I know you (Cal) weren't talking about the '91 Wolverines. You simply stated that you saw the '97 Wolverines play one game, and I was replying to tell you that I saw the '91 Dawgs play the Rose Bowl...which happened to be against Michigan.

I guess I could develop that a little further....that was just one of about 8 Husky games I saw in person that year. All those other teams mentioned (97 Michigan, 95 Nebraska etc)...well I never saw them play in person, so I have nothing to compare it to, so I will never change my mind about the Dawgs.

Obviously you never saw that Husky team play live, so you probably won't change your mind either...but I'm telling you, I will take that team against ANY other team EVER and I would bet on the Dawgs to win.

And yes, there's a fucking East coast bias, even if you're talking about Michigan, because aside from the occasional ridiculous USC team, Pac-10 football gets no respect, while the Big 10 and Big XII (and all the East coast conferences) relish in the media attention that the Pac-10 deserves also. Of course there are exceptions, but by and large, the West coast gets shit on.

U-Dub sucks

Go Blue!


Was this part of another thread or something?

how can you say the 91 washington team is the most dominant ever if you never even saw the other teams play?

Moved from the RM Photo Album in GD (I didn't want that thread to get locked).

I saw that team play in the Rose Bowl. They were dominant. I dont know about most dominant ever, but they walked into Lincoln Nebraska and were getting killed and my hero Billy Joe led them back to victory.

36-21 UW, if memory serves.

Jay Barry with a monster TD run in that game.

XXX, you were like 10 when all of this happened. i highly doubt you were the "college football expert" you are now back then. saying you witnessed the most dominant team ever is laughable.

saying they could beat any team in the history of college football is one of the stupidest statements i have ever seen on this board. thats great you like your local team and all, but show some respect for teams that would dominate the '91 huskie team.

i loved the '97 wolverine team (and they were dominant), but i would never be stupid enough to say they were better than the '68 Ohio State team or the '71 and '95 Nebraska teams.

[quote="Cal Varnsen"]XXX, you were like 10 when all of this happened. i highly doubt you were the "college football expert" you are now back then. saying you witnessed the most dominant team ever is laughable.

saying they could beat any team in the history of college football is one of the stupidest statements i have ever seen on this board. thats great you like your local team and all, but show some respect for teams that would dominate the '91 huskie team.

i loved the '97 wolverine team (and they were dominant), but i would never be stupid enough to say they were better than the '68 Ohio State team or the '71 and '95 Nebraska teams.[/quote]



What's scary about those Nebraska teams is they're saying Neb's new recruiting class could usher that age back in and be seniors on a team that good (or heaven forbid, better)

[quote="parchy"][quote="Cal Varnsen"]XXX, you were like 10 when all of this happened. i highly doubt you were the "college football expert" you are now back then. saying you witnessed the most dominant team ever is laughable.

saying they could beat any team in the history of college football is one of the stupidest statements i have ever seen on this board. thats great you like your local team and all, but show some respect for teams that would dominate the '91 huskie team.

i loved the '97 wolverine team (and they were dominant), but i would never be stupid enough to say they were better than the '68 Ohio State team or the '71 and '95 Nebraska teams.[/quote]



What's scary about those Nebraska teams is they're saying Neb's new recruiting class could usher that age back in and be seniors on a team that good (or heaven forbid, better)[/quote]



I don't even know what the second part of that sentence means

me neither

[quote="Cal Varnsen"]XXX, you were like 10 when all of this happened. i highly doubt you were the "college football expert" you are now back then. saying you witnessed the most dominant team ever is laughable.

saying they could beat any team in the history of college football is one of the stupidest statements i have ever seen on this board. thats great you like your local team and all, but show some respect for teams that would dominate the '91 huskie team.

i loved the '97 wolverine team (and they were dominant), but i would never be stupid enough to say they were better than the '68 Ohio State team or the '71 and '95 Nebraska teams.[/quote]
True, I was about 11 at the time...even so, I was a fucking die hard fan.

I was never comparing the 97 Wolverines to the 91 Dawgs...but now that you bring it up......it would be 31-17 UW.

The only way to settle this is on the field. I still highly doubt there's ever been a college football team you can say with confidence would go out there and "dominate" the '91 Huskies.

I'm sticking to my guns: IMO that was the best college football team ever!!! :twisted:

I certainly would never get behind 68 OSU or 71 Nebraska...how the hell could I? Or you for that matter? Did [i]you[/i] ever see them play? And finally, when those two teams are concerned....I believe that players in the 90's were faster & stronger than players in the 70's.

It's a fact that people have gotten stronger and faster as time has passed...that's why track & swimming records, etc., continue to be broken. College football is no exception.

no way in hell the Wolverine defense would give up 31 points to that offense. 21-9 Michigan



if we are talking any team in the history of college football, I can think of about 15-20 teams that would dominate them.



and i am sticking to mine, they were NOT the best team ever.



no i didnt see them play, i never said i did. the one team i DID see play that i think can beat the '91 huskies is the '97 wolverines.



yeah thats great, but it doesnt mean the '91 huskies would beat a team from the 60's, 70's, or 80's. Sit here and tell me you would take Napolean Kauffmann over Archie Griffin and I will laugh in your face.

Kauffman was a freshman on that team & didn't play much. Anyway, that Dawgs team, although they had some great offensive players, was built on defense.

Why don't you take the liberty of posting about who you believe are the Top 10 college football teams in history and then tell us why the 1991 Washington Huskies' team was better than each and every team you have listed from 2-10. It's not enough to say that I saw them play, there's an east coast bias and they're the best because I say so. Give us some numbers/examples/specific games/statistics/players for each team. Because right now, I think you're full of shit. Try to convince me I'm wrong.

The 91 defense was unbelievable. Emtman was the man and Hoffman at linebacker was outstanding. The corners shut down Desmond "Heisman Trophy" Howard. If memory serves Mario Bailey had statistics almost equivalent to him that year.

I already said earlier....they might not have had the best numbers. In fact, I think Mitchell said they were 3rd in the nation on defense that year...not first.

The point is...they never lost a game, their closest win, I believe, was 11 points at USC. The average score of their games that year was probably high 30's - maybe even 40's ? - to under 10 for the opponent...

They dominated. Period. And that defense was the most intimidating group of motherfuckers to ever get roided up and hit the gridiron.

Like I said...it would have to be settled on the field to determine who was truly the best. But for my money, I'll take that Dawgs team against anyone.

check out this site, it lists the "dominance factor," which is % of games would win vs. remaining top 10 teams. I'm not sure how they figure it, but it's neat to look at.

http://www.mratings.com/cf/years.txt

yeah so like i was saying about '68 OSU and '71 Nebraska.......and Holy shit, look at those numbers for '95 Nebraska.

Nice work, Mitch.

ok ok ok ...you can say whatever you want and show me all the stats you can get your hands on.

The most important stat is: 0 Losses.

Like I said...on the field is the only true way to determine the best...too bad it'll never happen.

Go Dawgs!