team had run out of gas by that point and I understand the idea of bringing in an offensive HC when you're developing a new QB (Heath Shuler, but there was no development possible on him).. You know that he never held another NFL job after that? To this day.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-19-2017, 04:01 PM
 
6,466 posts, read 3,462,944 times
Reputation: 10259
Statistics for the overall season may paint a certain picture. Inconsistencies, injuries, ranking on offense & defense, etc.

But I personally don't look at Super Bowls in that way. It's about timing, peaking, luck, etc. So a 9-7 Giants team limped into the playoffs. But they peaked as a team in the playoffs, and won out to capture the Super Bowl. Where there are only 16 games in a season, I believe statistics can be very misleading. You make it to the Super Bowl, you earned it and I personally don't consider any team in the Super Bowl weak.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-19-2017, 10:01 PM
 
929 posts, read 297,282 times
Reputation: 799
Quote:
Originally Posted by metalmancpa View Post
Statistics for the overall season may paint a certain picture. Inconsistencies, injuries, ranking on offense & defense, etc.

But I personally don't look at Super Bowls in that way. It's about timing, peaking, luck, etc. So a 9-7 Giants team limped into the playoffs. But they peaked as a team in the playoffs, and won out to capture the Super Bowl. Where there are only 16 games in a season, I believe statistics can be very misleading. You make it to the Super Bowl, you earned it and I personally don't consider any team in the Super Bowl weak.
Very good way to put it. No question the Giants were very good by the Super Bowl- how else would they have thoroughly outplayed 15-1 Greenbay on the road just weeks earlier? In fact they were favored vs the 13-3 Patriots in that 2011 Super Bowl. I think we have to look thru the prism of what teams looked the worse for the vast majority of the season regardless of injury factors, etc... ; and in that case the Giants were just bad a good chunk of the season, ignoring even the fact that they were just 9-7 record. Stats lie all the time too; statistical ranks in a given season just don't indicate a whole lot. Miami, for example in the Ricky Williams era before he retired the first time, I believe finished first in rushing and first in defense in the AFC and missed the playoffs. I remember too some of those early 90's Bills teams with the likes of Bruce Smith, Cornelius Bennett, et. al finishing near the bottom defensively; no way that defense wasn't very good- an up-tempo offense that scored often and quickly had much more to do with that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-19-2017, 10:28 PM
 
929 posts, read 297,282 times
Reputation: 799
If it was only about one team, then the 08 Cardinals take the cake. In fact, they were one of the very worst teams that ever make the playoffs. But wouldn't you know it- they were a whisker away from winning the Super Bowl vs the Steelers. Any given Sunday.....
As for the 94 Chargers beating the Dolphins the way they did, then shocking Pittsburgh also sort of boggled my mind. SD was a 2 TD underdog vs Pittsburgh and the Steelers were comprised in a way that many thought there could alas be an AFC team that could muster a challenge to the NFC (albeit the Bills vs Giants and Bengals vs Niners were close games). However I recently saw some footage of that SD-Pitt game- and you know what- while the Chargers struggled after starting the season as the NFL's last unbeaten, in hindsight I thought the Chargers' talent was better.
I hadn't thought about the 87 Super Bowl. Denver was the best the AFC could offer in those days- very one dimensional and soft on D. The Red Skins with a resurrected Doug Williams came out of no where, even though of course they enjoyed plenty of success in the 80's up to that point with Gibbs. Three strike games sort of blurred what teams were based on records that season. And let's not forget, while you can only play who is in front of you, I think the Red Skins caught a break not having to face the 49ers in the playoffs. The loss by SF to Minnesota in the divisional round still probably ranks as the most shocking upset I've seen.
Giants-Ravens; I remember the infamous Terry Bradshaw quote about how if the Giants made it, they would be the worse ever SB participant. They were 12-4, but another deceptive example I think the like the 13-3 Patriots in 2011. While the Ravens had Trent Dilfer, their D went up a notch or two by December and became a defense so good, many of us began to draw comparisons to the 85 Bears- NEVER thought I'd be comparing any D to Chicago's in 1985. That Ravens defense was so phenomenal, I have a hard time ranking the Ravens-Giants SB as the worst....top 5 perhaps.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-20-2017, 10:50 AM
 
9,426 posts, read 7,101,948 times
Reputation: 12202
Quote:
Originally Posted by SonnyCrockett View Post
If it was only about one team, then the 08 Cardinals take the cake. In fact, they were one of the very worst teams that ever make the playoffs. But wouldn't you know it- they were a whisker away from winning the Super Bowl vs the Steelers. Any given Sunday.....
The Cardinals were, my opinion, really good on offense that year. I mean, look at who they had.. Kurt Warner, Tim Hightower(very underrated RB in my opinion), Fitzgerald and Boldin.. I suppose you could toss Edgerrin James in there, though I think he was mostly a benchwarmer by the Super Bowl.

I'd love to have those pieces on any team of mine. Warner and James were at the end of their careers, but everyone else was in their prime. And Warner was still good.

Defensively.. They relied on the offense. But.. There were some good pieces on Defense. Antrel Rolle, Rodgers-Cromartie.. And Neil Rackers was a helluva kicker.

Were they a cinderella story? Absolutely. And, sure, you can say a 9-7 team almost winning the Super Bowl.. But, look at who they lost to.. Patriots who were 11-5 and missed the playoffs. the Vikings at 10-6 a playoff team, the Eagles who were 9-6-1 and in the playoffs, the Giants who were 12-4 and in the playoffs, the Panthers who were 12-4 and in the playoffs, the Jets who were 9-7 and the Redskins who were 8-8.

Now, admittedly, 6 of their wins came from division opponents, and they all suuuuucked that year.

To play that tight against the Steelers.. I just have a hard time calling them a bad team. If they had been blown out 55-10.. yeah. But, you want to put them in, then you have to say the Steelers sucked, too, because they damn near lost.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-20-2017, 02:04 PM
 
Location: AriZona
5,230 posts, read 3,129,743 times
Reputation: 5395
Quote:
Originally Posted by SonnyCrockett View Post
If it was only about one team, then the 08 Cardinals take the cake. In fact, they were one of the very worst teams that ever make the playoffs. But wouldn't you know it- they were a whisker away from winning the Super Bowl vs the Steelers. Any given Sunday.....
Quote:
Originally Posted by Labonte18 View Post
The Cardinals were, my opinion, really good on offense that year. I mean, look at who they had.. Kurt Warner, Tim Hightower(very underrated RB in my opinion), Fitzgerald and Boldin.. I suppose you could toss Edgerrin James in there, though I think he was mostly a benchwarmer by the Super Bowl.

I'd love to have those pieces on any team of mine. Warner and James were at the end of their careers, but everyone else was in their prime. And Warner was still good.

Defensively.. They relied on the offense. But.. There were some good pieces on Defense. Antrel Rolle, Rodgers-Cromartie.. And Neil Rackers was a helluva kicker.

Were they a cinderella story? Absolutely. And, sure, you can say a 9-7 team almost winning the Super Bowl.. But, look at who they lost to.. Patriots who were 11-5 and missed the playoffs. the Vikings at 10-6 a playoff team, the Eagles who were 9-6-1 and in the playoffs, the Giants who were 12-4 and in the playoffs, the Panthers who were 12-4 and in the playoffs, the Jets who were 9-7 and the Redskins who were 8-8.

Now, admittedly, 6 of their wins came from division opponents, and they all suuuuucked that year.

To play that tight against the Steelers.. I just have a hard time calling them a bad team. If they had been blown out 55-10.. yeah. But, you want to put them in, then you have to say the Steelers sucked, too, because they damn near lost.
Yeah, that Super bowl still has me upset that the Cards lost within the last couple of minutes to Big Ben and the Steelers. They had it won, and gave it away.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-21-2017, 08:54 PM
 
Location: Here or There
3,962 posts, read 2,514,546 times
Reputation: 1655
Quote:
Originally Posted by Labonte18 View Post
And Dilfer gets most of the blame for that for some reason.. He only started that last game in that streak. The damndest thing, they didn't score a TD, still went 2-3 and the largest margin of loss was 8 points.. one score. the offense got a LOT better after Dilfer started. I mean, it still wasn't great.. Or even 'good'.. It was passable.
True...how many games did Tony Banks start that season?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Sports > Pro Football
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top