UW Doog-lb picks USC first, UCLA 3rd in Pac12 South

HeretoBeatmyChest

http://www.uwdawgpound.com/2015/7/5/8890311/the-gekko-files-ucla-bruins-2015-preview

A comment even says we dodged a bullet with Mora.

Jesus Christ, how fucking stupid can you be. We were better than UCLA for three straight seasons, then Mora comes in and immediately UCLA is better than us and trends higher in years 2 and 3. We dodged the bullet.....of sustained improvement you fucking twat.

Hmmm. So UCLA kicks the shit out of USC the past two years, brings back basically the same team (ex-Hundley with more starters), brings in the #2 recruiting class (stars per player) while USC loses its three best players (Williams, Agolor, Buck Allen) and somehow you come up with USC winning the south and UCLA umm being a 5 or 6 win conference team.

And by the way, USC's offense last year in yards per play (the most important stat) was 40th nationally. 40th!

Even Dawgman has moved on from Sark. (I read it for free, thank you and shove your snide comment back into your beardless cunt).

Not these clowns though. Early leader for Doog of the year in 2015.

FremontTroll

The weird part is that Gekko spends the whole article on how much talent UCLA has at every position and how easy their schedule is...and then at the end for essentially no reason other than his gut he thinks they will only win 5 conference games.

Tequilla

Long term I'd rather have Pete than Mora ... but no question that you'd rather have Mora than Seven.

The only way that UCLA comes anywhere close to that prediction is if their QB play gets a lot of Miley Cyrus caliber play behind it. Considering that worst case the team is led by Slick Rick's kid and plays a try not to make a mistake game, hard to see them falling off of where they were last year.

Maybe a better question: how many games last year did Hundley win where they would have lost otherwise?

BallSacked

Recruiting rankings and Kessler is the book on SC from national analysts. Could happen, probably even should happen, but Sark gon' Sark in the end. Front 7 is their weakness.

UCLA could be really good, but Rosen will have to be an above average P12 QB almost immediately. The schedule is the easiest of the Mora era, but they start pac12 play @Az, @Stanford, ASU. Get past those 3 and they'll rack up a big season, or TSIO in early October.

BallSacked

Tequilla said:

Long term I'd rather have Pete than Mora ... but no question that you'd rather have Mora than Seven.

The only way that UCLA comes anywhere close to that prediction is if their QB play gets a lot of Miley Cyrus caliber play behind it. Considering that worst case the team is led by Slick Rick's kid and plays a try not to make a mistake game, hard to see them falling off of where they were last year.

Maybe a better question: how many games last year did Hundley win where they would have lost otherwise?

Agree with this, although I believe Peterson wouldn't have been a great fit for the LA schools - which is probably why he turned them down all those years.

I think between the 20s Rosen will prove to at least be Hundleys equal, but the last two years Hundleys was a one man wrecking crew in the redzone. Running game will have to pick up that slack, I believe it will.

greenblood

I think mora is a better fit at UCLA than Pete because UCLA needs a better recruiter, while in the not as rich talent area like UW a better game day coach like Pete is much more coveted.

Sarkingham

I would like to punch Chris Landon right in his doog face. The fucker just can't quit Sark. And he's spending the offseason telling everyone how concerned he is that Pete can't recruit with the big boys. Fuck him and fuck the doogpound.

Tequilla

Here's all you need to know about Seven and his recruiting ...

He's barely out-recruiting TCU with the same number of committed recruits with the resources, power, and history of USC behind him ... #myFrogs

RoadDawg55

The Seven and USC stuff aside, I don't think the UCLA analysis was that bad. The author pretty spot on last year. He said he sees UCLA as a 5 or 6 win team in conference. 6 conference wins is probably the over-under. They have a lot of talent, but the defense needs to be better and until a QB proves he can play at a high level, that spot will be a question mark.

TierbsHsotBoobs

RoadDawg55 said:

The Seven and USC stuff aside, I don't think the UCLA analysis was that bad. The author pretty spot on last year. He said he sees UCLA as a 5 or 6 win team in conference. 6 conference wins is probably the over-under. They have a lot of talent, but the defense needs to be better and until a QB proves he can play at a high level, that spot will be a question mark.

Hundley came back?

Kaepsknee

I think you can pretty much shell game US. SC and the bRuins in the South.

Sundevil76

The North has regressed with the exception of Oregon and Stanford, and even there they don't seem as strong, but Oregon has always regrouped so we shall see? The Dawgs needed a better showing last year and Coach Pete pretty much got a grade of D plus suprisingly. I think you all gravitate to the LA hype. How did that work for the Bruins final four year?Oh, Arizona won. The road to the title in the South will go through the state of Arizona. ASU will have a decent year and Texas A & M will tell a lot.

RoadDawg55

Sundevil76 said:

The North has regressed with the exception of Oregon and Stanford, and even there they don't seem as strong, but Oregon has always regrouped so we shall see? The Dawgs needed a better showing last year and Coach Pete pretty much got a grade of D plus suprisingly. I think you all gravitate to the LA hype. How did that work for the Bruins final four year?Oh, Arizona won. The road to the title in the South will go through the state of Arizona. ASU will have a decent year and Texas A & M will tell a lot.

Nobody besides Oregon and Stanford has ever been any good since the Pac 12 was divided. They are the only two teams from the Pac 12 that have had real success the past 5 or 6 years. Of course you think the South goes through Arizona. I can't see any team from the South not losing at least two conference games, maybe even 3.

BallSacked

I'd say that goes for anyone in the pac12 this year, not just the south. Oregon has big losses to cycle through that no one seems to be really mentioning. Ditto Stanford.

It's going to be a blood bath in the pac12. I see lots of 9-3 teams and that might include Oregon as well.