The conference now vs 10 years ago: was it better then?
Comments
-
Oregon best player on offense in 2016 was a true freshman QB or a WR that finished at Utah and their best player on defense was a true freshman LB. Freeman was mailing it in that year like he did last year when Herbie went down.haie said:
I mostly agree with your take that UW is a good but not great program under Petersen, but the 2016 schtick is laughable. Oregon had a horrible defense and ASU was shittier than usual. That was it.Mosster47 said:USC was at the end of their run.
UCLA was UCLA.
Cal was on Ted's free fall.
Stanford was awful.
Oregon was under Bellotti.
OS was under Riley.
UA was UA.
ASU peaked the year before.
UW was UW.
Wazzu was Wazzu.
As all of these better then vs now things always come to the same conclusion; this conference blows regardless of time frame. If USC happens to be good the conference has a team that actually competes nationally. If USC is bad they don't.
For the mega-doogs trying to rewrite history Oregon was an 8 or 9 win team back then just like they are now and will be. Outside of those four years of Chip the Ducks have been an 8 or 9 win team since football was invented.
2009 was probably the worst year this conference has had in the last twenty. There wasn't even a conference race that year. A mediocre Oregon team played two good teams, got pushed around by both and lost to a bad Stanford team. If I remember right the team that finished second that year only had 6 conference wins and it might have been UA. 2016 wasn't really much different though.
The good teams in conference were Utah, SC, WAzzu, Stanford, and Colorado. 3 of those games on the road including the one at Oregon. Lost only 1 of those by 13 and absolutely rolled everyone else except Utah.
If the conference was historically bad that year than Oregon wins 2-3 more games just with the residual talent from 2014.
Congrats on losing to SC and winning the conference and I'm glad we live in a world right now where that is possible, but trying to rewrite Oregon history for your Doog insecurities just isn't working. -
By being worse than both asu and ucla?haie said:
Last year those 2 teams (possibly Utah, before they collapsed) replaced your bRuins and devil's. That's all I'm saying. I don't think UCLA, ASU being bad means anything different than when they're relatively good: always good talent, always brotastic coaching staffs.Pitchfork51 said:
When did Arizona become an 8/9 win team? They have won more than 7 games once in the past 10 years. And averaged around 5/6.haie said:
Ehh UCLA and ASU flipped with WSU and Arizona. 8-9 win teams that are relevant part of the year.Pitchfork51 said:
Usually if the middle of the pack teams are unusually good or unusually bad that's what pushes the needle either way.haie said:
They were all roughly the same, is the correct answer. No one cares some doogs thought Oregon was only good because Washington was down.creepycoug said:Let me give you outsiders the HCH formula: Washington Good = Conference is Good. USC Good = Conference is Good. Washington and USC Good = Conference is Apex. Oregon Good = Conference Bad.
It's really that simple. The doogs will pull hamstrings rationalizing this formula through the ages.
You're welcome.
Every year in the pac 12 you have 1-2 good to very good teams to beat, and 3 or so really solid teams to not fuck up against. Plus maybe your 1 or so trap game to a shitty team (Stanford Beavlets 2017, UW Arizona 2016, UW ASU 2017)
Whether that means the conference is awful or not doesn't matter, it's roughly the same in difficulty every year. 2010 and 2014 weren't different than 2016
If you think of the middle of the road teams the past decade which are Utah, ASU, UW, UCLA you get UCLA and ASU that have been really up or down. Utah and UW relatively consistent.
So when both ASU and UCLA suck the conference is awful.
And UW just traded places with oregon recently so nothings changedtherewith me.
Cal and UCLA won OOC games against the SEC. The conference wasn't terrible, it's just that the team that won it had a ton of hype, more than just winning the conference, which probably was a bad call anyways because their coach is really mediocre.
Or has the weird preseason hype on utah and arizona clouded your mind?
-
Congrats on shaking and vomiting over some friendly off-season banter.Mosster47 said:
Oregon best player on offense in 2016 was a true freshman QB or a WR that finished at Utah and their best player on defense was a true freshman LB. Freeman was mailing it in that year like he did last year when Herbie went down.haie said:
I mostly agree with your take that UW is a good but not great program under Petersen, but the 2016 schtick is laughable. Oregon had a horrible defense and ASU was shittier than usual. That was it.Mosster47 said:USC was at the end of their run.
UCLA was UCLA.
Cal was on Ted's free fall.
Stanford was awful.
Oregon was under Bellotti.
OS was under Riley.
UA was UA.
ASU peaked the year before.
UW was UW.
Wazzu was Wazzu.
As all of these better then vs now things always come to the same conclusion; this conference blows regardless of time frame. If USC happens to be good the conference has a team that actually competes nationally. If USC is bad they don't.
For the mega-doogs trying to rewrite history Oregon was an 8 or 9 win team back then just like they are now and will be. Outside of those four years of Chip the Ducks have been an 8 or 9 win team since football was invented.
2009 was probably the worst year this conference has had in the last twenty. There wasn't even a conference race that year. A mediocre Oregon team played two good teams, got pushed around by both and lost to a bad Stanford team. If I remember right the team that finished second that year only had 6 conference wins and it might have been UA. 2016 wasn't really much different though.
The good teams in conference were Utah, SC, WAzzu, Stanford, and Colorado. 3 of those games on the road including the one at Oregon. Lost only 1 of those by 13 and absolutely rolled everyone else except Utah.
If the conference was historically bad that year than Oregon wins 2-3 more games just with the residual talent from 2014.
Congrats on losing to SC and winning the conference and I'm glad we live in a world right now where that is possible, but trying to rewrite Oregon history for your Doog insecurities just isn't working. -
You're shit poasting again.haie said:
Congrats on shaking and vomiting over some friendly off-season banter.Mosster47 said:
Oregon best player on offense in 2016 was a true freshman QB or a WR that finished at Utah and their best player on defense was a true freshman LB. Freeman was mailing it in that year like he did last year when Herbie went down.haie said:
I mostly agree with your take that UW is a good but not great program under Petersen, but the 2016 schtick is laughable. Oregon had a horrible defense and ASU was shittier than usual. That was it.Mosster47 said:USC was at the end of their run.
UCLA was UCLA.
Cal was on Ted's free fall.
Stanford was awful.
Oregon was under Bellotti.
OS was under Riley.
UA was UA.
ASU peaked the year before.
UW was UW.
Wazzu was Wazzu.
As all of these better then vs now things always come to the same conclusion; this conference blows regardless of time frame. If USC happens to be good the conference has a team that actually competes nationally. If USC is bad they don't.
For the mega-doogs trying to rewrite history Oregon was an 8 or 9 win team back then just like they are now and will be. Outside of those four years of Chip the Ducks have been an 8 or 9 win team since football was invented.
2009 was probably the worst year this conference has had in the last twenty. There wasn't even a conference race that year. A mediocre Oregon team played two good teams, got pushed around by both and lost to a bad Stanford team. If I remember right the team that finished second that year only had 6 conference wins and it might have been UA. 2016 wasn't really much different though.
The good teams in conference were Utah, SC, WAzzu, Stanford, and Colorado. 3 of those games on the road including the one at Oregon. Lost only 1 of those by 13 and absolutely rolled everyone else except Utah.
If the conference was historically bad that year than Oregon wins 2-3 more games just with the residual talent from 2014.
Congrats on losing to SC and winning the conference and I'm glad we live in a world right now where that is possible, but trying to rewrite Oregon history for your Doog insecurities just isn't working. -
Like "Oregon wins it all...Ohio State is really good," type of shit poasting?Mosster47 said:
You're shit poasting again.haie said:
Congrats on shaking and vomiting over some friendly off-season banter.Mosster47 said:
Oregon best player on offense in 2016 was a true freshman QB or a WR that finished at Utah and their best player on defense was a true freshman LB. Freeman was mailing it in that year like he did last year when Herbie went down.haie said:
I mostly agree with your take that UW is a good but not great program under Petersen, but the 2016 schtick is laughable. Oregon had a horrible defense and ASU was shittier than usual. That was it.Mosster47 said:USC was at the end of their run.
UCLA was UCLA.
Cal was on Ted's free fall.
Stanford was awful.
Oregon was under Bellotti.
OS was under Riley.
UA was UA.
ASU peaked the year before.
UW was UW.
Wazzu was Wazzu.
As all of these better then vs now things always come to the same conclusion; this conference blows regardless of time frame. If USC happens to be good the conference has a team that actually competes nationally. If USC is bad they don't.
For the mega-doogs trying to rewrite history Oregon was an 8 or 9 win team back then just like they are now and will be. Outside of those four years of Chip the Ducks have been an 8 or 9 win team since football was invented.
2009 was probably the worst year this conference has had in the last twenty. There wasn't even a conference race that year. A mediocre Oregon team played two good teams, got pushed around by both and lost to a bad Stanford team. If I remember right the team that finished second that year only had 6 conference wins and it might have been UA. 2016 wasn't really much different though.
The good teams in conference were Utah, SC, WAzzu, Stanford, and Colorado. 3 of those games on the road including the one at Oregon. Lost only 1 of those by 13 and absolutely rolled everyone else except Utah.
If the conference was historically bad that year than Oregon wins 2-3 more games just with the residual talent from 2014.
Congrats on losing to SC and winning the conference and I'm glad we live in a world right now where that is possible, but trying to rewrite Oregon history for your Doog insecurities just isn't working.
Or the "I went fishing during the 38-3 game," kind?
-
And rightfully so.PostGameOrangeSlices said:The conference 10 years ago was infinitely better because USC was fresh off some natties and the SEC hadn't butt fucked everyone for 10+ years.
The nation actually respected West Coast football and now no one gives a shit
Beat Auburn.
-
Icreepycoug said:Let me give you outsiders the HCH formula: Washington Good = Conference is Good. USC Good = Conference is Good. Washington and USC Good = Conference is Apex. Oregon Good = Conference Bad.
It's really that simple. The doogs will pull hamstrings rationalizing this formula through the ages.
You're welcome.
respect the formula -
Cuogs have taken a step back.
-
One of the best things about HH is the bonding that takes place between Ducks and Dawgs over their Mosster trolling.haie said:
Like "Oregon wins it all...Ohio State is really good," type of shit poasting?Mosster47 said:
You're shit poasting again.haie said:
Congrats on shaking and vomiting over some friendly off-season banter.Mosster47 said:
Oregon best player on offense in 2016 was a true freshman QB or a WR that finished at Utah and their best player on defense was a true freshman LB. Freeman was mailing it in that year like he did last year when Herbie went down.haie said:
I mostly agree with your take that UW is a good but not great program under Petersen, but the 2016 schtick is laughable. Oregon had a horrible defense and ASU was shittier than usual. That was it.Mosster47 said:USC was at the end of their run.
UCLA was UCLA.
Cal was on Ted's free fall.
Stanford was awful.
Oregon was under Bellotti.
OS was under Riley.
UA was UA.
ASU peaked the year before.
UW was UW.
Wazzu was Wazzu.
As all of these better then vs now things always come to the same conclusion; this conference blows regardless of time frame. If USC happens to be good the conference has a team that actually competes nationally. If USC is bad they don't.
For the mega-doogs trying to rewrite history Oregon was an 8 or 9 win team back then just like they are now and will be. Outside of those four years of Chip the Ducks have been an 8 or 9 win team since football was invented.
2009 was probably the worst year this conference has had in the last twenty. There wasn't even a conference race that year. A mediocre Oregon team played two good teams, got pushed around by both and lost to a bad Stanford team. If I remember right the team that finished second that year only had 6 conference wins and it might have been UA. 2016 wasn't really much different though.
The good teams in conference were Utah, SC, WAzzu, Stanford, and Colorado. 3 of those games on the road including the one at Oregon. Lost only 1 of those by 13 and absolutely rolled everyone else except Utah.
If the conference was historically bad that year than Oregon wins 2-3 more games just with the residual talent from 2014.
Congrats on losing to SC and winning the conference and I'm glad we live in a world right now where that is possible, but trying to rewrite Oregon history for your Doog insecurities just isn't working.
Or the "I went fishing during the 38-3 game," kind? -
ntxduck said:
One of the best things about HH is the bonding that takes place between Ducks and Dawgs over their Mosster trolling.
haie said:
Like "Oregon wins it all...Ohio State is really good," type of shit poasting?Mosster47 said:
You're shit poasting again.haie said:
Congrats on shaking and vomiting over some friendly off-season banter.Mosster47 said:
Oregon best player on offense in 2016 was a true freshman QB or a WR that finished at Utah and their best player on defense was a true freshman LB. Freeman was mailing it in that year like he did last year when Herbie went down.haie said:
I mostly agree with your take that UW is a good but not great program under Petersen, but the 2016 schtick is laughable. Oregon had a horrible defense and ASU was shittier than usual. That was it.Mosster47 said:USC was at the end of their run.
UCLA was UCLA.
Cal was on Ted's free fall.
Stanford was awful.
Oregon was under Bellotti.
OS was under Riley.
UA was UA.
ASU peaked the year before.
UW was UW.
Wazzu was Wazzu.
As all of these better then vs now things always come to the same conclusion; this conference blows regardless of time frame. If USC happens to be good the conference has a team that actually competes nationally. If USC is bad they don't.
For the mega-doogs trying to rewrite history Oregon was an 8 or 9 win team back then just like they are now and will be. Outside of those four years of Chip the Ducks have been an 8 or 9 win team since football was invented.
2009 was probably the worst year this conference has had in the last twenty. There wasn't even a conference race that year. A mediocre Oregon team played two good teams, got pushed around by both and lost to a bad Stanford team. If I remember right the team that finished second that year only had 6 conference wins and it might have been UA. 2016 wasn't really much different though.
The good teams in conference were Utah, SC, WAzzu, Stanford, and Colorado. 3 of those games on the road including the one at Oregon. Lost only 1 of those by 13 and absolutely rolled everyone else except Utah.
If the conference was historically bad that year than Oregon wins 2-3 more games just with the residual talent from 2014.
Congrats on losing to SC and winning the conference and I'm glad we live in a world right now where that is possible, but trying to rewrite Oregon history for your Doog insecurities just isn't working.
Or the "I went fishing during the 38-3 game," kind?
