Would you trade the 91 natty for Oregon’s success the past 15 years? I think it’s a tougher question for someone like me who was too young to experience 91. I’d also factor in that UW probably recruits better locally in the 2010s and past few years if they’re more successful in that era and the brand is bigger at a crucial time with the PAC-12 dying and NIL.
Anyone under the age of 37ish who answers no to this is a liar
There's somebody here other than Fudgie that's under 37?
Our two biggest demographics here (including lurkers) are 25-34 and 35-44.
For the record I wouldn’t trade it even though I’m on that 37 year old line where I don’t actually remember a single thing prior to 95 really. I did have VHS tapes of the 92 Rose Bowl and a lot of the 91 games I watched a lot in high school and I think things were a lot bigger deals back then than they are in the past 20 years with how splintered the culture and media are. I’d also add that the 91 team is objectively considered a goat team regionally and nationally with non idiots which factors in. It’s not like Colorado’s natty or some team that won with a loss or a down year.
Some context to also consider is how hard it is. Ohio State the last 20 years has one and they barely got into the CFP that year. Since the 70s they only also have the 2002 one which was won on a controversial call.
In the time since around 91 Texas has one, Notre Dame has one, Georgia has zero until two years ago, Michigan has one. It’s really fucking hard. Plenty of teams have lost titles games.
For the record I wouldn’t trade it even though I’m on that 37 year old line where I don’t actually remember a single thing prior to 95 really. I did have VHS tapes of the 92 Rose Bowl and a lot of the 91 games I watched a lot in high school and I think things were a lot bigger deals back then than they are in the past 20 years with how splintered the culture and media are. I’d also add that the 91 team is objectively considered a goat team regionally and nationally with non idiots which factors in. It’s not like Colorado’s natty or some team that won with a loss or a down year.
Some context to also consider is how hard it is. Ohio State the last 20 years has one and they barely got into the CFP that year. Since the 70s they only also have the 2002 one which was won on a controversial call.
In the time since around 91 Texas has one, Notre Dame has one, Georgia has zero until two years ago, Michigan has one. It’s really fucking hard. Plenty of teams have lost titles games.
Deboer has been using the phrase: "Winners win because that's what winners do."
Sounds like something he got from the boards tbh but it's true. No room for narrative once you get the banner flyin
Would you trade the 91 natty for Oregon’s success the past 15 years? I think it’s a tougher question for someone like me who was too young to experience 91. I’d also factor in that UW probably recruits better locally in the 2010s and past few years if they’re more successful in that era and the brand is bigger at a crucial time with the PAC-12 dying and NIL.
Anyone under the age of 37ish who answers no to this is a liar
There's somebody here other than Fudgie that's under 37?
Our two biggest demographics here (including lurkers) are 25-34 and 35-44.
Comments
Some context to also consider is how hard it is. Ohio State the last 20 years has one and they barely got into the CFP that year. Since the 70s they only also have the 2002 one which was won on a controversial call.
In the time since around 91 Texas has one, Notre Dame has one, Georgia has zero until two years ago, Michigan has one. It’s really fucking hard. Plenty of teams have lost titles games.
Sounds like something he got from the boards tbh but it's true. No room for narrative once you get the banner flyin
Another year, another no natty