While this game was not on the Pac 12 network comments made on the board

[CougEd]

made me wonder.

Would it be fair to say the 97 team, the 02 team, the 92 team, the 03 team, the 88 team and the 15 team are best teams in the last 30 years.

If for example the 97 team was to play the 02 team three times, who would win best two out of three? If the 92 team played the 88 team three times, who would win the best two out of three?

If the 15 team played the 92 team best out of three, who would win?

Because of depth I think in a three game series the 02 team would beat everyone.

Then if we had a four team playoff, and the seeding is as follows-- 1) 97 Cougs 2) 02 Cougs 3) 15 Cougs 4) 92 Cougs....Personally I think the 97 team would win in a shoot out against the 15 Cougs, and I think the 02 Cougs would beat the 92 Cougs. Then the 97 team in a one game series would beat the 02 team. There has to be a computer formula that would figure this out...

 

[Fab5Coug]

made me wonder.

Would it be fair to say the 97 team, the 02 team, the 92 team, the 03 team, the 88 team and the 15 team are best teams in the last 30 years.

If for example the 97 team was to play the 02 team three times, who would win best two out of three? If the 92 team played the 88 team three times, who would win the best two out of three?

If the 15 team played the 92 team best out of three, who would win?

Because of depth I think in a three game series the 02 team would beat everyone.

Then if we had a four team playoff, and the seeding is as follows-- 1) 97 Cougs 2) 02 Cougs 3) 15 Cougs 4) 92 Cougs....Personally I think the 97 team would win in a shoot out against the 15 Cougs, and I think the 02 Cougs would beat the 92 Cougs. Then the 97 team in a one game series would beat the 02 team. There has to be a computer formula that would figure this out...

I don't know a ton about the teams prior to '97, but don't forget the '01 team. They also won 10 games, which I'm pretty sure the '88 & '92 teams did not.

 

[SDCoug]

In your scenario 97 (1 seed) plays 92 (4 seed). Think the final ends up the same but that game would be fun to watch.

 

[Flatlandcoug]

In your scenario 97 (1 seed) plays 92 (4 seed). Think the final ends up the same but that game would be fun to watch.

Only if it's in the snow.

 

[cr8zyncalif]

I think you need an 8 team format, with 88, 92, 01, 02, 03, 15 and probably 72 and either 81 or 83 to round out the 8 spots.

Let's get the 94 team out of the way for the purposes of this discussion. Unless the defense scored enough touchdowns, the 94 team had a hard time winning games. That 94 offense kept this team from being top 5. Special teams were OK and D was unbelievable. The offense only scored when the D set them up, and many of the other teams in this list were not prone to beat themselves. Now, if you were strictly comparing D's alone, 94 might be the favorite of the whole group; but from a complete team perspective, I don't see them in this tournament.

My favorite for the tournament would have been 97. If Black had not been injured we would have won the Rose Bowl, and if the ref's had not given the last 2 seconds to Michigan so Leaf did not get a last try at the end zone, we might still have won the game. My dark horses to take it all based on how the teams were playing at the end of the season would either be 83 or 03. Both of those teams were red hot at the end. In what might have been the nicest words he ever uttered regarding the Cougs, Don James felt we were the best team in the PAC at the end of the 83 season. And you only had to watch the Holiday Bowl against Texas to gain a full appreciation for where that team was at the end of the season, with I would argue the best punter WSU has ever seen...certainly the only punter that I could legitimately classify as a weapon.

 

[CougPatrol]

The 97 team would beat every other team every time they played.

 

[Fab5Coug]

The 97 team would beat every other team every time they played.

Not every time, no. That team was good, but they weren't so much better than the rest of the teams we're taking about that they could beat them without paying near their best.

 

[Flatlandcoug]

The 97 team would beat every other team every time they played.

The 1997 team was great, but outside of their win against UCLA (who lost the next week to Tennessee and started out 0-2), the next best win of that season was against 8-4 UW. They lost to 9-3 ASU and 12-0 Michigan. They also beat 7-5 Oregon and 7-5 Arizona.....barely. As great as that team was, and as much as I enjoyed watching them, their schedule was so soft that the Huskies current schedule looks challenging in comparison. Here is the murderer's row that we beat in 1997:

10-2 UCLA (good win)
6-5 USC
0-11 Illinois
4-7 BSU
7-5 Oregon
3-8 Cal
7-5 Arizona (1 point win)
1-10 Louisiana-Lafayette
5-6 Stanford
8-4 UW

We went 4-2 against bowl teams in 1997 including 1-2 against top level teams. To suggest that none of our best teams could beat them is ignoring reality. To be fair, the 2002 squad also went 1-2 against top level teams. A match-up between those teams would be very, very good. I might give the edge to the 1997 squad because of Leaf alone.