Rank all ’90s Super Bowl winners, #1 - #10
- 74_75_78_79_
- Posts: 2420
- Joined: Sat Oct 11, 2014 1:25 pm
Rank all ’90s Super Bowl winners, #1 - #10
Never actually did this one pertaining to strictly Lombardi winners of this very decade. A very difficult exercise this can be! Despite Dallas, then San Fran, being the initial consensus thoughts, there are at least three other teams that some can very well call the very best of the decade. Difficult to shuffle up! I myself may not be able to do this!
Here they are in chrono…
’90 Giants
’91 Redskins
’92 Cowboys
’93 Cowboys
’94 Forty Niners
’95 Cowboys
’96 Packers
’97 Broncos
’98 Broncos
’99 Rams
Have fun!
’
Here they are in chrono…
’90 Giants
’91 Redskins
’92 Cowboys
’93 Cowboys
’94 Forty Niners
’95 Cowboys
’96 Packers
’97 Broncos
’98 Broncos
’99 Rams
Have fun!
’
-
- Posts: 3209
- Joined: Wed Nov 27, 2019 12:43 am
Re: Rank all ’90s Super Bowl winners, #1 - #10
93 Dallas ... rolled to back-to-back Champs
92 Dallas ... could have lost to turnover-penalty prone SF
94 SF ... best team free agency ever bought
94 Dallas ... defense played terrible against best team free agency ever bought
91 Wash ... great year but no Cowboys in postseason
95 Dall ... slumped but finished strong
96 GB ... great year but no Cowboys in postseason
90 NYG ... One of the toughest teams ever
97 GB ... took the Broncos lightly ... Wolf and Holmgren became estranged
97 Denv ... great finish to season
98 Denv ... great finish for Elway and unfortunately, Davis
99 St Lou ... A fluke-cinderella year ... hard to compare to the other teams
92 Dallas ... could have lost to turnover-penalty prone SF
94 SF ... best team free agency ever bought
94 Dallas ... defense played terrible against best team free agency ever bought
91 Wash ... great year but no Cowboys in postseason
95 Dall ... slumped but finished strong
96 GB ... great year but no Cowboys in postseason
90 NYG ... One of the toughest teams ever
97 GB ... took the Broncos lightly ... Wolf and Holmgren became estranged
97 Denv ... great finish to season
98 Denv ... great finish for Elway and unfortunately, Davis
99 St Lou ... A fluke-cinderella year ... hard to compare to the other teams
Re: Rank all ’90s Super Bowl winners, #1 - #10
This is pretty tough - the 90’s had some dominant championship teams and thanks to players moving around in free agency you didn’t really see all of these teams compete against each other. Off the top of my head I’d go…
‘92 Cowboys
‘93 Cowboys
‘94 49ers
‘99 Rams
‘96 Packers
‘98 Broncos
‘91 Redskins
‘95 Cowboys
‘97 Broncos
‘90 Giants
‘92 Cowboys
‘93 Cowboys
‘94 49ers
‘99 Rams
‘96 Packers
‘98 Broncos
‘91 Redskins
‘95 Cowboys
‘97 Broncos
‘90 Giants
-
- Posts: 3209
- Joined: Wed Nov 27, 2019 12:43 am
Re: Rank all ’90s Super Bowl winners, #1 - #10
I had to rank mine #1 - #12 because in my heart and mind, I still believe the 94 Cowboys were better than the 94 Niners, but were poorly prepared by Switzer for the NFC Championship game and the 97 Packers were better than the 97 Broncos but were underestimating them for the SB ... someone pointed out that the 96 Packer victory over Denver was closer than the score indicated and Denver pulling starters which is true, yet I believe the Packers under Holmgren still took them lightly, as Ron Wolf was furious afterwards ...
Re: Rank all ’90s Super Bowl winners, #1 - #10
Eddie Epstein's book "Dominance" looks at Super Bowl champions from a statistical efficiency standpoint. The 90's are an interesting decade because the de facto "Team of the Decade" Cowboys aren't among the most dominant single season teams. Epstein's top teams based on his Adjusted Power Index were:
96 Packers +7.49
99 Rams +6.91
91 Redskins +6.89
97 Broncos +6.43
94 Niners +6.27
92 Cowboys +5.90
The 96 Packers led the league in points scored and fewest points allowed, one of the only teams in history to do so. The 99 Rams had a huge point differential, as most of their wins were blowouts. The 91 Redskins were one of the most statistically dominant teams in history...they had 50 sacks while only giving up 9, for instance.
The point is that you had some incredibly impressive teams. I wouldn't say the 99 Rams were cinderella, because they were even better in 2001. The 92-95 Cowboys were probably more like the early 70's Oakland A's in baseball...no single season stands out, but they were well-rounded and could win in a number of different ways. But I don't think you can downgrade teams like the 96 Packers and 91 Redskins because the Cowboys lost in the postseason those years. Those teams were great on their own merits.
96 Packers +7.49
99 Rams +6.91
91 Redskins +6.89
97 Broncos +6.43
94 Niners +6.27
92 Cowboys +5.90
The 96 Packers led the league in points scored and fewest points allowed, one of the only teams in history to do so. The 99 Rams had a huge point differential, as most of their wins were blowouts. The 91 Redskins were one of the most statistically dominant teams in history...they had 50 sacks while only giving up 9, for instance.
The point is that you had some incredibly impressive teams. I wouldn't say the 99 Rams were cinderella, because they were even better in 2001. The 92-95 Cowboys were probably more like the early 70's Oakland A's in baseball...no single season stands out, but they were well-rounded and could win in a number of different ways. But I don't think you can downgrade teams like the 96 Packers and 91 Redskins because the Cowboys lost in the postseason those years. Those teams were great on their own merits.
-
- Posts: 3209
- Joined: Wed Nov 27, 2019 12:43 am
Re: Rank all ’90s Super Bowl winners, #1 - #10
Great points Bryan, as usual ...
Impressive teams or not, I felt the Cowboys from 92-94 should have been the first team to three-peat since the Giants ended the 49ers chance in 1990/91. Of course it hasnt been done since the 60s Packers. I also feel had John Elway came back in 1999, the Broncos would have had a chance as well. I believe the 49ers in 94-95 could have went back-to-back but lost a crucial game to Atlanta to end the 95 season and were just flat against the Packers in the divisional. I feel the Packers in 96-97 should have went back-to-back but the Denver offensive line manhandled their defensive line in the SB. By the end of the game, linemen for GB, including Reggie White, were either gasping for air on the sideline or injured ...
Impressive teams or not, I felt the Cowboys from 92-94 should have been the first team to three-peat since the Giants ended the 49ers chance in 1990/91. Of course it hasnt been done since the 60s Packers. I also feel had John Elway came back in 1999, the Broncos would have had a chance as well. I believe the 49ers in 94-95 could have went back-to-back but lost a crucial game to Atlanta to end the 95 season and were just flat against the Packers in the divisional. I feel the Packers in 96-97 should have went back-to-back but the Denver offensive line manhandled their defensive line in the SB. By the end of the game, linemen for GB, including Reggie White, were either gasping for air on the sideline or injured ...
-
- Posts: 279
- Joined: Wed Apr 05, 2017 2:12 pm
Re: Rank all ’90s Super Bowl winners, #1 - #10
93 Dallas ...One of the best teams of the past 30 years
92 Dallas ...They were just warming up
94 SF ...Steve Young gets his SB, too bad Deion did as well
97 Denv ...Elway finally had a ground game with Davis
95 Dall ...One last run for Troy, Emmitt, and M. Irvin
96 GB ...Great offense but struggled to get past NE in the SB
98 Denv ...Should have played the Vikings in the SB and John may not have gone out a winner
99 St Lou ...To hell with how many points we give up, we'll just score more! The reincarnation of the 51 Rams
91 Wash ...As John Madden said, they were not a great team but there was just no one left to beat them. The Larry Holmes of the NFL
90 NYG ...Great D but mediocre offense at best. Caught Buffalo on a bad day
92 Dallas ...They were just warming up
94 SF ...Steve Young gets his SB, too bad Deion did as well
97 Denv ...Elway finally had a ground game with Davis
95 Dall ...One last run for Troy, Emmitt, and M. Irvin
96 GB ...Great offense but struggled to get past NE in the SB
98 Denv ...Should have played the Vikings in the SB and John may not have gone out a winner
99 St Lou ...To hell with how many points we give up, we'll just score more! The reincarnation of the 51 Rams
91 Wash ...As John Madden said, they were not a great team but there was just no one left to beat them. The Larry Holmes of the NFL
90 NYG ...Great D but mediocre offense at best. Caught Buffalo on a bad day
Re: Rank all ’90s Super Bowl winners, #1 - #10
1991 Redskins were 6-2 against teams with 10 wins or more and came within a few points of being undefeated. They dominated all of their 3 playoff games.Bryan wrote:Eddie Epstein's book "Dominance" looks at Super Bowl champions from a statistical efficiency standpoint. The 90's are an interesting decade because the de facto "Team of the Decade" Cowboys aren't among the most dominant single season teams. Epstein's top teams based on his Adjusted Power Index were:
96 Packers +7.49
99 Rams +6.91
91 Redskins +6.89
97 Broncos +6.43
94 Niners +6.27
92 Cowboys +5.90
The 96 Packers led the league in points scored and fewest points allowed, one of the only teams in history to do so. The 99 Rams had a huge point differential, as most of their wins were blowouts. The 91 Redskins were one of the most statistically dominant teams in history...they had 50 sacks while only giving up 9, for instance.
The point is that you had some incredibly impressive teams. I wouldn't say the 99 Rams were cinderella, because they were even better in 2001. The 92-95 Cowboys were probably more like the early 70's Oakland A's in baseball...no single season stands out, but they were well-rounded and could win in a number of different ways. But I don't think you can downgrade teams like the 96 Packers and 91 Redskins because the Cowboys lost in the postseason those years. Those teams were great on their own merits.
The 1991 Cowboys were not a team to be feared in 1991. They were basically even in turnover differential and total yards gained v given up. They played against backup quarterbacks often enough that year.
Re: Rank all ’90s Super Bowl winners, #1 - #10
1. 1997 Broncos
2. 1996 Packers
3. 1993 Cowboys
4. 1998 Broncos
5. 1992 Cowboys
6. 1994 49ers
7. 1999 Rams
8. 1995 Cowboys
9. 1990 Giants
10. 1991 Redskins
2. 1996 Packers
3. 1993 Cowboys
4. 1998 Broncos
5. 1992 Cowboys
6. 1994 49ers
7. 1999 Rams
8. 1995 Cowboys
9. 1990 Giants
10. 1991 Redskins
- 74_75_78_79_
- Posts: 2420
- Joined: Sat Oct 11, 2014 1:25 pm
Re: Rank all ’90s Super Bowl winners, #1 - #10
There are those who feel that the '90s were the last truly great decade of the NFL (which I, myself, opine). The fact that each and every Lombardi winner that decade was a true-blue Super Bowl champion is an example of this opinion. This is why this is a tough exercise because you don't want to place any of these teams at #10; or #9 or #8 etc for that matter.
The '99 Rams...yes, they had that soft schedule in which the only two playoff teams they met (SB-opponent-to-be, Tennessee, and 8-8 Detroit) were defeats. But you can only play whose on your schedule, and they did win and blowout all those bad teams as a champ ought to do against bad teams, those two losses mentioned were close and each could have gone the other way; and once those playoffs began, they showed their true championship-caliber form. "Soft" teams don't necessarily beat back-to-back smash-mouth teams for the CC and SB respectively! And, FWIW, they (statistically, computer-wise) are the "best team ever" on Whatifsports.com!
The defense still doesn't get credit. No, not as strong as either of the other nine Lombardi winners of the decade, but that obviously by no means is a shame at all. Had that 'Greatest Show' side of ball "only" been as good as their D, the Rams would've still been a winning team albeit the 10-6 or 11-5 variety. Carter, Farr, Fletcher, Wistrom, Lyght, etc...(and the others who rotated in and out of the lineup - keeping things as fresh as possible - as that steamroller of a Titans offense gained more and more momentum as the 2nd half wore on)...they can't be ignored! Just look what they did in the NFCCG vs Tampa when the 'Greatest Show' took the day off! You can't mistakenly lump that unit with the following year's unit which, yes, 2000 was bad! And don't let 2001's greater revamped Rams' D (enter Aeneas - such a shame he didn't get a Ring) allow you to forget the '99 unit either. They clearly were better than any '80s Coryell defense. Otherwise, they don't win or make it to that SB in the first place. Better D than '84 Dolphins and most of Peyton's Colts defenses if not better than them all. I did say two years ago that I thought the Chiefs (2019) D was better than the '99 Rams D. I take that back.
'96 Packers...up until quite recently, I anointed that year's Broncos team as their "equal". Maybe a little bit far-fetched, but not too much so. Shanny did rest/rust his starters down the stretch (thus getting Favre-vs-Mus instead for Wk#15) with many blaming that on their loss to Jax along with taking them lightly. '77 Cowboys #1 in both O&D but with Steelers "out the way", '96 Pack #1 in both as well with Carolina pushing Big D out their way.
That said, bottom-line is (and many of you in here pushed me in this direction) Green Bay was still the best team in the league that year; and I think they beat Dallas in a hypo-NFCCG although I feel GB would have, at least, sweated some before earning their trip to NO (Big D was best in '77 as well and would've beaten the plain old "good" Steelers in a hypo-SBXII match). And, of course, you always place GB over Denver in '96! Yes, Denver was SB-caliber. Yes, it should have been Favre-vs-Elway (and all other starters), Wk#15 - we all would have loved to see that as well as a GB/Den SB that very year! But what happened, happened. And Denver - at home - simply didn't get past the 9-7 Jags. You just got to say they weren't fully ready just yet (maybe next year, and '98). Perhaps they were slightly lesser than the Champs in '96, but still lesser just the same.
'90 Giants...yes, the 3-3 finish which is why everyone is quick to forget that they did start off...10-0! Just like that obvious MNF Classic in Wk#12, that loss to Buffalo could have easily gone the other way. They could have gone 15-1! They beating either SF or Buf in the post-season are very minor upsets at very best - and overall I can't call them upsets at all. They were one of the only three teams going into the playoffs that had a legit shot at winning-it-all. Tuna...Belichick...SBXXI...four playoff berths and five winning seasons in the last six years...this wasn't a team that "came out of nowhere"!
The '91 Champs...may as well say they were 15-1! Superior team! No, they didn't "avoid" Dallas in the playoffs nor take advantage of G-men and San Fran falling off. Many may very well say they are #1 in the '90s. Rypien? Clearly not a HOFer, but if you judge him by just that one year, he was indeed HOF-caliber! Nobody else under center may have done better. Running game, statistically-speaking (Y/A-wise), nothing to jump through hoops over, but as an overall team - especially the defense - they are an all-time great and clearly Gibbs' best-ever team.
But this field of teams is so strong from top-to-bottom that I can only place them where I place them. With all the due-est of due respect for #10, and the ones just above, here are my rankings...
Top 3:
Either '92 & '93 Cowboys tied for #1 with '94 Forty Niners at a solid #3, '92/'93 tied at '1a' with SF at '1c', or (if the wind blows just right/wake up on wrong side of bed) all three tied at one!
A 1994 NFC Championship Game with Jimmy Johnson still with Big D...'Game of the Century'!
4a) & 4b) - '91 Redskins & '90 Giants respectively. The Gibbs/Parcells factor places both teams in both these spots over Shanny and Holmgren. Treat '91 as a 15-1 team, treat '90 as better than 13-3; plain and simple! You can flip-flop or outright tie both these teams and - if the wind blows just right/wake up on wrong side - have either or both invade the three listed above!
6) '98 Broncos - true juggernaut, won first 13 games, would have beaten Minny, IMO. Maybe should be higher.
7) '96 Packers - true jugg as well! Maybe they should be higher also. #1 offense, #1 defense, and - again - best team in '96, regular-season or post!
8) '97 Broncos - juggernaut, but in-guise of a 12-4 wild card who loses at Pit & SF down stretch
9) '95 Cowboys - sloppy but still championship-caliber if however barely at that point (maybe they beat SF in a hypo-NFCCG, maybe), offense goes out-of-commission 2nd Q of SBXXX after Irvin TD called back for OPI, but defense saves the day thus clinching a Dynasty!
10) '99 Rams - again, no shame here! Look at the other nine! Someone, sadly, had to be #10 here. Classic team just the same and do want to see that new flick on them! Really wish they would have also won in '01!
The '99 Rams...yes, they had that soft schedule in which the only two playoff teams they met (SB-opponent-to-be, Tennessee, and 8-8 Detroit) were defeats. But you can only play whose on your schedule, and they did win and blowout all those bad teams as a champ ought to do against bad teams, those two losses mentioned were close and each could have gone the other way; and once those playoffs began, they showed their true championship-caliber form. "Soft" teams don't necessarily beat back-to-back smash-mouth teams for the CC and SB respectively! And, FWIW, they (statistically, computer-wise) are the "best team ever" on Whatifsports.com!
The defense still doesn't get credit. No, not as strong as either of the other nine Lombardi winners of the decade, but that obviously by no means is a shame at all. Had that 'Greatest Show' side of ball "only" been as good as their D, the Rams would've still been a winning team albeit the 10-6 or 11-5 variety. Carter, Farr, Fletcher, Wistrom, Lyght, etc...(and the others who rotated in and out of the lineup - keeping things as fresh as possible - as that steamroller of a Titans offense gained more and more momentum as the 2nd half wore on)...they can't be ignored! Just look what they did in the NFCCG vs Tampa when the 'Greatest Show' took the day off! You can't mistakenly lump that unit with the following year's unit which, yes, 2000 was bad! And don't let 2001's greater revamped Rams' D (enter Aeneas - such a shame he didn't get a Ring) allow you to forget the '99 unit either. They clearly were better than any '80s Coryell defense. Otherwise, they don't win or make it to that SB in the first place. Better D than '84 Dolphins and most of Peyton's Colts defenses if not better than them all. I did say two years ago that I thought the Chiefs (2019) D was better than the '99 Rams D. I take that back.
'96 Packers...up until quite recently, I anointed that year's Broncos team as their "equal". Maybe a little bit far-fetched, but not too much so. Shanny did rest/rust his starters down the stretch (thus getting Favre-vs-Mus instead for Wk#15) with many blaming that on their loss to Jax along with taking them lightly. '77 Cowboys #1 in both O&D but with Steelers "out the way", '96 Pack #1 in both as well with Carolina pushing Big D out their way.
That said, bottom-line is (and many of you in here pushed me in this direction) Green Bay was still the best team in the league that year; and I think they beat Dallas in a hypo-NFCCG although I feel GB would have, at least, sweated some before earning their trip to NO (Big D was best in '77 as well and would've beaten the plain old "good" Steelers in a hypo-SBXII match). And, of course, you always place GB over Denver in '96! Yes, Denver was SB-caliber. Yes, it should have been Favre-vs-Elway (and all other starters), Wk#15 - we all would have loved to see that as well as a GB/Den SB that very year! But what happened, happened. And Denver - at home - simply didn't get past the 9-7 Jags. You just got to say they weren't fully ready just yet (maybe next year, and '98). Perhaps they were slightly lesser than the Champs in '96, but still lesser just the same.
'90 Giants...yes, the 3-3 finish which is why everyone is quick to forget that they did start off...10-0! Just like that obvious MNF Classic in Wk#12, that loss to Buffalo could have easily gone the other way. They could have gone 15-1! They beating either SF or Buf in the post-season are very minor upsets at very best - and overall I can't call them upsets at all. They were one of the only three teams going into the playoffs that had a legit shot at winning-it-all. Tuna...Belichick...SBXXI...four playoff berths and five winning seasons in the last six years...this wasn't a team that "came out of nowhere"!
The '91 Champs...may as well say they were 15-1! Superior team! No, they didn't "avoid" Dallas in the playoffs nor take advantage of G-men and San Fran falling off. Many may very well say they are #1 in the '90s. Rypien? Clearly not a HOFer, but if you judge him by just that one year, he was indeed HOF-caliber! Nobody else under center may have done better. Running game, statistically-speaking (Y/A-wise), nothing to jump through hoops over, but as an overall team - especially the defense - they are an all-time great and clearly Gibbs' best-ever team.
But this field of teams is so strong from top-to-bottom that I can only place them where I place them. With all the due-est of due respect for #10, and the ones just above, here are my rankings...
Top 3:
Either '92 & '93 Cowboys tied for #1 with '94 Forty Niners at a solid #3, '92/'93 tied at '1a' with SF at '1c', or (if the wind blows just right/wake up on wrong side of bed) all three tied at one!
A 1994 NFC Championship Game with Jimmy Johnson still with Big D...'Game of the Century'!
4a) & 4b) - '91 Redskins & '90 Giants respectively. The Gibbs/Parcells factor places both teams in both these spots over Shanny and Holmgren. Treat '91 as a 15-1 team, treat '90 as better than 13-3; plain and simple! You can flip-flop or outright tie both these teams and - if the wind blows just right/wake up on wrong side - have either or both invade the three listed above!
6) '98 Broncos - true juggernaut, won first 13 games, would have beaten Minny, IMO. Maybe should be higher.
7) '96 Packers - true jugg as well! Maybe they should be higher also. #1 offense, #1 defense, and - again - best team in '96, regular-season or post!
8) '97 Broncos - juggernaut, but in-guise of a 12-4 wild card who loses at Pit & SF down stretch
9) '95 Cowboys - sloppy but still championship-caliber if however barely at that point (maybe they beat SF in a hypo-NFCCG, maybe), offense goes out-of-commission 2nd Q of SBXXX after Irvin TD called back for OPI, but defense saves the day thus clinching a Dynasty!
10) '99 Rams - again, no shame here! Look at the other nine! Someone, sadly, had to be #10 here. Classic team just the same and do want to see that new flick on them! Really wish they would have also won in '01!
Last edited by 74_75_78_79_ on Sun Jan 23, 2022 11:30 am, edited 7 times in total.