Page 3 of 3

Re: Joe Gibbs' 3 Super Bowls- a great achievment or an asterisk?

Posted: Wed May 28, 2025 4:12 pm
by SeahawkFever
CSKreager wrote: Wed May 28, 2025 4:04 pm
sheajets wrote: Thu May 22, 2025 2:05 pm I'll always remember that shot of him on the sidelines after Darrin Nelson dropped that pass from Wade Wilson to send the Skins to the Super Bowl, breathing the biggest sigh of relief I have ever seen. It was like all the blood drained from his body.
He was playing an 8-7 team at home. What did he have to worry about?
True, granted it was an 8-7 team that lost all three scab games; one of them by 20 points. 87 Vikings may not be one of the better teams to go as far as they did, but if you look at their record and stats at face value, you might sell them a bit short.

Re: Joe Gibbs' 3 Super Bowls- a great achievment or an asterisk?

Posted: Wed May 28, 2025 4:15 pm
by CSKreager
SeahawkFever wrote: Wed May 28, 2025 4:12 pm
CSKreager wrote: Wed May 28, 2025 4:04 pm
sheajets wrote: Thu May 22, 2025 2:05 pm I'll always remember that shot of him on the sidelines after Darrin Nelson dropped that pass from Wade Wilson to send the Skins to the Super Bowl, breathing the biggest sigh of relief I have ever seen. It was like all the blood drained from his body.
He was playing an 8-7 team at home. What did he have to worry about?
True, granted it was an 8-7 team that lost all three scab games; one of them by 20 points. 87 Vikings may not be one of the better teams to go as far as they did, but if you look at their record and stats at face value, you might sell them a bit short.
You are what your record says you are. They still only made the playoffs because STL choked. Wade Wilson of all people randomly had 2 good games ouy of nowhere.

They would have been one of the WORST SB teams of all time

Re: Joe Gibbs' 3 Super Bowls- a great achievment or an asterisk?

Posted: Wed May 28, 2025 7:29 pm
by ChrisBabcock
You are what your record says you are.
I would say 1987 is the one season in which this rule didn't apply.

Re: Joe Gibbs' 3 Super Bowls- a great achievment or an asterisk?

Posted: Wed May 28, 2025 9:52 pm
by conace21
CSKreager wrote: Wed May 28, 2025 4:04 pm
sheajets wrote: Thu May 22, 2025 2:05 pm I'll always remember that shot of him on the sidelines after Darrin Nelson dropped that pass from Wade Wilson to send the Skins to the Super Bowl, breathing the biggest sigh of relief I have ever seen. It was like all the blood drained from his body.
He was playing an 8-7 team at home. What did he have to worry about?


Gibbs had a group of players that went 8-4 in 1987 going up against another group of players that went 8-4 in 1987. Sounds like a pretty even matchup.

Re: Joe Gibbs' 3 Super Bowls- a great achievment or an asterisk?

Posted: Thu May 29, 2025 12:42 am
by JuggernautJ
CSKreager wrote: Wed May 28, 2025 4:15 pm You are what your record says you are....
Not to start a firefight or anything quite so dramatic but you're continuingly telling us that is entirely not the case.
Here's an example from earlier today...

Re: Joe Gibbs' 3 Super Bowls- a great achievment or an asterisk?

Posted: Sun Jun 08, 2025 12:52 pm
by 74_75_78_79_
If the '91 Redskins had a weakness, it was their run-game ranked at just 18th in Y/A at 3.8. But considering that it was no 3.3 (23rd) as the case with the '70 Colts or 3.5 (28th) as the case with the '81 Forty Niners or the 2011 Giants also at 3.5 (but 32nd) https://profootballresearchers.com/foru ... php?t=5849, and that Washington was dominant practically everywhere else, it should hardly be used as a reason to disregard them. Okay, their rushing-D wasn't all that great either, allowing 3.9 Y/A (11th), and they gave up 11 rushing TDs making them 12th there, but not enough either to historically lessen them.

Again, they weren't da '85 Bears, '89 Forty Niners, '92/'93 Cowboys, or '94 Forty Niners (nor, maybe, the '86 Giants either), but they're not at all far beneath them. Again, like peak Larry Holmes to peak Ali/Frazier/Foreman; the Easton Assassin could only fight who was in his immediate time and, frankly, it was still very good competition from '78 thru '85! Very good! Like '91 for Washington!

Back to that run-game of theirs, Tampa Bay in 2002 was also at just 3.8 per carry. But that placed them at 28th in the league instead of just 18th!


As for the '87 season - from now on when I mention a W/L mark of a team from that season, I'm simply going to give the actual non-scab record without actually typing the word, "non-scab" before the record. Examples, I'm now going to simply type, "On the final week of the season, it was 7-4 Washington at 8-3 Minnesota", or "Both San Fran and NO each finished at 10-2", or "The Eagles finished above-500", and so on.

Re: Joe Gibbs' 3 Super Bowls- a great achievment or an asterisk?

Posted: Sun Jun 08, 2025 4:09 pm
by 74_75_78_79_
74_75_78_79_ wrote: Thu May 01, 2025 7:02 pm What happens if you replay the entire 1991 season, but that season's Giants, Forty Niners, and Bills are each replaced with the exact 1990 versions instead? And instead of the actual '91 Cowboys, you have next year's exact version instead??

I can't imagine it "written in stone" that Washington automatically doesn't still finish on top. I would place Big D as the favorite, but not by much. Just think of that NFC East in this scenario! With the Eagles (and that Classic defense) in there as well, Dallas is not finishing 13-3, nor is NYG. And Washington doesn't finish 14-2 (and Philly likely wins just 8 or 7 games).

Yes, in '91, the Redskins benefited by not having to be in the same season with better versions of each of the teams mentioned. But they still dominated, didn't have an easy schedule, won 14 games going into a meaningless finale, and dominated even more-so in the post-season! Not among the very elite teams of All-Time, but not far beneath. Just like Larry Holmes at his peak is not far behind Ali, Frazier, Foreman, etc at their peaks.

Back to the hypothetical, I think Washington at least split with Dallas & NYG, Cowboys & Giants split with each other as well, and the division is up for grabs for all three going into the finale; Washington's game at Philly is now a meaningful affair. My best guess would be Dallas winning the division by just one game with Wash & NYG finishing with the same record taking up the 4th & 5th seeds thus playing each other in the 1st Rd. And if Washington wins that one, and then win at San Fran, and then top the Cowboys in Big D, I think they still would have been the better team than Buffalo and pull it off. It's just that this game would be competitive as opposed to what really happened.
Following my 'passion-project' of the 1982 NFL season in-full via What-If-Sports, I will then apply the same for this. Only, of course, it would apply from the very first week and not Wk#3. And, no, I will not do a week-by-week posting. I’ll post a season when all finished.

Not sure when I will actually roll up my sleeves and, actually, START this. But no surprise if it's real soon! But '82, Week #3, first. And I hope What-If-Sports agrees with 7Den on my Steelers, with the Emperor and many '70s studs still onboard, beating Perkins/LT/Parcells/ Erhardt/Belichick/Crennel/Austin, etc to that...3-0 START!!

Again, 1991, I'm guessing NYG and Wash in a SICK Wild Card match in which the only team in the entire league with a better record than them would be...DALLAS! Okay, maybe San Fran too because they WOULDN'T be in that NFC EAST. Actually, maybe SF better record than Big D because of it all!