Hardcore Husky Podcast: Hot Football Talk
Comments
-
Did we* hire a new TE coach?Dardanus said:
-
Is everyone who listened direct linking or iTunes. I can't see it in iTunes and several others have said the same. It automatically downloaded because I subscribe, but non-subscribers seem to be having a problem. Thanks in Advance.
-
Good podcast again guys.
Just my 0.02 @koopdog, but I think you should have stuck to your guns describing Oregon's store bought teams (great line by @DerekJohnson) as really really good, not great.
Oregon has had an excellent run. They deserve a lot of credit for what they've done, even more so when you consider they have done so without vast in state high school talent to build upon. Coffee cups or not, Oregon has done a great job in building a program. However, IMO, what has kept them from being considered great has been their inability to handle really good physical teams that have speed and are disciplined. Teams like Ohio State, LSU, even Boise State. Running past inferior opponents looks impressive, but I don't think a football team can be considered great without having the physicality to take it to anyone they face. -
Not this again. They made two title games in five years.Southerndawg said:Good podcast again guys.
Just my 0.02 @koopdog, but I think you should have stuck to your guns describing Oregon's store bought teams (great line by @DerekJohnson) as really really good, not great.
Oregon has had an excellent run. They deserve a lot of credit for what they've done, even more so when you consider they have done so without vast in state high school talent to build upon. Coffee cups or not, Oregon has done a great job in building a program. However, IMO, what has kept them from being considered great has been their inability to handle really good physical teams that have speed and are disciplined. Teams like Ohio State, LSU, even Boise State. Running past inferior opponents looks impressive, but I don't think a football team can be considered great without having the physicality to take it to anyone they face. -
Win half a natty and some Rose Bowls and stuff this century and THEN POP OFF!!!!!!!11!!!1!!RoadDawg55 said:
Not this again. They made two title games in five years.Southerndawg said:Good podcast again guys.
Just my 0.02 @koopdog, but I think you should have stuck to your guns describing Oregon's store bought teams (great line by @DerekJohnson) as really really good, not great.
Oregon has had an excellent run. They deserve a lot of credit for what they've done, even more so when you consider they have done so without vast in state high school talent to build upon. Coffee cups or not, Oregon has done a great job in building a program. However, IMO, what has kept them from being considered great has been their inability to handle really good physical teams that have speed and are disciplined. Teams like Ohio State, LSU, even Boise State. Running past inferior opponents looks impressive, but I don't think a football team can be considered great without having the physicality to take it to anyone they face. -
I don't disagree with you in principle, but I was trying to suck Derek off so I can do more podcasts with him.Southerndawg said:Good podcast again guys.
Just my 0.02 @koopdog, but I think you should have stuck to your guns describing Oregon's store bought teams (great line by @DerekJohnson) as really really good, not great.
Oregon has had an excellent run. They deserve a lot of credit for what they've done, even more so when you consider they have done so without vast in state high school talent to build upon. Coffee cups or not, Oregon has done a great job in building a program. However, IMO, what has kept them from being considered great has been their inability to handle really good physical teams that have speed and are disciplined. Teams like Ohio State, LSU, even Boise State. Running past inferior opponents looks impressive, but I don't think a football team can be considered great without having the physicality to take it to anyone they face.
Seriously, tho - when he challenged me it brought up the idea of what was "great". I was thinking Alabama, Ohio Stateish as great. There's only one "the best" and @puppylove_sugarsteel @RaceBannon and @PurpleJ can tell us who that is. So, during the pod I was thinking it might just be my Oregon bias because they come close but no cigar.
In terms of our conference. No question, as Sark would say.
@RoadDawg55 brings up a good poont. My point was not necessarily to quantify Oregon so much as it was to discuss how progress works on the sigma scale.
I guess "great" can be subjective depending on the angle. I bet my "great" for a blowjob would be better than say ---- @Fire_Marshall_Bill
I now Tequillaed myself.
TL,DR
-
I don't pay attention to tags, but if this one doesn't exist, it should.koopdog said:
I don't disagree with you in principle, but I was trying to suck Derek off so I can do more podcasts with him.Southerndawg said:Good podcast again guys.
Just my 0.02 @koopdog, but I think you should have stuck to your guns describing Oregon's store bought teams (great line by @DerekJohnson) as really really good, not great.
Oregon has had an excellent run. They deserve a lot of credit for what they've done, even more so when you consider they have done so without vast in state high school talent to build upon. Coffee cups or not, Oregon has done a great job in building a program. However, IMO, what has kept them from being considered great has been their inability to handle really good physical teams that have speed and are disciplined. Teams like Ohio State, LSU, even Boise State. Running past inferior opponents looks impressive, but I don't think a football team can be considered great without having the physicality to take it to anyone they face.
Seriously, tho - when he challenged me it brought up the idea of what was "great". I was thinking Alabama, Ohio Stateish as great. There's only one "the best" and @puppylove_sugarsteel @RaceBannon and @PurpleJ can tell us who that is. So, during the pod I was thinking it might just be my Oregon bias because they come close but no cigar.
In terms of our conference. No question, as Sark would say.
@RoadDawg55 brings up a good poont. My point was not necessarily to quantify Oregon so much as it was to discuss how progress works on the sigma scale.
I guess "great" can be subjective depending on the angle. I bet my "great" for a blowjob would be better than say ---- @Fire_Marshall_Bill
I now Tequillaed myself.
TL,DR
-
I read it. Begrudgingly.koopdog said:
I don't disagree with you in principle, but I was trying to suck Derek off so I can do more podcasts with him.Southerndawg said:Good podcast again guys.
Just my 0.02 @koopdog, but I think you should have stuck to your guns describing Oregon's store bought teams (great line by @DerekJohnson) as really really good, not great.
Oregon has had an excellent run. They deserve a lot of credit for what they've done, even more so when you consider they have done so without vast in state high school talent to build upon. Coffee cups or not, Oregon has done a great job in building a program. However, IMO, what has kept them from being considered great has been their inability to handle really good physical teams that have speed and are disciplined. Teams like Ohio State, LSU, even Boise State. Running past inferior opponents looks impressive, but I don't think a football team can be considered great without having the physicality to take it to anyone they face.
Seriously, tho - when he challenged me it brought up the idea of what was "great". I was thinking Alabama, Ohio Stateish as great. There's only one "the best" and @puppylove_sugarsteel @RaceBannon and @PurpleJ can tell us who that is. So, during the pod I was thinking it might just be my Oregon bias because they come close but no cigar.
In terms of our conference. No question, as Sark would say.
@RoadDawg55 brings up a good poont. My point was not necessarily to quantify Oregon so much as it was to discuss how progress works on the sigma scale.
I guess "great" can be subjective depending on the angle. I bet my "great" for a blowjob would be better than say ---- @Fire_Marshall_Bill
I now Tequillaed myself.
TL,DR
-
you're braver than I thought.PurpleJ said:
I read it. Begrudgingly.koopdog said:
I don't disagree with you in principle, but I was trying to suck Derek off so I can do more podcasts with him.Southerndawg said:Good podcast again guys.
Just my 0.02 @koopdog, but I think you should have stuck to your guns describing Oregon's store bought teams (great line by @DerekJohnson) as really really good, not great.
Oregon has had an excellent run. They deserve a lot of credit for what they've done, even more so when you consider they have done so without vast in state high school talent to build upon. Coffee cups or not, Oregon has done a great job in building a program. However, IMO, what has kept them from being considered great has been their inability to handle really good physical teams that have speed and are disciplined. Teams like Ohio State, LSU, even Boise State. Running past inferior opponents looks impressive, but I don't think a football team can be considered great without having the physicality to take it to anyone they face.
Seriously, tho - when he challenged me it brought up the idea of what was "great". I was thinking Alabama, Ohio Stateish as great. There's only one "the best" and @puppylove_sugarsteel @RaceBannon and @PurpleJ can tell us who that is. So, during the pod I was thinking it might just be my Oregon bias because they come close but no cigar.
In terms of our conference. No question, as Sark would say.
@RoadDawg55 brings up a good poont. My point was not necessarily to quantify Oregon so much as it was to discuss how progress works on the sigma scale.
I guess "great" can be subjective depending on the angle. I bet my "great" for a blowjob would be better than say ---- @Fire_Marshall_Bill
I now Tequillaed myself.
TL,DR
-
disagree
