Jump to content

Rate 1990s Super Bowl Champions from #1-10


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, 7DnBrnc53 said:

The 91 Redskins benefited from an extremely weak NFC:

East: Randall Cunningham got hurt in Week 1, and the Eagles (a SB fave by some) were crippled. Dallas emerged on the scene, but they were one year away, and the Giants regressed without Parcells.

Central: The Lions and Bears overachieved that year. Those teams weren't as good as their records. They proved that the next year.

West: SF was good, but they didn't have Montana or a running game (Young wasn't great that year, and they had Bono leading them). Also, the Saints were what they were (a great D with a shaky O and a QB in Hebert that didn't show up in the playoffs), and the Falcons were another fluke like the Lions.

Why are people so high on this team? The 1987 Skins were better, especially on defense.

Because it’s the most complete  team in history 

 

the claim of competition is laughable when they had one of the toughest SOS of any Superbowl champion and had one of the best point differentials ever

Edited by CP3MVP
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, CP3MVP said:

Because it’s the most complete  team in history 

 

the claim of competition is laughable when they had one of the toughest SOS of any Superbowl champion and had one of the best point differentials ever

They were 6-2 against winning teams, but again, it was the same questionable competition that I talked about earlier (Randall not on Philly, overachieving Lions & Bears, etc...).

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, 7DnBrnc53 said:

The 91 Redskins benefited from an extremely weak NFC:

East: Randall Cunningham got hurt in Week 1, and the Eagles (a SB fave by some) were crippled. Dallas emerged on the scene, but they were one year away, and the Giants regressed without Parcells.

Central: The Lions and Bears overachieved that year. Those teams weren't as good as their records. They proved that the next year.

West: SF was good, but they didn't have Montana or a running game (Young wasn't great that year, and they had Bono leading them). Also, the Saints were what they were (a great D with a shaky O and a QB in Hebert that didn't show up in the playoffs), and the Falcons were another fluke like the Lions.

Why are people so high on this team? The 1987 Skins were better, especially on defense.

In their division alone they had

 

11-5 Cowboys

10-6 Eagles (arguably the GOAT defense)

8-8 Giants

4-12 Cardinals

 

10 of their 16 opponents were .500 or better

 

Highest DVOA ever

4th highest SRS of Super Bowl era (highest among champions)

Never were in danger of losing any of their 3 playoff games

Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, LieutenantGains said:

In their division alone they had

 

11-5 Cowboys

10-6 Eagles (arguably the GOAT defense)

8-8 Giants

4-12 Cardinals

 

10 of their 16 opponents were .500 or better

 

Highest DVOA ever

4th highest SRS of Super Bowl era (highest among champions)

Never were in danger of losing any of their 3 playoff games

I already covered their strength of schedule and how it was a mirage. Also, them not being in danger of losing their playoff games is meaningless because of who they played (Atlanta and Detroit). They didn't play SF, Dallas, or Philly that year in the postseason.

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, 7DnBrnc53 said:

They were 6-2 against winning teams, but again, it was the same questionable competition that I talked about earlier (Randall not on Philly, overachieving Lions & Bears, etc...).

One of those losses were agains that 91 eagles(who had a historically great defense you ignore) in a meaningless week 17 game when they benched their starters at halftime in which they were up

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, 7DnBrnc53 said:

I already covered their strength of schedule and how it was a mirage. Also, them not being in danger of losing their playoff games is meaningless because of who they played (Atlanta and Detroit). They didn't play SF, Dallas, or Philly that year in the postseason.

They faced one of the best super bowl runner ups ever in the 91 Bills who had multiple HOF’s.

 

You never really explained how it was a “mirage” aside from they just stef the that good in your opinion lol

Edited by CP3MVP
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/19/2021 at 1:19 AM, 7DnBrnc53 said:

The 91 Redskins benefited from an extremely weak NFC:

East: Randall Cunningham got hurt in Week 1, and the Eagles (a SB fave by some) were crippled. Dallas emerged on the scene, but they were one year away, and the Giants regressed without Parcells.

Central: The Lions and Bears overachieved that year. Those teams weren't as good as their records. They proved that the next year.

West: SF was good, but they didn't have Montana or a running game (Young wasn't great that year, and they had Bono leading them). Also, the Saints were what they were (a great D with a shaky O and a QB in Hebert that didn't show up in the playoffs), and the Falcons were another fluke like the Lions.

Why are people so high on this team? The 1987 Skins were better, especially on defense.

Steve Young was still one of the better passers in the NFL that season. Had the highest QB rating that year. He simply hurt his knee, and was out for a while. Steve Bono filled in nicely. In the final game of the season Steve sliced the playoff bound Chicago Bears. You're right that the 49ers didn't have a quality running game that season. They were still a good team though. Not as great as Washington was, which I do think is in the conversation for greatest team ever. Offense, defense, special teams...they had it all operating at a high level. And trounced inferior competition in the playoffs in every game, which is what good teams are supposed to do. The 1987 Redskins could have easily lost the NFC title game at home to a so-so Vikings squad in which they were only favored by 3. And they didn't exactly blow out the Bears the previous week.  

Edited by TecmoSuperJoe
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...
On 6/19/2021 at 12:58 AM, 7DnBrnc53 said:

I already covered their strength of schedule and how it was a mirage. Also, them not being in danger of losing their playoff games is meaningless because of who they played (Atlanta and Detroit). They didn't play SF, Dallas, or Philly that year in the postseason.

SF didn't make the playoffs

You called Philly "questionable competition" in an earlier post, so why would playing them in the playoffs matter?

You called Dallas "one year away" in an earlier post, so why would playing them in the playoffs matter?

Your arguments make no sense. At least try to be consistent.   

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, AngusMcFife said:

You called Philly "questionable competition" in an earlier post, so why would playing them in the playoffs matter?

They were questionable because they didn't have Cunningham.

 

42 minutes ago, AngusMcFife said:

You called Dallas "one year away" in an earlier post, so why would playing them in the playoffs matter?

They beat the Redskins that year at RFK.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 7DnBrnc53 said:

They were questionable because they didn't have Cunningham.

So why would it matter if the Redskins played them in the playoffs.

Quote

They beat the Redskins that year at RFK.

Yeah, and they lost 38-6 against Detroit in the divisional round. And then the Redskins beat the Lions 41-10 in the conference championship. The Cowboys weren't that good so I don't know why you think the Redskins would have to beat them in the playoffs to prove anything. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...