Page 2 of 2
Re: Joe Gibbs' 3 Super Bowls- a great achievment or an asterisk?
Posted: Sun Apr 27, 2025 12:50 am
by 7DnBrnc53
92 was the shakiest of BUF's SB teams. 91 scored the most points, 93 was a better defense, 90 their best overall team
Although I truly thought they would beat Dallas since they steamrolled through the last 2.5 playoff games before the Super Bowl. After going down 35-3 to the Oilers, they outscored opponents 91-16 the rest of the way.
They did steamroll, but it was against the Steelers and Dolphins, teams that the Bills owned at that point (I would have liked to have seen them play against the Chargers).
Also, while the 1993 Bills did finish fifth in points allowed, they were 27th in total yards, 24th against the run, and 21st against the pass.
Re: Joe Gibbs' 3 Super Bowls- a great achievment or an asterisk?
Posted: Thu May 01, 2025 12:53 pm
by CSKreager
7DnBrnc53 wrote: ↑Sun Apr 27, 2025 12:50 am
92 was the shakiest of BUF's SB teams. 91 scored the most points, 93 was a better defense, 90 their best overall team
Although I truly thought they would beat Dallas since they steamrolled through the last 2.5 playoff games before the Super Bowl. After going down 35-3 to the Oilers, they outscored opponents 91-16 the rest of the way.
They did steamroll, but it was against the Steelers and Dolphins, teams that the Bills owned at that point (I would have liked to have seen them play against the Chargers).
Also, while the 1993 Bills did finish fifth in points allowed, they were 27th in total yards, 24th against the run, and 21st against the pass.
It's happened before. The 98 Chargers were 18th in points allowed, yet somehow finished #1 in total yards and against the run.
Re: Joe Gibbs' 3 Super Bowls- a great achievment or an asterisk?
Posted: Thu May 01, 2025 7:02 pm
by 74_75_78_79_
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. Not at all. 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 NYG. And Washington doesn't finish 14-2 (and Philly likely wins just 8 or 7 games).
Yes, in '91 the Redskins didn't have to be in the company of 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, but not far beneath. Just like Larry Holmes at his peak 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 as well), and if they make it to the SB, 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 in SBXXVI.