hypothetical '89 Steelers/Bills AFCC?

[74_75_78_79_]

5-1 going into the '89 playoffs, the Steelers gelled. Not only a super-far cry from their 0-2 start, but certainly no '9-7' team (which they ended up actually finishing) either. Though they wouldn't quite regain that form the following year, by December '89/January '90, they (in guise of 9-7) were very foreshadowing of (on-par with) the Cowher runs very soon to come. Yes, Denver was the AFC's best in the '89 campaign, but obviously by a hair come January as evidenced in the divisional matchup. I think Steelers beat Cleveland in a hypo AFCCG in the Dawg Pound if only due to Marty no longer at helm. Perhaps the 'Burgh doesn't win the rematch in Week #6 had Marty been present hence Steelers even making the playoffs after all. All this said, the possible matchup that semi-intrigues me is Steelers vs Buffalo that January considering the Bills came close to beating Cleveland in the divisionals. How do you all think the 'hot' Steelers would have held up at Rich Stadium in that 'calm' after Buffalo's '88 AFCC run before storming through the conference the next four years?

[conace21]

I think Buffalo would prevail. The Bills were always tough to beat in Rich Stadium, especially in the postseason. Jim Kelly struggled during 3 straight losses near the end of the regular season, but he obviously had regained his touch in the postseason when he picked Cleveland apart (despite nine dropped passes.)

In the Super Bowl, San Francisco would prevail. The Bills' losing streak included a 21-10 loss in San Francisco, even though Joe Montana had sat the game out with an injury. The Bills had playmakers on defense, but they had given up a number of big plays throughout the season. I think the Bills would have been more competitive than Denver, but Montana was in the zone that postseason.

[BD Sullivan]

In 1988-89, the Bills were 15-2 at Rich Stadium, the lone losses coming in the first and last home games of '89. In the first, they fell behind 21-0 to Denver on MNF and lost 28-14--despite the Broncos entering the game having lost 10 of their last 11 road MNF games, as well as their last eight contests on fake turf. The latter loss was even more inexplicable, coming against the Saints who had John Fourcade at QB.

FWIW, during their ill-fated Super Bowl years, the Bills were 34-5 at home.

[conace21]

The Bills never lost a playoff game in Rich Stadium until the Jaguars upset them in the 1996 wild card game.

[74_75_78_79_]

I'd have to agree that Buffalo wins. Very tough it was to win at Rich Stadium, especially in the playoffs and especially in that very Levy/Kelly Era. For what it's possibly worth, despite Denver being the better team than Buffalo in '89, I agree the Bills give San Fran quite a better game than '55-10'. Even if it meant they losing by "just" 17 or 21.

[conace21]

I'd have to agree that Buffalo wins. Very tough it was to win at Rich Stadium, especially in the playoffs and especially in that very Levy/Kelly Era. For what it's possibly worth, despite Denver being the better team than Buffalo in '89, I agree the Bills give San Fran quite a better game than '55-10'. Even if it meant they losing by "just" 17 or 21.

Denver has the AFC's No. 1 defense, but their tackling in the secondary left a lot to be desired, and they rarely pressured Montana. If Buffalo's defense had just been average tacklers, you figure Bruce Smith would put at least a little heat on Montana. I'm thinking 38-27, San Francisco

[7DnBrnc53]

I actually think that the Steelers go in there and pull off the upset. They were playing well at the time, and the Bills didn't have that winning chemistry that they would get the next year after they beat the Broncos, Raiders, and Jets at home in dramatic, come from behind fashion.

Then, I see Supe 24 being like the 1990 Pit@SF regular season game: The Steelers stay in it, and are only down 21-10 at halftime. Then, Brister throws a pick, and the 49ers open it up before the Steelers get a late TD pass to make the final score 35-17.

If the Steelers make that SB, though, does Tom Moore stay on as OC? And, if he does, do Bubby and Noll stay longer?

[Bryan]

5-1 going into the '89 playoffs, the Steelers gelled.

Those 5 wins came against last place SD, last place NYJ, 5-11 NE, last place TB, and 8-8 Miami in a monsoon. The 1989 Steelers were incredibly mediocre. They were dead last in yards gained. Tim Worley was on cocaine and would fall down and fumble without being touched. Bubby Brister was terrible. Louis Lipps was the only NFL caliber WR on the roster. Derek "alligator arms" Hill had the catching radius of a pinprick. The pass rush managed only 31 sacks.

The fact that the Steelers beat the talent-laden Oilers in Houston, having lost to Houston twice in the regular season by a combined 50-16 score, is a huge black mark against Jerry Glanville's coaching career. Brister was 15-33-127 yards, Moon was 29-48-315 yards and 2 TDs...and the Steelers won. Possibly the greatest achievement in Chuck Noll's tenure. For the Steelers to come within a botched Chuck Lanza snap of defeating the Broncos in Denver (having lost to Denver 34-7 earlier in the year) is equally remarkable.

[74_75_78_79_]

5-1 going into the '89 playoffs, the Steelers gelled.

Those 5 wins came against last place SD, last place NYJ, 5-11 NE, last place TB, and 8-8 Miami in a monsoon. The 1989 Steelers were incredibly mediocre. They were dead last in yards gained. Tim Worley was on cocaine and would fall down and fumble without being touched. Bubby Brister was terrible. Louis Lipps was the only NFL caliber WR on the roster. Derek "alligator arms" Hill had the catching radius of a pinprick. The pass rush managed only 31 sacks.

The fact that the Steelers beat the talent-laden Oilers in Houston, having lost to Houston twice in the regular season by a combined 50-16 score, is a huge black mark against Jerry Glanville's coaching career. Brister was 15-33-127 yards, Moon was 29-48-315 yards and 2 TDs...and the Steelers won. Possibly the greatest achievement in Chuck Noll's tenure. For the Steelers to come within a botched Chuck Lanza snap of defeating the Broncos in Denver (having lost to Denver 34-7 earlier in the year) is equally remarkable.

Yes, I'm aware of that. For most of the '89 campaign (games #3 through #10) they certainly did average "incredibly mediocre". Sometimes above mediocrity in games vs Vikes, Lions, Browns in rematch @ Clev, 'moral victory' in rematch vs Cincy; and sometimes below (quite below) as the case with blowout defeats (two of them shutouts) at Houston, at Denver, and their 'last breath' of such anemic play vs Chicago. Yes, 'write off' the monsoon at Miami, but the rest of that body of work down the stretch, to me, had the Steelers playing those weak opponents the very way that a regular Cowher contender would have pounded on them down the stretch the following decade. You can only play who's actually on your schedule and they took on each of them like a true playoff contender. Not making them out to be a juggernaut, but it's just how I look back on it, and without obvious bias. In fact, the most impressive game in that stretch, of course, was the one they lost - to Houston. They could have, and should have, won that one hence winning the division - and a home date vs Buffalo in the divisionals. With all that being said, yes, they did indeed lack a pass-rush; even when at their best. Same the following year despite another good defensive showing.

[Bryan]

Yes, 'write off' the monsoon at Miami, but the rest of that body of work down the stretch, to me, had the Steelers playing those weak opponents the very way that a regular Cowher contender would have pounded on them down the stretch the following decade. You can only play who's actually on your schedule and they took on each of them like a true playoff contender. Not making them out to be a juggernaut, but it's just how I look back on it, and without obvious bias. In fact, the most impressive game in that stretch, of course, was the one they lost - to Houston. They could have, and should have, won that one hence winning the division - and a home date vs Buffalo in the divisionals. With all that being said, yes, they did indeed lack a pass-rush; even when at their best. Same the following year despite another good defensive showing.

Steelers were 1-5 in divisional play, being outscored 43-149. I don't think they "should" have won the division. The 1989 Steelers were nothing like the Cowher teams. Conservative defense, anemic pass rush, inability to run the ball, very few big plays, terrible in divisional play, overachieving in the postseason. Its an interesting footnote in Steeler history, but its a stand-alone footnote IMO. It did not usher in a new era of consistently high performance for the Steeler franchise. The next season, it took them over a month to score an offensive touchdown.