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

Do the 1991 Huskies give up 35 points to the 2016 Clemson Tigers?

245

Comments

  • RoadDawg55
    RoadDawg55 Member Posts: 30,408 Standard Supporter
    UW playing 46 against Clemson? They would have gotten torched. Different era.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • TierbsHsotBoobs
    TierbsHsotBoobs Member Posts: 39,680
    Is it Friday yet?
    dnc said:

    creepycoug said:

    Fuck - 1991 teams didn't know what a dual-threat QB was. Watsun torches the '91 D. Uses their pursuit against them, while Mike Williams makes Dana and Walter look like the mediocre cover guys that they were and little Whity Renfro keeps the chains moving on the few 3rd downs they have to convert.

    That's not even close.

    2001 Canes torches them all.

    Quit playing this game. It's only going to result in another depressive episode.

    HR, YK.

    The team that practiced against Mark Brunell all of 1990 and part of 91 would have no clue how to play a QB who could run.

    Might as well not even play the game.
    Who the fuck are you?
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Pitchfork51
    Pitchfork51 Member Posts: 27,680
    Is it Friday yet?
    Every team in 91 would get destroyed by the hurry up no huddle.

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • WilburHooksHands
    WilburHooksHands Member Posts: 6,804
    Bread said:

    Shit man I don't think our 2016 defense gives up that many points.

    Kevin king ain't a pussy like those bama corners he woulda fought for those 50/50 balls.

    This.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • DerekJohnson
    DerekJohnson Administrator, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 69,822 Founders Club
    edited January 2017
    Hell no
    Bread said:

    Shit man I don't think our 2016 defense gives up that many points.

    Kevin king ain't a pussy like those bama corners he woulda fought for those 50/50 balls.

    So this comment is really an indictment of Jake Browning and J Smith
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • TommySQC
    TommySQC Member Posts: 5,813
    Hell no
    FUCK... the players from 91 are in their late 40's
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • WilburHooksHands
    WilburHooksHands Member Posts: 6,804
    DerekJohnson said:

    Bread said:

    Shit man I don't think our 2016 defense gives up that many points.

    Kevin king ain't a pussy like those bama corners he woulda fought for those 50/50 balls.

    So this comment is really an indictment of Jake Browning and J Smith
    I don't think its any secret that we could have beaten Bama with an offense. The defense gave up 17 points.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • HFNY
    HFNY Member Posts: 5,514
    Hell no
    And the OL.
    DerekJohnson said:

    Bread said:

    Shit man I don't think our 2016 defense gives up that many points.

    Kevin king ain't a pussy like those bama corners he woulda fought for those 50/50 balls.

    So this comment is really an indictment of Jake Browning and J Smith
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • HFNY
    HFNY Member Posts: 5,514
    Hell no
    That '91 team had very good depth up and down the roster. It had at least 95 players on scholarship, maybe more depending on when the NCAA dropped the number from 105 (and from an original 120) due to Title IX.

    The '91 offense was also complete and well-rounded. 'Bama had too many short drives in the 2nd half with Scarborough out and a true frosh QB who's a little shaky throwing the ball. Brunell was a college vet, mobile and accurate. The OL (Kennedy, Cunningham) was better than Alabama's too.
    Pitchfork51 said:

    Every team in 91 would get destroyed by the hurry up no huddle.

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter