1989 NFL season discussion

[74_75_78_79_]

https://profootballresearchers.com/foru ... 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.

https://www.profootballresearchers.com/ ... 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!

[CSKreager]

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

[74_75_78_79_]

Didn't I just write on another thread that I 'treat' the '88 GIants as a playoff team? Well, reading my very OP, I see that I began one of the paragraphs by actually writing, "As for Tuna's G-men, en route to their second straight playoff berth since their '87 hangover..." Oh well, a very understandable mistake.

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

I guess I would have to say, at the time, that I thought San Fran looked to repeat after that comeback. But maybe it wasn't too unanimous in my mind. And though I would imagine that most also thought it was more likely than not, maybe they weren't totally sure just yet.

You still had the Bears with that 4-0 start, handing Buddy Ball its second loss the following week on MNF, beating them more convincingly than SF did. Yes, the Forty Niners crushing Chicago in the cold for the NFC was still fresh in all minds, but this didn't look like a Bears team looking to finish at just 12-4, but quite better - pretty Super Bowl-lookin'. Yes, sadly, we all know what would immediately be starting Week #5!

And how about the Rams? They started 5-0 with one of those wins...at Candlestick one week after that comeback in Philly. Not to mention SF not exactly blowing out the Colts nor especially Tampa Bay in their first two games. And they didn't have Bill Walsh anymore.

So though you seemed to already know, CSK, and I still did lean that way after Week #3 (though I really don't remember what I was thinking when the Rams beat them), what were the rest of you thinking at the time and as the season wore on? At what point did each of you others know with certainty that it would, indeed, be San Fran winning their 4th as well as first back-to-back to conclude the campaign?

They still had yet to play the Giants that MNF game, and when the Rams were up on them in their second (also on Monday NIght) game against them later on, 27-10, I did think that the Rams would hold on - this despite Joe Cool's already etched-in-stone comeback rep! I guess afterward things tightened up with me on San Fran. A real boost was given when they were blasting Minny early from the opening gun. But going into the NFCCG, I still thought the Rams could give them something due to it being a rivalry and their ability to play them better at Candlestick.

The San Fran win/advancement did not surprise me at all, just the 30-3 result!

[ShinobiMusashi]

Love these retrospectives of past NFL seasons, there just doesn't seem to be enough of them. This was a good look at '89, a few years before I can remember watching but I had a huge box of football cards from that season growing up as a kid. I noticed that NFL attendance seemed to change around 1989. When looking through old record and fact books game summaries I noticed so many games in the 80's where if the teams were bad there was super low attendance. Around 89 seemed to be when that started to change, games would still draw huge crowds even if they were bad teams. Also noticed attendance total and single game average all started going up at this time. Why the spike?

Seemed like an interesting time to me but like I said was before my time. I look through the record and fact book for this season going through team vs team histories up to this point and just stands out how young most of the NFL teams were at this point. The original AFL teams were celebrating 30 years, while all the later 60's/1976 expansion teams were all around the age of the Houston Texans are now give or take.

[Brian wolf]

One huge positive about 1989 was the KC Chiefs. With Carl Peterson taking over from the dreadful general management of Steadman/Schaaf--where fans stayed away from Arrowhead in droves--his hiring of Schottenheimer helped turn around the franchise into a 90s powerhouse. The fans came back as well, and once their home field went back to grass, it felt similar to their dynamic teams of the 60s with ball control and tough defense.

[Raptorfan]

https://profootballresearchers.com/foru ... php?t=6433

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.

https://www.profootballresearchers.com/ ... 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...

Yes, the 1989 NFL season seemed to be San Fran (okay, at least mention the Giants) and nobody else.

Oh sure we can. I won’t tell

The 1989 NYG went through some big changes b4 the season even started. They lost Joe Morris to a pre season injury that ended his career with the NYG. So there goes the heart of the running game for the past 4 seasons although he hadn’t put up WOW numbers since 1986.

The draft brought big changes to the team in 1 and then later 2 new starters at safety. A continued upsizing of the O Line and most importantly Dave Meggett. The guy Parcells didn’t want because “what am I going to do with another 5’7” running back.” Morris was 5’7”. Parcells wanted Marion Butts.

The season would see LT’s first full season since 1986 and his last big season. Erik Howard replaced Jim Burt at NT. Harry Carson had retired and Pepper Johnson wasn’t the full time replacement yet. George Martin had retired. So a definite changing of at least some of the guard.

Results

Biggest improvement over prior years was on allowed passing yardage. Ranked 19th in passing defense in 1986, in 1989 they were ranked 7th. Sacks went from 52 in 1988 to 39 in 1989. Maybe they blitzed less? Granted John Washington and Eric Dorsey would never be seen near an opposing Qb. Overall the D was ranked 5th overall vs 11th in 1988. Iirc, they gave up few big plays.

The offense, Christ, that fukkin offense. Thank God for Meggett because, that offense sucked. OJ Anderson had 1000 yards on 1000 carries. Bavaro missed 9 games but his numbers weren’t exactly eye popping when healthy, 22/278. Simms had 14Tds and 14 Ints in 15 games and 3061 yards. Great numbers for 1971. Overall the O was ranked 20th and was 20th in passing vs overall 20th in 1988 and 14th passing in 1988.

They were in the middle of their manhandled by the Eagles era. Wasn’t this the year Randall had his 91 yd punt against the Giants? And even though Simms once described the Rams D as “vanilla,” he never put up big numbers against them.

Someone once said about the 1988-90 NFC East, the Giants beat the Redskins, the Redskins beat the Eagles, and the Eagles beat the Giants. I’d add the Giants couldn’t beat the Rams either.

But they did cut the 49ers down to size when they played.