redshirtguy#45 Posted January 15, 2012 Share Posted January 15, 2012 1994 'skins... 0-8 at home, 0-8 nfc east. Worst season in my view. Ken Harvey, felt like his talent was wasted during the early part of the still ongoing down time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hail2skins Posted January 15, 2012 Share Posted January 15, 2012 Wonderful tour du force of 20 years of mostly misery.....thanks Ed (sarcasm meter high!) One of the curious things about your list is that you rank the 1997 season pretty low and the 2000 season pretty high. Yes, we were 6-2 at one point during the 2000 season, but we were also 4-2 and then 6-4 in '97. I would agree that expectations were high for the Skins in '97 to take the next step after the nice start in '96 (which ultimately disintegrated), the expectations for 2000 were....well, you remember. I think the biggest impact to that season was Westbrook going down early in the season. Kind of like David Patton going down in the middle of 2005. but fortunately that Gibbs team was able to pull it together late after the three-game swoon. This thread also coincides with a recent thought I had about the early Norv years. Despite people wanting to already look at possible potential comparisons to Joe Gibbs for Shanahan, right now we are in a rebuilding mode like we were in Turner's first few years. For the life of me......I can remember very little about those 1994 and 1995 seasons. Maybe Shuler making his first start against Dallas at RFK and getting crushed. Gus making his entrance in an offensive explosion at Indy. Then a nice home win over Dallas in '95. Other than that.......nada. What memories do others have of those early Norv years? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BurgundyBlood Posted January 15, 2012 Share Posted January 15, 2012 I'm 34. I never noticed the team sucking in the 90s because I thought it was temporary. We had been so good throughout my childhood that I remember wondering how fans of teams like Cleveland could continue cheering for a team that had no chance of winning. Now I know! Little did I know we would fail to pull out of our post-Superbowl hangover in 20 years (and counting!) But for the purposes of this discussion: 2004 was the high point, when Gibbs came back and brought with him an awesome OC (Saunders) and DC (Williams). It looked like Gibbs was gonna set the stage then his 2 heirs apparent would continue the awesome for the next decade. Then 2008 rolls around, Gibbs retires, Saunders and Williams can't get along, and the next thing you know we have NO ONE coaching the team. We are so bad that no one of merit will even interview for the job, leaving us with unproven, over his head, Zorn. I would argue that November 27, 2007 continuing into Zorn's hiring, was the lowest point ANY TEAM has had in the last 20 years. Worse than Detroit's 0-16 season because you knew they could only get better. There was no such promise in the Zorn years. Now I'm depressed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redshirtguy#45 Posted January 15, 2012 Share Posted January 15, 2012 Wonderful tour du force of 20 years of mostly misery.....thanks Ed (sarcasm meter high!)One of the curious things about your list is that you rank the 1997 season pretty low and the 2000 season pretty high. Yes, we were 6-2 at one point during the 2000 season, but we were also 4-2 and then 6-4 in '97. I would agree that expectations were high for the Skins in '97 to take the next step after the nice start in '96 (which ultimately disintegrated), the expectations for 2000 were....well, you remember. I think the biggest impact to that season was Westbrook going down early in the season. Kind of like David Patton going down in the middle of 2005. but fortunately that Gibbs team was able to pull it together late after the three-game swoon. This thread also coincides with a recent thought I had about the early Norv years. Despite people wanting to already look at possible potential comparisons to Joe Gibbs for Shanahan, right now we are in a rebuilding mode like we were in Turner's first few years. For the life of me......I can remember very little about those 1994 and 1995 seasons. Maybe Shuler making his first start against Dallas at RFK and getting crushed. Gus making his entrance in an offensive explosion at Indy. Then a nice home win over Dallas in '95. Other than that.......nada. What memories do others have of those early Norv years? 1994 was awful. The realization of how far the team had fallen from being a consistent contender to being last in the East began to set in. While a few seasons later Norv would have a few winning records, my level of hope was crushed in 1994, and remains so. The miscues and "bad luck" Norv teams still see were in full force that year. 2 5+ game losing streaks, some awful qb play, no running game, bad defense, 0 for division and home games. Rotten giant fan pals of mine would call me laughing quite a bit that season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsiaticSkinsFan Posted January 15, 2012 Share Posted January 15, 2012 If the team was 5-6, and they had to win five straight games in order to qualify for a lowly 6th seed in the post season, then that means they hobbled into the playoffs. The 2005 team lost some close games against the AFC west in particular. Five of those losses that season did come against the KC Chiefs, Mike Shanahan's Broncos, the Raiders, and the Chargers. Those were all very close games that the Redskins played hard in. I give them credit for being a very competitive team that year. But in my opinion if a NFL team has to go on a winning streak from a losing record in order to qualify for the playoffs and they succeed, then that means they barley qualified for post season. you have a strange definition for hobbling or limping. I would say the 1992 Skins hobbled into the playoffs losing their last two game. If you lose your last few games or your last one, then you are not entering the playoffs at your strongest form. The Redskins won 5 straight games to win that year, and destroyed 3 teams during that streak. I think they entered that postseason at strength. I even remember some national analysts saying the Redskins were a Super Bowl darkhorse that yaer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rpredskins Posted January 15, 2012 Share Posted January 15, 2012 that 2008 rams game is the only redskins game ive been to in the last 10 years. i had actually forgotten about it til i read this. now the nightmares will return, thanks. Personally my favorite was 99 because the Detroit game was the only playoff game I've been to and I loved Stephen Davis and Brad Johnson. Westbrook may have been a tool but he was good that year. That was the last time I felt like we really had a good team- not just a lucky one or one on a flukey run. (I was 9 so whatever problems I'm overlooking are explained by that) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redskins4ever Posted January 15, 2012 Share Posted January 15, 2012 you have a strange definition for hobbling or limping. I would say the 1992 Skins hobbled into the playoffs losing their last two game. If you lose your last few games or your last one, then you are not entering the playoffs at your strongest form.The Redskins won 5 straight games to win that year, and destroyed 3 teams during that streak. I think they entered that postseason at strength. I even remember some national analysts saying the Redskins were a Super Bowl darkhorse that yaer. In the NFL, you either win games or you lose. The 1992 Redskins lost two very close games to the Eagles and Raiders at the end of the year. That particular Redskins team could have easily been 11-5, which means they played consistent football for all of that season. Those Redskins didn't have to resurrect themselves from a lowly losing record to a winning one in order to make post season like the 2005 squad did. What the 2005 team did was extremely impressive considering the 5-6 record that they came from. But the elite teams don't come from 5-6 or 4-7 entering week 12. Elite teams are at the very least slightly above .500 or better during that stage of a football season. While the 2005 was a winning team when it was all said and done, they still were not amongst the elite teams. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kwitt Posted January 15, 2012 Share Posted January 15, 2012 The big thing I remember in that game was Rogers dropping an pick-6 that would have put us in the lead 10-0 at the half. I agree that we definitely did not limp in as to limp in we would be like if we had clinched a spot and then lost those last 5 regular season games. My thought exactly. And now he can't drop anything! Just makes it that much more painful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kleese Posted January 15, 2012 Author Share Posted January 15, 2012 Judging by the responses, my observation over the years stands firm: fans overrate the 1999 team. Zero wins over teams above .500 (including playoffs) just sticks out to me. We got swept by an 8-8 Dallas team and lost key games throughout the year (notably at Indy) that could have gotten us a bye and homefield in the divisional round. NFC was just horrid that year aside from the Rams and the Bucs D. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hail26 Posted January 15, 2012 Share Posted January 15, 2012 Ugh. Been a long 20 years Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsiaticSkinsFan Posted January 15, 2012 Share Posted January 15, 2012 In the NFL, you either win games or you lose. The 1992 Redskins lost two very close games to the Eagles and Raiders at the end of the year. That particular Redskins team could have easily been 11-5, which means they played consistent football for all of that season. Those Redskins didn't have to resurrect themselves from a lowly losing record to a winning one in order to make post season like the 2005 squad did. What the 2005 team did was extremely impressive considering the 5-6 record that they came from. But the elite teams don't come from 5-6 or 4-7 entering week 12. Elite teams are at the very least slightly above .500 or better during that stage of a football season. Well now you have moved goalposts. I never said the 2005 Redskins were an elite team. I said they did not limp or hobble into the playoffs like you have kept repeating. and that 1992 team lost 2 games to close out the season so they did limp into the postseason while the 2005 team entered the playoffs in a stronger form. Unless you are trolling me, I dont see how losing your last two games is a stronger position than winning 5 straight games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TD_washingtonredskins Posted January 15, 2012 Share Posted January 15, 2012 Great write up. In some odd ways, I too loved that 1992 team almost as much as our 1991 team. So many things broke against us (and I'm not complaining given how easy that 1991 team seemed to cruise), that it was so cool to watch a proud team battle week in and week out and scrape together a 9-7, divisional playoff berth in a season that should have ended 6-10 or so. I loved this quote and agree that it is the perfect metaphor: "In a way, 20 years later, the Redskins have yet to recover that fumble." Nice thread man...I really enjoyed the 1999 and 2005 teams. They were like drops of water for someone struggling through a desert. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Botched Posted January 16, 2012 Share Posted January 16, 2012 Nice list. We were a QB away from being legitimate Super Bowl contenders in 2005. Everything else was in place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
justice98 Posted January 16, 2012 Share Posted January 16, 2012 Judging by the responses, my observation over the years stands firm: fans overrate the 1999 team. Zero wins over teams above .500 (including playoffs) just sticks out to me. We got swept by an 8-8 Dallas team and lost key games throughout the year (notably at Indy) that could have gotten us a bye and homefield in the divisional round. NFC was just horrid that year aside from the Rams and the Bucs D. All that said, they were still potentionally a competent snap away form the NFC championship. If that happens, that team is looked at with more reverence and nothing that happens before that really matters all that much in terms of who they beat and didn't beat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC9 Posted January 16, 2012 Share Posted January 16, 2012 Yeah, I'll go to my grave saying the 2005 team should've been a Super Bowl runner up at least. If Carlos Rogers caught that INT, we were golden. Never in my life has one play given me such a change in emotion from elation to heartbreak in an instant... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TD_washingtonredskins Posted January 16, 2012 Share Posted January 16, 2012 Nice list. We were a QB away from being legitimate Super Bowl contenders in 2005. Everything else was in place. I don't know...for the majority of that season Brunell played QB just fine. He wasn't elite, but he played well. I think we could have advanced a little further with a couple breaks, but I don't believe we were a Super Bowl team that year unless you put one of the best QBs in the league on that team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocky21 Posted January 17, 2012 Share Posted January 17, 2012 Hey this is depressing. All but 9 of the 32 NFL teams have been in a conference championship game since 1999, the year Snyder took over the Redskins: Bills Cowboys Bengals Browns Lions Texans Chiefs Dolphins Redskins Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henry Posted January 17, 2012 Share Posted January 17, 2012 If the team was 5-6, and they had to win five straight games in order to qualify for a lowly 6th seed in the post season, then that means they hobbled into the playoffs. The 2005 team lost some close games against the AFC west in particular. Five of those losses that season did come against the KC Chiefs, Mike Shanahan's Broncos, the Raiders, and the Chargers. Those were all very close games that the Redskins played hard in. I give them credit for being a very competitive team that year. But in my opinion if a NFL team has to go on a winning streak from a losing record in order to qualify for the playoffs and they succeed, then that means they barley qualified for post season. I'd rather lose some close games to the AFC West than to the NFC East. The 1999 Redskins got swept by the 8-8 Cowboys and dropped one to the 5-11 Eagles. Contrast that to the 2005 team which swept both of those teams and went 5-1 against the division, the only loss being to the Giants in NY who were playing with the ghost of Mara on their shoulders. The 1999 Redskins won the same amount of games as the 2005 Redskins, but did so against a much much MUCH softer schedule. The only teams with winning records the 1999 Redskins played all season long were the Buffalo Bills and the Indianapolis Colts, both losses, and the Miami Dolphins, which they beat in a meaningless game for both teams with both teams resting starters. It was a CREAMPUFF schedule and our division was terrible that year (we were the only team out of five with a winning record, despite the fact that the 8-8 Cowboys swept us), and we still only won 10 games. The 2005 team played TEN teams with winning records, including two within their own division. Despite the much tougher hill to climb, the '05 team was much more balanced than the '99 team. The '05 team had the #11 offense and the #9 defense, whereas the '99 Redskins, while impressive with the #2 ranked offense, were HORRIBLE on defense. They were 30th in the league that year, a reminder that even after six years Norv Turner still had no idea what he was on one side of the ball. When I look back at that '99 team, I just shake my head. A perfect storm of an easy schedule, incredible luck with injuries, mediocre players all having career years at the same time, absolutely no competition within the division, and we STILL only managed 10 wins. All that season served to do was to keep Norv Turner around for yet another season. It's depressing as hell that a season like that is even in our top five, but we have no choice. Still, there's no way I'd put it ahead of one of the grittiest, nastiest, never-say-die seasons our franchise has experienced in decades in the '05 season. It's not even close. Kleese, I like your gutsy choice of putting the 1992 team at #2. That team had SO many injuries. The last gasp of an old team dying hard. That win over the Cowboys in Week 14 was awesome, far more impressive than anything the '99 team managed during it's run. Being a spoiled fan back in the 80s and early 90s I was very disappointed with our team that year, but looking back now, I think that may have been the single most impressive coaching job of Gibbs' career. We had no business winning more than about 5 games that year and Gibbs squeezed blood out of a stone to get us into the playoffs. I would have put '99 as my #2, but you've certainly given me pause. I may just agree with you on that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsHokieFan Posted January 17, 2012 Share Posted January 17, 2012 I don't know...for the majority of that season Brunell played QB just fine. He wasn't elite, but he played well. I think we could have advanced a little further with a couple breaks, but I don't believe we were a Super Bowl team that year unless you put one of the best QBs in the league on that team. I think in 2005 there were 3 things that kept us from the Superbowl 1) The awful offsides call vs Tampa on the XP block which cost us the game 2) Randy Thomas getting injured vs Dallas in the 4th quarter of a blowout win 3) Brunell getting injured vs the Giants and losing any downfield passing attack By the time the team got to Seattle, it was injured and simply out of gas Beating Tampa gives us the division and a home playoff game. For round 2 we would have gone to the Bears as opposed to cross country. And I am convinced a healthy Redskins team beats Seattle in the NFC title game Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henry Posted January 17, 2012 Share Posted January 17, 2012 I think in 2005 there were 3 things that kept us from the Superbowl1) The awful offsides call vs Tampa on the XP block which cost us the game 2) Randy Thomas getting injured vs Dallas in the 4th quarter of a blowout win 3) Brunell getting injured vs the Giants and losing any downfield passing attack By the time the team got to Seattle, it was injured and simply out of gas Beating Tampa gives us the division and a home playoff game. For round 2 we would have gone to the Bears as opposed to cross country. And I am convinced a healthy Redskins team beats Seattle in the NFC title game Yep. That Tampa game was the key. Very rarely can you see how much a season changes on one or two regular season plays, but was the case that year. I was happy that we at least knocked Tampa out before we crashed. They deserved it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inigo Montoya Posted January 17, 2012 Share Posted January 17, 2012 great thread... but oh so depressing! I've never been more excited to be a Redskins fan than I was when Gibbs came back for round 2, I was so sure we would go to the Superbowl in 2005. "Stone hands" decides to choose 2011 as the year he learns how to catch, seems so unfair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S.T.real,lights,out Posted January 17, 2012 Share Posted January 17, 2012 I5. 2007 (9-7): That run was fun...and there was a moment there in th Seattle playoff game...when we recovered the kickoff after taking a lead...when I had visions of winning it all. I saw Gibbs pulling one final miracle. Then, Cooley dropped the pass, we missed the FG, and it was all over. That was such a killer.....I was like OMG we are going to win this game...and yea not so much..Damn that sucked Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Botched Posted January 17, 2012 Share Posted January 17, 2012 Yep. That Tampa game was the key. Very rarely can you see how much a season changes on one or two regular season plays, but was the case that year. I was happy that we at least knocked Tampa out before we crashed. They deserved it. I've despised Tampa ever since then. That stupid 2 point conversion haunts me. I will go to my grave believing Alstott never got in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henry Posted January 17, 2012 Share Posted January 17, 2012 I've despised Tampa ever since then. That stupid 2 point conversion haunts me. I will go to my grave believing Alstott never got in. Indeed, though the fact that we won the playoff game against them with some rather questionable calls makes me smile. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocky21 Posted January 17, 2012 Share Posted January 17, 2012 I've despised Tampa ever since then. That stupid 2 point conversion haunts me. I will go to my grave believing Alstott never got in.You should. 'Cause he didn't get in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.