Professional Football Researchers Association Forum

The only team in NFL history to start 0-4 and make the playoffs

From October/December, they lost only once and even that was by 2 points at Arrowhead

Given how no AFC team won 12 games, San Diego was THATCLOSE to homefield advantage throughout the playoffs and would have hosted Buffalo (remember Jim Kelly never played the Chargers )

It was mostly the same roster, minus Stan Humphries, that under Dan Lanning had practically invented new and unique ways to lose close games (1991 they were in just about ever game and only got blown out once)

I am not sure, but maybe Bobby Ross is the only coach to come from college and have a winning record in his first year in the NFL? I know Ross handled Special Teams for Marv Levy in Kansas City for a few years. Yep, Dan Henning did not have any winning seasons as an NFL head coach.

Just imagine had Bobby Ross taken over for the Chargers in '89! Such a scrappy, gritty respectable team they had the years leading up to he getting there. I really have a fondness for their '89 squad ('90 as well; both seasons, each at 6-10 mind you, they finished with a positive net Y/P; top-6 defense each year). Their game at Three Rivers against the Steelers a solid, brute clash to watch. They beating the Eagles, dropping the Birds to 6-3, I feel was the highlight of that season (my college roommate saying, "they're the team of the future"). It reeked of promise that wouldn't come to fruition; not immediate, at least. But, sadly, gritty respectability often times doesn't always equate to wins. All that close-losses stuff suddenly turned around with the right change in culture in '92.

Henning was a good overall coach, OC or position coaching, but perhaps was missing something at the 'head' spot. As the ironic case with other HCs who were coordinators, despite one side of the ball being your specialty, which in Dan's case was offense, it was the offense that lacked dynamic as the defense carried them to respectability instead.

The Chargers' schedule strength in '92 was compacted into the first four games: three playoff teams and a Broncos team that started 7-3 before collapsing. They lost all four games by a combined 95-29! They then went 11-1 the rest of the way, the one loss being another loss to KC for the sweep; Chiefs beat them in the opener. The only above-500 who SD beat in that remaining stretch were the 9-7 Colts twice.

One could have docked them going into the playoffs for feasting off an easier schedule the rest of the way, going 0-4 vs playoff teams, but you can only play who's on your schedule and it was simply a case of it being early in the season before the new system under Ross coming into form. Shutting out KC in the 1st Rd, 17-0. proved that they deserved it. They lost at home to the Steelers in Wk#3, 23-6, and then got shutout at Houston the following week, 27-0. Win-or-lose, sure-enough had SD played either of those teams come playoff time, a different story. They get schlacked at Miami, 31-0, in horrid conditions in the divisional round.

It's not fair to assume they advance over the Dolphins had the weather been normal, but likely a competitive contrast-in-style game it would have been. And, yes, they and Buffalo ever having met in a playoff game would have been an even more interesting match-up! A shame we didn't see that. Statistically, '92 was the stronger team than the one that made the Super Bowl two years later. Even if they beat Miami in a fair-weather game, they'd still have to play against a 'hot' off that Comeback (and then convincer at Pittsburgh) seasoned, resilient chomping-at-the-bit to get back to the Super Bowl, Buffalo team who IRL played lights-out at Miami in the AFCCG. Even with the game being in SD doesn't make it a sure thing. And if they do get by...does Stan & Co, even with that defense, really do any better vs Big D than they did vs San Fran two years later?

Had SD not finished in 5th-place the year before (which helps explain their light schedule in '92), they would have not only had the opportunity to play against Dallas, but also Philly & Washington. And if the game would be scheduled early enough, a Ray Handley Giants team who started 5-4 before their collapse.

1994 will always be the team to remember due to them actually making it all the was to the Super Bowl. After that sophmore-jinx for Ross letdown in '93, they start off 6-0 and yes coast the rest of the way to that 2nd-seed finish, but get it done when it mattered with two close ones over Miami and then the 'Burgh. Yes, huge upset the latter, but a credit to Bobby Ross simply exemplifying what an underrated coach he was and will always be. A much longer run it likely would have been had he, or someone his level or above (Parcells?) would have gotten there in '89 instead.

And a shame Anthony MIller, Gill Byrd, Billy Ray Smith Jr, Lee Williams, Burt Grossman, etc didn't make it to '94.

Miller...not just missing '94 SD, but playing for the '96 Broncos only to, the following year, go to...(6-10 to be)...Dallas!

And, yes, they and Buffalo ever having met in a playoff game would have been an even more interesting match-up!

If it doesn't rain in Miami, and the Chargers find a way to win there, I think they have a good shot at home against the Bills the next week. They had an NFC East Washington Redskin style of offense (big TE's, big O-line, and Butts and Bernstine ready to come at Buffalo and grind them down).

What did all of you think of John "Deep" Friesz? Do you feel that season-ending knee-injury in the '92 pre-season hampered potential he may have had? Or would he have been of non-superstar status anyway? He apparently was a phenomenal high school and Idaho Vandals QB. I always thought that Stan Humphries was brought in to be a starter initially. I didn't know he first got the starting job because of Friesz's injury.

Nice article below...

https://www.nytimes.com/1993/01/01/spor ... ineer.html

"Boss Ross" yelling at the players on the plane ride home from that pre-season loss in which Friesz went out for the season. They were playing cards and being a bit loud. According to Grossman's quote, Henning would allow that; also play cards with them.

7DnBrnc53 wrote: ↑Tue Oct 14, 2025 4:17 pm

And, yes, they and Buffalo ever having met in a playoff game would have been an even more interesting match-up!

If it doesn't rain in Miami, and the Chargers find a way to win there, I think they have a good shot at home against the Bills the next week. They had an NFC East Washington Redskin style of offense (big TE's, big O-line, and Butts and Bernstine ready to come at Buffalo and grind them down).

A One dimensional style of offense just like those outdated NFC East teams who were basically one trick ponies: big, slow, plodding, boring, literally an offensive line and nothing else.

A One dimensional style of offense just like those outdated NFC East teams who were basically one trick ponies: big, slow, plodding, boring, literally an offensive line and nothing else.

Teams that the Bills had trouble with in the Super Bowl.

A nice defense, 4th in points allowed at just 15.1 / Game; Seau 2nd in DPOY voting and Leslie O'Neal 5th in voting with his 17 Sacks. Also Chris Mims probably had his best season as a rookie that year.

Back to that Chargers at Steelers game from '89, it was a bigger game that year than you'd think. Both teams were 4-6 going in and were actually going in different directions. SD, as already mentioned, beat the Eagles two weeks earlier and then followed that up with another 'W', also at home, against a Raider team that was winning since Art Shell took over. They were hot on a 2-game win-streak while Pittsburgh, who became respectable after those first two games, looked to start digressing on back. First they get blown-out against the Broncos in their regular season match at Mile High, and then at home get shut-out for the third time that season to the Bears who were now struggling but were mad over their 'asterisk'-loss at Green Bay the week before (of course, it'd be the Bears' very last win in '89).

Despite Steelers being favorite by 3, all would have seemed to look like a third-straight win for the Bolts going in. And SD sure outplayed them stat-wise, out-gaining them in yardage for starters, 359-191. Their D, as the reoccurring theme during the Henning years, played their hearts our but all in vain. As Vegas called it, Steelers indeed won by three, 20-17.

Going in, SD was one of four teams to not allow a punt or kickoff return for a TD so far in '89 while the Steelers were one of two teams to not score a punt or kickoff return for a TD. However, in the 3rd Q, Rod Woodson returns a kickoff 84 yards to the house. Chargers special teams mishaps and a late McMahon INT is what did it for the 'Burgh in an, obvious now, important win.

Had they lost, and finish 4-1 from there starting in Miami the following week as they actually did, they come up just short, Woodruff doesn't have his teammates over thus they not on MNF via-satellite Christmas Night. As for SD, tough to say, They still would have had to shake their tendency to find a way to lose close games, but being 5-6 (and being even hotter on a, now, three-game tear) a big difference from 4-7 which they now were after that loss. Safe to say that may have taken some stuffing out of them (lost yet another close one, in Indy, the following week and then the week after that they lost at home to the Jets).

Yes, McMahon was their QB in '89. As the case with the Wk#4 game I saw live two years later, it was he vs Brister QB battle. When it comes to Jim McMahon hypotheticals, the one that matters the absolute most - if not the only one that matters - is he being healthy and at full-potential his entire time in Chicago, '86 in-particular, as well as he still being there years beyond '88 and at that very level.

But with he being gone from the Windy City when he was, no going back, thinking of how he'd be at full health and potential as a Charger well into the '90s not a bad thought. With the 'characters' the Bolts had at the time, rookie Grossman actually being the loudest of them (https://vault.si.com/vault/1990/10/15/a ... lue-streak), it looked to be a good fit, a new home for Jim if he wasn't going to stay in Chi-town. Kind of like Stabler - if he wasn't going to stay with the Raiders, then playing for Bum in that 'fun' environment a sensible alternative.

Back to Jimmy Mac, nothing against Stan, but he being there for the Bobby Ross years sure would have been an upgrade at QB. Not sure how much a difference it'd make against Dallas in '92 or San Fran in '94, but perhaps advancing further in '95? Maybe making the playoffs in '93?

Yes, this is supposed to be a thread on the '92 Chargers. The thing is, though, you can't mention them without thinking of the struggle-some years leading up as well as not being able to think of....1994. What makes 1992 special is you had those Henning studs who were still there, at least experiencing that one playoff berth/division title, joined with Seau and newer additions who, unlike them unfortunately, would indeed experience 1994. For that, if I was a Charger-fan, I'd look to '92 with more love than '94 if only for that reason. Yes, Leslie O'Neal and I assume some others were in SD for both those periods. '92 was a stronger team. They just may have (or maybe not) run into bad luck in Miami with those field conditions while the made-over '94 version simply overachieved like crazy in those AFC playoffs.


PS - and Burt...he should have been a Steeler. He did play at Pitt, and his cousin being Randy and all. Don't know why he didn't want to play for them. He could have simply stayed put, walk to the home games! He with Lloyd and, later, Kevin Greene...

7DnBrnc53 wrote: ↑Tue Oct 14, 2025 10:46 pm

A One dimensional style of offense just like those outdated NFC East teams who were basically one trick ponies: big, slow, plodding, boring, literally an offensive line and nothing else.

Teams that the Bills had trouble with in the Super Bowl.

Teams that were basically 3 yards and a cloud of dust.

Power without speed, physicality without separation, quarterbacks that outside of Montana were basically glorified handoff machines.