Tom Danyluk ranks 1980's SB champions

[7DnBrnc53]

1. 1985 Bears
2. 1984 49ers
3. 1989 49ers
4. 1983 Raiders
5. 1987 Redskins
6. 1986 Giants
7. 1988 49ers
8. 1981 49ers
9. 1980 Raiders
10. 1982 Redskins

[TanksAndSpartans]

Like some others, these 3:

'80 Raiders
'81 Niners
'87 Skins

would be at the bottom of my list. They don't stand out as all-time great champs to me, but I like the other 7 even the '86 Giants and '82 Skins. I watched a lot of games in the '80s and while thankfully as a Dolphins fan (was that '82 team really a Super Bowl team?), the decade may have started out a little slow, I thought it was a pretty good decade. I rewatched the '86 Giants playoff run a few years ago - they were really good. Some stuff you go back and watch and it doesn't hold up because you were a kid at the time, but I thought they held up.

[Bryan]

I rewatched the '86 Giants playoff run a few years ago - they were really good. Some stuff you go back and watch and it doesn't hold up because you were a kid at the time, but I thought they held up.

I felt bad for Joe Morris, because he was really the heart of that offense in 1985 and 1986. He was almost unstoppable from the 2nd half of the 1985 season through the 1986 regular season. The last really good game Morris played was the 1986 divisional playoff against SF. He kind of fell off a cliff after that...he remained in the league but wasn't anywhere near as effective. He had a ho-hum Super Bowl, Phil Simms stole the spotlight, but I don't think that was an accurate reflection of how the Giants usually operated.

Morris wasn't very big but he was super tough. He took a lot of hits, and I'd guess that Parcells overused Morris in 1985 and 1986. In typical Parcells nonsensical fashion, its interesting to see how many 20+ carry games Joe Morris had when he averaged less than 3 yards per carry...30 carries 83 yards, 27 carries 76 yards, 24-70, 24-55, 20-42, etc. That's a lot of pounding in a relatively short period of time.

[TanksAndSpartans]

I remember Joe Morris well. He really stepped into that role at exactly the right time. They weren't having the success they wanted with Rob Carpenter and Butch Woolfolk. To some extent, I think the overuse was a product of the era - keep feeding the feature back, don't give up on the run, maybe it will pay off in the 4th, etc.

[Brian wolf]

Thats why I feel Simms is underrated. With Woolfolk and Hampton being busts, though Hampton had a couple of good seasons along with Morris with Anderson recovering from injuries, his receivers were mostly pedestrian other than Bavaro, who also had injury problems. A great defense and coaching sure but Simms won with less offensive talent and in all kinds of Meadowland weather as well. He should be HOVG at least ...

[74_75_78_79_]

Great thread thus far about an, of course, intriguing topic!

In historic eyes, the '82 Redskins are, sadly, a 'victim' of the very thing that '82 is notoriously known for! Maybe not an 'elite' Lombardi winner, but I would not call them a "bare-minimum"/"pedestrian" Super Bowl-winne either. Yes, it seems that their regular season - first look - they being a possible "paper-tiger" due to those seemingly "too many" close games in which Moseley kicked "a bunch of" FGs. But upon closer inspection, it was really just a four-game-stretch of such apparent paper-tiger-hood.

Their first two games before that very infamous 57-day-stretch, they looked lively enough; not "just FGs". Opening Sunday at the Vet, they beat a Vermeil Eagles team coming off their fourth-staight-playoff berth and two years removed from SBXV, 37-34, in OT! They then visit last year's NFC Central champ, Tampa Bay (who would go on to plow into the 'tournament' on a 5-1 finish), and beat a great defense, 21-13! And then when the games resumed, another TDs-enough performance at a very respectable Giants team at the Meadowlands; besting them, 27-17. Three wins, zero defeats!

Then came the 'mostly-(Moseley)-FGs' stretch...

They best 1-3 Philly at home in their rematch with them, 13-9. Of course no real shame at all. Eagles would go on to a dismal 3-6 finish in Vermeil's final year with them. But FWIW, Birds were actually just 21 total points away from an 8-1 finish in '82! Two weeks later, Mark kicks four FGs to beat the Cards, 12-7. And then the following week he kicks five to beat the G-men again, 15-14! That likely was the 'tipping point' that won him that '82 MVP!

But as far as paper-tiger-rep was concerned, the heart of such a rep was what happened after that 13-9 win over Philly...losing their first (and only) game of the season at home to Dallas, 24-10! You got to be able to beat the 'Big Boys'. And Big D, thus far, was by far their toughest opponent yet! Not a good look after that 6-1 start! The other 6-1 NFC East team had to seem more superior going into the final two weeks.

And Washington started scoring TDs again while, at the same time, dominating. They blast a now-sliding, yet still respectable, Bum Phillps Saints team at the Superdome, 27-10. And then in the finale, instead of scoring four Moseley FGs, they score four touchdowns in a 28-0 shutout against the Cards who'd make playoffs while finishing 5-4!

The only real question, end of day, going into that 'tournament' was...if they could beat DALLAS? That's all. Still a great enough regular season anyway, and after beating Dallas when it mattered (and convincingly, at that) and then Miami, they finish 12-1! Nice enough 'sample-size' to me! Better sample-size than a college football National Champ!

And as I've opined before in past posts, had '82 went full, I still feel that Washington quite likely wins the Super Bowl anyway. This is whether Dallas would have finished with an even-better record thus Redskins settling for a strong WC finish, or whether they still get top-seed anyway. They weren't as "sexy" as the following year's installment, but they were more balanced. '83 had an Achilles heel or two, and the Raiders (who were really a 14-2 team in guise of a 12-4) threw it all at them while exposing such weaknesses!

And those '83 Raiders are historically underrated! "Just" 12-4, but they did, indeed, win their three post-season games by a combined 106-33 (35-11 avg)! Maybe I was out-of-hand in a past post by actually placing them above the 16-1 installment of '76, but they should still be placed higher than they seem to be placed generally.

'86 Giants? A bit underrated as well if only because they have that very '80s Holy Trinity of '89 & '84 Forty Niners and '85 Bears hanging over their heads. Big Blue Wrecking Crew (such a great, and fitting, name) were still a superior SB champ! A steamroller of a team! They got better, and better, and better as the season wore on! If not an "All-Time" great, at least not too far beneath such caliber. Yes, they "only" had the #2 defense in football. But being behind the team one year removed from 'Super Bowl Shuffle'/Buddy Ryan? Ain't no crime at all.

But let's face it, Bears' defense in '86 was still great, but was just as much a statistical thing. Second half of season they fed off a soft schedule, and many of those wins were close and against that very subpar competition. Jay Schroeder went ape on that D in the divisional at Soldier; and then G-men shut Jay out a week later not to mention...49-3 against you-know-who one week prior!! Any 'blemish' on G-men's '86 post-season run was simply being down to Denver, 10-9, at the half. After that, however, the real stuff rose way to the top!

Here's my opinion...

1) '89 Forty Niners (IMO the best team since 1980, the year I started following)
2a) '85 Bears
2b) '84 Forty Niners

4a) '83 Raiders
4b) '86 Giants

6) '82 Redskins
7) '81 Forty Niners
8) '88 Forty Niners

9) '80 Raiders
10) '87 Redskins

The '81 Forty Niners are the historic-Rodney Dangerfield of Super Bowl champs through-and-through! First, they wallop Big D in Week #6, 45-14, yet were ignored during the next evening's (then real famous) MNF halftime highlights. Okay, maybe Dallas had a bad game. Took them lightly. But San Fran finished all alone with the best-record in the league at 13-3! However, 12-4 Dallas was still favored at Candlestick three months later (okay, perennial-contender; I get it). Forty Niners win again and yet despite beating "America's Team" twice, and beating Cincy in Cincy by a final score of 21-3, they are just a one-point fave going into Pontiac.

And, to this day, still looked down upon. Yes, bad running game! They did rank 28th in Y/A!! But 13-3 and sweeping Dallas & Cincy...doesn't help but to take the edge off that fact at least IMO. '82 had RIGGO as opposed to Ricky Patton! But '88 has more 'bite' than either the two! They were basically the '89 version already once the playoffs began (if not even earlier, after that 6-5 start)! But five losses before the meaningless finale, sadly, is still five losses before the meaningless finale and tough to actually place them up the list any further.

'80 Raiders & '87 Redskins clearly are no 2011 Giants! But '80s-champs-wise, someone sadly has to finish at #9 and someone at #10. Raiders did finish 13-2 though both those losses were at Philly and home vs Dallas down that stretch. Didn't dominate vs Browns or Chargers though beating Oilers and Eagles quite lopsided. They had that swagger and mystique but still doesn't cut it as anywhere near an "All-Time" great.

‘87 Redskins? Can't disrespect them either but same thing if comparing them on an "All-Time" scale. Outside the scab games, they were a plainly "good" 8-4. That's the same record as the Vikings who they barely beat in the NFCC. "Avoided" San Fran? Maybe they still beat them anyway. Gibbs and staff being their coaches along with outstanding players on both sides of ball - but the QB position not being one of them, just 2nd quarter of that very last game of theirs.

[JKelly]

Good view Bryan but though the 1981 Niners were the ultimate Cinderella squad, they had a great season in terms of consistency, even with a pedestrian running game. Dean, Reynolds and rookie Lott galvanized the defense, which suffocated the Bengals and Cowboys ...

You really consider giving up 27 and 21 points in 1981 suffocating a teams offense?

[Brian wolf]

Yes I do JKelly ... The Niners beat both teams twice. Dallas forced 6 turnovers on defense in the Championship game but the offense couldnt get into position for the game winning FG. The Bengals scored 3 points in their first meeting with the Niners at home and were shutout in the first half of the SB despite a top offense. They finally got it together in the second half but the 49er goalline stand and Eric Wright interception later, ended their threats. The Niners pretty much let them score that final TD.

[Bryan]

Yes I do JKelly ... The Niners beat both teams twice. Dallas forced 6 turnovers on defense in the Championship game but the offense couldnt get into position for the game winning FG. The Bengals scored 3 points in their first meeting with the Niners at home and were shutout in the first half of the SB despite a top offense. They finally got it together in the second half but the 49er goalline stand and Eric Wright interception later, ended their threats. The Niners pretty much let them score that final TD.

I don't really think the Niners defense was suffocating in the Super Bowl. Through the first three periods, the Bengals had gotten the ball to San Fran's 5-yard line, 1 yard-line and 8-yard line and had come away with 0 points. Anderson threw a terrible pass in the 1st quarter, Collinsworth fumbled the ball in the 2nd quarter (which would have been ruled an incomplete pass in contemporary times), and the famous goal-line stand in the 3rd quarter. The Bengals had a significant yardage advantage over SF. David Verser's 5 kickoff returns for 52 yards certainly didn't help Cincy's offense.

But...I think the main issue is the use of "suffocating". I don't think the 81 Niners defense was "suffocating"...I would say they were "opportunistic".