Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
When they look back in the anals of Duck football history
Mosster47
Member Posts: 6,246
Marcus Mariota will look like our only good player ever.
Oh, and UW has no Heisman, so there is that.
Oh, and UW has no Heisman, so there is that.
Comments
also wtf'd for sour grapes. any program would KILL to have a player like Mariota. he's fucking brilliant on the field and it's a extra benefit that he doesn't make you absolutely fucking cringe every time he opens his mouth. 1991 was a long fucking time ago.
much as love my bad boys from the old Miami days, from an adult perspective, Winston is just a first class piece of shit. were he a Hurricane, I'd probably find some bit of good in him. but he's not, so I'll just say he's a fucking moron and will wind up in jail at some point in his life.
this has certainly been Marcus' week. Oregon struck fucking gold when they found him. Awesome player.
every program wants a Heisman winner. as much as people bitch about it, or like to argue that it's 'just a popularity contest', they want one for their program, and it's one of the things that the iconic programs point to in their 'trophy cases'. USC brags about theirs in Heritage Hall all the time.
there's no question that Mariota winning the Heisman, and by a landslide and with no controversy whatsoever, makes all the doogs a little green, which is ironic.
Good for Mariota. Could care less about Oregon in general.
I value wins more than I value stats.
Winning ugly >>> Losing pretty
Sure, I'd love to see a UW player win the Heisman one day. I'd trade the Heisman every single day for a National Title.
Of course, he only has to beat the #3 and #1 (probable) teams in CFB to get it.
Just think, if this were 1991, we'd be playing Ohio State in the Rose and we would probably cruise to a split title with Bama after they beat whoever in the Sugar.
The title is harder to win now for sure, but whoever gets it will have earned it, and there is a lot of great football on NYE and NYD this year, so I'm kind of coming around on this playoff thing.
I hate those (i.e. Softy) that root harder for your rival to lose than for you to win. That's Coug behavior.
If beating the Ducks means that we're 8-4 and the Ducks are a 4-8 team ... that doesn't mean that much to me. I'm the same way with the Cougs.
I won't be happy until the Dawgs are back competing for conference titles. Then I might care as much about who is losing as the Dawgs winning ... but that will be in November when the games are special.
i'm sure you could NOT care less about Oregon (you're welcome), except that I know you could because you're all green about them getting a Heisman first. which, of course, is what we were talking about.
what the fuck are you talking about now? winning ugly? you have apparently veered off subject.
assuming that you meant to say you value wins more than you value individual awards, well, duh. i'm sure most normal fans do.
but it's not a ZERO/SUM game. that's the fucking point. having a player like that bring home some quality hardware is additive to the program. period.
that's why walking through, say, Heritage Hall, is a more impressive experience than walking through the Husky Hall of Fame.
I didn't start a thread about Mariota winning the Heisman. Him winning a Heisman is a national story.
Nowhere have I said anything about him not being deserving, etc. All I said was that I'd trade a Heisman for a National Championship to a Quook trying to beat his chest about how superior they are to the UW.
Veering off course? Pretty sure that my original comment was about winning being greater than stats. So even though you claim that you don't get confused easily ... it's looking like you've gotten confused here.
Instead of trying to interpret what I am or am not saying when I haven't said something, why don't you ask somebody instead? People trying to read shit into things that aren't there is one of the most fucktarded things that we do in society.
kind of like your tin foil hat theory about Wisconsin? or do you have admissible evidence?
winning ugly.
that, my friend, is a different conversation than "wins vs. trophies".
you're right. i do, occasionally, get confused. i'm confused right now about why you're confused over why your comment about ugly wins was initially confusing.
I didn't say you said he wasn't deserving. decent attempt at a red herring. I said your response was sour grapes. and it was.
and was he really seriously beating his chest about Oregon being superior to UW like in a "superior history" sense? I rather doubt it. even the dumbest ducks I know understand that they are at least a title and a decade or two away from that. I think he was being sarcastic.
I think you read into his comment what you wanted to read into it so you could bring up 1991. let's be honest.
or do you really think there are a lot of Oregon fans out there who think that it was the Heisman that's made them the now more historically significant program?
and you got on my ass for mind reading.