Re: The Perfect Season
Posted: Sat Aug 11, 2018 12:02 pm
Already posted. Good stuff.
Tulane would have given Tennessee issues, the first actually playing defense on the whole field, not just inside the hash marks...Tenneessee did not have enuff D backs to play against Tulane's spread O...their LB's, while very good would have never been able to play a complete 60 minutes covering all aspects of the field...when U ask most people how long is a football field, they tell you 100 yards...that is WRONG, the field is actually 120 yards long and RR made you play D on all of itDfromCT wrote: ↑Sun Aug 12, 2018 10:49 am As I've believed, and posted for years, the 1998 team was as good as any in the country. Had we played Tennessee in a MNC game, we may or may not have won, but it would have been a whole lot more exciting game than the sleeper we saw that year between the Vols and FSU. Was Tulane the most talented team in the nation that year? No. But nobody proved they could stop the Wave, and were it not for the biased BCS, we should have played for a mythical national champions.
They need not embellish how good they were. They WERE that good.
I remember hearing a radio interview here in the NYC market by one of our O-lineman (Bernard Robertson, perhaps) during the 1998 season about how the offense was eating up opposing D. The Tulane player said that (paraphrasing I'm sure) "We knew we had the other team when, typically in the second half, they were holding their hips and sucking wind because we were too quick for them. Against Rutgers that happened late in the first quarter."golfnut69 wrote: ↑Sun Aug 12, 2018 10:58 amTulane would have given Tennessee issues, the first actually playing defense on the whole field, not just inside the hash marks...Tenneessee did not have enuff D backs to play against Tulane's spread O...their LB's, while very good would have never been able to play a complete 60 minutes covering all aspects of the field...when U ask most people how long is a football field, they tell you 100 yards...that is WRONG, the field is actually 120 yards long and RR made you play D on all of itDfromCT wrote: ↑Sun Aug 12, 2018 10:49 am As I've believed, and posted for years, the 1998 team was as good as any in the country. Had we played Tennessee in a MNC game, we may or may not have won, but it would have been a whole lot more exciting game than the sleeper we saw that year between the Vols and FSU. Was Tulane the most talented team in the nation that year? No. But nobody proved they could stop the Wave, and were it not for the biased BCS, we should have played for a mythical national champions.
They need not embellish how good they were. They WERE that good.
I agree, it would have woken up the stogie world of College FootballDfromCT wrote: ↑Sun Aug 12, 2018 11:19 amI remember hearing a radio interview here in the NYC market by one of our O-lineman (Bernard Robertson, perhaps) during the 1998 season about how the offense was eating up opposing D. The Tulane player said that (paraphrasing I'm sure) "We knew we had the other team when, typically in the second half, they were holding their hips and sucking wind because we were too quick for them. Against Rutgers that happened late in the first quarter."golfnut69 wrote: ↑Sun Aug 12, 2018 10:58 amTulane would have given Tennessee issues, the first actually playing defense on the whole field, not just inside the hash marks...Tenneessee did not have enuff D backs to play against Tulane's spread O...their LB's, while very good would have never been able to play a complete 60 minutes covering all aspects of the field...when U ask most people how long is a football field, they tell you 100 yards...that is WRONG, the field is actually 120 yards long and RR made you play D on all of itDfromCT wrote: ↑Sun Aug 12, 2018 10:49 am As I've believed, and posted for years, the 1998 team was as good as any in the country. Had we played Tennessee in a MNC game, we may or may not have won, but it would have been a whole lot more exciting game than the sleeper we saw that year between the Vols and FSU. Was Tulane the most talented team in the nation that year? No. But nobody proved they could stop the Wave, and were it not for the biased BCS, we should have played for a mythical national champions.
They need not embellish how good they were. They WERE that good.
Again, I don't know if we would have beaten Tennessee in 1998, but we would have given the world of college football a much better show, win or lose, than the boring Tennessee vs FSU game that gave the Vols the MNC.
Glory days.DfromCT wrote: ↑Sun Aug 12, 2018 11:19 amI remember hearing a radio interview here in the NYC market by one of our O-lineman (Bernard Robertson, perhaps) during the 1998 season about how the offense was eating up opposing D. The Tulane player said that (paraphrasing I'm sure) "We knew we had the other team when, typically in the second half, they were holding their hips and sucking wind because we were too quick for them. Against Rutgers that happened late in the first quarter."golfnut69 wrote: ↑Sun Aug 12, 2018 10:58 amTulane would have given Tennessee issues, the first actually playing defense on the whole field, not just inside the hash marks...Tenneessee did not have enuff D backs to play against Tulane's spread O...their LB's, while very good would have never been able to play a complete 60 minutes covering all aspects of the field...when U ask most people how long is a football field, they tell you 100 yards...that is WRONG, the field is actually 120 yards long and RR made you play D on all of itDfromCT wrote: ↑Sun Aug 12, 2018 10:49 am As I've believed, and posted for years, the 1998 team was as good as any in the country. Had we played Tennessee in a MNC game, we may or may not have won, but it would have been a whole lot more exciting game than the sleeper we saw that year between the Vols and FSU. Was Tulane the most talented team in the nation that year? No. But nobody proved they could stop the Wave, and were it not for the biased BCS, we should have played for a mythical national champions.
They need not embellish how good they were. They WERE that good.
Again, I don't know if we would have beaten Tennessee in 1998, but we would have given the world of college football a much better show, win or lose, than the boring Tennessee vs FSU game that gave the Vols the MNC.
Thanks for the link, Win. Each episode gets better and better.winwave wrote: ↑Sun Aug 19, 2018 1:20 am Episode Two:
https://twitter.com/GreenWaveFB/status/ ... 9414054913
Although I thoroughly enjoy the coverage, I thought this episode was a bit long on Ken and Graf and a lot short on actual game highlights.Houma de Wave wrote: ↑Sun Aug 19, 2018 8:23 amThanks for the link, Win. Each episode gets better and better.winwave wrote: ↑Sun Aug 19, 2018 1:20 am Episode Two:
https://twitter.com/GreenWaveFB/status/ ... 9414054913
I said that exact thing to a couple of friends.DfromCT wrote: ↑Sun Aug 19, 2018 8:52 amAlthough I thoroughly enjoy the coverage, I thought this episode was a bit long on Ken and Graf and a lot short on actual game highlights.Houma de Wave wrote: ↑Sun Aug 19, 2018 8:23 amThanks for the link, Win. Each episode gets better and better.winwave wrote: ↑Sun Aug 19, 2018 1:20 am Episode Two:
https://twitter.com/GreenWaveFB/status/ ... 9414054913
That one is a lot better, with more game film than Graf and Ken. The throw by Curtis could have been replayed a few more times, as that was one of the key plays of the season (and what a great throw and catch by J. Dawson!) The King TD Pass to Franklin was another big play, and if you watch closely you'll see how much that toss threads the needle. Jordan with a big interception in the 4th quarter was something he and the D did when we needed it time and time again that year.winwave wrote: ↑Sat Aug 25, 2018 5:34 pm Episode 3:
https://twitter.com/GreenWaveFB/status/ ... 8877284352
Thx!chain gang x man wrote: ↑Wed Aug 29, 2018 7:41 am Tonight at 6:30 on WUPL channel 2 Cox will have a special on the ‘98 Team
Shaun King, Tommy Bowden and others will be featured
Yes. And of course Shaun King can’t make it. USF playing.