Charles Mann vs. Sam Huff

Advantage: Mann

As was pointed out by many of you during the Huff-Hanburger matchup in the first round, many of Huff's greatest accomplishments came when he was with the Giants. While Mann did play with the 49ers at the end of his career, he still had his best years in Washington. The edge here goes to Mann because of his contributions to a pair of Redskins championship teams.

By Jason Feller |  August 9, 2006; 6:41 PM ET
Previous: Ken Houston vs. Mark Murphy | Next: Darrell Green vs. Ken Houston

Comments

Please email us to report offensive comments.



What bonehead put this list together? Mann certainly deserves "nicest" Redskin but if Gibbs had lost him in '82 he wouldn't have cried as much as if he'd lost ANY of the Hogs. or Warren. Or Walker. Or, for Heaven's sake, Joe Washington! The team just didn't live or die on the play of its defensive line. Mann played in a 4-3, meaning he had 25% more help on the line than most DE's get. The problem is neither guy in this bracket should beat any number of Skins including the fellas I mentioned and plenty more.

Posted by: Greg DePaul | August 12, 2006 05:59 PM

It's absurd that Huff has made it this far- as someone else noted, voting for Huff here is like voting for Art Monk on a list of all-time greatest Jets. Mann may not have been one of the greatest DEs of his era, but he was a great leader and great contributor to the first Gibbs era. In other words, he may not have been a Hall of Famer, but he was a great Redskin. Mann by a mile!

Posted by: Lou Jones | August 15, 2006 08:50 AM

mann over Manley. No way!!!!! But I am just glad my 2 favorite Redskins are facing off in the final round. Green and Monk. I am not sure they are the greatest Skins, but they sure are great people.

Posted by: Henry71 | August 15, 2006 11:09 AM

How about Ron Dole (the dancing bear) vs. Wahoo McDaniel. This would be more interesting!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by: Charlie | August 18, 2006 01:14 PM

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.




 
 

© 2007 The Washington Post Company