bulldog Posted September 9, 2005 Share Posted September 9, 2005 The Redskins went 7-9 in 1988. There were comments that Gibbs and Co. had exhausted the magic. Beathard was blamed for too many blown #2 and #3 draft choices. People questioned who the quarterback was going to be. The defense which had been very good for so long had seen the departure of Dexter Manley due in large part to his continued drug use. Overall, the team seemed to many to be stuck in place. Instead of imploding however the team rebounded to 10-6 At quarterback the team stuck with Mark Rypien who had taken over midway through 1988 for veteran Doug Williams. At running back the team acquired Earnest Byner and Gerald Riggs to replace Jamie Morris. On the offensive line we saw the team bring in Mark Schlereth and trade for Jim Lachey. Those changes mirror a lot of what we have seen here in 2004-2005. Ramsey given the vote of confidence continues to start and grow as a 25 year old qb. Raw with a big arm but limited sophistication. Clinton Portis brought in and like Earnest Byner took awhile to settle in the offense and for the staff to learn how to use him to effect. Rabach and the return of Jansen bring the quality lift to the OL that we got from these other players. Actually, this defense is vastly superior to the one that Petitbon was rebuilding in 1989. Outside of corner Darrell Green and end Charles Mann the Redskins had major holes to fill. This defense has fewer holes than that one did. It performed at a much higher level in 2004 than the Redskins had in 1988. One can point to the receiving corps of Monk, Clark and Sanders as being superior to our current group and a significant factor in the development of Mark Rypien. This is the area where we will have to watch this team closely. The current crop of receivers have posted good deep numbers in re avg. per catch. The question is whether they can be the game in and game out consistent unit that the Patriots or Packers have enjoyed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riggo-toni Posted September 9, 2005 Share Posted September 9, 2005 Great Analysis! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
More Complete Posted September 9, 2005 Share Posted September 9, 2005 I like the way you think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phat Hog Posted September 9, 2005 Share Posted September 9, 2005 Hmm...I think Rypen had better accuracy and a quicker release than Ramsey; but you may very well be correct in the fact that Rypen (so far as we know) had a better crop of receivers to throw to. I agree on everything else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GhostofAlvinWalton Posted September 9, 2005 Share Posted September 9, 2005 You smart! Dr. Z stupid! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZkinsFan Posted September 9, 2005 Share Posted September 9, 2005 yeah, good analysis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ouvan59 Posted September 9, 2005 Share Posted September 9, 2005 Gibbs' success with different quarterbacks is well documented but something that generally flies under the radar is his success with different RBs. Each time the Skins changed RBs the team's fortunes were generally much better in year 2. 1982-2nd year with Riggo (8-1 Super Bowl) 1986-2nd year with Rogers (12-4 NFC Championship game) 1990-2nd year wiht Byner (10-6 NFC Semi's) In each instance the team missed the playoffs the year before. It also should be noted that in all the above examples the team made it to the Super Bowl the following year so if history holds then this year should be a great improvement but next year will be magical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gortiz Posted September 9, 2005 Share Posted September 9, 2005 Gibbs' success with different quarterbacks is well documented but something that generally flies under the radar is his success with different RBs. Each time the Skins changed RBs the team's fortunes were generally much better in year 2. 1982-2nd year with Riggo (8-1 Super Bowl) 1986-2nd year with Rogers (12-4 NFC Championship game) 1990-2nd year wiht Byner (10-6 NFC Semi's) In each instance the team missed the playoffs the year before. It also should be noted that in all the above examples the team made it to the Super Bowl the following year so if history holds then this year should be a great improvement but next year will be magical. This is by far my favortie kind thread, I'm a history buff so I love it when you guys go back to dig this stuff up! Good Sh* man! Yes, Yes I know you can manipulate the past to make sense of the future, just let me enjoy this please ... I agree though man, both comparisons are pretty compelling, the 1988 team is dead on, BUT - what was the rest of division like, I'm assuming they weren't better then what they were this year? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulldog Posted September 9, 2005 Author Share Posted September 9, 2005 The Cowboys were on a deep decline after 1986 but the Giants and Eagles were playoff teams with nasty defenses. Part of this is reflected in the fact the Redskins finished 10-6 in 1989 but DID NOT make the playoffs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scruffylookin Posted September 9, 2005 Share Posted September 9, 2005 Very good analysis. I think this team has enough of the parts in place to be better than the 89 squad (though the record may not reflect it). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redman Posted September 9, 2005 Share Posted September 9, 2005 The Cowboys were on a deep decline after 1986 but the Giants and Eagles were playoff teams with nasty defenses. Part of this is reflected in the fact the Redskins finished 10-6 in 1989 but DID NOT make the playoffs I've been thinking a lot about this too. The only other reasonable historical comparison from the Gibbs era would be 1985 when we were transitioning from Theisman, the Smurfs, and Riggins to Schroeder, the Posse, and Rogers. It's no coincidence that in that year too (as in 1989) we finished 10-6 and missed the playoffs. Regarding your statement above, we have advantages this year in that regard that the '80's 'Skins teams didn't have. In the 1980's the NFC was very deep and talented, and not coincidentally had ripped off a series of Super Bowl wins in a row. Right now, the conference is significantly more up in the air; it's the Eagles (unfortunately in our division), maybe Carolina, and everyone else. It's stupid to say that we're any less of a threat to make the playoffs than is a team like Seattle, Minnesota, Atlanta, St. Louis, etc. Each of those teams IMHO has as many shortcomings if not more as we do. Ours really only boils down to Ramsey and the passing game. Everything else is in place for us. If we go 10-6 like I think we can, we're in the playoffs in 2005, whereas in '85 and '89, that didn't cut it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hog Lover Posted September 9, 2005 Share Posted September 9, 2005 A reason for hope. Good post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TC4 Posted September 9, 2005 Share Posted September 9, 2005 And I would be MORE THAN HAPPY to take the 10-6 record this year that the 1989 Redskins finshed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulldog Posted September 9, 2005 Author Share Posted September 9, 2005 the league has been watered down. 10-6 will definitely make the playoffs in 2005. remember the Redskins TWICE finished 10-6 and missed the playoffs, in both 1979 and 1989. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hail2skins Posted September 9, 2005 Share Posted September 9, 2005 Also, Bulldog, they finished 10-6 in '85 and didn't get in, as Redman said. The '89 season also included an 0-2 start (both heartbreakers at home to the Giants and Eagles) and of course the infamous loss at home later that season to the winless Cowboys. I don't think the 2005 team could psychologically handle a season like that!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulldog Posted September 9, 2005 Author Share Posted September 9, 2005 I thought that 13-3 loss to the Cowboy was the worst loss in Redskins history until I saw the 3-0 loss to the Jets at RFK under Petitbon. That was as close to suicide as 60,000 odd people have been in quite some time Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsmania123 Posted September 9, 2005 Share Posted September 9, 2005 Thanks for the reminders. I think we are going to be good with Portis back there, taking pressure off Ramsey. Patton and Moss are hard workers. I think they are durable too. They will have good years IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gortiz Posted September 9, 2005 Share Posted September 9, 2005 Also, Bulldog, they finished 10-6 in '85 and didn't get in, as Redman said.The '89 season also included an 0-2 start (both heartbreakers at home to the Giants and Eagles) and of course the infamous loss at home later that season to the winless Cowboys. I don't think the 2005 team could psychologically handle a season like that!! THAT IS HUGE! didn't know that! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hail2skins Posted January 2, 2006 Share Posted January 2, 2006 bump for Bulldog the Greek. The '89 team was 5-6 as well and won their last 5 (unfortunately missed the playoffs, though). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chiefhogskin48 Posted January 2, 2006 Share Posted January 2, 2006 Bulldog is the MAN. Hail2Redskins, did he tell you to bump this? Just kidding. I'll give credit where credit is due. (Note the date of the original thread- Sept 9th) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.