In other ranking news
Fuck you - I live Tui and every game that year was entertaining as hell, but that 1990 Team would have plungered them.
Discuss
Comments
-
Agree
-
Disagree
-
Neither agree nor disagree
-
-
Tequilla cliff notesHouhusky said:Neither agree nor disagree
-
Agree. Greg Lewis, and our power running game was fun to watch. Brunell could almost hit part of the barn by seasons end and was as fast as say, Steve Young or Jack Lockner but nowhere near as fast as Charlie Ward or Tony Rice before the knee. My personal favorite and least favorite team of all time. Favorite because their weekly plungerings of the Pac sealed my allegiance of Husky football for all time. Least favorite because they sealed my allegiance of Husky football for all time.
-
Let me get this straight. You're watching the Pac 12 network...
Fuuuuuuuuuck. -
That Tui team only lost once and it wasn't to those powder blue faggots from LA in Seattle in November.
I just about spazzed the fuck out when UW let UCLA pull that shit off at home.
The UO team that beat the 2000 Huskies was a damn sight better than UCLA was in 1990, too.
Hard to call that one. -
Dish has some split screen feature where you can watch all the sports channels on game day. Espn had a game on, sec had a game on, some other channels had a football game on...
Pac12 network had a women's soccer match on -
I'm gonna take the unpopular move and say if the 2000 Huskies could beat Miami (Oregon State to a lesser extent) they could beat the 90 team.Houhusky said:Neither agree nor disagree
90 was the better team, but the 2000 team was weird.
Edit: Didn't read your post correctly. It's way too fucking early. -
Well mr know
Well mrs knowledge, the 90 team was not the '91 team. A bottom feeder UCLA team figured that team out, @ husky stadium using a simple shotgun adjustment. No saying that team could stop the option either, they didnt really face it. What made Tui's UW so dangerous was that he could legitimately throw out of it. Very hard to defend.. Thats why nobody but Oregon could beat them (and that barely happened).theknowledge said:Agree. Greg Lewis, and our power running game was fun to watch. Brunell could almost hit part of the barn by seasons end and was as fast as say, Steve Young or Jack Lockner but nowhere near as fast as Charlie Ward or Tony Rice before the knee. My personal favorite and least favorite team of all time. Favorite because their weekly plungerings of the Pac sealed my allegiance of Husky football for all time. Least favorite because they sealed my allegiance of Husky football for all time.
-
Also; Ward was a pocket passer 1st and foremost. Bowden had a really cool offense where Chuck would be under center, then audible to shotgun and visa versa before the snap. He was a gifted runner, very nifty on his feet, but a pocket passer mostly. Rice not so much the same. Different offenses
-
Good chit puppy, though I lean towards the 1990 team being better than the 2000 team. When the 1990 team was on, they could, and did destroy opponents. The game against USC was incredible to witness firsthand. They laid a couple of eggs along the way, but were capable of complete domination. Totally agree with your take on Tui, but the 2000 team had too many close calls for me to think they would have beaten the 1990 team. Just not seeing it.
-
The 1990 was definitely the more talented team
The 2000 team just found ways to win
The two biggest differences were the 90 team had the beginnings of an elite defense whereas 00 was an above average but far from elite defense. In contrast, Tui was SIGNIFICANTLY better in 00 than Brunell was in 90.
The 90 team would probably be a 3.5 or 4.5 point favorite -
The 90 team seemed to lose focus - they fucking lost at home in November to a soft UCLA team while ranked #2 in the country - that is shitting the bed. The 2000 team would fuck around, look like they were going to squander a game away, and screw their heads on a get it done. And they beat a Miami team as good as about any college team you're going to see. Sure they lost to UO, but UO laid a solid win on Texas in the bowl game and beat Wisco earlier in the season - UCLA finished with a losing record in 1990.
4.5 points? No fucking way..................well, maybe by the same kind of assholes that have us (?) ranked #8 right now. -
The 90 team stuffs Tui and the option in the pie hole. The 2000 team was down 15 to Cal at home w/ 4 minutes left in the third and getting manhandled before Cal turned it over on 5 straight possessions iirc. They also had the ending at Stanford, and a 9 minute drive at home versus Arizona in the 4th qtr to finally take the lead with under a minute to play. Yes they did beat Miami, but if that game is played on a neutral field, UW wins 1 out of 10 times.
2000 team found ways to win no doubt, but that 1990 team would have won the NC if there had been a playoff back then and they were one of the teams in it. They were the best team in America by the end of the year. -
lol - yeah, maybe. That was a tough fucking D.godawgst said:The 90 team stuffs Tui and the option in the pie hole. The 2000 team was down 15 to Cal at home w/ 4 minutes left in the third and getting manhandled before Cal turned it over on 5 straight possessions iirc. They also had the ending at Stanford, and a 9 minute drive at home versus Arizona in the 4th qtr to finally take the lead with under a minute to play. Yes they did beat Miami, but if that game is played on a neutral field, UW wins 1 out of 10 times.
2000 team found ways to win no doubt, but that 1990 team would have won the NC if there had been a playoff back then and they were one of the teams in it. They were the best team in America by the end of the year.
-
Funny,dflea said:The 90 team seemed to lose focus - they fucking lost at home in November to a soft UCLA team while ranked #2 in the country - that is shitting the bed. The 2000 team would fuck around, look like they were going to squander a game away, and screw their heads on a get it done. And they beat a Miami team as good as about any college team you're going to see. Sure they lost to UO, but UO laid a solid win on Texas in the bowl game and beat Wisco earlier in the season - UCLA finished with a losing record in 1990.
4.5 points? No fucking way..................well, maybe by the same kind of assholes that have us (?) ranked #8 right now.
Tui's 1999 Team lost to UCLA, which kept them out of the Rose Bowl a year early.
#toumeanliketheUCLAgame
#wedonehere -
Was someone talking about the 99 team?CaptainPJ said:
Funny,dflea said:The 90 team seemed to lose focus - they fucking lost at home in November to a soft UCLA team while ranked #2 in the country - that is shitting the bed. The 2000 team would fuck around, look like they were going to squander a game away, and screw their heads on a get it done. And they beat a Miami team as good as about any college team you're going to see. Sure they lost to UO, but UO laid a solid win on Texas in the bowl game and beat Wisco earlier in the season - UCLA finished with a losing record in 1990.
4.5 points? No fucking way..................well, maybe by the same kind of assholes that have us (?) ranked #8 right now.
Tui's 1999 Team lost to UCLA, which kept them out of the Rose Bowl a year early.
#toumeanliketheUCLAgame
#wedonehere
The 89 Huskies were 8-4 and weren't part of the conversation either. -
90 was a better team.
00 was way more clutch.
I think that's a coin flip game or me. I kind of lean towards 00 ever so slightly, but it could go either way.
90 shouldln't be 4 spots below 00 though, they probably belong one slot apart.
The sad thing is both of them will rank above 92, which should have been the second best of them all.
