2016 UW vs. 1991 UW


Comments
-
2016The only reason I voted for 2016 is I think football has evolved so much since then. Our defense would get exposed, and I think 2016 defense would be able to contain our 1991 offense.
-
1991SF, J
-
1991
Stopazumah said:The only reason I voted for 2016 is I think football has evolved so much since then. Our defense would get exposed, and I think 2016 defense would be able to contain our 1991 offense.
-
god damn fuck the offseason, offseason needs to find a fucking fire and jump in.
-
1991
-
1991
GO DAWGS!!!!PurpleJ said: -
1991
But then we have to consider when the game would be played. If the game gets played in 1991, then all the players on the 2016 team would be suddenly born in the early 70s and late 60s, and therefore only have access to the training and coaching available during that era. If the game gets played in 2016, then the 1991 team gets to be born later and have access to all the improvements in training, coaching, and equipment.azumah said:The only reason I voted for 2016 is I think football has evolved so much since then. Our defense would get exposed, and I think 2016 defense would be able to contain our 1991 offense.
But then that would mean neither team would resemble the team it was when it played during their respective time. And that would make the entire idea of comparing the 2 teams silly.
I suppose we could always imagine a scenario where time machines are a thing that exist, and that the 2016 team climbs into a time machine and travels back to the year 1991 to challenge them to a game. But come on...imagine if you're a player for the 1991 team, and all of a sudden this strange machine appears out of nowhere, and all these guys wearing futuristic looking Washington Husky football uniforms (that have black in them for reasons you don't understand) start to get out. That would scare the shit out of you, and likely affect your ability to perform at 100% of your athletic capabilities.
That's why the best way to look at this question is to see which team was more dominant in the era they played in, while considering the competition they faced. Once the time machine is invented, then we can explore other ways to answer these questions.
-
1991If you play the game in 1991 then none of the 2016 players (except deontae cooper RIP) will be born yet. So 91 probably wins.
-
If you put the 2016 team in a time machine they'd be all starstruck by that Stan Emptermann guyFenderbender123 said:
But then we have to consider when the game would be played. If the game gets played in 1991, then all the players on the 2016 team would be suddenly born in the early 70s and late 60s, and therefore only have access to the training and coaching available during that era. If the game gets played in 2016, then the 1991 team gets to be born later and have access to all the improvements in training, coaching, and equipment.azumah said:The only reason I voted for 2016 is I think football has evolved so much since then. Our defense would get exposed, and I think 2016 defense would be able to contain our 1991 offense.
But then that would mean neither team would resemble the team it was when it played during their respective time. And that would make the entire idea of comparing the 2 teams silly.
I suppose we could always imagine a scenario where time machines are a thing that exist, and that the 2016 team climbs into a time machine and travels back to the year 1991 to challenge them to a game. But come on...imagine if you're a player for the 1991 team, and all of a sudden this strange machine appears out of nowhere, and all these guys wearing futuristic looking Washington Husky football uniforms (that have black in them for reasons you don't understand) start to get out. That would scare the shit out of you, and likely affect your ability to perform at 100% of your athletic capabilities.
That's why the best way to look at this question is to see which team was more dominant in the era they played in, while considering the competition they faced. Once the time machine is invented, then we can explore other ways to answer these questions. -
1991#90 vs Nick Harris ... LOL
-
1991
#90 vs the entire 2016 oline. LOLTequilla said:#90 vs Nick Harris ... LOL
-
1991
I'd give Adams, McGary and Eldrenkamp at least a decent chance to hold their own ... Center and Nick Harris would get absolutely abusedCFetters_Nacho_Lover said:
#90 vs the entire 2016 oline. LOLTequilla said:#90 vs Nick Harris ... LOL
-
2016
TL;DR there's a shit load of variables that have to be considered.Fenderbender123 said:
But then we have to consider when the game would be played. If the game gets played in 1991, then all the players on the 2016 team would be suddenly born in the early 70s and late 60s, and therefore only have access to the training and coaching available during that era. If the game gets played in 2016, then the 1991 team gets to be born later and have access to all the improvements in training, coaching, and equipment.azumah said:The only reason I voted for 2016 is I think football has evolved so much since then. Our defense would get exposed, and I think 2016 defense would be able to contain our 1991 offense.
But then that would mean neither team would resemble the team it was when it played during their respective time. And that would make the entire idea of comparing the 2 teams silly.
I suppose we could always imagine a scenario where time machines are a thing that exist, and that the 2016 team climbs into a time machine and travels back to the year 1991 to challenge them to a game. But come on...imagine if you're a player for the 1991 team, and all of a sudden this strange machine appears out of nowhere, and all these guys wearing futuristic looking Washington Husky football uniforms (that have black in them for reasons you don't understand) start to get out. That would scare the shit out of you, and likely affect your ability to perform at 100% of your athletic capabilities.
That's why the best way to look at this question is to see which team was more dominant in the era they played in, while considering the competition they faced. Once the time machine is invented, then we can explore other ways to answer these questions.
If you're looking at how dominant the team was relative to their respective era, then there's no question the '91 team is superior.
I was simply taking the "walking on the shoulders of giants" approach when making my analysis. I think if you gave both teams generic uniforms and game tape of each other and had a month to prepare, in my opinion the 2016 team would have the advantage. They have the higher football IQ thanks to great football that came before them (including the '91 team), and I think sports science has made huge strides in the last 25 years.
Just like when someone asked Wayne Gretzky how he would do if he played today. He just laughed and said he wouldn't even get drafted. -
1991
Plus Pettis/Ross/Chico would have been decapitated by Shane P and Tommie S when Jake throws his pop fly's up in the air to them. One makes the int, the other kills them.Tequilla said:#90 vs Nick Harris ... LOL
-
2016How many more votes to get this thing to 81%?
-
Its 2017 retards
-
The Tug delivers on occasion.rodmansrage said:god damn fuck the offseason, offseason needs to find a fucking fire and jump in.
-
1991The 1991 team was very similar to the 2016 Bama team. Stout defense. Adequate QB that can score at times. Rolled over almost everyone.
-
1991
Brownshorts making plays with Donald Jones and Andy Mason coming at him from both edges.Tequilla said:#90 vs Nick Harris ... LOL
-
1991
The defenses were similar. 91 UW had a significantly better offense than 16 Bama.2001400ex said:The 1991 team was very similar to the 2016 Bama team. Stout defense. Adequate QB that can score at times. Rolled over almost everyone.
-
Gay pole gay thread gay posters.
Fuck this gay bored and gay offseason. Fuck all of you except rodmansrage who apparently, aside from me, is the only non-gay to post here. -
1991
The guy with HIV happens to be one of our two straight poasters.chuck said:Gay pole gay thread gay posters.
Fuck this gay bored and gay offseason. Fuck all of you except rodmansrage who apparently, aside from me, is the only non-gay to post here.
What a time to be alive. -
It happened back when it could still spread via a toilet seat. I spent a year going to school on capital hill which was the only place on earth gayer than this bored.dnc said:
The guy with HIV happens to be one of our two straight poasters.chuck said:Gay pole gay thread gay posters.
Fuck this gay bored and gay offseason. Fuck all of you except rodmansrage who apparently, aside from me, is the only non-gay to post here.
What a time to be alive. -
Gayer than sven's sent items?chuck said:
It happened back when it could still spread via a toilet seat. I spent a year going to school on capital hill which was the only place on earth gayer than this bored.dnc said:
The guy with HIV happens to be one of our two straight poasters.chuck said:Gay pole gay thread gay posters.
Fuck this gay bored and gay offseason. Fuck all of you except rodmansrage who apparently, aside from me, is the only non-gay to post here.
What a time to be alive. -
That's not a place but a dimension of its own, aka hell.GrundleStiltzkin said:
Gayer than sven's sent items?chuck said:
It happened back when it could still spread via a toilet seat. I spent a year going to school on capital hill which was the only place on earth gayer than this bored.dnc said:
The guy with HIV happens to be one of our two straight poasters.chuck said:Gay pole gay thread gay posters.
Fuck this gay bored and gay offseason. Fuck all of you except rodmansrage who apparently, aside from me, is the only non-gay to post here.
What a time to be alive.