How would you define doog?
Comments
-
Doog vs quook.
Sad! -
A most confounding poast my good man. Here here.oregonblitzkrieg said:Lots of cucks in here for a school like USC. UW's problem is they never will see themselves as USC's better or equal. When Oregon was on a roll we? didn't give a FUCK about all their phony pageantry, their pre-BCS voted natties and the legions of cucks that pencil them in automatically every year as the standard of the conference. Oregon shit down their leg like they were trash and made UW slurp up the butt gravy ° (copyrighted by salemcoog). Fact is Oregon and Stanford have been the standard of the conference until recently, not USC. Until USC makes the playoffs and prove themselves in the current decade, they take a backseat to the teams that have.
On the one hand, you hit on something that has always bugged me about Husky fandom ... not just the doogs, which I agree is a term that has lost meaning and is now just a general pajorative in the hands of the average poaster. It is this enthusiastic acceptance of being in second place to USC and taking so much pride in how much "USC really respects us" that I find pathetic. I like the rebellious disdain for royalty. I hate people who bow.
I would have more respect for bitterness and begrudging credit where it's due ... to acknowledge the facts, but not embrace it so gladly and man crush so much on one's superior. Be pissed. Hate on 'em some. Accuse them of cheating (sound familiar?) ... do something for Jake's sake. This posture UW has relative to USC is effeminate. So you're spot on there and you should have about 100WTFs by now because it taps into the deepes insecurities of the best of 'em here. See, e.g., @southerndawg's infinitely ghey retort to me how USC trumps my Canes on cfb historical significance. He actually props up SC to hurt me ... so unmanly.
On the other hand, discussing any team in this conference as the standard for a truncated period of time is quooky/doogy. Oregon had a nice run; stipulated. Natty or no natty is whatever. UW has one and made up one or two others. Super.
But over time, in this confrunce, it is SC ... Seconds place or temporary substitutes are rather insignificant.
But I like your spunk. -
Fuck you!! Don't fuck with my Washington Huskies!! Now I'm 100% doogin
-
Nice.PurpleJ said:Popping off about 70 is fun, but I really wish we would have missed an extra point.
deadspin.com/rob-gronkowski-once-tanked-a-free-throw-to-keep-his-hig-1791836453 -
Take this to the spunk bored!creepycoug said:
A most confounding poast my good man. Here here.oregonblitzkrieg said:Lots of cucks in here for a school like USC. UW's problem is they never will see themselves as USC's better or equal. When Oregon was on a roll we? didn't give a FUCK about all their phony pageantry, their pre-BCS voted natties and the legions of cucks that pencil them in automatically every year as the standard of the conference. Oregon shit down their leg like they were trash and made UW slurp up the butt gravy ° (copyrighted by salemcoog). Fact is Oregon and Stanford have been the standard of the conference until recently, not USC. Until USC makes the playoffs and prove themselves in the current decade, they take a backseat to the teams that have.
On the one hand, you hit on something that has always bugged me about Husky fandom ... not just the doogs, which I agree is a term that has lost meaning and is now just a general pajorative in the hands of the average poaster. It is this enthusiastic acceptance of being in second place to USC and taking so much pride in how much "USC really respects us" that I find pathetic. I like the rebellious disdain for royalty. I hate people who bow.
I would have more respect for bitterness and begrudging credit where it's due ... to acknowledge the facts, but not embrace it so gladly and man crush so much on one's superior. Be pissed. Hate on 'em some. Accuse them of cheating (sound familiar?) ... do something for Jake's sake. This posture UW has relative to USC is effeminate. So you're spot on there and you should have about 100WTFs by now because it taps into the deepes insecurities of the best of 'em here. See, e.g., @southerndawg's infinitely ghey retort to me how USC trumps my Canes on cfb historical significance. He actually props up SC to hurt me ... so unmanly.
On the other hand, discussing any team in this conference as the standard for a truncated period of time is quooky/doogy. Oregon had a nice run; stipulated. Natty or no natty is whatever. UW has one and made up one or two others. Super.
But over time, in this confrunce, it is SC ... Seconds place or temporary substitutes are rather insignificant.
But I like your spunk. -
He never ponied up the doughCFetters_Nacho_Lover said:
Take this to the spunk bored!creepycoug said:
A most confounding poast my good man. Here here.oregonblitzkrieg said:Lots of cucks in here for a school like USC. UW's problem is they never will see themselves as USC's better or equal. When Oregon was on a roll we? didn't give a FUCK about all their phony pageantry, their pre-BCS voted natties and the legions of cucks that pencil them in automatically every year as the standard of the conference. Oregon shit down their leg like they were trash and made UW slurp up the butt gravy ° (copyrighted by salemcoog). Fact is Oregon and Stanford have been the standard of the conference until recently, not USC. Until USC makes the playoffs and prove themselves in the current decade, they take a backseat to the teams that have.
On the one hand, you hit on something that has always bugged me about Husky fandom ... not just the doogs, which I agree is a term that has lost meaning and is now just a general pajorative in the hands of the average poaster. It is this enthusiastic acceptance of being in second place to USC and taking so much pride in how much "USC really respects us" that I find pathetic. I like the rebellious disdain for royalty. I hate people who bow.
I would have more respect for bitterness and begrudging credit where it's due ... to acknowledge the facts, but not embrace it so gladly and man crush so much on one's superior. Be pissed. Hate on 'em some. Accuse them of cheating (sound familiar?) ... do something for Jake's sake. This posture UW has relative to USC is effeminate. So you're spot on there and you should have about 100WTFs by now because it taps into the deepes insecurities of the best of 'em here. See, e.g., @southerndawg's infinitely ghey retort to me how USC trumps my Canes on cfb historical significance. He actually props up SC to hurt me ... so unmanly.
On the other hand, discussing any team in this conference as the standard for a truncated period of time is quooky/doogy. Oregon had a nice run; stipulated. Natty or no natty is whatever. UW has one and made up one or two others. Super.
But over time, in this confrunce, it is SC ... Seconds place or temporary substitutes are rather insignificant.
But I like your spunk. -
-
SC is the benchmark. Oregon and Stanford had their little runs, but SC is usually at least a 7 or 8 win team they rarely go more than five years without at least tying for a title. I've never thought of them as a big rival, but it's usually an accomplishment to beat them. If nothing else, you're beating what's usually a more talented group.Pitchfork51 said:Sc cares about notre Dame and UCLA.
Beating Oregon just feels like something you ought to be able to do most years. That makes the yuge losing streak to them all the more pathetic. -
-
Doog = "new coach is just like Don James!"
