Best Husky team of all time

[Chin Diesel]

2004 was a frightening collection of talent.

At full bore, I’ll take them over just about any team in the modern era.

This is also the correct take. From 2000-present it could beat almost every team.

Very underrated historically because they lost some game during reg season while Emeka was hurt.

 

[Palatine]

The fact that 2006 team lost to George Mason still bothers me to this day. Not saying they beat 1999 or 2004, but that was the best team to not win a title in my opinion.

Supposedly, there was a huge collison in practice between Boone and Hilton. So neither was 100% for the Mason game.

 

[BigErnMcCracken]

Supposedly, there was a huge collison in practice between Boone and Hilton. So neither was 100% for the Mason game.

Then what explains the lackadaisical performances against Albany, Kentucky and Washington?

For some reason that loss never bothered me beyond the immediate aftermath. As I recall Mason was on a heater - I think they had beaten Carolina and MSU - and our squad played with a “we can flip the switch” mentality that bit them.

 

[tzznandrew]

Then what explains the lackadaisical performances against Albany, Kentucky and Washington?

For some reason that loss never bothered me beyond the immediate aftermath. As I recall Mason was on a heater - I think they had beaten Carolina and MSU - and our squad played with a “we can flip the switch” mentality that bit them.

They were an 11 that beat a 6 (MSU) and a 3 (UNC) before beating a 7 (Wichita State) in the S16. An all-time run for an 11-seed.

 

[SaeHusky]

Agrees that 2004 team is definitely the best - WHAT I DON'T AGREE with is that article had that 90s Arkansas championship team ahead of the our 04 team. No way 04 loses to Corliss Williamson and Scotty Thurman

 

[UCTitleTown]

In my opinion the 2003/04 team was the best I've seen. Imagine bigs of Okafor, Boone, Armstrong and Villanueva plus Ben Gordon and Rashad Anderson, and Denham Brown off the bench? I forgot how sick that team was until I recently watched the semi-final game vs Duke. Teams today are lucky to have two decent bigs and we had four great ones.

 

[Dutch Boyd]

The 04 team was slightly better but the 99 team was more consistent. The 99 team would of won that matchup at UNC in 04 witch still pisses me off!

 

[CONN78SEJ]

What you said in the bold is true and the 99 team, although very talented in terms of college talent and pro talent (3 players drafted to NBA), it was greater than the sum of the individual players. I don't think there is a clear cut answer per se, both the 99 and 04 teams were excellent teams that produced banner years.

One thing clear cut, in my view, is the 99 team was a better defensive team.

 

[CONN78SEJ]

Supposedly, there was a huge collison in practice between Boone and Hilton. So neither was 100% for the Mason game.

I remember hearing that also.

 

[businesslawyer]

04 team, if healthy, wins.

With Okafor limited they lost a few games. Imagine 99 without Rip for several games. Do they win as many as they won?

As for the F4 game against Duke and falling behind, 2 quick fouls made Okafor sit.

Okafor really was POY over Jameer Nelson that year, and although they had many other good players on the team, Okafor was the dominant factor.

The ‘99 team beat a top 5 at the time Stamford team, on the road rather handily without Rip. Just saying.

 

[Jaydumo20]

2001 Miami (FL) Hurricanes Roster | College Football at Sports-Reference.com

2001 Miami (FL) Hurricanes Roster

www.sports-reference.com

I always thought the 04 was so loaded it was almost improbable. Not as improbable as this team. The 01 Hurricanes FB is laughably rich. Top to bottom. I know it's a different school and sport but it's always worth a mention when talking about stacked squads