OFFICIAL HARDCORE HUSKY PAC-10 POWER RANKINGS

TierbsHsotBoobs

Methodology: Everyone in this conference sucks. I'm ranking the teams by conference points scored divided by conference points allowed because I can't think of any other way to do it. Can't use +/- because of differences in number of games played.

-------------- fucking dreckfest --------------

1. Washington (44/27 = 1.63)
2. Stanford (64/43 = 1.49)
3. USC (110/84 = 1.31)
4. UCLA (120/99 = 1.21)
5. Oregon (104/92 = 1.13)
6. Arizona (106/97 = 1.09)
7. Utah (57/56 = 1.02)

8. Cal (171/195 = 0.88) -- still way too damn high
9. ASU (103/120 = 0.86)
10. OSU (46/66 = 0.70)

allpurpleallgold

WE'RE BACK!!!!!!

dnc

I approve this methodology, as well as contraction.

WDWTA.

dhdawg

WSU is way too fucking high

Fire_Marshall_Bill

LOL, I love it when Boobs puts these out five minutes after Auburndoog's. It always cracks me up.

allpurpleallgold

Lol at TheGlove.

TierbsHsotBoobs

Fire_Marshall_Bill said:

LOL, I love it when Boobs puts these out five minutes after Auburndoog's. It always cracks me up.

I put 5.5 minutes of effort into my rankings.

Mosster47

USC is the best team in the conference right now. Wins over Stanford and UA are the most impressive resume so far.

TierbsHsotBoobs

Mosster47 said:

USC is the best team in the conference right now. Wins over Stanford and UA are the most impressive resume so far.

If the best team in your conference lost to Boston College, your conference blows.

Mosster47

TierbsHsotBoobs said:

Mosster47 said:

USC is the best team in the conference right now. Wins over Stanford and UA are the most impressive resume so far.

If the best team in your conference lost to Boston College, your conference blows.

That was never in the metric, but always a given. I actually bought into the preseason hype. I thought 10 returning QB's and the addition of Peterman while giving Sark more talent would really raise the ceiling. Instead this is the worst I can ever remember, like 1995 bad when a mediocre Duck team made the Cotton Bowl.

TierbsHsotBoobs

Mosster47 said:

TierbsHsotBoobs said:

Mosster47 said:

USC is the best team in the conference right now. Wins over Stanford and UA are the most impressive resume so far.

If the best team in your conference lost to Boston College, your conference blows.

That was never in the metric, but always a given. I actually bought into the preseason hype. I thought 10 returning QB's and the addition of Peterman while giving Sark more talent would really raise the ceiling. Instead this is the worst I can ever remember, like 1995 bad when a mediocre Duck team made the Cotton Bowl.

1999 was the worst ever:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1999_Stanford_Cardinal_football_team

This year isn't that bad.

dhdawg

Mosster47 said:

USC is the best team in the conference right now. Wins over Stanford and UA are the most impressive resume so far.

Since when did USC fire sark?

TierbsHsotBoobs

dhdawg said:

Mosster47 said:

USC is the best team in the conference right now. Wins over Stanford and UA are the most impressive resume so far.

Since when did USC fire sark?

How funny would it be if they fired him at the airport after a win?

Mosster47

TierbsHsotBoobs said:

Mosster47 said:

TierbsHsotBoobs said:

Mosster47 said:

USC is the best team in the conference right now. Wins over Stanford and UA are the most impressive resume so far.

If the best team in your conference lost to Boston College, your conference blows.

That was never in the metric, but always a given. I actually bought into the preseason hype. I thought 10 returning QB's and the addition of Peterman while giving Sark more talent would really raise the ceiling. Instead this is the worst I can ever remember, like 1995 bad when a mediocre Duck team made the Cotton Bowl.

1999 was the worst ever:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1999_Stanford_Cardinal_football_team

This year isn't that bad.

Holy fuck, 7-1 conference record with a loss to San Jose State. That is Rich Brooks quality!

Ty actually wasn't that awful at Stanford. Those Indiana Nazis/Catholics fucked him up badly.

allpurpleallgold

Mosster47 said:

TierbsHsotBoobs said:

Mosster47 said:

TierbsHsotBoobs said:

Mosster47 said:

USC is the best team in the conference right now. Wins over Stanford and UA are the most impressive resume so far.

If the best team in your conference lost to Boston College, your conference blows.

That was never in the metric, but always a given. I actually bought into the preseason hype. I thought 10 returning QB's and the addition of Peterman while giving Sark more talent would really raise the ceiling. Instead this is the worst I can ever remember, like 1995 bad when a mediocre Duck team made the Cotton Bowl.

1999 was the worst ever:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1999_Stanford_Cardinal_football_team

This year isn't that bad.

Holy fuck, 7-1 conference record with a loss to San Jose State. That is Rich Brooks quality!

Ty actually wasn't that awful at Stanford. Those Indiana Nazis/Catholics fucked him up badly.

Husky fans tend to remember Ty for 0-12 but the truth is his career suggests he is mediocre like Sark. With slightly more success.

Fire_Marshall_Bill

TierbsHsotBoobs said:

Mosster47 said:

TierbsHsotBoobs said:

Mosster47 said:

USC is the best team in the conference right now. Wins over Stanford and UA are the most impressive resume so far.

If the best team in your conference lost to Boston College, your conference blows.

That was never in the metric, but always a given. I actually bought into the preseason hype. I thought 10 returning QB's and the addition of Peterman while giving Sark more talent would really raise the ceiling. Instead this is the worst I can ever remember, like 1995 bad when a mediocre Duck team made the Cotton Bowl.

1999 was the worst ever:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1999_Stanford_Cardinal_football_team

This year isn't that bad.

I'll never forget that. Air Farce kicked "our" ass (again) in Seattle. We still damn near won the conference. And Tytanic's Rose Bowl.

dhdawg

What happened to Nevada btw?

RoadDawg55

allpurpleallgold said:

Mosster47 said:

TierbsHsotBoobs said:

Mosster47 said:

TierbsHsotBoobs said:

Mosster47 said:

USC is the best team in the conference right now. Wins over Stanford and UA are the most impressive resume so far.

If the best team in your conference lost to Boston College, your conference blows.

That was never in the metric, but always a given. I actually bought into the preseason hype. I thought 10 returning QB's and the addition of Peterman while giving Sark more talent would really raise the ceiling. Instead this is the worst I can ever remember, like 1995 bad when a mediocre Duck team made the Cotton Bowl.

1999 was the worst ever:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1999_Stanford_Cardinal_football_team

This year isn't that bad.

Holy fuck, 7-1 conference record with a loss to San Jose State. That is Rich Brooks quality!

Ty actually wasn't that awful at Stanford. Those Indiana Nazis/Catholics fucked him up badly.

Husky fans tend to remember Ty for 0-12 but the truth is his career suggests he is mediocre like Sark. With slightly more success.

Sark is Ty. The USC job is the same as Ty at Notre Dame.

oregonblitzkrieg

Notre Dame is the epitome of PAC 12 dreckfest. Why isn't this PAC 12 member on the list?

dhdawg

oregonblitzkrieg said:

Notre Dame is the epitome of PAC 12 dreckfest. Why isn't this PAC 12 member on the list?

haven't played enough games yet. Will be at the top come season's end

TierbsHsotBoobs

allpurpleallgold said:

Mosster47 said:

TierbsHsotBoobs said:

Mosster47 said:

TierbsHsotBoobs said:

Mosster47 said:

USC is the best team in the conference right now. Wins over Stanford and UA are the most impressive resume so far.

If the best team in your conference lost to Boston College, your conference blows.

That was never in the metric, but always a given. I actually bought into the preseason hype. I thought 10 returning QB's and the addition of Peterman while giving Sark more talent would really raise the ceiling. Instead this is the worst I can ever remember, like 1995 bad when a mediocre Duck team made the Cotton Bowl.

1999 was the worst ever:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1999_Stanford_Cardinal_football_team

This year isn't that bad.

Holy fuck, 7-1 conference record with a loss to San Jose State. That is Rich Brooks quality!

Ty actually wasn't that awful at Stanford. Those Indiana Nazis/Catholics fucked him up badly.

Husky fans tend to remember Ty for 0-12 but the truth is his career suggests he is mediocre like Sark. With slightly more success.

Ty at Stanford was better than Sark at Washington.