Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
Talked to a buddy today who's a Sark defender. He mentioned that we're still too young and immature as a team. Again, I asked him whose fault is that? Then you hear on fagman that you can't win when you rely on underclassmen to play. Besides the fact we're a fairly veteran team. But UCfuckingLA is playing SEVENTEEN true freshman this year. Seventeen. And they don't have their own version of Kimberly running around making excuses that they're young because they don't fucking have to. They're winning. And they're young. I was led to believe the two were mutually exclusive.
2 ·
Comments
Oregon's offense was a bunch of underclassmen and they plungered Washington.
1. Alabama won the natty the last two years.
2. Alabama played a dozen true freshmen last year with 3 or 4 starters depending on game.
3. Alabama has 11 true freshmen on the 2-deeps with 4 starting. Thirteen have played this year.
Is Alabama too young to be #1?
Every contributor but Shaq Thompson is either a senior or a junior. This was supposed to be the year.
This team has talent, experience, and caught Oregon without their best player.
Sark will NEVER BEAT OREGON!
It hasn't been that way for a long time but because it was that way when UW was good people still think it's true.
Rick won a Rose Bowl with Rich Alexis, Roc Alexander, Greg Carothers and even the terrible Chris Massey playing pivotal roles on the team.
I understand not redshirting Ross as he does play some. However Daniels, Stringfellow, I believe Mathis and a few other DL have already played when they didn't need to.
Is the team young? Of course they are: they are late teens early twenties. Do you hate it when people ask and answer their own fucking questions? Of course you do.