Bad options. Price doesn't elevate the 2000 team to a win over Miami, nor do they make it to a Rose Bowl. Tui elevates this year's team to 9 or 10 wins, but there aren't enough bad mother fuckers on this team to win the league, and those 9 or 10 wins not only save Sark's ass, but get him another contract extension.
Option A sacrifices a Rose Bowl, option B sacrifices Tui AND saves Sark. Fuck both options.
Team still goes to a Rose Bowl if you swapped Tui for Price. That team only upset one team which was Miami.
Remember that year the Pac-10 was very top heavy. You had Washington, Oregon State and Oregon who were all in the top 10. They all took turns beating each other at home. Meanwhile the rest of the conference was a total dreckfest. Why those three teams that I mentioned went a combined 18-0 against the rest of the league while only going 1-1 against each other.
Look for yourselves. The conference besides those three were all fucking dogshit. All those "great" comeback wins were because Tui couldn't get off to a good start. It's why after every comeback win in the post game presser Gilby was always pissed off.
In fact after the comeback win over Cal he sarcastically said "For just once I'd like to see this 4th quarter offense happen in the first three quarters. That would be a nice change for once".
I would take Tui over Price but this notion that if you replace Tui with a good QB that team crumbles is bullshit.
Not sure they beat Oregon State or Stanford with that swap, and I'm also not convinced the team would have had the same focus. The difference in intangibles between Price and Tui is immense. Griity lead by example performances defined Tui. The team responded to him. That is not what or who Keith Price is. Sorry, I get poking a finger in doogs eyes, but the anti doog rhetoric on this is missing the bigger point.
Bad options. Price doesn't elevate the 2000 team to a win over Miami, nor do they make it to a Rose Bowl. Tui elevates this year's team to 9 or 10 wins, but there aren't enough bad mother fuckers on this team to win the league, and those 9 or 10 wins not only save Sark's ass, but get him another contract extension.
Option A sacrifices a Rose Bowl, option B sacrifices Tui AND saves Sark. Fuck both options.
Team still goes to a Rose Bowl if you swapped Tui for Price. That team only upset one team which was Miami.
Remember that year the Pac-10 was very top heavy. You had Washington, Oregon State and Oregon who were all in the top 10. They all took turns beating each other at home. Meanwhile the rest of the conference was a total dreckfest. Why those three teams that I mentioned went a combined 18-0 against the rest of the league while only going 1-1 against each other.
Look for yourselves. The conference besides those three were all fucking dogshit. All those "great" comeback wins were because Tui couldn't get off to a good start. It's why after every comeback win in the post game presser Gilby was always pissed off.
In fact after the comeback win over Cal he sarcastically said "For just once I'd like to see this 4th quarter offense happen in the first three quarters. That would be a nice change for once".
I would take Tui over Price but this notion that if you replace Tui with a good QB that team crumbles is bullshit.
Not sure they beat Oregon State or Stanford with that swap, and I'm also not convinced the team would have had the same focus. The difference in intangibles between Price and Tui is immense. Griity lead by example performances defined Tui. The team responded to him. That is not what or who Keith Price is. Sorry, I get poking a finger in doogs eyes, but the anti doog rhetoric on this is missing the bigger point.
The Stanford team was shit and they shouldn't have been in that spot to begin with.
Also Oregon State when we defeated was a much different team than they ended up being. That wasn't some miracle comeback. In fact Paul Arnold won that game. We pounded the ball on them the whole game.
Tui had a bad turnover on a 2 point conversation that led to Oregon State getting 2 points in fact. Tripplett had a huge tackle forcing them to kick a long FG.
Had UW played Oregon State in November even with Tui I bet they beat us. I agree Tui had the intangibles but he also sucked for most of the game against bad to average teams why those comebacks were needed.
Bad options. Price doesn't elevate the 2000 team to a win over Miami, nor do they make it to a Rose Bowl. Tui elevates this year's team to 9 or 10 wins, but there aren't enough bad mother fuckers on this team to win the league, and those 9 or 10 wins not only save Sark's ass, but get him another contract extension.
Option A sacrifices a Rose Bowl, option B sacrifices Tui AND saves Sark. Fuck both options.
Team still goes to a Rose Bowl if you swapped Tui for Price. That team only upset one team which was Miami.
Remember that year the Pac-10 was very top heavy. You had Washington, Oregon State and Oregon who were all in the top 10. They all took turns beating each other at home. Meanwhile the rest of the conference was a total dreckfest. Why those three teams that I mentioned went a combined 18-0 against the rest of the league while only going 1-1 against each other.
Look for yourselves. The conference besides those three were all fucking dogshit. All those "great" comeback wins were because Tui couldn't get off to a good start. It's why after every comeback win in the post game presser Gilby was always pissed off.
In fact after the comeback win over Cal he sarcastically said "For just once I'd like to see this 4th quarter offense happen in the first three quarters. That would be a nice change for once".
I would take Tui over Price but this notion that if you replace Tui with a good QB that team crumbles is bullshit.
Not sure they beat Oregon State or Stanford with that swap, and I'm also not convinced the team would have had the same focus. The difference in intangibles between Price and Tui is immense. Griity lead by example performances defined Tui. The team responded to him. That is not what or who Keith Price is. Sorry, I get poking a finger in doogs eyes, but the anti doog rhetoric on this is missing the bigger point.
The Stanford team was shit and they shouldn't have been in that spot to begin with.
Also Oregon State when we defeated was a much different team than they ended up being. That wasn't some miracle comeback. In fact Paul Arnold won that game. We pounded the ball on them the whole game.
Tui had a bad turnover on a 2 point conversation that led to Oregon State getting 2 points in fact. Tripplett had a huge tackle forcing them to kick a long FG.
Had UW played Oregon State in November even with Tui I bet they beat us. I agree Tui had the intangibles but he also sucked for most of the game against bad to average teams why those comebacks were needed.
You're missing a big part of the picture here, no way you run the option with Price, and without the option RN's running game sucked.
Sorry, that team was not special anywhere except the running game and QB. Swap Price for Tui and the running game is gone.
NO WAY 2000 UW goes to the Rose Bowl with Keith Price at QB. Zero chance. That's a 9 win team at best.
And that's assuming Miami didn't snap him in two the second game of the year.
Bad options. Price doesn't elevate the 2000 team to a win over Miami, nor do they make it to a Rose Bowl. Tui elevates this year's team to 9 or 10 wins, but there aren't enough bad mother fuckers on this team to win the league, and those 9 or 10 wins not only save Sark's ass, but get him another contract extension.
Option A sacrifices a Rose Bowl, option B sacrifices Tui AND saves Sark. Fuck both options.
Team still goes to a Rose Bowl if you swapped Tui for Price. That team only upset one team which was Miami.
Remember that year the Pac-10 was very top heavy. You had Washington, Oregon State and Oregon who were all in the top 10. They all took turns beating each other at home. Meanwhile the rest of the conference was a total dreckfest. Why those three teams that I mentioned went a combined 18-0 against the rest of the league while only going 1-1 against each other.
Look for yourselves. The conference besides those three were all fucking dogshit. All those "great" comeback wins were because Tui couldn't get off to a good start. It's why after every comeback win in the post game presser Gilby was always pissed off.
In fact after the comeback win over Cal he sarcastically said "For just once I'd like to see this 4th quarter offense happen in the first three quarters. That would be a nice change for once".
I would take Tui over Price but this notion that if you replace Tui with a good QB that team crumbles is bullshit.
Not sure they beat Oregon State or Stanford with that swap, and I'm also not convinced the team would have had the same focus. The difference in intangibles between Price and Tui is immense. Griity lead by example performances defined Tui. The team responded to him. That is not what or who Keith Price is. Sorry, I get poking a finger in doogs eyes, but the anti doog rhetoric on this is missing the bigger point.
The Stanford team was shit and they shouldn't have been in that spot to begin with.
Also Oregon State when we defeated was a much different team than they ended up being. That wasn't some miracle comeback. In fact Paul Arnold won that game. We pounded the ball on them the whole game.
Tui had a bad turnover on a 2 point conversation that led to Oregon State getting 2 points in fact. Tripplett had a huge tackle forcing them to kick a long FG.
Had UW played Oregon State in November even with Tui I bet they beat us. I agree Tui had the intangibles but he also sucked for most of the game against bad to average teams why those comebacks were needed.
You're missing a big part of the picture here, no way you run the option with Price, and without the option RN's running game sucked.
Sorry, that team was not special anywhere except the running game and QB. Swap Price for Tui and the running game is gone.
NO WAY 2000 UW goes to the Rose Bowl with Keith Price at QB. Zero chance. That's a 9 win team at best.
And that's assuming Miami didn't snap him in two the second game of the year.
You guys are all forgetting that UW that year was picked to win the conference.
Now your option point is a great point. I can't or won't even try to refute that. It's the first good point someone has brought up on this subject instead of the old cliche "Tui willed them in comebacks".
Bad options. Price doesn't elevate the 2000 team to a win over Miami, nor do they make it to a Rose Bowl. Tui elevates this year's team to 9 or 10 wins, but there aren't enough bad mother fuckers on this team to win the league, and those 9 or 10 wins not only save Sark's ass, but get him another contract extension.
Option A sacrifices a Rose Bowl, option B sacrifices Tui AND saves Sark. Fuck both options.
Team still goes to a Rose Bowl if you swapped Tui for Price. That team only upset one team which was Miami.
Remember that year the Pac-10 was very top heavy. You had Washington, Oregon State and Oregon who were all in the top 10. They all took turns beating each other at home. Meanwhile the rest of the conference was a total dreckfest. Why those three teams that I mentioned went a combined 18-0 against the rest of the league while only going 1-1 against each other.
Look for yourselves. The conference besides those three were all fucking dogshit. All those "great" comeback wins were because Tui couldn't get off to a good start. It's why after every comeback win in the post game presser Gilby was always pissed off.
In fact after the comeback win over Cal he sarcastically said "For just once I'd like to see this 4th quarter offense happen in the first three quarters. That would be a nice change for once".
I would take Tui over Price but this notion that if you replace Tui with a good QB that team crumbles is bullshit.
Not sure they beat Oregon State or Stanford with that swap, and I'm also not convinced the team would have had the same focus. The difference in intangibles between Price and Tui is immense. Griity lead by example performances defined Tui. The team responded to him. That is not what or who Keith Price is. Sorry, I get poking a finger in doogs eyes, but the anti doog rhetoric on this is missing the bigger point.
The Stanford team was shit and they shouldn't have been in that spot to begin with.
Also Oregon State when we defeated was a much different team than they ended up being. That wasn't some miracle comeback. In fact Paul Arnold won that game. We pounded the ball on them the whole game.
Tui had a bad turnover on a 2 point conversation that led to Oregon State getting 2 points in fact. Tripplett had a huge tackle forcing them to kick a long FG.
Had UW played Oregon State in November even with Tui I bet they beat us. I agree Tui had the intangibles but he also sucked for most of the game against bad to average teams why those comebacks were needed.
You're missing a big part of the picture here, no way you run the option with Price, and without the option RN's running game sucked.
Sorry, that team was not special anywhere except the running game and QB. Swap Price for Tui and the running game is gone.
NO WAY 2000 UW goes to the Rose Bowl with Keith Price at QB. Zero chance. That's a 9 win team at best.
And that's assuming Miami didn't snap him in two the second game of the year.
You guys are all forgetting that UW that year was picked to win the conference.
Now your option point is a great point. I can't or won't even try to refute that. It's the first good point someone has brought up on this subject instead of the old cliche "Tui willed them in comebacks".
Tui was a very big reason why they were picked to win the conference as he was predicted to be conference player of the year (which he was.)
Bad options. Price doesn't elevate the 2000 team to a win over Miami, nor do they make it to a Rose Bowl. Tui elevates this year's team to 9 or 10 wins, but there aren't enough bad mother fuckers on this team to win the league, and those 9 or 10 wins not only save Sark's ass, but get him another contract extension.
Option A sacrifices a Rose Bowl, option B sacrifices Tui AND saves Sark. Fuck both options.
Team still goes to a Rose Bowl if you swapped Tui for Price. That team only upset one team which was Miami.
Remember that year the Pac-10 was very top heavy. You had Washington, Oregon State and Oregon who were all in the top 10. They all took turns beating each other at home. Meanwhile the rest of the conference was a total dreckfest. Why those three teams that I mentioned went a combined 18-0 against the rest of the league while only going 1-1 against each other.
Look for yourselves. The conference besides those three were all fucking dogshit. All those "great" comeback wins were because Tui couldn't get off to a good start. It's why after every comeback win in the post game presser Gilby was always pissed off.
In fact after the comeback win over Cal he sarcastically said "For just once I'd like to see this 4th quarter offense happen in the first three quarters. That would be a nice change for once".
I would take Tui over Price but this notion that if you replace Tui with a good QB that team crumbles is bullshit.
Not sure they beat Oregon State or Stanford with that swap, and I'm also not convinced the team would have had the same focus. The difference in intangibles between Price and Tui is immense. Griity lead by example performances defined Tui. The team responded to him. That is not what or who Keith Price is. Sorry, I get poking a finger in doogs eyes, but the anti doog rhetoric on this is missing the bigger point.
The Stanford team was shit and they shouldn't have been in that spot to begin with.
Also Oregon State when we defeated was a much different team than they ended up being. That wasn't some miracle comeback. In fact Paul Arnold won that game. We pounded the ball on them the whole game.
Tui had a bad turnover on a 2 point conversation that led to Oregon State getting 2 points in fact. Tripplett had a huge tackle forcing them to kick a long FG.
Had UW played Oregon State in November even with Tui I bet they beat us. I agree Tui had the intangibles but he also sucked for most of the game against bad to average teams why those comebacks were needed.
You're missing a big part of the picture here, no way you run the option with Price, and without the option RN's running game sucked.
Sorry, that team was not special anywhere except the running game and QB. Swap Price for Tui and the running game is gone.
NO WAY 2000 UW goes to the Rose Bowl with Keith Price at QB. Zero chance. That's a 9 win team at best.
And that's assuming Miami didn't snap him in two the second game of the year.
You guys are all forgetting that UW that year was picked to win the conference.
Now your option point is a great point. I can't or won't even try to refute that. It's the first good point someone has brought up on this subject instead of the old cliche "Tui willed them in comebacks".
Tui was a very big reason why they were picked to win the conference as he was predicted to be conference player of the year (which he was.)
Exactly.
Without Tui running the option so well in 99, that team's not picked to win the conference.
Bad options. Price doesn't elevate the 2000 team to a win over Miami, nor do they make it to a Rose Bowl. Tui elevates this year's team to 9 or 10 wins, but there aren't enough bad mother fuckers on this team to win the league, and those 9 or 10 wins not only save Sark's ass, but get him another contract extension.
Option A sacrifices a Rose Bowl, option B sacrifices Tui AND saves Sark. Fuck both options.
Team still goes to a Rose Bowl if you swapped Tui for Price. That team only upset one team which was Miami.
Remember that year the Pac-10 was very top heavy. You had Washington, Oregon State and Oregon who were all in the top 10. They all took turns beating each other at home. Meanwhile the rest of the conference was a total dreckfest. Why those three teams that I mentioned went a combined 18-0 against the rest of the league while only going 1-1 against each other.
Look for yourselves. The conference besides those three were all fucking dogshit. All those "great" comeback wins were because Tui couldn't get off to a good start. It's why after every comeback win in the post game presser Gilby was always pissed off.
In fact after the comeback win over Cal he sarcastically said "For just once I'd like to see this 4th quarter offense happen in the first three quarters. That would be a nice change for once".
I would take Tui over Price but this notion that if you replace Tui with a good QB that team crumbles is bullshit.
Not sure they beat Oregon State or Stanford with that swap, and I'm also not convinced the team would have had the same focus. The difference in intangibles between Price and Tui is immense. Griity lead by example performances defined Tui. The team responded to him. That is not what or who Keith Price is. Sorry, I get poking a finger in doogs eyes, but the anti doog rhetoric on this is missing the bigger point.
The Stanford team was shit and they shouldn't have been in that spot to begin with.
Also Oregon State when we defeated was a much different team than they ended up being. That wasn't some miracle comeback. In fact Paul Arnold won that game. We pounded the ball on them the whole game.
Tui had a bad turnover on a 2 point conversation that led to Oregon State getting 2 points in fact. Tripplett had a huge tackle forcing them to kick a long FG.
Had UW played Oregon State in November even with Tui I bet they beat us. I agree Tui had the intangibles but he also sucked for most of the game against bad to average teams why those comebacks were needed.
You're missing a big part of the picture here, no way you run the option with Price, and without the option RN's running game sucked.
Sorry, that team was not special anywhere except the running game and QB. Swap Price for Tui and the running game is gone.
NO WAY 2000 UW goes to the Rose Bowl with Keith Price at QB. Zero chance. That's a 9 win team at best.
And that's assuming Miami didn't snap him in two the second game of the year.
You guys are all forgetting that UW that year was picked to win the conference.
Now your option point is a great point. I can't or won't even try to refute that. It's the first good point someone has brought up on this subject instead of the old cliche "Tui willed them in comebacks".
What difference does that make? I watched that team all year (and I wasn't 12 either). They weren't very good. Pretty much average across the board except the OL were very good run blockers and good pass blockers and Tui was TUFF as nails and ran the option perfectly. Alexis' big run against Miami was off an option pitch, as were many of the other huge run plays that didn't show up in Tui's stats.
Yes, Tripplett was very good as was Stevens, but the WR's were dreckfest, the RB's weren't special, the rest of the DL was average, the LB's were mediocre and the DB's were populated by true freshman. There wasn't much special about that team. Probably the worst 11-1 team the conference ever produced.
Best pole ever to confuse and out Doogs who want to masquerade as 1%ers.
Hypothetical polls are irrelevant.....unless you barely have a high school diploma and think the Affordable Health Care Act is going to save the world.
Best pole ever to confuse and out Doogs who want to masquerade as 1%ers.
Hypothetical polls are irrelevant.....unless you barely have a high school diploma and think the Affordable Health Care Act is going to save the world.
Comments
Also Oregon State when we defeated was a much different team than they ended up being. That wasn't some miracle comeback. In fact Paul Arnold won that game. We pounded the ball on them the whole game.
Tui had a bad turnover on a 2 point conversation that led to Oregon State getting 2 points in fact. Tripplett had a huge tackle forcing them to kick a long FG.
Had UW played Oregon State in November even with Tui I bet they beat us. I agree Tui had the intangibles but he also sucked for most of the game against bad to average teams why those comebacks were needed.
Sorry, that team was not special anywhere except the running game and QB. Swap Price for Tui and the running game is gone.
NO WAY 2000 UW goes to the Rose Bowl with Keith Price at QB. Zero chance. That's a 9 win team at best.
And that's assuming Miami didn't snap him in two the second game of the year.
Now your option point is a great point. I can't or won't even try to refute that. It's the first good point someone has brought up on this subject instead of the old cliche "Tui willed them in comebacks".
Without Tui running the option so well in 99, that team's not picked to win the conference.
Yes, Tripplett was very good as was Stevens, but the WR's were dreckfest, the RB's weren't special, the rest of the DL was average, the LB's were mediocre and the DB's were populated by true freshman. There wasn't much special about that team. Probably the worst 11-1 team the conference ever produced.