Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
If you guys are right about recruiting
Comments
-
Once again, I waited and you didn't show. Had to make small talk with a crack dealer.backthepack said:
I’ll bring Mario with me so you can gargle!creepycoug said:
7-11. Don't make me wait.backthepack said:
Your incessant sucking off of Cristobol has gotten to the point where it’s pathetic.creepycoug said:
This. It would have been a miracle if they'd gotten a couple of geriatrics like Race and me to sign with them last year.RaceBannon said:I would say a new coach coming in off the heels of Taggert's ride getting an even class with the established Petersen doesn't bode will for recruiting ourselves to the top
In fact this year only solidifies that though
Oregon loves to recruit. Maybe a franchise recruiting website for the ducks would work.
I think we fell behind USC as well this year as they recruited some "wide outs" whatever they are
If Cristoballin' has any success on the field there, he could wind up bringing in a lot of talent to the Youjeen.
You confirmed yourself as a pussy. -
Here's the thing, this just reeks of "Sark beating #3 USC". Seemed like a big deal at the time but it turned out to be a good but flawed USC. Is there anyone on this boared that didn't see 2018 Washington as being good but flawed?creepycoug said:
Look, I'm not going to pretend like I've not invoked this concept. I have. When Miami outrushed, outpassed, dominated and outeverything'd Penn State in the '86 Fiesta Bowl and despite all that could not overcome their QB's apparent need to throw 5 picks - 5 BAD picks - I said and say, they were the better team on the field despite the result. But I also still have to say, winners win.WRDawg said:All of this is moot... we were the better team on the field despite the result. Oregon has out recruited Washington for the last decade pretty much. Pete has done more with less, but our good hasn't been good enough! Poor crunch time decisions by coach and a lackadaisical noodle arm leading the charge
The box score of this year's Oregon game does not look like the box score of the '86 Fiesta Bowl. There's no doubt that Washington was the better team in 2018. Don't twist. But that day, on that field, in that game, Oregon played Washington straight up and circumstances gave them a chance to win, and they took it. That's football man.
All jokes aside, would I put $$ on Cristobal proving himself to be Pete's equal in time? No. Pete is a really good coach, and it's hard to be a really good coach. That's why there aren't that many of them. So on odds alone, he probably won't be in Pete's class.
But it was his first season, he improved them in some areas, and the jury is out. And like I told you fuckers, the guy can recruit, and that matters too. If he turns out to be a shit coach and all he does is recruit, then yeah it's all sizzle and hype.
And I have to tell ya: the whole "does more with less" bit is played out. If Washington is the program it says it is, then the poor mouth routine has to stop. It's fine for Boise State. Not for Washington. If Pete can't recruit now, he never will.
We? lost to Cal! like we? always do and what turned out to be a 7-5 Auburn, we could have easily lost to UCLA as well.
It was a good win for Oregon but that fact is telling. One good home win against a flawed team in a paper soft season and at least one completely awful loss to the best stanford team of our lifetimes. Take out the Washington win for a moment and consider a 7-4 record with 3 wins spotted against exhibition teams. It's not exactly as if Oregon is bare cupboard talent wise either.
I agree Mario is an ace recruiter, early results say he's a mediocre coach. Worst case scenario for Dwags is that Mario keeps selling the sizzle, recruiting top classes, and then gets canned for someone competent who gets to walk into a program with 30+ blue chips already on the roster. That's what I'd actually be worried about. -
I didn't say it was a great win. I was just debating the "we were the better team on the field" bit, which just flatly isn't true.UW_Doog_Bot said:
Here's the thing, this just reeks of "Sark beating #3 USC". Seemed like a big deal at the time but it turned out to be a good but flawed USC. Is there anyone on this boared that didn't see 2018 Washington as being good but flawed?creepycoug said:
Look, I'm not going to pretend like I've not invoked this concept. I have. When Miami outrushed, outpassed, dominated and outeverything'd Penn State in the '86 Fiesta Bowl and despite all that could not overcome their QB's apparent need to throw 5 picks - 5 BAD picks - I said and say, they were the better team on the field despite the result. But I also still have to say, winners win.WRDawg said:All of this is moot... we were the better team on the field despite the result. Oregon has out recruited Washington for the last decade pretty much. Pete has done more with less, but our good hasn't been good enough! Poor crunch time decisions by coach and a lackadaisical noodle arm leading the charge
The box score of this year's Oregon game does not look like the box score of the '86 Fiesta Bowl. There's no doubt that Washington was the better team in 2018. Don't twist. But that day, on that field, in that game, Oregon played Washington straight up and circumstances gave them a chance to win, and they took it. That's football man.
All jokes aside, would I put $$ on Cristobal proving himself to be Pete's equal in time? No. Pete is a really good coach, and it's hard to be a really good coach. That's why there aren't that many of them. So on odds alone, he probably won't be in Pete's class.
But it was his first season, he improved them in some areas, and the jury is out. And like I told you fuckers, the guy can recruit, and that matters too. If he turns out to be a shit coach and all he does is recruit, then yeah it's all sizzle and hype.
And I have to tell ya: the whole "does more with less" bit is played out. If Washington is the program it says it is, then the poor mouth routine has to stop. It's fine for Boise State. Not for Washington. If Pete can't recruit now, he never will.
We? lost to Cal! like we? always do and what turned out to be a 7-5 Auburn, we could have easily lost to UCLA as well.
It was a good win for Oregon but that fact is telling. One good home win against a flawed team in a paper soft season and at least one completely awful loss to the best stanford team of our lifetimes. Take out the Washington win for a moment and consider a 7-4 record with 3 wins spotted against exhibition teams. It's not exactly as if Oregon is bare cupboard talent wise either.
I agree Mario is an ace recruiter, early results say he's a mediocre coach. Worst case scenario for Dwags is that Mario keeps selling the sizzle, recruiting top classes, and then gets canned for someone competent who gets to walk into a program with 30+ blue chips already on the roster. That's what I'd actually be worried about.
Oregon isn't bare, but it's thin at a few spots, WR being the most pronounced. Herbert locked in on one guy all season long, which made their passing game one-dimensional, which made it more and more anemic as the season wore on. It's Quooky, but I don't really hold much water in the Stanford game. That kind of unraveling has happened to every program and they really had been handling Stanford for most of the game. I just don't think there's enough there to really say one way or the other. Like I said, just on statistical probability alone, he's probably not going to prove to be a great coach. So I think the criticism of the hire that's fair is, why did you hire an unproven guy?
The completely awful loss was the one to Arizona. If there's one game that Cristobal has to explain, it's that one. -
Arizona and @Utah, in Utah's first game with a backup QB and back RB. Those first halves were embarrassing (as was the first half at WSU but we lose to them every year so I wasn't expecting anything other than an L)creepycoug said:
I didn't say it was a great win. I was just debating the "we were the better team on the field" bit, which just flatly isn't true.UW_Doog_Bot said:
Here's the thing, this just reeks of "Sark beating #3 USC". Seemed like a big deal at the time but it turned out to be a good but flawed USC. Is there anyone on this boared that didn't see 2018 Washington as being good but flawed?creepycoug said:
Look, I'm not going to pretend like I've not invoked this concept. I have. When Miami outrushed, outpassed, dominated and outeverything'd Penn State in the '86 Fiesta Bowl and despite all that could not overcome their QB's apparent need to throw 5 picks - 5 BAD picks - I said and say, they were the better team on the field despite the result. But I also still have to say, winners win.WRDawg said:All of this is moot... we were the better team on the field despite the result. Oregon has out recruited Washington for the last decade pretty much. Pete has done more with less, but our good hasn't been good enough! Poor crunch time decisions by coach and a lackadaisical noodle arm leading the charge
The box score of this year's Oregon game does not look like the box score of the '86 Fiesta Bowl. There's no doubt that Washington was the better team in 2018. Don't twist. But that day, on that field, in that game, Oregon played Washington straight up and circumstances gave them a chance to win, and they took it. That's football man.
All jokes aside, would I put $$ on Cristobal proving himself to be Pete's equal in time? No. Pete is a really good coach, and it's hard to be a really good coach. That's why there aren't that many of them. So on odds alone, he probably won't be in Pete's class.
But it was his first season, he improved them in some areas, and the jury is out. And like I told you fuckers, the guy can recruit, and that matters too. If he turns out to be a shit coach and all he does is recruit, then yeah it's all sizzle and hype.
And I have to tell ya: the whole "does more with less" bit is played out. If Washington is the program it says it is, then the poor mouth routine has to stop. It's fine for Boise State. Not for Washington. If Pete can't recruit now, he never will.
We? lost to Cal! like we? always do and what turned out to be a 7-5 Auburn, we could have easily lost to UCLA as well.
It was a good win for Oregon but that fact is telling. One good home win against a flawed team in a paper soft season and at least one completely awful loss to the best stanford team of our lifetimes. Take out the Washington win for a moment and consider a 7-4 record with 3 wins spotted against exhibition teams. It's not exactly as if Oregon is bare cupboard talent wise either.
I agree Mario is an ace recruiter, early results say he's a mediocre coach. Worst case scenario for Dwags is that Mario keeps selling the sizzle, recruiting top classes, and then gets canned for someone competent who gets to walk into a program with 30+ blue chips already on the roster. That's what I'd actually be worried about.
Oregon isn't bare, but it's thin at a few spots, WR being the most pronounced. Herbert locked in on one guy all season long, which made their passing game one-dimensional, which made it more and more anemic as the season wore on. It's Quooky, but I don't really hold much water in the Stanford game. That kind of unraveling has happened to every program and they really had been handling Stanford for most of the game. I just don't think there's enough there to really say one way or the other. Like I said, just on statistical probability alone, he's probably not going to prove to be a great coach. So I think the criticism of the hire that's fair is, why did you hire an unproven guy?
The completely awful loss was the one to Arizona. If there's one game that Cristobal has to explain, it's that one. -
Yup...Oregon is back. I saw Cristal-balls offense.. with everybody back on line I expect 225-250 on ground next year...very physical, downhill attack. With best qb in pac expect 250-300 thru the air as well. 40+ points per. Oregon is going to be very goodPurpleBaze said:@puppylove_sugarsteel true?
-
The best QB in the Pac-12 this year couldn’t even play, hth pump.
-
More subtle. You're blowing your cover.puppylove_sugarsteel said:
Yup...Oregon is back. I saw Cristal-balls offense.. with everybody back on line I expect 225-250 on ground next year...very physical, downhill attack. With best qb in pac expect 250-300 thru the air as well. 40+ points per. Oregon is going to be very goodPurpleBaze said:@puppylove_sugarsteel true?
Remember, I was doing this shit while you were still dating cheerleaders.
I was arguing with @RaceBannon while he was in his 80s. -
True. I couldn't figure out if Shelley and what's his face were a lot better than we should have expected, or if Oregon was making them look that way.ntxduck said:
Arizona and @Utah, in Utah's first game with a backup QB and back RB. Those first halves were embarrassing (as was the first half at WSU but we lose to them every year so I wasn't expecting anything other than an L)creepycoug said:
I didn't say it was a great win. I was just debating the "we were the better team on the field" bit, which just flatly isn't true.UW_Doog_Bot said:
Here's the thing, this just reeks of "Sark beating #3 USC". Seemed like a big deal at the time but it turned out to be a good but flawed USC. Is there anyone on this boared that didn't see 2018 Washington as being good but flawed?creepycoug said:
Look, I'm not going to pretend like I've not invoked this concept. I have. When Miami outrushed, outpassed, dominated and outeverything'd Penn State in the '86 Fiesta Bowl and despite all that could not overcome their QB's apparent need to throw 5 picks - 5 BAD picks - I said and say, they were the better team on the field despite the result. But I also still have to say, winners win.WRDawg said:All of this is moot... we were the better team on the field despite the result. Oregon has out recruited Washington for the last decade pretty much. Pete has done more with less, but our good hasn't been good enough! Poor crunch time decisions by coach and a lackadaisical noodle arm leading the charge
The box score of this year's Oregon game does not look like the box score of the '86 Fiesta Bowl. There's no doubt that Washington was the better team in 2018. Don't twist. But that day, on that field, in that game, Oregon played Washington straight up and circumstances gave them a chance to win, and they took it. That's football man.
All jokes aside, would I put $$ on Cristobal proving himself to be Pete's equal in time? No. Pete is a really good coach, and it's hard to be a really good coach. That's why there aren't that many of them. So on odds alone, he probably won't be in Pete's class.
But it was his first season, he improved them in some areas, and the jury is out. And like I told you fuckers, the guy can recruit, and that matters too. If he turns out to be a shit coach and all he does is recruit, then yeah it's all sizzle and hype.
And I have to tell ya: the whole "does more with less" bit is played out. If Washington is the program it says it is, then the poor mouth routine has to stop. It's fine for Boise State. Not for Washington. If Pete can't recruit now, he never will.
We? lost to Cal! like we? always do and what turned out to be a 7-5 Auburn, we could have easily lost to UCLA as well.
It was a good win for Oregon but that fact is telling. One good home win against a flawed team in a paper soft season and at least one completely awful loss to the best stanford team of our lifetimes. Take out the Washington win for a moment and consider a 7-4 record with 3 wins spotted against exhibition teams. It's not exactly as if Oregon is bare cupboard talent wise either.
I agree Mario is an ace recruiter, early results say he's a mediocre coach. Worst case scenario for Dwags is that Mario keeps selling the sizzle, recruiting top classes, and then gets canned for someone competent who gets to walk into a program with 30+ blue chips already on the roster. That's what I'd actually be worried about.
Oregon isn't bare, but it's thin at a few spots, WR being the most pronounced. Herbert locked in on one guy all season long, which made their passing game one-dimensional, which made it more and more anemic as the season wore on. It's Quooky, but I don't really hold much water in the Stanford game. That kind of unraveling has happened to every program and they really had been handling Stanford for most of the game. I just don't think there's enough there to really say one way or the other. Like I said, just on statistical probability alone, he's probably not going to prove to be a great coach. So I think the criticism of the hire that's fair is, why did you hire an unproven guy?
The completely awful loss was the one to Arizona. If there's one game that Cristobal has to explain, it's that one.
I'll say this: Huntley wasn't much better. Kid could hit the broad side of a barn to save his life. -
They weren'tcreepycoug said:
True. I couldn't figure out if Shelley and what's his face were a lot better than we should have expected, or if Oregon was making them look that way.ntxduck said:
Arizona and @Utah, in Utah's first game with a backup QB and back RB. Those first halves were embarrassing (as was the first half at WSU but we lose to them every year so I wasn't expecting anything other than an L)creepycoug said:
I didn't say it was a great win. I was just debating the "we were the better team on the field" bit, which just flatly isn't true.UW_Doog_Bot said:
Here's the thing, this just reeks of "Sark beating #3 USC". Seemed like a big deal at the time but it turned out to be a good but flawed USC. Is there anyone on this boared that didn't see 2018 Washington as being good but flawed?creepycoug said:
Look, I'm not going to pretend like I've not invoked this concept. I have. When Miami outrushed, outpassed, dominated and outeverything'd Penn State in the '86 Fiesta Bowl and despite all that could not overcome their QB's apparent need to throw 5 picks - 5 BAD picks - I said and say, they were the better team on the field despite the result. But I also still have to say, winners win.WRDawg said:All of this is moot... we were the better team on the field despite the result. Oregon has out recruited Washington for the last decade pretty much. Pete has done more with less, but our good hasn't been good enough! Poor crunch time decisions by coach and a lackadaisical noodle arm leading the charge
The box score of this year's Oregon game does not look like the box score of the '86 Fiesta Bowl. There's no doubt that Washington was the better team in 2018. Don't twist. But that day, on that field, in that game, Oregon played Washington straight up and circumstances gave them a chance to win, and they took it. That's football man.
All jokes aside, would I put $$ on Cristobal proving himself to be Pete's equal in time? No. Pete is a really good coach, and it's hard to be a really good coach. That's why there aren't that many of them. So on odds alone, he probably won't be in Pete's class.
But it was his first season, he improved them in some areas, and the jury is out. And like I told you fuckers, the guy can recruit, and that matters too. If he turns out to be a shit coach and all he does is recruit, then yeah it's all sizzle and hype.
And I have to tell ya: the whole "does more with less" bit is played out. If Washington is the program it says it is, then the poor mouth routine has to stop. It's fine for Boise State. Not for Washington. If Pete can't recruit now, he never will.
We? lost to Cal! like we? always do and what turned out to be a 7-5 Auburn, we could have easily lost to UCLA as well.
It was a good win for Oregon but that fact is telling. One good home win against a flawed team in a paper soft season and at least one completely awful loss to the best stanford team of our lifetimes. Take out the Washington win for a moment and consider a 7-4 record with 3 wins spotted against exhibition teams. It's not exactly as if Oregon is bare cupboard talent wise either.
I agree Mario is an ace recruiter, early results say he's a mediocre coach. Worst case scenario for Dwags is that Mario keeps selling the sizzle, recruiting top classes, and then gets canned for someone competent who gets to walk into a program with 30+ blue chips already on the roster. That's what I'd actually be worried about.
Oregon isn't bare, but it's thin at a few spots, WR being the most pronounced. Herbert locked in on one guy all season long, which made their passing game one-dimensional, which made it more and more anemic as the season wore on. It's Quooky, but I don't really hold much water in the Stanford game. That kind of unraveling has happened to every program and they really had been handling Stanford for most of the game. I just don't think there's enough there to really say one way or the other. Like I said, just on statistical probability alone, he's probably not going to prove to be a great coach. So I think the criticism of the hire that's fair is, why did you hire an unproven guy?
The completely awful loss was the one to Arizona. If there's one game that Cristobal has to explain, it's that one.
I'll say this: Huntley wasn't much better. Kid could hit the broad side of a barn to save his life.
3 points in the CCG -
Pumpeii on record for UO to go 500 yards a game and 40 points
Taking action on that bet now
They'll hit that mark against the refuse they play same as us? Utah, Stanford, UW and maybe ASU will put a damper on them with good defense
As bad as the Pac is it should be a good race. Just pretend there isn't a playoff that none of us will make and fight for the legendary Pac 12 crown
