Rank the 1990, 1992, 2000, and 2016 UW teams
Comments
-
True, but 90 has by far the worst loss of any of the teams on that list. That's why they're below 84 and 16 for me.TTJ said:The '90 and '84 teams were both excellent. Both came within a whisker of being national champs. '16 wasn't quite at that level, but '17 should be. The '00 team was merely good, but with huge heart.
That UCLA game in 90 was probably the most costly loss of my lifetime. -
Probably true about CW and AV. That's still a lot less talent than 2016 had in the secondary though.Quietcowskee said:
2000 had more talent than people recognize. CW had NFL talent, and so did Vontoure. Pharms could've stayed in the league a while.Fire_Marshall_Bill said:2000
1990
2016
1992
1992 only scored three points against a good, but not great Arizona defense, got clobbered by Cougit losers, and lost three games. They're a disappointment and last.
2016's schedule was too weak.
2000 probably had the least talent, but they won the Rose Bowl, beat Miami, and only lost once.
Fucking Neu and his "Built for Prison" program derailed a lot of that.
And if we're going by who started the season rather than who ended it that gives 2016 Mathis and Azeem and a noodle armed Jake rather than a broken noodle armed Jake.
Cakewalk. -
Ugh. Good idea for a thread though. See you there.dnc said:
True, but 90 has by far the worst loss of any of the teams on that list. That's why they're below 84 and 16 for me.TTJ said:The '90 and '84 teams were both excellent. Both came within a whisker of being national champs. '16 wasn't quite at that level, but '17 should be. The '00 team was merely good, but with huge heart.
That UCLA game in 90 was probably the most costly loss of my lifetime. -
The voice of reason. Cheers.Dennis_DeYoung said:1990 - Almost as good as the '91 team.
1992 - Pre-BJH fiasco they were good. Post? Not so much.
2016 and 2000 were about equal.
It would be hard to say 2000 > 2016, but Marques was just really hard to beat. If you put Marques on the 2016 team, it's possible no one beats them.
That 2000 team wasn't even that good. The 2016 team was a great team, but talent is way lower than the '90 and '92 teams. A clutch QB and some depth and 2016 would've been a truly great team.
