2018 Pac-12 Football Coach Rankings: Can Anyone Win a National Title?
Comments
-
Oh dude my bad, I was under the impression from your original comment that I was retorting that we were discussing the more storied program in terms of football history.oregonblitzkrieg said:
No category for playoff wins in this display. GTF outta here with this doog shit. Win/loss records, NFL drafts picks, weeks at #1 etc., none of that matters. Only playoff wins & national championships (which require playoff wins in the modern era) matter. UO has 1 playoff win. UW has zero playoff wins. UO played in 2 natty games. UW has never played in one. UW has half a voted natty. UO matched that accomplishment in 2010 with an undefeated season. In short, UO will be the dominant program until UW gets a playoff win. Then both programs will be on equal footing again.DoogCourics said:oregonblitzkrieg said:
I'm not even charged to half quook. Bow down and recognize the accomplishments of the O, bitches. Acknowledge that we? are your betters in football accomplishments and I'll go easier on the beatdowns next time. The case has been laid out and the facts presented. The 2 undefeated seasons cancel each other out. The program with the most playoff wins is the more storied program. #QuookLogic is #WinningLogicPurpleJ said:Angry quook obk is best obk. Glad to see my comment spark some decent discussion around here lol
Quite literally the only thing Oregon is more storied in is Heisman winners. And yes, Marcus was amazing.
But even with a 12 year stretch of dominance by Oregon and Washington hitting the ultimate depths of hell, Oregon is still behind in every metric.
I didn't realize you were attempting to make an argument that college football didn't begin until 2014 when the Playoffs began (by your definition 2010 "natty game" doesn't count because it did not require a playoff win to get into, but rather voters chose the teams).
So by this measure the most storied programs are Alabama, Clemson, Ohio State, Georgia, and Oregon (one of these things is not like the others), as they are the only teams to have won playoff games, or National Championships that required playoff wins in the modern era.
I mean, it's ok to be a little retarded. We all are. But.....
PS - USC, Oklahoma, Notre Dame, Michigan, Texas, Nebraska, Tennessee, Penn State, LSU, and a few others would like a word.
PSS - Thank you for the FREE PUB! at the beginning of your statement.
You can continue trolling now.
-
Bunch of retards beating each other up
It's USC and then everyone else.
Oregon vs Washington is a dumb debate.
If you are over 40 I guess you think Washington is better and if you are under then Oregon is way better. -
Washington and OregonPitchfork51 said:Bunch of retards beating each other up
It's USC and then everyone else.
Oregon vs Washington is a dumb debate.
If you are over 40 I guess you think Washington is better and if you are under then Oregon is way better.
Arizona State
-
No arguments here
-
We've been undefeated more than once. And we have more than one REAL national title.oregonblitzkrieg said:
I'm not even charged to half quook. Bow down and recognize the accomplishments of the O, bitches. Acknowledge that we? are your betters in football accomplishments and I'll go easier on the beatdowns next time. The case has been laid out and the facts presented. The 2 undefeated seasons cancel each other out. The program with the most playoff wins is the more storied program. #QuookLogic is #WinningLogicPurpleJ said:Angry quook obk is best obk. Glad to see my comment spark some decent discussion around here lol
Looks like I win again.
-
He is completely serious.Swaye said:
I know you are trolling, because nobody but Hondo can be this stupid.oregonblitzkrieg said:
No category for playoff wins in this display. GTF outta here with this doog shit. Win/loss records, NFL drafts picks, weeks at #1 etc., none of that matters. Only playoff wins & national championships (which require playoff wins in the modern era) matter. UO has 1 playoff win. UW has zero playoff wins. UO played in 2 natty games. UW has never played in one. UW has half a voted natty. UO matched that accomplishment in 2010 with an undefeated season. In short, UO will be the dominant program until UW gets a playoff win. Then both programs will be on equal footing again.DoogCourics said:oregonblitzkrieg said:
I'm not even charged to half quook. Bow down and recognize the accomplishments of the O, bitches. Acknowledge that we? are your betters in football accomplishments and I'll go easier on the beatdowns next time. The case has been laid out and the facts presented. The 2 undefeated seasons cancel each other out. The program with the most playoff wins is the more storied program. #QuookLogic is #WinningLogicPurpleJ said:Angry quook obk is best obk. Glad to see my comment spark some decent discussion around here lol
Quite literally the only thing Oregon is more storied in is Heisman winners. And yes, Marcus was amazing.
But even with a 12 year stretch of dominance by Oregon and Washington hitting the ultimate depths of hell, Oregon is still behind in every metric. -
No it isn't. Fuck that shit and everyone that regurgitates it. They haven't been relevant this decade at all. They are no different than any other PAC team until they are, and deserve no special consideration just because they're USC.Pitchfork51 said:Bunch of retards beating each other up
It's USC and then everyone else.
Oregon vs Washington is a dumb debate.
If you are over 40 I guess you think Washington is better and if you are under then Oregon is way better. -
*Defending Pac-12 Champions USCoregonblitzkrieg said:
No it isn't. Fuck that shit and everyone that regurgitates it. They haven't been relevant this decade at all. They are no different than any other PAC team until they are, and deserve no special consideration just because they're USC.Pitchfork51 said:Bunch of retards beating each other up
It's USC and then everyone else.
Oregon vs Washington is a dumb debate.
If you are over 40 I guess you think Washington is better and if you are under then Oregon is way better. -
I get that you like to suck their cock, you're a UW fan, that comes with the territory.PurpleJ said:
*Defending Pac-12 Champions USCoregonblitzkrieg said:
No it isn't. Fuck that shit and everyone that regurgitates it. They haven't been relevant this decade at all. They are no different than any other PAC team until they are, and deserve no special consideration just because they're USC.Pitchfork51 said:Bunch of retards beating each other up
It's USC and then everyone else.
Oregon vs Washington is a dumb debate.
If you are over 40 I guess you think Washington is better and if you are under then Oregon is way better. -
Real recognize realoregonblitzkrieg said:
I get that you like to suck their cock, you're a UW fan, that comes with the territory.PurpleJ said:
*Defending Pac-12 Champions USCoregonblitzkrieg said:
No it isn't. Fuck that shit and everyone that regurgitates it. They haven't been relevant this decade at all. They are no different than any other PAC team until they are, and deserve no special consideration just because they're USC.Pitchfork51 said:Bunch of retards beating each other up
It's USC and then everyone else.
Oregon vs Washington is a dumb debate.
If you are over 40 I guess you think Washington is better and if you are under then Oregon is way better. -
obk's ass is all hurt because nobody thinks UO's high water mark of first loser is anything special, and SC's voted natties are.
He's like that fat, ugly bitch that thinks hot women that wear revealing clothes are slutty and cheap.
obk/UO
USC
It is funny to watch him struggle, though. So desperate for respect that they haven't earned with their inability to become champions. If it wasn't obk, I'd feel bad for him. Her?
-
Accidentally upload a pic of your wife there?dflea said:He's like that fat, ugly bitch that thinks hot women that wear revealing clothes are slutty and cheap.
-
Seething anger and jealousy from OBK. I would be pissed too if I married a chick that quickly got fat and then took half my shit.
-
No.
Go eat another donut, fat ass. And tell everyone about your glorious first loser season again. -
USC are the PAC champions. So what, no one gives a shit because they didn't make the playoffs. UW has, but their fans act like they would rather ride shotgun with USC being in the driver's seat. UW has a serf mentality when it comes to USC. It's pathetic. UO never respected them or gave a single fuck about them during the run, never saw itself as USC's inferior, and accomplished more in a few short years than UW accomplished in 128.
-
"The run" = That time we were relevant and almost accomplished something!!!1oregonblitzkrieg said:USC are the PAC champions. So what, no one gives a shit because they didn't make the playoffs. UW has, but their fans act like they would rather ride shotgun with USC being in the driver's seat. UW has a serf mentality when it comes to USC. It's pathetic. UO never respected them or gave a single fuck about them during the run, never saw itself as USC's inferior, and accomplished more in a few short years than UW accomplished in 128.
Shit like this is embarrassing to PROUD Pac-12 schools like UW and USC. Hope Chip can lead UCLA back to relevance again, because I know Oregon isn't coming back and this conference needs all the respect it can get. -
PurpleJ said:
"The run" = That time we were relevant and almost accomplished something!!!1oregonblitzkrieg said:USC are the PAC champions. So what, no one gives a shit because they didn't make the playoffs. UW has, but their fans act like they would rather ride shotgun with USC being in the driver's seat. UW has a serf mentality when it comes to USC. It's pathetic. UO never respected them or gave a single fuck about them during the run, never saw itself as USC's inferior, and accomplished more in a few short years than UW accomplished in 128.
Shit like this is embarrassing to PROUD Pac-12 schools like UW and USC. Hope Chip can lead UCLA back to relevance again, because I know Oregon isn't coming back and this conference needs all the respect it can get.
-
Punk talk from a never-was.oregonblitzkrieg said:USC are the PAC champions. So what, no one gives a shit because they didn't make the playoffs. UW has, but their fans act like they would rather ride shotgun with USC being in the driver's seat. UW has a serf mentality when it comes to USC. It's pathetic. UO never respected them or gave a single fuck about them during the run, never saw itself as USC's inferior, and accomplished more in a few short years than UW accomplished in 128.
"The run" is first loser talk for losing the big game, isn't it? -
Wood all day airrrryy day.oregonblitzkrieg said:PurpleJ said:
"The run" = That time we were relevant and almost accomplished something!!!1oregonblitzkrieg said:USC are the PAC champions. So what, no one gives a shit because they didn't make the playoffs. UW has, but their fans act like they would rather ride shotgun with USC being in the driver's seat. UW has a serf mentality when it comes to USC. It's pathetic. UO never respected them or gave a single fuck about them during the run, never saw itself as USC's inferior, and accomplished more in a few short years than UW accomplished in 128.
Shit like this is embarrassing to PROUD Pac-12 schools like UW and USC. Hope Chip can lead UCLA back to relevance again, because I know Oregon isn't coming back and this conference needs all the respect it can get. -
UW = never-has been to the big game. And never will as long as it's content riding shotgun to USC.dflea said:
Punk talk from a never-was.oregonblitzkrieg said:USC are the PAC champions. So what, no one gives a shit because they didn't make the playoffs. UW has, but their fans act like they would rather ride shotgun with USC being in the driver's seat. UW has a serf mentality when it comes to USC. It's pathetic. UO never respected them or gave a single fuck about them during the run, never saw itself as USC's inferior, and accomplished more in a few short years than UW accomplished in 128.
"The run" is first loser talk for losing the big game, isn't it?
USC and UO are the only two PAC schools to ever play in a championship game. It makes more sense for UO to pump them than it does fans of a loser school that, along with the coogs, has never tasted that rarified air. -
lol
Rarified air is first loser talk for "lost the big game" right?
Champion is the word that is eluding you, faggot. Washington was the unbeaten champion in 1991. Oregon was the champion never.
Go suck loser dick if you want. No skin off my hide. -
Champions are decided on the field not in the polls. The change to the BCS format where natty games are actually played on the field was the first nail in the coffin to the good ole boys club of voted natty 'winners.' The relevance of voted titles continues to diminish with the expansion to the playoff format and the increased difficulty of winning the championship, where teams have to win 2 post season games against the best teams in the nation. And that's not even including the conference championship games that need to be won first. Voted titles are a fucking joke. There are 100's of spurious 'championship' claims by teams with no business claiming them. A game played between 2 teams on the field leaves no gray area for funny business.dflea said:lol
Rarified air is first loser talk for "lost the big game" right?
Champion is the word that is eluding you, faggot. Washington was the unbeaten champion in 1991. Oregon was the champion never.
Go suck loser dick if you want. No skin off my hide.
I'll say it again. Play the early 90's Canes or GTFO. -
The only funny business going on is you pretending Oregon is anything except a team with no championship.
Sad! -
So no team before 2014 won a natty? Yaaa right... nice logic qoock!oregonblitzkrieg said:
Champions are decided on the field not in the polls. The change to the BCS format where natty games are actually played on the field was the first nail in the coffin to the good ole boys club of voted natty 'winners.' The relevance of voted titles continues to diminish with the expansion to the playoff format and the increased difficulty of winning the championship, where teams have to win 2 post season games against the best teams in the nation. And that's not even including the conference championship games that need to be won first. Voted titles are a fucking joke. There are 100's of spurious 'championship' claims by teams with no business claiming them. A game played between 2 teams on the field leaves no gray area for funny business.dflea said:lol
Rarified air is first loser talk for "lost the big game" right?
Champion is the word that is eluding you, faggot. Washington was the unbeaten champion in 1991. Oregon was the champion never.
Go suck loser dick if you want. No skin off my hide.
I'll say it again. Play the early 90's Canes or GTFO. -
Take a lie detector test and I'll bet nearly 100% of doogs will be flagged as liars when axed the question: was there any real situational difference between UW/Miami in 1991 and UO/Auburn in 2010. Because there's not. But like I already said, I get the need to maintain the pretense that you're better than UO even though UO has been to the natty game twice and has a playoff victory, and you've never been. It's what you need to do when you have nothing else to fall back on.dflea said:The only funny business going on is you pretending Oregon is anything except a team with no championship.
Sad! -
Tennessee was the first real natty winner. College football officially began in 1998. Hth.backthepack said:
So no team before 2014 won a natty? Yaaa right... nice logic qoock!oregonblitzkrieg said:
Champions are decided on the field not in the polls. The change to the BCS format where natty games are actually played on the field was the first nail in the coffin to the good ole boys club of voted natty 'winners.' The relevance of voted titles continues to diminish with the expansion to the playoff format and the increased difficulty of winning the championship, where teams have to win 2 post season games against the best teams in the nation. And that's not even including the conference championship games that need to be won first. Voted titles are a fucking joke. There are 100's of spurious 'championship' claims by teams with no business claiming them. A game played between 2 teams on the field leaves no gray area for funny business.dflea said:lol
Rarified air is first loser talk for "lost the big game" right?
Champion is the word that is eluding you, faggot. Washington was the unbeaten champion in 1991. Oregon was the champion never.
Go suck loser dick if you want. No skin off my hide.
I'll say it again. Play the early 90's Canes or GTFO. -
hey fuck you! we almost won in 97!oregonblitzkrieg said:
Tennessee was the first real natty winner. College football officially began in 1998. Hth.backthepack said:
So no team before 2014 won a natty? Yaaa right... nice logic qoock!oregonblitzkrieg said:
Champions are decided on the field not in the polls. The change to the BCS format where natty games are actually played on the field was the first nail in the coffin to the good ole boys club of voted natty 'winners.' The relevance of voted titles continues to diminish with the expansion to the playoff format and the increased difficulty of winning the championship, where teams have to win 2 post season games against the best teams in the nation. And that's not even including the conference championship games that need to be won first. Voted titles are a fucking joke. There are 100's of spurious 'championship' claims by teams with no business claiming them. A game played between 2 teams on the field leaves no gray area for funny business.dflea said:lol
Rarified air is first loser talk for "lost the big game" right?
Champion is the word that is eluding you, faggot. Washington was the unbeaten champion in 1991. Oregon was the champion never.
Go suck loser dick if you want. No skin off my hide.
I'll say it again. Play the early 90's Canes or GTFO. -
You northern Washingtonians just don’t see these jack duck types. I do.
Hate USC. Hate UW. Hate the LA Lakers.
Big surprise.
They serve beer and weed all day. They wouldn’t know winning of it kicked them in their poor cunts. -
If we are bashing smoking trees and shotgunning beer then I'm out!haie said:You northern Washingtonians just don’t see these jack duck types. I do.
Hate USC. Hate UW. Hate the LA Lakers.
Big surprise.
They serve beer and weed all day. They wouldn’t know winning of it kicked them in their poor cunts.
-
The situational difference is UW, Miami and Auburn won their big games. Oregon is the only loser in the bunch.oregonblitzkrieg said:
Take a lie detector test and I'll bet nearly 100% of doogs will be flagged as liars when axed the question: was there any real situational difference between UW/Miami in 1991 and UO/Auburn in 2010. Because there's not. But like I already said, I get the need to maintain the pretense that you're better than UO even though UO has been to the natty game twice and has a playoff victory, and you've never been. It's what you need to do when you have nothing else to fall back on.dflea said:The only funny business going on is you pretending Oregon is anything except a team with no championship.
Sad!
