'91 Skins vs. '04 Skins - Opinions!?

[GURU]

Okay, I'm going to be nit-picky. Some of your '91 starters are off. Andre Collins was the starter at WLB, not Monty Coleman. Marshall was the SLB. LaVar has a big edge over Collins. Washington has Pro Bowl talent, but hasn't played to that level yet. LaVar has yet to reach the level of Marshall's play, but he has the ability to surpass him, maybe this season. Michael Barrow is a more complete linebacker than either Matt Millen or Kurt Gouveia. But that combo in '91 was effective and splitting time probably helped both stay fresh. The '04 group might have more overall talent, but they have yet to play together.

At tight end and H-back, the starters were Ron Middleton and Terry Orr. Donnie Warren was old and at the end of the line, and Jimmy Johnson was injured. Both played little that season. Long snapper John Brandes was a backup H-back, but he actually contributed on offense at times. We don't really know much about our current group. Mostly untested. Mike Sellers could be a surprise. He's built like Ron Middleton was, but he runs well. Could be a guy who could play both positions, kind of like Doc Walker used to. Hard to compare the two groups.

The O-line was off, too. While Russ Grimm played frequently over the course of that season, he was never a starter because his knees simply didn't allow him to play full time, any more. The starting lineup at the beginning of the season was Lachey at LT, Jacoby at LG, Raleigh McKenzie at C, Mark Schlereth at RG, and Ed Simmons at RT. Simmons got hurt early in the season, however, and Bostic came off the bench at C, McKenzie slid over to LG, and Jacoby shifted to RT. That was the lineup that started in the Super Bowl. The thing that was amazing about that line was the incredible depth. Maybe the deepest O-line of all time. They had vets like Bostic, Grimm, and Mark Addicks (a vet who was a starter for other teams) who all made significant contributions. I'll never forget the Houston game, the one where the Oilers' kicker missed a chip shot field goal at the end of regulation, and the Skins pulled out the miracle win in OT. There were so many injuries to the O-line by the end of that game, that McKenzie and Grimm were both playing offensive tackle. I consider the two most dominant offensive lines of all time to be the Skins in '91, and the Cowboys in '93. But the Skins second team O-line was better than a lot of teams' first stringers. I really like the talent of of this coming season's line, but they have yet to gel as a unit. The '91 Hogs were the best of all time.

In the secondary, Barry Wilburn wasn't even in the league in '91. He was out due to substance abuse. But he DID lead the league in interceptions in '87. I also like the talent of the '04 secondary, but they haven't gotten a chance to gel as a unit, either.

One thing I think a lot of people don't realize or remember, is that besides Charles Mann, there really wasn't much difference in the talent level of the D-line. To me, Eric Williams and Brandon Noble are practically the same player. Frankly, I think Cornelius Griffin is more talented than Tim Johnson was. At DE, Regan Upshaw, Renaldo Wynn, and Phillip Daniels are similar to Fred Stokes. Hustlers who play the run pretty well and can give you some pass rush. Upshaw and Daniels have both posted better career numbers than Stokes did. What? Jumpy Geathers, you say? Well, Geathers was a heck of an interior pass rusher who was good for about 10 plays a game. But another thing you must realize is that Phillip Daniels notched a majority of his sacks in Chicago from the DT position. LB Rosevelt Colvin moved to DE on passing downs and Daniels slid to DT. If you look at Daniel's sack numbers, they are fair for a DE, but pretty good for a DT. So I think this line will get a better interior push from Daniels' presence. So before you say "no contest," look more closely at the personnel. The '91 benifitted from Mann's presence, no doubt. But they got a lot of help by some creative scheming by Richie Pettitbon. 13 different players notched sacks in '91. The whole was definately better than the sum of its parts.

Also, Clinton Portis is the most talented running back Joe Gibbs has ever coached, and he's coached some good ones (including Tampa Bay and San Diego as offensive coordinator). Portis can be a workhorse back, but he's also a threat to score every time he touches the ball. I'll be very interested to see how this effects how Gibbs calls plays and installs the overall offense. This year's RB group has the potential to be very good, but that '91 squad was awfully, awfully good.

I think Art makes the most valid point here. What made the '91 team special wasn't the talent. There were more talented teams in the NFL that season, even in the NFC East. It was the coaching, of course, and the chemistry, especially. That wasn't one of the most talented teams to ever win the Super Bowl. But statistically, they were one of the most dominant, and it was because of intangibles. That's an impossible thing to measure with the current team because they've never played a down for Joe Gibbs. The '91 team really came together during the '90 season. Essentially the same personnel grew and learned and started becoming a real team that year, not in '91. In '91, they blossomed because of all the hard work and adversity the year before. Keep that in mind while making your '04 predictions.