My exchange with a "doog"

Passion

So I'm sitting in my seat at a sports bar in DC after the Huskies just knocked off the traditional juggernaut - Illinois. There were a bunch of Husky Fans seated around me, and then I hear a comment over my left shoulder.

Doog: Our defense is awesome this year.

Passion: They look improved, but let's wait 'til they play arizona or oregon before we label them "awesome."

Doog (now annoyed): That's not fair. oregon is the best offensive team in the nation.

Passion: Isn't that how you measure whether you're "awesome?" By going against the best?

Doog doesn't make eye contact and stops engaging me.


This is the mentality that has been instilled - you're awesome when you beat up on inferior opponents. But it's acceptable to play poorly against good opponents because they're "the best in the nation."

This is how 7-6, 8-5, or even 9-4 becomes acceptable. This is the formula for NEVER winning another championship. You accept losing because...well..."a lot of teams lose to this school or that school."

Douchebags.

DerekJohnson

I like to give up 24 points to a mediocre-to-crappy offense and call my defense awesome. It's what I like to do.

dnc

Passion said:

So I'm sitting in my seat at a sports bar in DC after the Huskies just knocked off the traditional juggernaut - Illinois. There were a bunch of Husky Fans seated around me, and then I hear a comment over my left shoulder.

Doog: Our defense is awesome this year.

Passion: They look improved, but let's wait 'til they play arizona or oregon before we label them "awesome."

Doog (now annoyed): That's not fair. oregon is the best offensive team in the nation.

Passion: Isn't that how you measure whether you're "awesome?" By going against the best?

Doog doesn't make eye contact and stops engaging me.


This is the mentality that has been instilled - you're awesome when you beat up on inferior opponents. But it's acceptable to play poorly against good opponents because they're "the best in the nation."

This is how 7-6, 8-5, or even 9-4 becomes acceptable. This is the formula for NEVER winning another championship. You accept losing because...well..."a lot of teams lose to this school or that school."

Doogbags.

Auburndawg

Agree 100%. During the game I asked the people I was with, "what would Oregon do to Illinois?" Blank stares.

CFetters_Nacho_Lover

I had an exchange with a football fan who went to the game. He was a Chicago native and went as a casual Illinois fan. His coments regarding UW: sloppy and undisciplined, usually a reflection of the coach.

Fire_Marshall_Bill

lol in what universe is allowing 24 points awesome?

Auburndawg

Our defense was awesome..... in the first half.

LawDawg1

DerekJohnson said:

I like to give up 24 points to a mediocre-to-crappy offense and call my defense awesome. It's what I like to do.

To be fair, this moron was led to believe Nick Dolt was the best D Coordinator in the nation. Probably believed it.

fivehundredmileDAWG

This is what I've been talking about.... We are a barely above average team until we prove otherwise.

Homebrew_Dawg

My assessment:

Defense 1st half: B-
Defense 2nd half: D+

Doogbag grader: Awesome.

Mediocrity is the new awesome. 7-6 is awesome. Accept it, expect it; anywhere, anytime, anyone. Expect to win, if lesser opponent. Otherwise prepare to be plungered.

Don't see many lesser opponents remaining on the schedule after Idaho St.

TierbsHsotBoobs

Fire_Marshall_Bill said:

lol in what universe is allowing 24 points awesome?

Paging HereToBeatMyChest to this thread...

fivehundredmileDAWG

Can I get a websters dictionary definition for 'doog' ?

Would it be

Doog ( dUUg) noun - One whom has blind faith in the UofW athletics regime and most recently would be exemplified by an in visual who believed Ty Willingham merely needed one more year.

fivehundredmileDAWG

In visual = individual

Fucking telephone

TierbsHsotBoobs

fivehundredmileDAWG said:

Can I get a websters dictionary definition for 'doog' ?

Would it be

Doog ( dUUg) noun - One whom has blind faith in the UofW athletics regime and most recently would be exemplified by an in visual who believed Ty Willingham merely needed one more year.

That's the commonly misused form of the term.

The REAL Doog is one whom is obsessed over Oregon football's status as superior to Washington football. Just like Coogs care more about seeing Washington suffer than they do about seeing Washington State succeed.

Hi Harv!

TierbsHsotBoobs

And yes, many REAL Doogs also have blind faith in the UW AD regime. There's a lot of correlation, even if there is no direct causation.

Passion

fivehundredmileDAWG said:

Can I get a websters dictionary definition for 'doog' ?

Would it be

Doog ( dUUg) noun - One whom has blind faith in the UofW athletics regime and most recently would be exemplified by an in visual who believed Ty Willingham merely needed one more year.

Apparently it's a play on the word "coog," as in coogs that are satisfied with things like lots of offensive yards, dynamic WRs, and 7-6 or 8-5 records.

I needed to ask that question myself.

Homebrew_Dawg

fivehundredmileDAWG said:

In visual = individual

Fucking telephone

Perfect irony. No mistake, Willingham was an "In visual" for the UW administration. AD must have lost his fucking telephone since didn't flush that turd soon enough.

fivehundredmileDAWG

I used Doog on dawgman in a war with the 'new school' doogs who think I am ruining the board with my posts questioning where we are at and what might go wrong... I guess I burst the 'pink cloud' there... The thread was deleted because I used Doog. There is a new wave of doogs ... I think I will call them 'post modern doogs' .

CuntWaffle

Every defense we have from here on out will be elite to the doogs since it is slightly less worse than Holt's D.

greenblood

It's like going from PBR to Coors. Coors tastes a hell of a lot better, but it's still Coors.

vadawg

Sounds like an Obama supporter:-p