2016 UW vs 2000 UW

2016 UW vs 2000 UW

  • Total voters
    64
Tui beats Brownshorts rather easily
Click to expand...

Tui better clutch QB (at least, 2 years into Browning's career) but there are some things that Browning does better. 2000 team was lucky to go 11-1. The 2016 team would have gone undefeated that year with few close games and completely destroyed Purdue in the Rose Bowl. Pete > Rick and not even close.
Click to expand...

Like anticipating the quick crosser and executing the under thrown play action pass???
Click to expand...

No, like completing 62% of his passes last year vs Tui completing 52% of his as a senior (2000). Or Jake throwing 43 TDs against 9 picks (as Sophomore) vs Tui throwing 14 TDs with 9 picks in the 2000 season. In the short to medium range game, Jake is more accurate than Tui was and it's not even close. But against a team like Bama last year, I'd take Tui over Jake. Tui better at improvising and dealing with a dirty pocket.
 
Last edited:
Tui beats Brownshorts rather easily
Click to expand...

Tui better clutch QB (at least, 2 years into Browning's career) but there are some things that Browning does better. 2000 team was lucky to go 11-1. The 2016 team would have gone undefeated that year with few close games and completely destroyed Purdue in the Rose Bowl. Pete > Rick and not even close.
Click to expand...

Browning is irreparably damaged by getting curb stomped by Miami in 2000. 2000 played a better schedule in a better Pac without Utah and Colorado who Tui beat as a non conference foe
Click to expand...

I don't buy that. The team that showed up Friday night on ESPN to curb stomp the Trees could probably have beat that 2000 Miami squad at home.

Allow me to axe you this: Let's say the 2000 team never plays Miami at home early in the year, but instead gets them in a big time bowl in the deep south - what do you think the score would have looked like? In other words would it be closer to us losing 24- 7 or 17- 7 or more like 65- 7?
 
Last edited:
2016 would put the 2000 team away before they showed up after halftime. 2016 was better at probably 9 positions on defense and most of the skill positions. OL was about even. 2000 was better at QB, TE and not having Psalm. That's about it.

2016 rather easily.
Click to expand...

This is why 2000 wins rather easily, say 34-17?
Click to expand...

I know you are being sarcastic but the guys from 2000 are in their mid to late 30's now. Have they even lifted or worked out since then? No way could Tui run away from Bierria
Click to expand...

Louis Prima: With all the great players playing ball right now, how well do you think you would do against today's pitchers?

Ty Cobb: Well, I figure against today's pitchers I'd only probably hit about .290

Louis Prima: .290? Well that's amazing, because you batted over .400 a... a whole bunch of times. Now tell us all, we'd all like to know, why do you think you'd only hit .290?

Ty Cobb: Well, I'm 72 fucking years old you ignorant son of a bitch.
 
Last edited:
One team beat #2 and #4. Lost to #7.

One team lost to #2 and #3 and beat some teams ranked over 10.

But 2016 is better cause John Ross is fast and Brownsocks threw a bunch of TDs against hot garbage defenses ZOMG
 
2016 would put the 2000 team away before they showed up after halftime. 2016 was better at probably 9 positions on defense and most of the skill positions. OL was about even. 2000 was better at QB, TE and not having Psalm. That's about it.

2016 rather easily.
Click to expand...

This. The 2000 team did beat Miami though. They weren't that great though. The 2016 team was a lot more consistent and had better talent.
 
One team beat #2 and #4. Lost to #7.

One team lost to #2 and #3 and beat some teams ranked over 10.

But 2016 is better cause John Ross is fast and Brownsocks threw a bunch of TDs against hot garbage defenses ZOMG
Click to expand...

Only doogs make it all about the offense.

2016 defense >>>>>>>> 2000 defense. That's why they'd win.
 
2016 would put the 2000 team away before they showed up after halftime. 2016 was better at probably 9 positions on defense and most of the skill positions. OL was about even. 2000 was better at QB, TE and not having Psalm. That's about it.

2016 rather easily.
Click to expand...

This. The 2000 team did beat Miami though. They weren't that great though. The 2016 team was a lot more consistent and had better talent.
Click to expand...

It's easy to be consistent when you play dogshit every week.
 
Tui beats Brownshorts rather easily
Click to expand...

Tui better clutch QB (at least, 2 years into Browning's career) but there are some things that Browning does better. 2000 team was lucky to go 11-1. The 2016 team would have gone undefeated that year with few close games and completely destroyed Purdue in the Rose Bowl. Pete > Rick and not even close.
Click to expand...

Browning is irreparably damaged by getting curb stomped by Miami in 2000. 2000 played a better schedule in a better Pac without Utah and Colorado who Tui beat as a non conference foe
Click to expand...

I don't buy that. The team that showed up Friday night on ESPN to curb stomp the Trees could probably have beat that 2000 Miami squad at home.

Allow me to axe you this: Let's say the 2000 team never plays Miami at home early in the year, but instead gets them in a big time bowl in the deep south - what do you think the score would have looked like? In other words would it be closer to us losing 24- 7 or 17- 7 or more like 65- 7?
Click to expand...

Great point. In a bowl game Miami would have named the score on the 2000 team in a rematch or if they were meeting for the first time that year.

2016 Defense doesn't allow that to happen even if offense is anemic just like we were against Bama.

Tui was a warrior, but the 2000 team isn't hanging with last year dawgs
 
dnc saying the OL is even is LOL funny
Click to expand...

You're right. 2016 OL > 2000.
Click to expand...

The 2000 Dawgs weren't great from top to bottom. But they had a great, and senior-laden, OL. Much better up front than 2016. Not close.
Click to expand...

I was just fucking with J when I said 2016 is greater, but I do think they're basically even. 2000 is remembered very fondly but I think it was a good line that is overrated based on two things: the option made it look better than it was, and the ensuing dreck OL's made it look better than it was.

2000 was a very good OL, not a great one. Just like 2016.
 
One huge reason 2016 wins this gayme rather easily.

Turnover margin vs Pac12 opponents (since 2000 clearly paid a tougher non con): 2016 + 13, 2000 (-3).

2016 takes the ball away at least two more times against 2000. Ballgame.
 
Tui beats Brownshorts rather easily
Click to expand...

Tui better clutch QB (at least, 2 years into Browning's career) but there are some things that Browning does better. 2000 team was lucky to go 11-1. The 2016 team would have gone undefeated that year with few close games and completely destroyed Purdue in the Rose Bowl. Pete > Rick and not even close.
Click to expand...

Browning is irreparably damaged by getting curb stomped by Miami in 2000. 2000 played a better schedule in a better Pac without Utah and Colorado who Tui beat as a non conference foe
Click to expand...

I don't buy that. The team that showed up Friday night on ESPN to curb stomp the Trees could probably have beat that 2000 Miami squad at home.

Allow me to axe you this: Let's say the 2000 team never plays Miami at home early in the year, but instead gets them in a big time bowl in the deep south - what do you think the score would have looked like? In other words would it be closer to us losing 24- 7 or 17- 7 or more like 65- 7?
Click to expand...

Probably something like 34-17 Miami
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top