Professional Football Researchers Association Forum

Why did the Redskins of 1992 suffer such a massive Super Bowl hangover?

They go from one of the GOAT teams ever in 1991 to only making the playoffs because Green Bay lost in week 17

Outside of Matt Millen, Russ Grimm and backup QB Stan Humphries, it was basically the same roster that dominated last year. (This was also the last season before modern free agency).

When they were good, they had impressive wins over quality teams (Eagles, Cowboys, Vikings)

But when they were bad, they looked BAD (Giants, Chiefs, Saints, 4th quarter meltdown vs the Cardinals/Raiders, only scored 16 points against 2-14 Seattle

Even with all that, this aging team had enough experience and veteran guile to get past Minnesota and gave the 49ers a run for their money at Candlestick, but left a few wins on the table that could have maybe gotten them a different and less daunting playoff path

Was it really as simple as Mark Rypien's holdout disrupting team chemistry?

CSKreager wrote:Why did the Redskins of 1992 suffer such a massive Super Bowl hangover?

They go from one of the GOAT teams ever in 1991 to only making the playoffs because Green Bay lost in week 17

Outside of Matt Millen, Russ Grimm and backup QB Stan Humphries, it was basically the same roster that dominated last year. (This was also the last season before modern free agency).

When they were good, they had impressive wins over quality teams (Eagles, Cowboys, Vikings)

But when they were bad, they looked BAD (Giants, Chiefs, Saints, 4th quarter meltdown vs the Cardinals/Raiders, only scored 16 points against 2-14 Seattle

Even with all that, this aging team had enough experience and veteran guile to get past Minnesota and gave the 49ers a run for their money at Candlestick, but left a few wins on the table that could have maybe gotten them a different and less daunting playoff path

Was it really as simple as Mark Rypien's holdout disrupting team chemistry?

In 1991, players like Charles Mann, Art Monk, and the aforementioned Rypien had great years. They never had anything approaching that again. They had 20 players that were 30 and over, and six players that were 29. This was an aging team, and their fall off in 1993 wasn't surprising.

The Skins had a great 1991 season but when the Cowboys bopped them on MNF, the air somewhat went out of their sails, where complacency and other factors contributed to their disappointing season. Their running game wasnt nearly as good as the year before and Rypien struggled ...

The 1992 team also had a lot of injuries, which isn't surprising with an old team. And then in 1993 they had even more, and the bottom fell out.

7DnBrnc53 wrote:In 1991, players like Charles Mann, Art Monk, and the aforementioned Rypien had great years. They never had anything approaching that again. They had 20 players that were 30 and over, and six players that were 29. This was an aging team, and their fall off in 1993 wasn't surprising.

Agree with this. Even the coaching staff was old. Looking at the 92 Skins, the top 5 receiving yard leaders were all 30+ years old. And that doesn't even include starting TE Don Warren who was 36 years old.

A healthy 1991 O-line only missed 3 games. In 1992 they missed 18 games. They did have depth. Sacks given up went from 2.0% to 4.5%. That 4.5% was still the 2nd lowest.
They fell off a bit everywhere
YPCarry 3.8-3.6
YPCarry def 3.9-4.2

Comp% 58.1-56.4
Comp% def 53.3-55.4

Sack% 2.0-4.5
Sack% def 8.4-7.7

YPCatch 14.4-12.3
YPCatch def 11.3-11.7

With age, injuries, and certain players' career-years from the year before being hard to live up to, Gibbs' initial run in DC went out in enough of a 'blaze of glory' with me! Quality wins throughout the '92 regular season including handing the Champs-to-be, Dallas, their final loss in Wk#15 before they'd win-out!

That playoff win at 11-5 division champ, Minny, was sick! Outgaining them by more than 200 in total yards, more than doubling them in rushing yards, and then the time of possession...42:43 to 17:17 - ouch!! And then they give top-seed San Fran at Candlestick a real good game! Yes, Big D was better and should have really been top-seed instead. And part of the reason why I knew Dallas would win - and by more than a TD as they actually did - was because of SF's failure to beat 9-7 Wash decisively. But if SF was worse than their record, it wasn't at all by much. Definitely no paper-tiger (understatement)! And playing SF as tough as they did, and that walloping at Minny, was indeed something to not be ashamed of for the depleted, "another year older" defending-Champs! Yes, it was against Salisbury that 1st-Rounder, but Sean did well filling in for Gannon. The '88 Grey Cup Champ went 3-1 in the games he started including the finale where he heavily out-dueled Brett Favre! Yes, the Vikes already clinched the division, but a Green Bay win gets them, and not Washington, in the playoffs instead!

Of course this invites a what-if Wash gets by SF and plays a rubberband match at Big D for the NFCC? Not really worth entertaining, IMO. I think Wash would be spent in such an event and Big D pulls a convincer as they did vs Philly the prior week. But a respectable way to go just the same. And a shame how sudden, and steep, the fall would be from there. 4-12 in '93 and not a contender at all in the three decades since. I couldn't have imagined it at the time. And that MNF opener over the new defending-Champs added more, at the time, to me never imagining such a thing.