Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

1990 Team = 2005 Team /1991 Team = 2006 Team??


redskins55

Recommended Posts

You know at the beginning of the season I watched tapes of the 1990 Washington Redskins season and thought that our 2005 squad would have a similar season as that team. Its amazing how similar they ended up ..

That 1990 team was led by an inconsistant offense with big play capability and a strong defense. Ok I'm sure you can see the similarity with the 2005 squad. But if your still wondering where I'm going then take a look at these facts.....

1990 Redskins ................................... 2005 Redskins

Squad got off to a 3-1 record.............Got off to a surprising 3-1 record

One game above .500 ........................... One game below .500

going into December................................heading into December

Final record (10-6) with a .................Final record (10-6) with

wild card birth @ Philly...................... a wildcard birth @ Tampa

Beat the NFC East Champs.................Beat the NFC South Champs

advance to divisional round................ advance to divisional round

@ San Fransisco ...............................@ Seattle

Lose 20-10 to 49ers ...................Lose 20-10 @ Seahawks rainy

at rainy Candle Stick Park ..................conditions at Quest Field

* So what does all this prove??? Well if this team can stay together and add some key additions as that 1991 team did. I believe they have a good chance of being as powerful as the 1991 team! The team that ran over the regular season opponents and celebrated a Super Bowl XXVI Victory.

If you follow the Redskins then you know what I'm talking about! I have faith in Gibbs and the Redskins

HTTR!! :helmet: :logo:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You know at the beginning of the season I watched tapes of the 1990 Washington Redskins season and thought that our 2005 squad would have a similar season as that team. Its amazing how similar they ended up ..

That 1990 team was led by an inconsistant offense with big play capability and a strong defense. Ok I'm sure you can see the similarity with the 2005 squad. But if your still wondering where I'm going then take a look at these facts.....

1990 Redskins ................................... 2005 Redskins

Squad got off to a 3-1 record.................Got off to a surprising 3-1 record

One game above .500 ........................... One game below .500

going into December................................heading into December

Final record (10-6) with a .................Final record (10-6) with

wild card birth @ Philly...................... a wildcard birth @ Tampa

Beat the NFC East Champs.................Beat the NFC South Champs

advance to divisional round................ advance to divisional round

@ San Fransisco ...............................@ Seattle

Lose 20-10 to 49ers ...................Lose 20-10 @ Seahawks rainy

at rainy Candle Stick Park ..................conditions at Quest Field

* So what does all this prove??? Well if this team can stay together and add some key additions as that 1991 team did. I believe they have a good chance of being as powerful as the 1991 team! The team that ran over the regular season opponents and celebrated a Super Bowl XXVI Victory.

If you follow the Redskins then you know what I'm talking about! I have faith in Gibbs and the Redskins

HTTRS!! :helmet: :logo:

I have total confidence for next season, and after reading this post, even more so. I think Gibbs will take us to the Superbowl next year. He will solve all our weaknesses this off season and make us a dominate team next year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Or you can compare this team to the 92 team that went 9-7 and won in Minn. then lost to S.F in muddy conditions only to go 4-12 next season. Depends on how you look at it.

BTW

We lost to SF 28-10 in 1990-91.

BTW

S.F in 90 went on to lose to the Giants at home 15-13

BTW

S.F in 92-93 lost to Dallas at home the next week. 30-20.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In 1990 we were not starting a veteran QB who has a history of injuries and inconsistency on the downside of his career. If we have a QB change or Mark Brunell finds himself a young man again(doubt it) I can see us being serious contenders. Otherwise I just see a repeat season if that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree except that Ryp was still somewhat young and we will not get it done with Brunell playing hurt. And he gets hurt every year (including Jacksonville) and it impacts him more than it does other QB. Ryp was also a consummate pocket passer.

We can only hope that PRam or Campbell are able to do something next year.

Ryp was on the money that year because of 2 reasons.

#1. He had 3 years to learn the offense and develop relationships with Clark,Monk,and Sanders

#2. He had all day to throw the football because the HOGS allowed only like 9 sacks all season.

Remember Ryp was benched and brought back many times due to his inconsistant play. And going into that 91 season noone thought that he was the answer to our QB woes..

My point is that Brunell is not my ideal fit at QB, ( Personally I'd like to see Cambell get in there and make plays with his big arm and agility) But Brunell can definetly get the job done if with those 2 factors mentioned above are present with the 2006 team..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agreed, the Brunell ride is over. It is a testament to how tenacious Gibbs and company have been that he had the season that he had, but push come to shove, he's not physically capable of leading this offense any longer.

A well coached, disciplined team, with a good offensive line, good running game, and a defense that gives you the short field often, will inflate any QBs stats, so I'm not as wowed by the 23 and 11 as some.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree except that Ryp was still somewhat young and we will not get it done with Brunell playing hurt. And he gets hurt every year (including Jacksonville) and it impacts him more than it does other QB. Ryp was also a consummate pocket passer.

We can only hope that PRam or Campbell are able to do something next year.

Do you have issues with Brunell, Ghost?

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

:silly:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ryp was on the money that year because of 2 reasons.

#1. He had 3 years to learn the offense and develop relationships with Clark,Monk,and Sanders

#2. He had all day to throw the football because the HOGS allowed only like 9 sacks all season.

Remember Ryp was benched and brought back many times due to his inconsistant play. And going into that 91 season noone thought that he was the answer to our QB woes..

My point is that Brunell is not my ideal fit at QB, ( Personally I'd like to see Cambell get in there and make plays with his big arm and agility) But Brunell can definetly get the job done if with those 2 factors mentioned above are present with the 2006 team..

Yeah, give Brunell that oline and The Posse and he puts up insane #s too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hopefully it's not 1992 Team = 2005 Team ;)

Considering that our defense and offense ranked highly this year and our o-line really started to click before Thomas was hurt, there is a lot to be optimistic about. But as usual, QB is a question mark and we're all getting tired of that. Can't this franchise have a sure thing at QB for once???

If we played Detroit at home to open up next year, I'd feel really good about your analogy. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Differences. . . .

There is a cap now that you are projected 20 million over. You don't even know who your QB is, and you don't have a 1st or 4th round pick. . .

With Williams back Id expect you to have a top 1/3 defense regardless of personnel. But other then that, there are serious questions

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Or you can compare this team to the 92 team that went 9-7 and won in Minn. then lost to S.F in muddy conditions only to go 4-12 next season. Depends on how you look at it.

BTW

We lost to SF 28-10 in 1990-91.

BTW

S.F in 90 went on to lose to the Giants at home 15-13

BTW

S.F in 92-93 lost to Dallas at home the next week. 30-20.

Your right we did lose to the 49ers 28-10 but the point is not remissed that both the 1990 and 2005 seasons are strikingly similar with everything else being accurate. And about the scores in the divisional round....THe 49ers had Joe Montana and Jerry Rice so I'll give them a touchdown over the seahawks..So 28-10 is still similar to 20-10...

BTW

Obviously you didnt read my last sentence in the original post..

"If you follow the Skins then you know what I'm talking about"

It seems like you dont follow the skins because there is no way you can compare this team to the 1992 team.

First of all, the 1992 team were DEFENDING SUPERBOWL CHAMPS! I dont know about you, but I dont see a ring ceremony happening for this 2005 club this year. Also that the 92' team stumbled into the playoffs losing 2 straight at the end of the season . IN FACT they only got into the playoffs because the Vikngs beat the Packers the final week to knock them out of playoff contention. The 92' team DID NOT control their own destiny as the 1990 team did by winning 4 of its last 5 games to advance to play Philly.

So your point is illogical because your comparing the 2005 squad to the 1991 Super Bowl Squad and the 1992 Defending Champs...

Go Skins!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That OL in 1991 was great but don't give them all the credit.

The Defense was forced to play pass due to the great receivers and the ability of Rypien to get the ball to any of them anywhere. He improved on 1990 by not throwing as many Ints and a lot more TD's. The OL was the same. He improved.

Our current team with Brunell only has 1 great receiver and Brunell doesn't look at the other options whether they are open or not. It makes it a pretty simple gameplan for the defense and makes our OL look worse than it is. Maybe it's just that our other receivers suck, I don't know.

If Ramsey had started this season he probably would have had a season like Rypien did in 1990 and would improve next year. Thats not going to happen with a 36 year old Brunell though. Like others have said, he never plays a full season without getting some sort of injury and this year he was pretty lucky and still played several games hurt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...