Skinja Posted January 6, 2006 Share Posted January 6, 2006 hellof an article Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redman Posted January 6, 2006 Share Posted January 6, 2006 I was intrigued by Boswell's statement in his article about Gibbs' improvement in rematch games versus teams that beat him previously, so I looked it up and posted the following on a fantasy football message board where we were also talking Redskins: This is a breakdown of that statistic I quoted above as written up by Thomas Boswell regarding Gibbs' teams improving over his career by an average of 17 points in rematches vs. teams that previously beat his teams during the season. One point of clarification: Boswell didn't specify whether he meant a 17-point improvement in net points (meaning score differential) or simply offensive points - I suspect it was the latter. Here's the history both ways. 1981 Season (8-8, missed playoffs) vs NYG 7-17 at NYG 30-27 (+17 off pts; +13 net points) at Cards 30-40 vs Cards 42-21 (+12 off pts; +31 net points) at Phi 13-36 vs Phi 15-13 (+2 off pts; +25 net pts) 1982 Season (8-1; won Super Bowl) vs. Dal 20-24 vs. Dal (NFC Championship Game) 31-17 (+11 off pts; +18 net pts) 1983 Season (14-2; lost in Super Bowl) vs Dal 30-31 at Dal 31-10 (+1 off pts; +22 net pts) 1984 Season (11-5; lost in 1st round of playoffs) at Cards 24-26 vs Cards 29-27 (+5 off pts; +4 net pts) (Note: 1984 was a year in which Gibbs won his first game against both Philly and the Giants, but then lost the rematch.) 1985 Season (10-6; missed playoffs) at Dal 14-44 vs Dal 7-13 (-7 off pts; +24 net pts) vs Phi 6-19 at Phi 17-12 (+11 off pts; +18 net pts) at NYG 3-17 vs NYG 23-21 (+20 off pts; +16 net pts) 1986 Season (12-4; lost in NFC Championship Game) at Dal 6-30 vs Dal 41-14 (+35 off pts; +51 net pts) at NYG 20-27 vs NYG 14-24 (-6 off pts; -7 net pts) at NYG (NFC Championship Game) 0-17 (-14 off pts; -7 net pts) (Note: this is the only time I'm able to discern that Gibbs' teams have declined over the course of 3 consecutive games in both off pts and net pts against the same opponent. That Giants team, of course went on to win the Super Bowl that year. They accounted for 3 of the 'Skins 5 losses during the regular season and playoffs.) 1987 Season (11-4; won Super Bowl) at NYG 20-27 vs NYG 23-24 (+3 off pts; +6 net pts) at Cards 21-30 vs Cards 33-17 (+12 off pts; +25 net pts) 1988 Season (7-9; missed playoffs) None. 1989 Season (missed playoffs) vs NYG 24-27 at NYG 17-20 (-7 off pts; 0 net pts) vs Phi 37-41 at Phi 10-3 (-27 off pts; +11 net pts) 1990 Season (10-6; lost Divisional Playoff Game) at SF 13-26 vs SF (NFC Divisional Playoff Game) 10-28 (-3 off pts; -5 net pts) vs NYG 20-24 at NYG 10-21 (-10 off pts; -7 net pts) at Phi 14-28 at Phi (NFC Wildcard Game) 20-6 (+6 off pts; +28 net pts) 1991 Season (14-2; won Super Bowl) None. 1992 Season (9-7; lost Divisional Playoff Game) at Dal 10-23 vs Dal 20-17 (+10 off pts; +16 net pts) at Cards 24-27 vs Cards 41-3 (+17 off pts; +41 net pts) vs NYG 7-24 at NYG 20-17 (+13 off pts; +20 net pts) 2004 Season (6-10; missed playoffs) at NYG 14-20 vs NYG 31-7 (+17 off pts; +30 net pts) at Phi 6-28 vs Phi 14-17 (+8 off pts; +18 net pts) vs Dal 18-21 at Dal 10-13 (-8 off pts; 0 net pts) 2005 Season (10-6; in playoffs as Wildcard Team) at NYG 0-36 vs NYG 35-20 (+35 off pts; +51 net pts) at TB 35-36 at TB (NFC Wildcard Game) ????? Average Offensive Point Change: +6.04 (+151 pts / 25 games) Average Net Point Change: +17.68 (+442 pts / 25 games) Obviously, I was wrong about assuming Boswell was referring to offensive points, however his teams were still about one TD better on offense in rematches than they were the first time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TLusby Posted January 6, 2006 Share Posted January 6, 2006 Graet article! It gives me goosebumps to think Joe could pull it all off again. I want the SB badly just to prove to this media idiots that Joe Gibbs is the man! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riggo-toni Posted January 6, 2006 Share Posted January 6, 2006 One thing about his player stats in '87 - Weren't scabs playing the first 3 games. Ergo, we didn't have a 1000 yd rushing duo in 13 games. He still makes a great point, but the rushing/receiving yards might not have been quite as dismal as they first appear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Gichin13 Posted January 6, 2006 Share Posted January 6, 2006 We want to believe, to hope, to dream. Boswell remembers this. TK used to know this. Give Tony some credit -- he called for us running the table when everyone else threw us under the bus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redman Posted January 6, 2006 Share Posted January 6, 2006 One thing about his player stats in '87 - Weren't scabs playing the first 3 games. Ergo, we didn't have a 1000 yd rushing duo in 13 games. He still makes a great point, but the rushing/receiving yards might not have been quite as dismal as they first appear. Not the first 3, but yeah, for 3 games. Thing is, the last of those three games was played on the road at Dallas, which brought back a bunch of their regular players for the game because the strike had already been negotiated to a conclusion. We still beat them! :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atloldskin Posted January 7, 2006 Share Posted January 7, 2006 Some nice nuggets in that article! A 17 point improvement would be nice Saturday! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulldog Posted January 7, 2006 Share Posted January 7, 2006 before Bill Belichick came on the scene, Gibbs had the most impressive postseason record (16-5) since Vince Lombardi Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinFan63 Posted January 7, 2006 Share Posted January 7, 2006 Great article. Personally, I think Williams out performed Brunell. Especially in the playoffs AND in the Super Bowl. Williams was a God and led us to 35 unanswered points in ONE quarter. I believe that is STILL a Super Bowl record. But as Gibbs has pointed out, the past buys you nothing. Brunell, if healthy, will wreck havoc on Tampa tomorrow. If he's not at 100%, then let Ramsey sling it out. I trust Gibbs to do what's right, and what needs to be done to get over the hurdle to the next game. The hurdle, being Tampa. The next game being Seattle. (Who we already beat) Can anyone besides ne, taste the sweetness? Hail!:point2sky Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chomerics Posted January 7, 2006 Share Posted January 7, 2006 That's a great article. I'm not a big Boswell reader and typically find him too dry for my taste. But, with his Redskins writing, there's the quality about it that most of us miss in writing for the local papers. Boswell writes a nice piece. He doesn't assign the Redskins any unearned greatness. He lays out a series of reasonable facts. All that's fine.But, the underlying component of it is HOPEFUL. This is the element most of the media now seems to ignore when writing stuff about the team. The article is written in a way you, as a fan and reader, connect with because AS a fan and reader, it is meaningful to you. It speaks to you. Why? Because sports writing has to take into account that the readers of any particular beat are people who are likely VERY interested in the beat and who almost uniformly WANT the beat to perform well. We want to believe, to hope, to dream. Boswell remembers this. TK used to know this. Yeah, the Redskins have flaws. Boswell was able to point that out without fixating on it. And, he was able to bring some inspiration to us as fans and readers who are feeling the exact same way. Boswell did well here connecting with the audience. The Post infrequently does this. Yep, what he said. :point2sky: looks funny coming from me huh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.