I could do another full podcast on this game because of all the things stated above. The narrative is we lucked out. Not that we were clutch when it mattered. Not that we played our C+ game and they played at minimum an A- game.
Media saying their team has the better roster too to bottom, yet can’t name anybody outside of the three players (Nix, Irving and Franklin) that make all their plays. UW line is better and I don’t think it’s close. Irving makes the plays for their fat unathletic line and they throw short quick passes so Nix doesn’t feel pressure.
Every one of their fourth downs is washed out by a Husky mistake. First one at the end of the half they got from an inexplicable pick that could be due to luck but since it’s Oregon it isn’t labeled that way. The second failed fourth down the Huskies squandered away possessions with two three and outs afterwards with questionable play calling. The last fourth down failure came from a Husky fourth down failure.
In short fuck that team and that bullshit fake ass program.
I guess your argument boils down to whether we played a C+ game because of ourselves or because Oregon had something to do with it. I tend to think UW played their B game and Oregon brought their A game.
I can't believe how many UW fans have spent the last 3 days apologizing for the win, as if the UW took something that didn't belong to them.
Lanning is an idiot, but he's an idiot for making stupid decisions against a team that was BETTER than his team. You can get away with that stupid shit against Portland State, but those morons needed every point they could get against UW because the UW is better than them.
And even with Lanning's stupidity, his players still had a chance to execute, and they failed, repeatedly ... because the UW is better than them.
Do you remember when our #2 receiver got hurt and walked off the field and didn't play for the rest of the game? Or how about when our #4 receiver got hurt and didn't play for the rest of the game? Or seeing our best D-lineman play 1/2 the snaps he normally does? (Or when our #1 RB was lost before the season even started?). I'd venture a guess that losing those guys had just as much to do with the final score as any of Oregon's stupidity, and the UW still won.
I've actually read, countless times, about people having a new level of respect for Oregon after watching them play.
Really? What was it about Oregon that bolstered people's respect for them?
Their coach, who can't seem to get out of his own way?
The UW defense forcing Oregon to go 0 for 3 on 4th downs?
The UW offense, going deep to burn the Oregon defense for the game winning touchdown for the second year in a row?
Or was it Oregon's special teams, failing to execute when given a chance to tie the game?
Maybe it was watching a bunch of Oregon dudes wallow around on the turf like bitches faking injuries?
What combination of those factors made people have MORE respect for Oregon?
UW took that game from Oregon, said thank you very much, and then ushered them onto their bus so they could soak in their collective failures. That's what winners do. I wish we'd stop fucking apologizing for it.
Isn't the point of your post the same exact thing that Doog employs currently any time the 2018 game comes up when trying rationalize the OT loss? You know, that if Pete had only been a bigger dick coach Washington wins in regulation? I mean, it's all fun and games, but the efforts to establish superiority as a fanbase is at times a little humorous.
Comparing plays and coaching decisions are slightly different things. And Penix's interception, as it turned out, meant nothing anyway because Oregon didn't capitalize. Lanning going for it rather than taking the points meant 3 pts, of course assuming the guy doesn't miss from 10 yards out, which is an assumption.
Also, PGOS just launched a thread the other day proudly asserting that Washington fans blame their coach and their players and their administration when Washington loses football games. Isn't that exactly what the Ducks are doing by calling their coach a dipshit? I mean, I know it's "bow down" around here, but don't hold your breath expecting anyone to actually do it.
The other thing to consider is that, if the "what if" game were to be ruled out of order here, half the site's traffic disappears.
Lastly, I've not read a serious post by anyone suggesting that UW was just lucky. In fact, I've read a ton of praise being heaped on Penix and the WRs, a ton of criticism about their coach and not a small amount of criticism of Nix. How much boot licking is required?
This seems to be an effort to find a problem that's not really there.
Isn't the point of your spin here the same exact thing that Doog nation employs currently any time the 2018 game comes up when trying rationalize the OT loss? You know, that if Pete had only been a bigger dick coach Washington wins in regulation? I mean, it's all fun and games, but the efforts to establish superiority as a fanbase is at times a little humorous. The word Doog didn't come out of nowhere.
Comparing plays and coaching decisions are slightly different things. And Penix's interception, as it turned out, meant nothing anyway because Oregon didn't capitalize. Lanning going for it rather than taking the points meant 3 pts, of course assuming the guy doesn't miss from 10 yards out, which is an assumption.
Also, PGOS just launched a thread the other day proudly asserting that Washington fans blame their coach and their players and their administration when Washington loses football games Isn't that effectively what the Ducks are doing by calling their coach a dipshit? I mean, I know it's "bow down" around here, but don't hold your breath expecting anyone to actually do it.
The other thing to consider is that, if the "what if" game were to be ruled out of order here, half the site's traffic disappears.
Lastly, I've not read a serious post by anyone suggesting that UW was just lucky. In fact, I've read a ton of praise being heaped on Penix and the WRs, a ton of criticism about their coach and not a small amount of criticism of Nix. How much boot licking is required?
This seems to be an effort to find a problem that's not really there.
I couldn't agree more. And that's some fine technically gifted writing, my cheapskate Latino barrister friend.
Isn't the point of your spin here the same exact thing that Doog nation employs currently any time the 2018 game comes up when trying rationalize the OT loss? You know, that if Pete had only been a bigger dick coach Washington wins in regulation? I mean, it's all fun and games, but the efforts to establish superiority as a fanbase is at times a little humorous. The word Doog didn't come out of nowhere.
Comparing plays and coaching decisions are slightly different things. And Penix's interception, as it turned out, meant nothing anyway because Oregon didn't capitalize. Lanning going for it rather than taking the points meant 3 pts, of course assuming the guy doesn't miss from 10 yards out, which is an assumption.
Also, PGOS just launched a thread the other day proudly asserting that Washington fans blame their coach and their players and their administration when Washington loses football games. Isn't that effectively what the Ducks are doing by calling their coach a dipshit? I mean, I know it's "bow down" around here, but don't hold your breath expecting anyone to actually do it.
The other thing to consider is that, if the "what if" game were to be ruled out of order here, half the site's traffic disappears.
Lastly, I've not read a serious post by anyone suggesting that UW was just lucky. In fact, I've read a ton of praise being heaped on Penix and the WRs, a ton of criticism about their coach and not a small amount of criticism of Nix. How much boot licking is required?
This seems to be an effort to find a problem that's not really there.
Isn't the point of your spin here the same exact thing that Doog nation employs currently any time the 2018 game comes up when trying rationalize the OT loss? You know, that if Pete had only been a bigger dick coach Washington wins in regulation? I mean, it's all fun and games, but the efforts to establish superiority as a fanbase is at times a little humorous. The word Doog didn't come out of nowhere.
Comparing plays and coaching decisions are slightly different things. And Penix's interception, as it turned out, meant nothing anyway because Oregon didn't capitalize. Lanning going for it rather than taking the points meant 3 pts, of course assuming the guy doesn't miss from 10 yards out, which is an assumption.
Also, PGOS just launched a thread the other day proudly asserting that Washington fans blame their coach and their players and their administration when Washington loses football games. Isn't that effectively what the Ducks are doing by calling their coach a dipshit? I mean, I know it's "bow down" around here, but don't hold your breath expecting anyone to actually do it.
The other thing to consider is that, if the "what if" game were to be ruled out of order here, half the site's traffic disappears.
Lastly, I've not read a serious post by anyone suggesting that UW was just lucky. In fact, I've read a ton of praise being heaped on Penix and the WRs, a ton of criticism about their coach and not a small amount of criticism of Nix. How much boot licking is required?
This seems to be an effort to find a problem that's not really there.
Disagree
I know. But let's turn lemons into lemonade. The other guy famous for inventing phony offenses and insults was Michael Jordan, and he was pretty good.
Isn't the point of your spin here the same exact thing that Doog nation employs currently any time the 2018 game comes up when trying rationalize the OT loss? You know, that if Pete had only been a bigger dick coach Washington wins in regulation? I mean, it's all fun and games, but the efforts to establish superiority as a fanbase is at times a little humorous. The word Doog didn't come out of nowhere.
Comparing plays and coaching decisions are slightly different things. And Penix's interception, as it turned out, meant nothing anyway because Oregon didn't capitalize. Lanning going for it rather than taking the points meant 3 pts, of course assuming the guy doesn't miss from 10 yards out, which is an assumption.
Also, PGOS just launched a thread the other day proudly asserting that Washington fans blame their coach and their players and their administration when Washington loses football games. Isn't that effectively what the Ducks are doing by calling their coach a dipshit? I mean, I know it's "bow down" around here, but don't hold your breath expecting anyone to actually do it.
The other thing to consider is that, if the "what if" game were to be ruled out of order here, half the site's traffic disappears.
Lastly, I've not read a serious post by anyone suggesting that UW was just lucky. In fact, I've read a ton of praise being heaped on Penix and the WRs, a ton of criticism about their coach and not a small amount of criticism of Nix. How much boot licking is required?
This seems to be an effort to find a problem that's not really there.
Disagree
I know. But let's turn lemons into lemonade. The other guy famous for inventing phony offenses and insults was Michael Jordan, and he was pretty good.
I haven't seen one single fan apologize for the win.
Pretty sure it was a figure of speech.
But many folks have said we only won because Lanning fucked up.
Including some posters here.
It's a loser narrative.
If Lanning punts with 2:00 left, UW probably loses. That doesn't mean Penix & Co. didn't take advantage to win.
Penix and Co scored that last TD on two plays, going 53 yards, and only using 33 seconds. I don't think our probability would have gone down much if we had to go another 30 yards.
Edit: I jumped the gun a bit with my response here. I see Race is already all over this.
When you play a legitimately great team you have to play perfect, including the coaches, and one or two mistakes will cost you and make you think that that is why you lost the game.
But the real reason is that they're so good that they force you to be perfect. Whereas they do not have to be.
I unequivocally believe Lanning made the right decision on the last 4th down. This is how I break it down:
Go for it: 50% chance of success = win the game 50% chance of failure, subsequent outcomes are --20% stop UW, win the game --40% give up TD to UW with not enough time left on clock, lose the game --40% give up TD to UW but with time left on clock to win/tie ----10% score winning TD ----60% do not score, lose the game ----30% make tying FG, go to OT where it's 50/50
That all adds up to (for Oregon) 65% win 35% loss
Punting: 30% chance to stop UW, win the game 70% chance UW scores TD --95% chance not enough time left on clock, lose the game --5% chance time on clock and make FG to tie, 50/50
That comes out to (with rounding) 32% win 68% lose
Basically have to believe Oregon had a better than 60% chance to stop UW, with all 4 downs available, or that their chance of moving the ball 3 yards were less than 40%, to think punting was a better decision.
I unequivocally believe Lanning made the right decision on the last 4th down. This is how I break it down:
Go for it: 50% chance of success = win the game 50% chance of failure, subsequent outcomes are --20% stop UW, win the game --40% give up TD to UW with not enough time left on clock, lose the game --40% give up TD to UW but with time left on clock to win/tie ----10% score winning TD ----60% do not score, lose the game ----30% make tying FG, go to OT where it's 50/50
That all adds up to (for Oregon) 65% win 35% loss
Punting: 30% chance to stop UW, win the game 70% chance UW scores TD --95% chance not enough time left on clock, lose the game --5% chance time on clock and make FG to tie, 50/50
That comes out to (with rounding) 32% win 68% lose
Basically have to believe Oregon had a better than 60% chance to stop UW, with all 4 downs available, or that their chance of moving the ball 3 yards were less than 40%, to think punting was a better decision.
In agreement on the basic principles there. This is the NFL 4th down stats from the last ten years. Have to figure that many of these are in the red zone, a 4th and 3 from inside the ten is harder than one at midfield theoretically. So that combined with it being college makes Oregon's 4th and 3 had probably 50/50 chance, or maybe even better as you said.
I haven't seen one single fan apologize for the win.
Pretty sure it was a figure of speech.
But many folks have said we only won because Lanning fucked up.
Including some posters here.
It's a loser narrative.
If Lanning punts with 2:00 left, UW probably loses. That doesn't mean Penix & Co. didn't take advantage to win.
I would counter that if UW can score in two plays from 53 yards in 33 seconds, a very reasonable argument could be made that they could do it from 90 yards in less than two minutes.
Edit: Yeah, I just saw your other post. Bottom line is, we will never know. And probabilities are often wrong.
Second edit: I would also say that if Oregon punted, that pretty much squashes whatever "momentum" they had.
And while Washington has the toughest defense that Oregon has faced this year, Oregon is only the 2nd toughest defense that Washington has faced when you look at points scored. Arizona's defense was tougher.
We held Oregon to their season low of 33 points on Saturday.
Oregon didn't hold us to our season low, Arizona gets that honor.
We won caz penix is not a lil bitch QB that we are accustomed to having. Grubb did some questionable play calling, but got bailed out by the talent. We should thank Junior Adam for getting them here
Comments
Lanning made the right decision to go for it, he just made another FS play call when he did.
Ducks suck on our shit!!!
Comparing plays and coaching decisions are slightly different things. And Penix's interception, as it turned out, meant nothing anyway because Oregon didn't capitalize. Lanning going for it rather than taking the points meant 3 pts, of course assuming the guy doesn't miss from 10 yards out, which is an assumption.
Also, PGOS just launched a thread the other day proudly asserting that Washington fans blame their coach and their players and their administration when Washington loses football games. Isn't that exactly what the Ducks are doing by calling their coach a dipshit? I mean, I know it's "bow down" around here, but don't hold your breath expecting anyone to actually do it.
The other thing to consider is that, if the "what if" game were to be ruled out of order here, half the site's traffic disappears.
Lastly, I've not read a serious post by anyone suggesting that UW was just lucky. In fact, I've read a ton of praise being heaped on Penix and the WRs, a ton of criticism about their coach and not a small amount of criticism of Nix. How much boot licking is required?
This seems to be an effort to find a problem that's not really there.
Penix and Co scored that last TD on two plays, going 53 yards, and only using 33 seconds. I don't think our probability would have gone down much if we had to go another 30 yards.
Edit: I jumped the gun a bit with my response here. I see Race is already all over this.
But the real reason is that they're so good that they force you to be perfect. Whereas they do not have to be.
Go for it:
50% chance of success = win the game
50% chance of failure, subsequent outcomes are
--20% stop UW, win the game
--40% give up TD to UW with not enough time left on clock, lose the game
--40% give up TD to UW but with time left on clock to win/tie
----10% score winning TD
----60% do not score, lose the game
----30% make tying FG, go to OT where it's 50/50
That all adds up to (for Oregon)
65% win
35% loss
Punting:
30% chance to stop UW, win the game
70% chance UW scores TD
--95% chance not enough time left on clock, lose the game
--5% chance time on clock and make FG to tie, 50/50
That comes out to (with rounding)
32% win
68% lose
Basically have to believe Oregon had a better than 60% chance to stop UW, with all 4 downs available, or that their chance of moving the ball 3 yards were less than 40%, to think punting was a better decision.
Edit: Yeah, I just saw your other post. Bottom line is, we will never know. And probabilities are often wrong.
Second edit: I would also say that if Oregon punted, that pretty much squashes whatever "momentum" they had.