How Dominant was the 91 Team?

[Goaldeje]

So I'm watching Mike and Mike while getting ready for work this morning, getting more and more irritated. They are discussing the Greatest Team of All Time, the 85 Bears, 78 Steelers, 93 Cowboys (WTF?), some of the 9ers teams of the 80's, etc.

Not once did they mention the greatest team I have ever seen, the 91 Skins. How is it that this team is consistently overlooked? I mean, for God's sake, Golic even mentioned the 07 Pats, who didn't even win the SB. How is it that the 91 Skins are constantly overlooked in these discussions?

Am I misremembering this team's greatness? Am I overrating them?

 

[Henry]

The '91 team was as dominant as any team that's ever won a superbowl. I can delve into stats but I don't think that's really necessary.

 

[burgold]

No, you're not.

Not only were they one of the most dominant teams offensively. They shut people down. They had multiple shut outs against good teams throughout the season.

Here are their first five games...



September 1, 1991

Detroit Lions

W 45-0


2

September 9, 1991

at Dallas Cowboys

W 33-31


3

September 15, 1991

Phoenix Cardinals

W 34-0


4

September 22, 1991

at Cincinnati Bengals

W 34-27

5

September 30, 1991

Philadelphia Eagles

W 23-0
----------------------------

That's not simple dominance and it was against some pretty good teams including Barry Sander's Lions.

 

[Goaldeje]

Yeah, upon further reflection, I'm not surprised Golic didn't mention us, as we played against him and beat his ass while he was with the Eagles.

I just can not figure out for me why the 91 Skins are NEVER mentioned in these conversations.

Nice to know I'm not misremembering though.

 

[Henry]

Ok, one stat.

The 1991 Redskins scored, on average, 16.3 points per game more than their opponents. Obviously that was the best in the league that year. But compared to the teams you mentioned in your original post:

The 1985 Bears, who I would say might be considered the single most dominant team in modern NFL history, averaged 16.1

The 1978 Steelers, 10.1 ... not even the best in the league that year.

The 1993 Cowboys, 9.2 ... again, not even the best of that year. (Personally, I think the 1992 Cowboy team was the more dominant team anyway.)

The 1984 49ers, in my opinion the most dominant of the 49ers teams, 15.5. None of the other 49er teams come close.

In fact, the only team I could find that had a better average and, uh, actually won the superbowl was the 1999 Rams at 17.8. But they only played one team with a winning record all season long (until the playoffs when they weren't nearly so dominant as compared to the Redskins) whereas the Redskins had the 11-5 Cowboys and the 10-6 Eagles IN THEIR DIVISION.

EDIT: Oh look. I just found a website that confirms my research.

http://www.coldhardfootballfacts.com/Articles/7_1340_Most_dominant_Super_Bowl_winners.html

 

[Lanky Livingston]

Definite oversight on their part. I think that team gets overlooked because it was a typical Gibbs team - no franchise QB or dominant RB, just a massive (at the time) OL that dominated the line of scrimmage. The defense was dominant...not sure why they aren't mentioned in the all-time defenses.

And they annihilated teams in the playoffs...24-7, 41-10, and 37-24. They just rolled!

 

[Ax]

Golic is a big fat fatty who has ALWAYS hated on us just like Stinky has. He says **** on that show JUST to get a reaction and he knows our fanbase is big enough and touchy enough that we will call him out on his ****.

Stink was part of the 91 team.

And you're right, Golic still hates us from the Philthy days.

****'em both.

 

[Ax]

ever notice how much Stinky hates on us though? the guy seems like it is in his contract to talk **** on us. I mean at least Strahan doesnt hide the fact he is biased FOR the VaGiants..Stinky should have more loyalty now than if anything since Shan is here.

Yeah, he's never gotten over us letting him go.

Hell, the way things worked out for the two teams, we did him a favor.

I guess he thinks if we had kept him we would have scored a Three-Peat.

He was tailor made for the dirty line blocking technique of the Broncos from that time. He couldn't continually man up on people. It irritated his vagina.

 

[Rymanofthenorth]

The 85 bears were the most dominating defencive team, but the 91 redskins were the most dominating all around team, the 85 bears had a decent running game and one speed demon receiver in gault but they didnt drop a lot of points on anyone, the 91 skins had a very good defence but also had a prolific offence. anyone who doesnt put them in a top 5 most dominant teams is an idiot who doesnt watch football. I cant remember now which one it was but one of the skins teams from when I was a kid was also extremely dominant.

 

[Lanky Livingston]

The 85 bears were the most dominating defencive team, but the 91 redskins were the most dominating all around team, the 85 bears had a decent running game and one speed demon receiver in gault but they didnt drop a lot of points on anyone, the 91 skins had a very good defence but also had a prolific offence. anyone who doesnt put them in a top 5 most dominant teams is an idiot who doesnt watch football. I cant remember now which one it was but one of the skins teams from when I was a kid was also extremely dominant.

The '83 team had one of the best offenses in NFL history, but their D was suspect. Then they all got drunk before the Superbowl and lost to Da Raidahs.

 

[Lanky Livingston]

werent the 2000 Ravens statistically better than the 85 bears too?

Yes, they allowed the fewest points in NFL history (regular season), 165 (10.3 PPG!). The Bears weren't far behind, only allowing about 2 more per game at 198 (12.4 PPG).

The reason why the Ravens is a better defense, is because the 85 Bears had the 2nd best offense in the NFL (28.5ppg). The 2000 Ravens only put up 20.8 points a game, good for 14th.

 

[ntotoro]

The '91 'Skins were the dominant team that year, but the Bills took all the headlines, likely because of their personalities. We were the #2 Offense that year behind them (in terms of yards, but we scored more points than Buffalo), also, but not by as much. Our Defense? We finished 2nd overall, they finished 19th. The 'Skins were that good.

Nick

 

[servumtuum]

The 91 Skins were one of the most dominant teams I have ever seen. Just a few bits of data from Pro-Football Reference.

In the regular season:

13 different players recorded sacks for a total of 50 for the season-tied for 3rd in the league-as opposed to the aforementioned only giving up 9 sacks

Charles Mann-11.5

Fred Stokes-6.5

Wilbur Marshall-5.5

Bobby Wilson-4.5

Jumpy Geathers-4.5

Monty Coleman-3.5

Tim Johnson-3.5

Andre Collins-3.0

Eric Williams-3.0

Jason Buck-1.5

A.J. Johnson-1.0

Sidney Johnson-1.0

Marcus Koch-1.0

The 91 Redskins also were #2 in the league with 27 INTs. 12 different Redskins had at least 1 INT during that season.

Wilbur Marshall-5

Darrel Green-5

Brad Edwards-4

Martin Mayhew-3

Andre Collins-2

Sidney Johnson-2

Fred Stokes-1

Monte Coleman-1

Tim Johnson-1

Kurt Goveia-1

Alvoid Mays-1

Danny Copeland-1

Pro football Reference has one stat in which the 91 Redskins did something that may be unique. It's called Net Yards per Pass attempt. It's calculated like this: (Passing yards-Sack yards)/(Passes Attempted+Times Sacked). It's a more accurate measure of effective passing offense as well as passing defense because it includes sacks as part of the calculation.


The 91 Skins ranked #1 in the league in Net yards per pass attempt on offense-8.1-and #2 in the league in fewest Net yards per pass attempt allowed-4.9 That particular combination of rankings I don't think has ever been duplicated.


That team also ranked #1 in the league with 21 rushing TDs and #2 in the league with 30 Passing TDs.

The 91 Skins also were ranked #1 in the league in most points scored in the regular season with 485 and #2 in the league on defense for fewest points scored against with 224.

An amazing combination of both offensive and defensive ability made that team an all-time powerhouse.

Link to Pro-Football Reference 1991 Redsins stats: http://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/was/1991.htm

 

[Rymanofthenorth]

To me one of the biggest factors in naming a dominant team is the strength of the opponents, if your schedule is filled with patsies and you smoke them, you may not be as dominant as a team that has other great teams on the schedule and still dominates. Thats why I take the Bears over the Ravens, the Bears actually had a tough schedule while the ravens schedule had some lame win percentage of 41 percent or something. Same with the 91 skins we had 2 opponents with good record in our division and played several teams with winning records.

I will say those ravens in 2000 had a scary defence, they didnt get much help from their passing game but had a solid rushing game. lol Trent Dilfer got a ring.

 

[Rymanofthenorth]

man Mike that clip brings back memories, if geathers hadnt had bad knees ,,,,,,,,

 

[Canadian Hog]

I think it ultimately boils down to star power. People are attracted to the high profile type players. While consisting of some Hall of Famers, the '91 didn't exactly have guys who most who associate with being the best at their respective positions, especially at the high profile spots like running back, wideout, and quarterback. Just ask Art Monk, who was constantly overlooked for years in Hall of Fame discussions.

Really, you need to look no further than the schoolyard for answers as to why this team is overlooked. While I was pretending to be Rickey Sanders or Earnest Byner while playing football at recess, other kids were asking me who the heck they were.

Again, it boils down to star power.

We simply had a bunch of guys who brought their lunch pails to work and kicked peoples' ass.

 

[servumtuum]

I think it ultimately boils down to star power. People are attracted to the high profile type players. While consisting of some Hall of Famers, the '91 didn't exactly have guys who most who associate with being the best at their respective positions, especially at the high profile spots like running back, wideout, and quarterback. Just ask Art Monk, who was constantly overlooked for years in Hall of Fame discussions.

Really, you need to look no further than the schoolyard for answers as to why this team is overlooked. While I was pretending to be Rickey Sanders or Earnest Byner while playing football at recess, other kids were asking me who the heck they were.

Again, it boils down to star power.

We simply had a bunch of guys who brought their lunch pails to work and kicked peoples' ass.

You hit it Canadian. The emphasis I use on the 91 Redskins is the very word "team." Although there weren't very many what might have been considered "elite" players there were an astonishing number of good-to-very good players on the team on both sides of the ball. The depth available was exceptional. How many teams ever have 13 players capable of sacking a quarterback? How many teams ever have 12 players capable of intercepting a pass?

It's no wonder that Redskins team ground other teams down like they did. Just too much overall horsepower. Everywhere.

 

[Neophyte]

What I find amazing is how good this team was in 91 and just how bad it was only 2 years later. I know some of the guys were a bit long in the tooth and we were siphoning the very last bit of gas out of the tank of guys like Gathers and Grimm but there was some youth on that team too. On both sides of the ball.

We are talking about a team that limped into the playoffs with a hard earned Wild Card spot and made the Super Bowl with a couple lucky breaks in the playoffs. This team dominated everyone it played.

It is mind blowing just how fast the wheels came off.

 

[hail2skins]

I don't think the '91 Redskins are as "disrespected" as fans often make them out to be. I remember reading a similar thread on another board and did a search for "best NFL teams of all time" and the '91 team was consistently in the top 6 on the lists I saw just by browsing the first page.

Heck, you often have debate among Redskins fans about which team was better, the '91 team that won the SB, or the '83 team that got blown out in it. I think the '91 team was the better one overall, as the '83 team had the secondary weakness, in large part because of the absence of Tony Peters and Jeris White from the previous season.

I also think the '91 team sometimes tends to be somewhat of a forgotten one due to the lack of a signature win on the road to the Super Bowl. In the SB itself, the Skins throttled a damn good Bills team that was in the midst of going to four straight of the big games. But in the NFC playoffs, we beat Atlanta and Detroit....good teams that particular season, but hardly ones that people remember as being dominant over time, as people remember with some of the teams we defeated in other years, like the Cowboys, 49ers, and Bears.

 

[Rymanofthenorth]

thurman thomas misplaced his helmet..LOL

Reed got SO mad he threw his on the turf..LOL

and poor Jim Kelly..man, that guy couldnt stay upright.

I think my favorite part of that season though is the ATL playoff game..or the "seat cushion game". They disrespected us SO much in our own house I was pissed from the get go. Hammer and Evander on the sidelines like they thought they were gonna have a party against us in OUR house? After we just whooped their asses in the beginning of the season? "Are you scareyed?"

I was SO happy to see them get beat again. That was an amazing game and an amazing ending. **** Glanville and his NASCAR loving ass.

lmao Thurman thomas was never the same after that, I rememebr thinking " how the eff do you lose your helmet on the damn sideline, and when Reed threw his helmet I was literally rubbing into my cousins face " theres your stupid Kgun offence asshat!" the best against the falcons was when after he threw the second TD Rypien pointed at Hammer. lmao