Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
Options

Peach Bowl postmortem

TTJTTJ Member Posts: 4,795
First Anniversary 5 Up Votes 5 Awesomes First Comment
edited April 2018 in Hardcore Husky Board
«1

Comments

  • Options
    CaptainPJCaptainPJ Member Posts: 2,986
    5 Awesomes First Anniversary First Comment 5 Up Votes
  • Options
    TequillaTequilla Member Posts: 19,815
    First Anniversary 5 Awesomes 5 Up Votes 5 Fuck Offs
    That Alabama defense is the best defense I've ever seen in person ... not surprising where all these guys have been drafted.
  • Options
    TTJTTJ Member Posts: 4,795
    First Anniversary 5 Up Votes 5 Awesomes First Comment
    Tequilla said:

    That Alabama defense is the best defense I've ever seen in person ... not surprising where all these guys have been drafted.

    Better than ‘91?
  • Options
    FireCohenFireCohen Member Posts: 21,823
    First Anniversary 5 Awesomes Combo Breaker 5 Up Votes
    TTJ said:

    Tequilla said:

    That Alabama defense is the best defense I've ever seen in person ... not surprising where all these guys have been drafted.

    Better than ‘91?
    Better
  • Options
    TequillaTequilla Member Posts: 19,815
    First Anniversary 5 Awesomes 5 Up Votes 5 Fuck Offs
    TTJ said:

    Tequilla said:

    That Alabama defense is the best defense I've ever seen in person ... not surprising where all these guys have been drafted.

    Better than ‘91?
    I never saw the '91 defense in person
  • Options
    TTJTTJ Member Posts: 4,795
    First Anniversary 5 Up Votes 5 Awesomes First Comment
    Come think of it, neither did I.
  • Options
    SwayeSwaye Moderator, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 41,062
    First Anniversary Combo Breaker 5 Up Votes 5 Awesomes
    Founders Club
    I like to think highlight reels of them steamrolling Shitsocks helped their draft stock.
  • Options
    dncdnc Member Posts: 56,614
    First Anniversary First Comment 5 Awesomes 5 Up Votes
    I saw the 91 defense in person. The Bama defense was better. 91 UW was a much better team than that Bama team, though.
  • Options
    backthepackbackthepack Member Posts: 19,795
    First Anniversary 5 Up Votes Combo Breaker 5 Awesomes

    dnc said:

    I saw the 91 defense in person. The Bama defense was better. 91 UW was a much better team than that Bama team, though.

    the only thing i know is that the 91 UW defense would've broken Browning in half
    Which Bama did.
  • Options
    SoutherndawgSoutherndawg Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 8,234
    5 Awesomes First Anniversary 5 Up Votes First Comment
    Founders Club
    dnc said:

    I saw the 91 defense in person. The Bama defense was better. 91 UW was a much better team than that Bama team, though.

    Different teams, different times, but my money would be on 91 UW holding Clemson to fewer than 35. 2016 Bama also gave up 40 to Ole Miss and 30 to Arkansas. 91 UW gave up 21 to Nebraska and WSU. Just my opinion, but having seen both teams I don't think 2016 Bama defense was better than 91 UW.

    As far as the teams overall, I agree 91 UW was probably better. They are considered amongst the greatest college football teams of all time, were extremely dominant, went undefeated and won a National Championship, whereas 2016 Bama came up one game short, and did look vulnerable at times. IMO, 91 UW had a huge advantage at QB, 2016 Bama had more powerful running backs. 91 UW had a better Oline and a more aggressive defense, particularly on the Dline with a once in a generation DT. 91 UW had good linebackers, but 2016 Bama had stellar linebackers. 91 UW had 11 taken in the 92 draft. 2016 Bama had 10 taken in the 2017 draft. One a truly great team, and the other an outstanding team.

    Obligatory UW is not nor ever has been Bama qualifier. Bama is operating at an extremely high level, as they have done a few times in my lifetime. When Saban leaves, they may flail awhile while trying to find then next Bryant, Stallings, Saban, but they will eventually get there. Pete is not like those guys. I could be wrong, but I doubt he will take take a chance on some of the "fast strategy" types that go to school to be football players only, and that's what it takes to be a Bama or Ohio State. I just don't think it will happen; the school from the administration on down won't allow it, including (likely) Pete himself. The James gang had a bit less reluctance in this area, hence 90-91 UW, and a slew of some of the meanest motherfuckers to ever roll through UW's football program starting in the late 70's and rolling through 2000, along side some surprisingly good "choir boys".
  • Options
    creepycougcreepycoug Member Posts: 22,741
    First Anniversary 5 Up Votes 5 Awesomes Photogenic
    edited May 2018

    dnc said:

    I saw the 91 defense in person. The Bama defense was better. 91 UW was a much better team than that Bama team, though.

    Different teams, different times, but my money would be on 91 UW holding Clemson to fewer than 35. 2016 Bama also gave up 40 to Ole Miss and 30 to Arkansas. 91 UW gave up 21 to Nebraska and WSU. Just my opinion, but having seen both teams I don't think 2016 Bama defense was better than 91 UW.

    As far as the teams overall, I agree 91 UW was probably better. They are considered amongst the greatest college football teams of all time, were extremely dominant, went undefeated and won a National Championship, whereas 2016 Bama came up one game short, and did look vulnerable at times. IMO, 91 UW had a huge advantage at QB, 2016 Bama had more powerful running backs. 91 UW had a better Oline and a more aggressive defense, particularly on the Dline with a once in a generation DT. 91 UW had good linebackers, but 2016 Bama had stellar linebackers. 91 UW had 11 taken in the 92 draft. 2016 Bama had 10 taken in the 2017 draft. One a truly great team, and the other an outstanding team.

    Obligatory UW is not nor ever has been Bama qualifier. Bama is operating at an extremely high level, as they have done a few times in my lifetime. When Saban leaves, they may flail awhile while trying to find then next Bryant, Stallings, Saban, but they will eventually get there. Pete is not like those guys. I could be wrong, but I doubt he will take take a chance on some of the "fast strategy" types that go to school to be football players only, and that's what it takes to be a Bama or Ohio State. I just don't think it will happen; the school from the administration on down won't allow it, including (likely) Pete himself. The James gang had a bit less reluctance in this area, hence 90-91 UW, and a slew of some of the meanest motherfuckers to ever roll through UW's football program starting in the late 70's and rolling through 2000, along side some surprisingly good "choir boys".
    You fucking homers act like he's recruiting Rhodes Scholars who are choosing between playing at Harvard, MIT and Washington. Cheese and Rice.

    Did it ever occur to you that he'd like to grab more guysm like the ones he saw on the other side of the field in the Peach Bowl, except those guysms have a lot of choices and don't all love UW like you guysms do?

    This "won't take a chance" shit is a built-in excuse, and just one click of homer stupid above "academis", neither of which is really a thing.

    Anybody who actually believes (hello Dennis) that Peterman would turn down an elite talent who legitimately wanted to play at UW because OKG or slow strategy or talent-phobia is just fucking stupid. This is a high-paying gig typically held by very serious people who make very serious decisions that are calibrated to generate results that allow for job security.

    Washington can recruit and on occasion recruit at an elite level. But at the end of the day, there is a relative dearth of talent in this region of the country, and Washington isn't a household name in cf, as much as it pains you all to hear that. It's a name, it's a known quantity, it's respected. It's not Kansas State, but it's also not Oklahoma.

    The '91 rewind was special to read. Good God you guys are in love with that fucking team. If the 91 Cal 'too high' Bears could take them to the wire, I think they were just mortal enuff to give Alabama a chance.
  • Options
    creepycougcreepycoug Member Posts: 22,741
    First Anniversary 5 Up Votes 5 Awesomes Photogenic
    dnc said:

    I saw the 91 defense in person. The Bama defense was better. 91 UW was a much better team than that Bama team, though.

    I assume you are referring to the fact that, whenever people talk about the 91 team, they tend to focus on the defense and the offense gets overlooked. This is true. That's the tendency, and the offense, especially the running game, was nails.

    But a "much better" team than bama is a stretch. Better, maybe. Not much.
  • Options
    YellowSnowYellowSnow Moderator, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 33,892
    First Anniversary First Comment 5 Up Votes Combo Breaker
    Swaye's Wigwam

    dnc said:

    I saw the 91 defense in person. The Bama defense was better. 91 UW was a much better team than that Bama team, though.

    Different teams, different times, but my money would be on 91 UW holding Clemson to fewer than 35. 2016 Bama also gave up 40 to Ole Miss and 30 to Arkansas. 91 UW gave up 21 to Nebraska and WSU. Just my opinion, but having seen both teams I don't think 2016 Bama defense was better than 91 UW.

    As far as the teams overall, I agree 91 UW was probably better. They are considered amongst the greatest college football teams of all time, were extremely dominant, went undefeated and won a National Championship, whereas 2016 Bama came up one game short, and did look vulnerable at times. IMO, 91 UW had a huge advantage at QB, 2016 Bama had more powerful running backs. 91 UW had a better Oline and a more aggressive defense, particularly on the Dline with a once in a generation DT. 91 UW had good linebackers, but 2016 Bama had stellar linebackers. 91 UW had 11 taken in the 92 draft. 2016 Bama had 10 taken in the 2017 draft. One a truly great team, and the other an outstanding team.

    Obligatory UW is not nor ever has been Bama qualifier. Bama is operating at an extremely high level, as they have done a few times in my lifetime. When Saban leaves, they may flail awhile while trying to find then next Bryant, Stallings, Saban, but they will eventually get there. Pete is not like those guys. I could be wrong, but I doubt he will take take a chance on some of the "fast strategy" types that go to school to be football players only, and that's what it takes to be a Bama or Ohio State. I just don't think it will happen; the school from the administration on down won't allow it, including (likely) Pete himself. The James gang had a bit less reluctance in this area, hence 90-91 UW, and a slew of some of the meanest motherfuckers to ever roll through UW's football program starting in the late 70's and rolling through 2000, along side some surprisingly good "choir boys".
    You fucking homers act like he's recruiting Rhodes Scholars who are choosing between playing at Harvard, MIT and Washington. Cheese and Rice.

    Did it ever occur to you that he'd like to grab more guysm like the ones he saw on the other side of the field in the Peach Bowl, except those guysms have a lot of choices and don't all love UW like you guysms do?

    This "won't take a chance" shit is a built-in excuse, and just one click of homer stupid above "academis", neither of which is really a thing.

    Anybody who actually believes (hello Dennis) that Peterman would turn down an elite talent who legitimately wanted to play at UW because OKG or slow strategy or talent-phobia is just fucking stupid. This is a high-paying gig typically held by very serious people who make very serious decisions that are calibrated to generate results that allow for job security.

    Washington can recruit and on occasion recruit at an elite level. But at the end of the day, there is a relative dearth of talent in this region of the country, and Washington isn't a household name in cf, as much as it pains you all to hear that. It's a name, it's a known quantity, it's respected. It's not Kansas State, but it's also not Oklahoma.

    The '91 rewind was special to read. Good God you guys are in love with that fucking team. If the 91 Cal 'too high' Bears could take them to the wire, I think they were just mortal enuff to give Alabama a chance.
    I think it's silly that we compare '91 Huskies vs 2016 'Bama. Human beans have gotten much stronger and faster since then. Would Stan even start on a D-Line like Bammer's these days? He was only like 290 which is like 30 lbs less than Greg Gaines. 2001 Miami would kill mid 1980's Miami rather easily.
  • Options
    creepycougcreepycoug Member Posts: 22,741
    First Anniversary 5 Up Votes 5 Awesomes Photogenic
    edited May 2018

    dnc said:

    I saw the 91 defense in person. The Bama defense was better. 91 UW was a much better team than that Bama team, though.

    Different teams, different times, but my money would be on 91 UW holding Clemson to fewer than 35. 2016 Bama also gave up 40 to Ole Miss and 30 to Arkansas. 91 UW gave up 21 to Nebraska and WSU. Just my opinion, but having seen both teams I don't think 2016 Bama defense was better than 91 UW.

    As far as the teams overall, I agree 91 UW was probably better. They are considered amongst the greatest college football teams of all time, were extremely dominant, went undefeated and won a National Championship, whereas 2016 Bama came up one game short, and did look vulnerable at times. IMO, 91 UW had a huge advantage at QB, 2016 Bama had more powerful running backs. 91 UW had a better Oline and a more aggressive defense, particularly on the Dline with a once in a generation DT. 91 UW had good linebackers, but 2016 Bama had stellar linebackers. 91 UW had 11 taken in the 92 draft. 2016 Bama had 10 taken in the 2017 draft. One a truly great team, and the other an outstanding team.

    Obligatory UW is not nor ever has been Bama qualifier. Bama is operating at an extremely high level, as they have done a few times in my lifetime. When Saban leaves, they may flail awhile while trying to find then next Bryant, Stallings, Saban, but they will eventually get there. Pete is not like those guys. I could be wrong, but I doubt he will take take a chance on some of the "fast strategy" types that go to school to be football players only, and that's what it takes to be a Bama or Ohio State. I just don't think it will happen; the school from the administration on down won't allow it, including (likely) Pete himself. The James gang had a bit less reluctance in this area, hence 90-91 UW, and a slew of some of the meanest motherfuckers to ever roll through UW's football program starting in the late 70's and rolling through 2000, along side some surprisingly good "choir boys".
    You fucking homers act like he's recruiting Rhodes Scholars who are choosing between playing at Harvard, MIT and Washington. Cheese and Rice.

    Did it ever occur to you that he'd like to grab more guysm like the ones he saw on the other side of the field in the Peach Bowl, except those guysms have a lot of choices and don't all love UW like you guysms do?

    This "won't take a chance" shit is a built-in excuse, and just one click of homer stupid above "academis", neither of which is really a thing.

    Anybody who actually believes (hello Dennis) that Peterman would turn down an elite talent who legitimately wanted to play at UW because OKG or slow strategy or talent-phobia is just fucking stupid. This is a high-paying gig typically held by very serious people who make very serious decisions that are calibrated to generate results that allow for job security.

    Washington can recruit and on occasion recruit at an elite level. But at the end of the day, there is a relative dearth of talent in this region of the country, and Washington isn't a household name in cf, as much as it pains you all to hear that. It's a name, it's a known quantity, it's respected. It's not Kansas State, but it's also not Oklahoma.

    The '91 rewind was special to read. Good God you guys are in love with that fucking team. If the 91 Cal 'too high' Bears could take them to the wire, I think they were just mortal enuff to give Alabama a chance.
    I think it's silly that we compare '91 Huskies vs 2016 'Bama. Human beans have gotten much stronger and faster since then. Would Stan even start on a D-Line like Bammer's these days? He was only like 290 which is like 30 lbs less than Greg Gaines. 2001 Miami would kill mid 1980's Miami rather easily.
    Hey, I didn't start it. The resident "UW '91 vs. a Tornado" crew started it. Actually, when it comes to the "who would start" line of questioning, it disfavors UW's 91 team in particular, because there were more good college players on that team, rather than elite football talent guys, than people care to admit. Emtman created a lot of havoc up front, which allowed a lot of guys who didn't have the talent to get a cup of coffee in the NFL to make a lot of plays. Credit them for that, but you have to ask yourself just how mean Washington's D would have been w/o him. Ultimately, it doesn't matter because they had him, but going through the "Andy Mason" analysis isn't going to do the '91 Doog Legend Storytelling Group any favors.

    2001 Miami, playing their best football, beats any team I've seen to date when playing their best football. The weapons on that crew still stand out as an embarrassment of riches, even by the standards of today's Bama teams. They had a future HOFer sitting two deep on the bench despite averaging 9yds. a carry every tim he touched the ball. They were stacked with pro bowl level talent all over the field, and carried with them anywhere from two (Reed and Gore) to four (Reed, Gore, Johnson and Wilfork) HOFers. That's not counting Sean Taylor, who was on the bench at that point, who was an elite NFL player who stood as good a chance as any to be a first ballot guy had he not been killed. And that's after losing Reggie Wayne, who I think eventually gets in, Dan Morgan & Santana Moss the year before.

    That team coached itself to a title. Uncle Fester was perhaps the ultimate example of a caretaker.

Sign In or Register to comment.