https://www.profootballresearchers.org/ ... php?t=6433
Click up above, and you'll see that - despite the Obvious thing about it that I'm forever nostalgic about - I place this campaign in unbiased fashion as the weakest non-strike season of the '80s. Not only did I opine that not only '82 but also '87 likely would have been better than '89 if not for the strike, but I also opined that every '90s season was better than '89.
But other than the Obvious with me (which I will not mention in this, here, thread; I'll leave it to others if they wish), there are still some good things to say about the 1989 NFL season. As a freshman in college, I remember being, really, no less excited than I was for any other surrounding NFL seasons in-general as it was going on. This especially considering the new football fans in my life that were crammed in the dorms, the weekly betting pool two residents who lived together distributed for all of us, the TV room crammed every Sunday and Monday Nights, etc. And speaking of...it celebrating its 20th season...many great, memorable MNF games in '89! I have never bothered rolling up my sleeves and looking at each and every season from 1970 thru now, but I wouldn't be surprised if this was the overall best MNF season ever; having the most good games.
I did like the Eagles. #12, of course, was on the SI season preview cover! Great, fitting shot of him! Zimmerman (nor Hollander) wasn't very optimistic of the Eagles going in, but I myself and the many Eagle-fans in my new vicinity were excited about how they'd followup their exciting, division-winning '88 campaign - their opening romp over Seattle quite the optimizer! Of course there is the famous (or infamous, depending on one's view as was with mine) San Fran at the Vet in Wk#3. But I feel the Eagles game the week prior could be a sneaky better game though not historically seen at all as being more 'important'...their super-suspenseful comeback win at RFK over a team/coach whom Buddy Ryan hardly ever beat. As for a team they DID beat, the Birds swept the Giants yet again in '89.
viewtopic.php?t=3965
As for Tuna's G-men, en route to their second straight playoff berth since their '87 hangover, I did not place them as "the 2nd-best team" in the NFL in '89. Again, they couldn't beat the Eagles. And that, of course, also went for they against the Rams. But, that said, I feel that they were the only NFC playoff team that could have given San Fran a game in those very playoffs; and that's not even a given. Parcels says he feels his '89 installment was his best team. Yes, you can't disagree with a Legend's take on his own team, but I just don't know...
After a SB-looking 4-0 start, we all saw what happened to the Bears. But meanwhile, in their division, was the surprise 'Majik' season in Green Bay. Yes, a bit flukey-like. IMO, every team that actually made the playoffs in '89 were the better team at least by the time the playoffs actually began. That IMO also goes for the just-miss Redskins and also the real bi-polar dangerous Bengals too. I would have liked to see them play against every AFC Central team that year which they would have done if not for they finishing in 5th-place the year before. But to their credit, they still were deserving of their winning record. Maj and Sterling were outstanding. And, of course, their 'Ace-in-the-Hole' triumph at Candlestick!
The other thing that could 'add' to this campaign's cred...yes, each season "should" be seen as separate, but the Pack looked to go on another run in '90 mid-season. They almost beat San Fran a second year in a row, this time at Lambeau, but came up just short. but Maj gets knocked out for the year in their tenth game which still ended up a win to even them up to 5-5. And then Dilweg feasts off the Bucs in Milwaukee the following week to make it 6-5. But then Maj's absence catches up and bottom falls out. Sure-enough they, instead of 8-8 Saints, get in the 6th-spot had Maj not gotten hurt.
Yes, the 1989 NFL season seemed to be San Fran (okay, at least mention the Giants) and nobody else. The AFC was mired in mediocrity thus enabling practically all its teams to still be in the running going into the final week!
https://mail.profootballresearchers.org ... php?t=7201
Heck, its second-seed would finish 9-6-1! But exciting-enough even if your favorite team wasn't still in the running. It was 5 of 14 getting in instead of, say, 8 teams or even more so! Therefore it was not the worst thing. And although I still think Denver loses convincingly had John not had the flu and Wade brought in a better defensive-plan, the Broncos looked to have more 'bite' that season. "Not wimps!", I believe, was the quote from SI after giving the Giants in the Mile High snow all they could handle. If not tougher than '86, they at least seemed quite tougher than '87 now under Wade. And they did have a run-game now in Humphrey which may have made them seem more SB-promising than '86 after all. Yes, you still got to beat them NFC teams - Giants, and also Eagles - at least at home, but still 'bite' enough. End-of-day, though obviously not by much, Denver did deserve to represent the AFC in '89; and FWIW they at least were stronger than their '87 SB-participant (I still keep forgetting that '86 was "just" 11-5). If I ever DID think that '87 was better than '89 (not sure), then I've since changed my mind.
John did say on the SI cover going into SBXXIV, "We'll show up!" I believed a bit of it - perhaps in hope of an actual good game - but I should have known better. And, ultimately, I wasn't surprised at the actual lopsided result though '55-10' was too much. Yes, the 1989 San Francisco Forty Niners are what I've always said they are, noticeably better than Denver, it should not have been close, but simply not 45pts (practically 2TDs-per-quarter) better!
Other things to say about this campaign which I'll leave to those who wish to. Not comparing it to all other non-strike '80s seasons or all the '90s ones, still a good season that, even if I was a Dallas-fan, I would have been excited-enough over.
PS - yes, the Herschel Trade! As a non-Cowboys-fan (I disliked them even MORE, now, because of the Landry firing) I couldn't "enjoy" 1-15! I couldn't enjoy it. I've already said it, I knew that very moment the 'Boys would Return! And when Jimmy angrily made that, perhaps paraphrasing, "our Day will come" statement following the Bounty Bowl, I further believed. I simply knew he'd know what to do with draft picks and their losing would end shortly-enough!
PPS - I keep forgetting Mora's Saints didn't make the playoffs! Forget about 10-6 Redskins & 10-6 Packers missing out in the NFC...had New Orleans been in the AFC, sure-enough a playoff berth! Perhaps double-digit wins as well! They sure played the spoiler, at least, in the end!
1989 NFL season discussion
Re: 1989 NFL season discussion
You’re not wrong when you said 1989 was the least suspenseful of the decade
When SF came back in the 4th quarter at Philly in week 3, it felt like you may as well have just handed them the SB, and we were waiting 4 months for the inevitable.
Even in 1984, the 49ers didn’t seem like a stone cold SB lock from day 1
When SF came back in the 4th quarter at Philly in week 3, it felt like you may as well have just handed them the SB, and we were waiting 4 months for the inevitable.
Even in 1984, the 49ers didn’t seem like a stone cold SB lock from day 1