Why will this be different?

Gladstone

Every marquee game the past fifteen years we have shat the bed. What is it about this team and staff that makes it different?

Stanford by 10. Prove me wrong, Pete.

MelloDawg

Baird and Millen have already said that we shouldn't expect clutch performances from Browning as he's only a true sophomore. Real performances like that only come as an upperclassmen.

And it's that loser mentality that keeps us accepting of 7-5, 8-4 seasons.

But Petersen and the AD say we should fill the stadium

EwaDawg

Gladstone said:

Every marquee game the past fifteen years we have shat the bed. What is it about this team and staff that makes it different?

Stanford by 10. Prove me wrong, Pete.

(how do you have a marquee game if you are not a marquee team?)

Stanford. USC twice. Bowel game against classy team from Nebraska.

I am much more worried about Peterman's 3-6 record, at home, against conference opponents.

Seriously. 3-6 at home. FYFMFE.

GrundleStiltzkin

It won't be different. I hope this helps.

Gladstone

EwaDawg said:

Gladstone said:

Every marquee game the past fifteen years we have shat the bed. What is it about this team and staff that makes it different?

Stanford by 10. Prove me wrong, Pete.

(how do you have a marquee game if you are not a marquee team?)

Stanford. USC twice. Bowel game against classy team from Nebraska.

I am much more worried about Peterman's 3-6 record, at home, against conference opponents.

Seriously. 3-6 at home. FYFMFE.

They can only be assessed in hindsight, of course. Did those USC or Stanford wins propel the team into the upper tier of the Pac-12? No. Using my own logic we won't know for sure until seasons' end, but it damn well feels like it now. I like to fuck my cat.

Mad_Son

Gladstone said:

EwaDawg said:

Gladstone said:

Every marquee game the past fifteen years we have shat the bed. What is it about this team and staff that makes it different?

Stanford by 10. Prove me wrong, Pete.

(how do you have a marquee game if you are not a marquee team?)

Stanford. USC twice. Bowel game against classy team from Nebraska.

I am much more worried about Peterman's 3-6 record, at home, against conference opponents.

Seriously. 3-6 at home. FYFMFE.

They can only be assessed in hindsight, of course. Did those USC or Stanford wins propel the team into the upper tier of the Pac-12? No. Using my own logic we won't know for sure until seasons' end, but it damn well feels like it now. I like to fuck my cat.

A turning point can not be assessed until there is a body of work on either side. Maybe we had that turning point last game. Maybe this is the real turning point Friday. Maybe we don't have a turning point and we stay the same. Obviously the last few turning points were all duds. Realistically turning points are where you start to get incremental progress in the right direction and continue down that route. Not two steps forward, three steps to the side, then two back.

RaceBannon

I'll be bumping this thread after we lose 38-12!!!!!


Wait

Tequilla

Mad_Son said:

Gladstone said:

EwaDawg said:

Gladstone said:

Every marquee game the past fifteen years we have shat the bed. What is it about this team and staff that makes it different?

Stanford by 10. Prove me wrong, Pete.

(how do you have a marquee game if you are not a marquee team?)

Stanford. USC twice. Bowel game against classy team from Nebraska.

I am much more worried about Peterman's 3-6 record, at home, against conference opponents.

Seriously. 3-6 at home. FYFMFE.

They can only be assessed in hindsight, of course. Did those USC or Stanford wins propel the team into the upper tier of the Pac-12? No. Using my own logic we won't know for sure until seasons' end, but it damn well feels like it now. I like to fuck my cat.

A turning point can not be assessed until there is a body of work on either side. Maybe we had that turning point last game. Maybe this is the real turning point Friday. Maybe we don't have a turning point and we stay the same. Obviously the last few turning points were all duds. Realistically turning points are where you start to get incremental progress in the right direction and continue down that route. Not two steps forward, three steps to the side, then two back.

If you go back to 1990, it's a very similar situation to what we have now. The 1989 team finished the season strong and went into the year with a lot of expectations. They started the 1990 season with a blah win over San Jose St and then an indifferent win at Purdue. Then we blew out #5 USC 31-0.

IF we see a similar situation Friday, then like the 1990 season, you knew you had the turning point at that time.

IF we see a narrow win, we still won't truly know because I think that there's a lot of question as to how good Stanford is. Like the Arizona win, finding a way to win on the road is a huge step for the program as would be beating Stanford in a game where eyeballs and expectations are there. But the win over Arizona only proves progress if we beat Stanford ... and if we beat Stanford the next hurdle of progress is beating Oregon.

I've said since before the season that this team has the talent to get to 3-0 going into the bye. I still think that that's very possible. IF that happens, to me the true turning point of where we are as a program would be how we handle the NEXT 3 game stretch against the Beavers, @Utah, and @Cal.

Fire_Marshall_Bill

Tequilla said:

Mad_Son said:

Gladstone said:

EwaDawg said:

Gladstone said:

Every marquee game the past fifteen years we have shat the bed. What is it about this team and staff that makes it different?

Stanford by 10. Prove me wrong, Pete.

(how do you have a marquee game if you are not a marquee team?)

Stanford. USC twice. Bowel game against classy team from Nebraska.

I am much more worried about Peterman's 3-6 record, at home, against conference opponents.

Seriously. 3-6 at home. FYFMFE.

They can only be assessed in hindsight, of course. Did those USC or Stanford wins propel the team into the upper tier of the Pac-12? No. Using my own logic we won't know for sure until seasons' end, but it damn well feels like it now. I like to fuck my cat.

A turning point can not be assessed until there is a body of work on either side. Maybe we had that turning point last game. Maybe this is the real turning point Friday. Maybe we don't have a turning point and we stay the same. Obviously the last few turning points were all duds. Realistically turning points are where you start to get incremental progress in the right direction and continue down that route. Not two steps forward, three steps to the side, then two back.

If you go back to 1990, it's a very similar situation to what we have now. The 1989 team finished the season strong and went into the year with a lot of expectations. They started the 1990 season with a blah win over San Jose St and then an indifferent win at Purdue. Then we blew out #5 USC 31-0.

IF we see a similar situation Friday, then like the 1990 season, you knew you had the turning point at that time.

IF we see a narrow win, we still won't truly know because I think that there's a lot of question as to how good Stanford is. Like the Arizona win, finding a way to win on the road is a huge step for the program as would be beating Stanford in a game where eyeballs and expectations are there. But the win over Arizona only proves progress if we beat Stanford ... and if we beat Stanford the next hurdle of progress is beating Oregon.

I've said since before the season that this team has the talent to get to 3-0 going into the bye. I still think that that's very possible. IF that happens, to me the true turning point of where we are as a program would be how we handle the NEXT 3 game stretch against the Beavers, @Utah, and @Cal.

1990's defense was more death row than 2016's.

Tequilla

Fire_Marshall_Bill said:

Tequilla said:

Mad_Son said:

Gladstone said:

EwaDawg said:

Gladstone said:

Every marquee game the past fifteen years we have shat the bed. What is it about this team and staff that makes it different?

Stanford by 10. Prove me wrong, Pete.

(how do you have a marquee game if you are not a marquee team?)

Stanford. USC twice. Bowel game against classy team from Nebraska.

I am much more worried about Peterman's 3-6 record, at home, against conference opponents.

Seriously. 3-6 at home. FYFMFE.

They can only be assessed in hindsight, of course. Did those USC or Stanford wins propel the team into the upper tier of the Pac-12? No. Using my own logic we won't know for sure until seasons' end, but it damn well feels like it now. I like to fuck my cat.

A turning point can not be assessed until there is a body of work on either side. Maybe we had that turning point last game. Maybe this is the real turning point Friday. Maybe we don't have a turning point and we stay the same. Obviously the last few turning points were all duds. Realistically turning points are where you start to get incremental progress in the right direction and continue down that route. Not two steps forward, three steps to the side, then two back.

If you go back to 1990, it's a very similar situation to what we have now. The 1989 team finished the season strong and went into the year with a lot of expectations. They started the 1990 season with a blah win over San Jose St and then an indifferent win at Purdue. Then we blew out #5 USC 31-0.

IF we see a similar situation Friday, then like the 1990 season, you knew you had the turning point at that time.

IF we see a narrow win, we still won't truly know because I think that there's a lot of question as to how good Stanford is. Like the Arizona win, finding a way to win on the road is a huge step for the program as would be beating Stanford in a game where eyeballs and expectations are there. But the win over Arizona only proves progress if we beat Stanford ... and if we beat Stanford the next hurdle of progress is beating Oregon.

I've said since before the season that this team has the talent to get to 3-0 going into the bye. I still think that that's very possible. IF that happens, to me the true turning point of where we are as a program would be how we handle the NEXT 3 game stretch against the Beavers, @Utah, and @Cal.

1990's defense was more death row than 2016's.

Both have potential to be elite PAC defenses ... this defense is in a position where they are learning how to be elite. The big miss on this defense is having solid options on both rush ends. Only Mathis is an average or better edge rusher in the conference.

PostGameOrangeSlices

Wuff with me boys


WOOF

WOOF

WOOF

beer me while I SNARL

RaceBannon

People forget that the 1990 team was MENTALLY weak as well just like the entire Husky history up to that point.

First and goal at Colorado. I was sitting at the ten yard line at that end of the field and the mouthy fucking BUFF fan next to me finally shut up as he saw impending defeat.

We fucking blow it. And to make sure we blew it we lose at home to a soft faggoty UCLA 3-8 fucking true freshman QB of a team. We made that mother fucker a millionaire as he was smart enough to LEAVE before it became obvious how bad he sucked. Tommy F Maddox.

We SHOULD have had 5 Rose Bowls in a row and a natty or two a decade earlier but we fucking lost the APPLE CUP two years in a row and shit the bed AT Stanford as the #1 ranked team in the cuntry.

That's why the 91 Nebraska game is seared in my memory like Christmas in Cambodia because it was the only time in my LIFE that we were #HUSKYSTRONG and came back on the ROAD to beat a good team and completed the 12-0 natty.

In 1999 we lose to another horrible UCLA team to blow the conference. In 2000 we come out flat and soft on the ROAD at whOregon (lol) and lose that game keeping us from the BCS title game.

Then shit forever WE FUCKING SUCK.

Ok?

LoneStarDawg

RaceBannon said:

People forget that the 1990 team was MENTALLY weak as well just like the entire Husky history up to that point.

First and goal at Colorado. I was sitting at the ten yard line at that end of the field and the mouthy fucking BUFF fan next to me finally shut up as he saw impending defeat.

We fucking blow it. And to make sure we blew it we lose at home to a soft faggoty UCLA 3-8 fucking true freshman QB of a team. We made that mother fucker a millionaire as he was smart enough to LEAVE before it became obvious how bad he sucked. Tommy F Maddox.

We SHOULD have had 5 Rose Bowls in a row and a natty or two a decade earlier but we fucking lost the APPLE CUP two years in a row and shit the bed AT Stanford as the #1 ranked team in the cuntry.

That's why the 91 Nebraska game is seared in my memory like Christmas in Cambodia because it was the only time in my LIFE that we were #HUSKYSTRONG and came back on the ROAD to beat a good team and completed the 12-0 natty.

In 1999 we lose to another horrible UCLA team to blow the conference. In 2000 we come out flat and soft on the ROAD at whOregon (lol) and lose that game keeping us from the BCS title game.

Then shit forever WE FUCKING SUCK.

Ok?

sounds like you care

PostGameOrangeSlices

RaceBannon said:

People forget that the 1990 team was MENTALLY weak as well just like the entire Husky history up to that point.

First and goal at Colorado. I was sitting at the ten yard line at that end of the field and the mouthy fucking BUFF fan next to me finally shut up as he saw impending defeat.

We fucking blow it. And to make sure we blew it we lose at home to a soft faggoty UCLA 3-8 fucking true freshman QB of a team. We made that mother fucker a millionaire as he was smart enough to LEAVE before it became obvious how bad he sucked. Tommy F Maddox.

We SHOULD have had 5 Rose Bowls in a row and a natty or two a decade earlier but we fucking lost the APPLE CUP two years in a row and shit the bed AT Stanford as the #1 ranked team in the cuntry.

That's why the 91 Nebraska game is seared in my memory like Christmas in Cambodia because it was the only time in my LIFE that we were #HUSKYSTRONG and came back on the ROAD to beat a good team and completed the 12-0 natty.

In 1999 we lose to another horrible UCLA team to blow the conference. In 2000 we come out flat and soft on the ROAD at whOregon (lol) and lose that game keeping us from the BCS title game.

Then shit forever WE FUCKING SUCK.

Ok?

Race was there

doogsinparadise

RaceBannon said:

People forget that the 1990 team was MENTALLY weak as well just like the entire Husky history up to that point.

First and goal at Colorado. I was sitting at the ten yard line at that end of the field and the mouthy fucking BUFF fan next to me finally shut up as he saw impending defeat.

We fucking blow it. And to make sure we blew it we lose at home to a soft faggoty UCLA 3-8 fucking true freshman QB of a team. We made that mother fucker a millionaire as he was smart enough to LEAVE before it became obvious how bad he sucked. Tommy F Maddox.

We SHOULD have had 5 Rose Bowls in a row and a natty or two a decade earlier but we fucking lost the APPLE CUP two years in a row and shit the bed AT Stanford as the #1 ranked team in the cuntry.

That's why the 91 Nebraska game is seared in my memory like Christmas in Cambodia because it was the only time in my LIFE that we were #HUSKYSTRONG and came back on the ROAD to beat a good team and completed the 12-0 natty.

In 1999 we lose to another horrible UCLA team to blow the conference. In 2000 we come out flat and soft on the ROAD at whOregon (lol) and lose that game keeping us from the BCS title game.

Then shit forever WE FUCKING SUCK.

Ok?

Pepperidge Farms Race remembers.

RaceBannon

LoneStarDawg said:

RaceBannon said:

People forget that the 1990 team was MENTALLY weak as well just like the entire Husky history up to that point.

First and goal at Colorado. I was sitting at the ten yard line at that end of the field and the mouthy fucking BUFF fan next to me finally shut up as he saw impending defeat.

We fucking blow it. And to make sure we blew it we lose at home to a soft faggoty UCLA 3-8 fucking true freshman QB of a team. We made that mother fucker a millionaire as he was smart enough to LEAVE before it became obvious how bad he sucked. Tommy F Maddox.

We SHOULD have had 5 Rose Bowls in a row and a natty or two a decade earlier but we fucking lost the APPLE CUP two years in a row and shit the bed AT Stanford as the #1 ranked team in the cuntry.

That's why the 91 Nebraska game is seared in my memory like Christmas in Cambodia because it was the only time in my LIFE that we were #HUSKYSTRONG and came back on the ROAD to beat a good team and completed the 12-0 natty.

In 1999 we lose to another horrible UCLA team to blow the conference. In 2000 we come out flat and soft on the ROAD at whOregon (lol) and lose that game keeping us from the BCS title game.

Then shit forever WE FUCKING SUCK.

Ok?

sounds like you care

I wish I didn't. I cared a lot more back then too. I busted up an umbrella in the stands after the 90 UCLA game. My wife tells me the next summer that she would rather spend her crisp fall days doing something else

PostGameOrangeSlices

RaceBannon said:

LoneStarDawg said:

RaceBannon said:

People forget that the 1990 team was MENTALLY weak as well just like the entire Husky history up to that point.

First and goal at Colorado. I was sitting at the ten yard line at that end of the field and the mouthy fucking BUFF fan next to me finally shut up as he saw impending defeat.

We fucking blow it. And to make sure we blew it we lose at home to a soft faggoty UCLA 3-8 fucking true freshman QB of a team. We made that mother fucker a millionaire as he was smart enough to LEAVE before it became obvious how bad he sucked. Tommy F Maddox.

We SHOULD have had 5 Rose Bowls in a row and a natty or two a decade earlier but we fucking lost the APPLE CUP two years in a row and shit the bed AT Stanford as the #1 ranked team in the cuntry.

That's why the 91 Nebraska game is seared in my memory like Christmas in Cambodia because it was the only time in my LIFE that we were #HUSKYSTRONG and came back on the ROAD to beat a good team and completed the 12-0 natty.

In 1999 we lose to another horrible UCLA team to blow the conference. In 2000 we come out flat and soft on the ROAD at whOregon (lol) and lose that game keeping us from the BCS title game.

Then shit forever WE FUCKING SUCK.

Ok?

sounds like you care

I wish I didn't. I cared a lot more back then too. I busted up an umbrella in the stands after the 90 UCLA game. My wife tells me the next summer that she would rather spend her crisp fall days doing something else

Break more umbrellas, thats our problem

TierbsHsotBoobs

RaceBannon said:

LoneStarDawg said:

RaceBannon said:

People forget that the 1990 team was MENTALLY weak as well just like the entire Husky history up to that point.

First and goal at Colorado. I was sitting at the ten yard line at that end of the field and the mouthy fucking BUFF fan next to me finally shut up as he saw impending defeat.

We fucking blow it. And to make sure we blew it we lose at home to a soft faggoty UCLA 3-8 fucking true freshman QB of a team. We made that mother fucker a millionaire as he was smart enough to LEAVE before it became obvious how bad he sucked. Tommy F Maddox.

We SHOULD have had 5 Rose Bowls in a row and a natty or two a decade earlier but we fucking lost the APPLE CUP two years in a row and shit the bed AT Stanford as the #1 ranked team in the cuntry.

That's why the 91 Nebraska game is seared in my memory like Christmas in Cambodia because it was the only time in my LIFE that we were #HUSKYSTRONG and came back on the ROAD to beat a good team and completed the 12-0 natty.

In 1999 we lose to another horrible UCLA team to blow the conference. In 2000 we come out flat and soft on the ROAD at whOregon (lol) and lose that game keeping us from the BCS title game.

Then shit forever WE FUCKING SUCK.

Ok?

sounds like you care

I wish I didn't. I cared a lot more back then too. I busted up an umbrella in the stands after the 90 UCLA game. My wife tells me the next summer that she would rather spend her crisp fall days doing something else

Thanks for showing the younger generation how to act in 20-30 years.

RoadDawg55

MelloDawg said:

Baird and Millen have already said that we shouldn't expect clutch performances from Browning as he's only a true sophomore. Real performances like that only come as an upperclassmen.

And it's that loser mentality that keeps us accepting of 7-5, 8-4 seasons.

But Petersen and the AD say we should fill the stadium

So unbelievably doogish and stupid. Mariota, Manziel, Winston, Watson, Alabama's QB now... If you want to use guys similar to Browning, Colt McCoy, Kellen Moore.. If you're good you're good. It's just a stupid cliche that has become standard.

UW will play some close games this year and Browning needs to come through. Fuck next year or the year after. This fucking year.

Browning could get hurt as an upperclassman, he could struggle, the team could be worse, USC could hire a great coach, etc.... Improvement and becoming clutch isn't always linear. He's started 15 games or so. He's not a green QB anymore.

PurpleJ

Brownig will be lucky to be able to walk after the game is over.

#puppy

Tequilla

The reality is that winning at an elite level is hard and handling success is one of the biggest challenges throughout college football.