1992 #20 USC @ #1 Washington No Huddle

DerekJohnson

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A9fe6H_wPqM

JaWarrenJaHooker

https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1992-10-04-sp-977-story.html

chuck

I was there. The cracks were showing. SC was faster and more athletic. UW defense still lived in the backfield but struggled to bring guys down. The corners couldn't hang with SCs 5* receivers. UWs receivers couldn't separate and Beno/Kauffman couldn't run away from a stacked box full of great athletes.

So yeah, we walked out of there shaking our heads in doubt over the #1 ranking.

RaceBannon

USC was always a tough out. It was 14-0 in 91 and USC won three games that year. Both those games hurt us but I was just glad to beat those fuckers by any score


Also in 1991 the big reason we "knew" UW could win it all was because UCLA wasn't on the schedule. They had won 3 games in 1990, one of them being one of the worst losses ever for our DAWGS

UW under James had 80% of the schedule on lockdown. They didn't lose to Cal, Stanford, or the NW Three. Those were W's going in

It was always between UW, UCLA, USC, and ASU for recruits and the league. It's why UW was first or second for years and years under James

Today we have no one on lockdown. Cal and Stanford are mysteries, Oregon always wins. We just have the Apple Cup

dnc

RaceBannon said:

USC was always a tough out. It was 14-0 in 91 and USC won three games that year. Both those games hurt us but I was just glad to beat those fuckers by any score


Also in 1991 the big reason we "knew" UW could win it all was because UCLA wasn't on the schedule. They had won 3 games in 1990, one of them being one of the worst losses ever for our DAWGS

UW under James had 80% of the schedule on lockdown. They didn't lose to Cal, Stanford, or the NW Three. Those were W's going in

It was always between UW, UCLA, USC, and ASU for recruits and the league. It's why UW was first or second for years and years under James

Today we have no one on lockdown. Cal and Stanford are mysteries, Oregon always wins. We just have the Apple Cup

Why do you hate Britain Covey?

RaceBannon

I just hate Utah

DerekJohnson

RaceBannon said:

USC was always a tough out. It was 14-0 in 91 and USC won three games that year. Both those games hurt us but I was just glad to beat those fuckers by any score


Also in 1991 the big reason we "knew" UW could win it all was because UCLA wasn't on the schedule. They had won 3 games in 1990, one of them being one of the worst losses ever for our DAWGS

UW under James had 80% of the schedule on lockdown. They didn't lose to Cal, Stanford, or the NW Three. Those were W's going in

It was always between UW, UCLA, USC, and ASU for recruits and the league. It's why UW was first or second for years and years under James

Today we have no one on lockdown. Cal and Stanford are mysteries, Oregon always wins. We just have the Apple Cup

*14-3

RaceBannon

DerekJohnson said:

RaceBannon said:

USC was always a tough out. It was 14-0 in 91 and USC won three games that year. Both those games hurt us but I was just glad to beat those fuckers by any score


Also in 1991 the big reason we "knew" UW could win it all was because UCLA wasn't on the schedule. They had won 3 games in 1990, one of them being one of the worst losses ever for our DAWGS

UW under James had 80% of the schedule on lockdown. They didn't lose to Cal, Stanford, or the NW Three. Those were W's going in

It was always between UW, UCLA, USC, and ASU for recruits and the league. It's why UW was first or second for years and years under James

Today we have no one on lockdown. Cal and Stanford are mysteries, Oregon always wins. We just have the Apple Cup

*14-3

QLITP

PurpleBaze

DerekJohnson said:

RaceBannon said:

USC was always a tough out. It was 14-0 in 91 and USC won three games that year. Both those games hurt us but I was just glad to beat those fuckers by any score


Also in 1991 the big reason we "knew" UW could win it all was because UCLA wasn't on the schedule. They had won 3 games in 1990, one of them being one of the worst losses ever for our DAWGS

UW under James had 80% of the schedule on lockdown. They didn't lose to Cal, Stanford, or the NW Three. Those were W's going in

It was always between UW, UCLA, USC, and ASU for recruits and the league. It's why UW was first or second for years and years under James

Today we have no one on lockdown. Cal and Stanford are mysteries, Oregon always wins. We just have the Apple Cup

*14-3

From memory or Google?

LoneStarDawg

Did Walter Bailey fumble the ball after that INT at the end of the game? It looks like he just drops the ball in the end zone.

JaWarrenJaHooker

chuck said:

I was there. The cracks were showing. SC was faster and more athletic. UW defense still lived in the backfield but struggled to bring guys down. The corners couldn't hang with SCs 5* receivers. UWs receivers couldn't separate and Beno/Kauffman couldn't run away from a stacked box full of great athletes.

So yeah, we walked out of there shaking our heads in doubt over the #1 ranking.

Losing Bailey and McKay hurt. Those guys were good

DerekJohnson

PurpleBaze said:

DerekJohnson said:

RaceBannon said:

USC was always a tough out. It was 14-0 in 91 and USC won three games that year. Both those games hurt us but I was just glad to beat those fuckers by any score


Also in 1991 the big reason we "knew" UW could win it all was because UCLA wasn't on the schedule. They had won 3 games in 1990, one of them being one of the worst losses ever for our DAWGS

UW under James had 80% of the schedule on lockdown. They didn't lose to Cal, Stanford, or the NW Three. Those were W's going in

It was always between UW, UCLA, USC, and ASU for recruits and the league. It's why UW was first or second for years and years under James

Today we have no one on lockdown. Cal and Stanford are mysteries, Oregon always wins. We just have the Apple Cup

*14-3

From memory or Google?

Memory of course