NFL Network's Top 10 What-Ifs: Number 8

In 1993, Dallas lost to the Redskins by 30+ points (in the Week 1 MNF opener). A Skin team that was getting ready to fall off a cliff. They only lost to Buffalo by three points.

And, I didn't say that the 91 Skins had a weak schedule (they played eight games against teams that finished above .500). I just said that the NFC wasn't a juggernaut that year.
Oops, my bad. You're right, it was the Redskins who put up the thirty-burger, which is at least as embarrassing for Dallas as the Saints doing the same to Houston was. I still think Dallas wins that matchup, but I'll concede that point.

Does it matter that the NFC wasn't a juggernaut that year? The stats say they were an all-time team. They flattened everyone in their path in the playoffs; they didn't play down to the competition at all.
 
Since I promised a list of coaching changes following both 1991 and 1992, let's talk about Parcells and what might have happened had he chosen to stay
in coaching.

In '91, the open jobs other than the Giants were Cleveland, New England, Philadelphia, and Tampa. The two that intrigue me are Cleveland and Philly; Cleveland because the teacher is hired in place of his star pupil and just may bring enough star power to somehow alter history enough to keep the original version of the Browns in town, and Philly because of the white-hot nature of the Giants-Eagles rivalry. Hiring Parcells fresh off of a Super Bowl win might have been the type of victory for the Eagles that no amount of wins on the field by the Giants could have made up for.

I'll handle '92 in a separate post. If anyone has any thoughts about Parcells in Foxboro two years early or actually taking the Tampa job instead of screwing Hugh Culverhouse around, feel free to share them.
 
Last edited:
Oops, my bad. You're right, it was the Redskins who put up the thirty-burger, which is at least as embarrassing for Dallas as the Saints doing the same to Houston was. I still think Dallas wins that matchup, but I'll concede that point.

Does it matter that the NFC wasn't a juggernaut that year? The stats say they were an all-time team. They flattened everyone in their path in the playoffs; they didn't play down to the competition at all.

It was bad for both Dallas and Houston, because they got pounded by teams that were ready to decline. However, Dallas was struggling without Emmitt, and the Oilers were going through all sorts of turmoil that whole season. It took a while for them to get it going.

And, it doesn't matter if the NFC wasn't a juggernaut in 91. However, just because they have these great stats doesn't make them an all-time great team.
 
Without digging, Hornet, I know the Steelers had to replace Chuck Noll after '91, and I also know that Parcells was never seriously considered for the job, probably because he was too set in his ways. I can put together a list a little later of jobs that were open in '91 and '92 if you'd like.

I do remember that he almost took the Tampa job before the '92 season, but backed out at the last second. It almost ruined his career, as he was vilified in a similar way to Josh McDaniels after he turned down the Colts a few months back.


The candidates were Cowher, Wannstedt, and Mean Joe Greene.
 
Mike Holmgren was a serious candidate too before he went to Green Bay. There were a couple of others that I can't think of at the moment.
 
In 1993, Dallas lost to the Redskins by 30+ points (in the Week 1 MNF opener). A Skin team that was getting ready to fall off a cliff. They only lost to Buffalo by three points.

And, I didn't say that the 91 Skins had a weak schedule (they played eight games against teams that finished above .500). I just said that the NFC wasn't a juggernaut that year.

Keep in mind the 1993 Cowboys did not have Emmitt Smith for the first two games because of his contract hold out...
 
Top