From: bernie@lgc.com (Bernie De La Torre)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Subject: Re: AFC's best in 1985
Date: 8 Oct 92 17:31:39 GMT
Organization: Landmark Graphics Corp., Houston, Tx.

In article <CPM.92Oct8105652@clyde.clearpoint.com>, cpm@clyde.clearpoint.com (Chris Martel) writes:
|> In article <1992Oct7.224425.2321@ncar.ucar.edu> gary@colossus.cgd.ucar.edu (Gary Strand) writes:
|> 
|> 
|> cm> Chris Martel
|> 
|> cm> The Pats defense, special teams, and running attack beat Miami. It was not
|>     a case of 'The rignt bounces of the ball'. The Pats forced 6 turnovers in
|>     each of their 3 playoff games leading up to the SB.
|> 
|> >Yep, the Pat defense played well for those three games. Too bad they played
|> >so poorly in the SB. 
|> 
|> 
|> The 85 Pats won 3 of 4 post season games. All the wins came on the road. 
|> Miami had two home games and won 1 of 2, barely beating the Browns. Miami 
|> is the best in the AFC? Why didn't they go to the SB then?
|> 
|> 
|> cm> Concerning that Miami victory over the Bears, combine McMahon's absence
|>     from the game (or had limited snaps), his replacement (Tomzak?) did
|>     not play well, a loud Orange bowl crowd, and Marinos quick release and 
|>     you have a victory. 
|> 
|> >A 38-24 victory? What happened to the vaunted Bears defense? They managed
|> >to shut down New England and win 20-7 the 2nd week of the season. In any
|> >case, none of the factors you mention have anything to do with the Bears'
|> >defense, which is what really cost them the game.
|> 
|> The Bears played 19 games winning 18 and their defense had a letdown in 1 
|> game. It just happened to be against Miami. This makes Miami the best in 
|> the AFC even when they played poorly in the playoffs?
|> 
|> cm> Marino's quick release might have made the SB a little closer, but the
|>     best team in the AFC in 1985 was either the Pats or the Raiders.
|> 
|> >A toss-up between Miami, the Jets, the Pats, the Broncos and the Raiders,
|> >I'd say, since all did 11-5 or better, Miami having an edge since they beat
|> >Chicago.
|> 
|> The Pats beat the Jets, the Raiders, and Miami in the playoffs when it 
|> counts. Three of the four teams you mention. Why does this result in
|> Miami getting the edge? why not NE? Oh yeh I forgot, because they beat the 
|> Bears in the regular season. The one victory 'claim to fame'.
|> 
|> 
|> >--
|> >Gary Strand                      Opinions stated herein are mine alone and are
|> >strandwg@ncar.ucar.edu            not representative of NCAR, UCAR, or the NSF

It's kind of stupid to argue about this after the fact. But, I think
most people would agree that a Miami-Chicago Superbowl would have been
a much better game. As it turned out the Patriots got whipped. Miami
actually would have had a chance because of their offense.

Miami had the home field advantage during the playoffs and beat the
Patriots in the final game or near the end of the regular season. All
expectations were that they would go to the superbowl. Yes, they struggled
against Cleveleand, but they came back. They were on there way back
against New england when Carter (I forget his first name) fumbled, and that 
was the end of that. Never heard from him again. This was the beginning
of the decline of the Dolphin's defense.


*-------------------------------------------------------------*
*    Bernie de la Torre  Landmark Graphics Corporation
*    333 Cypress Run     Houston, Texas 77094   (713)-579-4680
*    bdelatorre@lgc.com  Rm 247
*-------------------------------------------------------------*