Pretty Much Almost Nobody, No Pac 12 team, etc, has LOST(NOT games) as Much EXPERIENCE, and maybe might even Talent, with as LITTLE replacing that, in the last about 2,3,4 years, then the fuskies have since from the end of last year to the beginning of this coming season.
If that had happened to WSU, Ore St, etc, even with a Leach, Peterson type coach, that would be a 3,4,5,6,7 win team for either WSU, Ore St.
And before you say that that happened to WSU this year, That didnt happen to WSU this year.
WSU hasnt LOST(Not games) even close to as much as the Fuskies have this year. And even if it were close, WSU has done a pretty good job of REPLACING what they have lost.
And the fuskies have not done a good job of, and have done a bad job of replacing what they have lost ON PAPER.
And there is a limit to Plug and Play, and Plug and Play will only go so far.
And because of all that, since WSU, Ore St would only win about 3,4,5,6,7 games if they were in the fuskies shoes this season, and since the fuskies, have a traditionally better program, to the point that the fuskies would win about 5,6 5.5 games at minimum, to about 8,9, 8.5 games at maximum, in the situation they are in, instead of the 3 to 7 win range WSU, Ore St would get in their shoes, this season.
So the fuskies winning about 5,6, 5.5 to about 8,9,8.5 games is pretty realistic, based on above.
And WSU winning about 7,8,9, ave 8 wins at minimum to about 9,10, 11, ave 10 wins at maximum, with 6,7 games at worst, with only 4,5 wins almost impossible(.000001% chance), is pretty realistic.
Why?
Because WSU has a better team ON PAPER, then the fuskies this season, and have not lost(not games), as much as the fuskies, and have replaced what they have lost better, and have more TALENT, EXPERIENCE, DEPTH, ETC, then the fuskies do this season ON PAPER.
And when you, others say how can WSU be better when they lost to the fuskies? thats wrong to say, think that.
Doesnt matter in a way that WSU lost to fuskies.
WSU was 11-2 last year. Fuskies won about 8,9 games last year. WSU won their bowl game. Fuskies lost their bowl game.
So WSU was the better team, record wise, talent, etc, DESPITE losing to the fuskies.
And the ONLY reason why Fuskies even won that game is because they GOT LUCKY, SNOW, ICE, etc.
And before anybody says "But the fuskies had to play in that too", everybody should know that playing in SNOW, ICE, FAVORS the kind of team the fuskies have, over the kind of team WSU is, has.
So WSU was the better team last season then the fuskies.
And WSU is the better team then the fuskies, this season, no matter what happens vs the fuskies.
And because of that WSU's win range is 1,2, 2.5 wins on both the low side, high side then the fuskies
So that means that the fuskies win about 5,6, 5.5 games at minimum to about 8,9, 8.5 wins at maximum, and about 7 wins at average
And WSU should win about 6,7, 8, ave of 7 games at minimum, to about 9,10,11, ave of 10 games at maximum, and about 8.5 games at average, which is also their over, under.
Thats realistic, Logical
I’m trying to translate this but Google doesn’t have a retard Cuog to English option. Can someone help? I feel like @SECDAWG or @puppylove_sugarsteel would understand this but I’m not sure I’d understand their interpretation
Pretty Much Almost Nobody, No Pac 12 team, etc, has LOST(NOT games) as Much EXPERIENCE, and maybe might even Talent, with as LITTLE replacing that, in the last about 2,3,4 years, then the fuskies have since from the end of last year to the beginning of this coming season.
If that had happened to WSU, Ore St, etc, even with a Leach, Peterson type coach, that would be a 3,4,5,6,7 win team for either WSU, Ore St.
And before you say that that happened to WSU this year, That didnt happen to WSU this year.
WSU hasnt LOST(Not games) even close to as much as the Fuskies have this year. And even if it were close, WSU has done a pretty good job of REPLACING what they have lost.
And the fuskies have not done a good job of, and have done a bad job of replacing what they have lost ON PAPER.
And there is a limit to Plug and Play, and Plug and Play will only go so far.
And because of all that, since WSU, Ore St would only win about 3,4,5,6,7 games if they were in the fuskies shoes this season, and since the fuskies, have a traditionally better program, to the point that the fuskies would win about 5,6 5.5 games at minimum, to about 8,9, 8.5 games at maximum, in the situation they are in, instead of the 3 to 7 win range WSU, Ore St would get in their shoes, this season.
So the fuskies winning about 5,6, 5.5 to about 8,9,8.5 games is pretty realistic, based on above.
And WSU winning about 7,8,9, ave 8 wins at minimum to about 9,10, 11, ave 10 wins at maximum, with 6,7 games at worst, with only 4,5 wins almost impossible(.000001% chance), is pretty realistic.
Why?
Because WSU has a better team ON PAPER, then the fuskies this season, and have not lost(not games), as much as the fuskies, and have replaced what they have lost better, and have more TALENT, EXPERIENCE, DEPTH, ETC, then the fuskies do this season ON PAPER.
And when you, others say how can WSU be better when they lost to the fuskies? thats wrong to say, think that.
Doesnt matter in a way that WSU lost to fuskies.
WSU was 11-2 last year. Fuskies won about 8,9 games last year. WSU won their bowl game. Fuskies lost their bowl game.
So WSU was the better team, record wise, talent, etc, DESPITE losing to the fuskies.
And the ONLY reason why Fuskies even won that game is because they GOT LUCKY, SNOW, ICE, etc.
And before anybody says "But the fuskies had to play in that too", everybody should know that playing in SNOW, ICE, FAVORS the kind of team the fuskies have, over the kind of team WSU is, has.
So WSU was the better team last season then the fuskies.
And WSU is the better team then the fuskies, this season, no matter what happens vs the fuskies.
And because of that WSU's win range is 1,2, 2.5 wins on both the low side, high side then the fuskies
So that means that the fuskies win about 5,6, 5.5 games at minimum to about 8,9, 8.5 wins at maximum, and about 7 wins at average
And WSU should win about 6,7, 8, ave of 7 games at minimum, to about 9,10,11, ave of 10 games at maximum, and about 8.5 games at average, which is also their over, under.
IF, WHEN, IF the Fuskies beat a GOOD Leach, WSU team that win 8 to 11 games that:
1. Not starting 2nd, 3rd string, BENDER like QB, due to a injury of a GOOD STARTING QB
2. The GOOD Starting QB, recovering from a condition like a concussion, injury.
3. A Snowstorm that dump 1/2 foot to 1 and 1/2, 1.5 feet of snow that will stop a AIR RAID OFFENSE, but BENEFIT a UW power running game
UNTIL, IF THAT HAPPENS, ITS LUCK, UNTIL THAT HAPPENS.
And IF that happens, THEN you can rightly say that UW beat a GOOD Leach, WSU team.
Untii then, you can't rightly say that UW beat a GOOD Leach,WSU team during Leach's Tenure at WSU.
Would UW have beaten a GOOD WSU LEACH team if UW had to play without STARTING QB BROWNING, due to injury, if Browning had been injured?
PROBABLY NOT.
And if WSU had technically won against that without Browning UW team, could WSU have rightly claimed it BEAT UW?
NO
And if UW was a AIR RAID team, and WSU was a POWER RUNNING team, and if a Snow storm dumped snow, that shut down a UW AIR RAID, and were to benefit a WSU Power Running game, so that WSU technically won vs UW, could WSU rightly claim that BEAT UW?
No
Not only that, but the SPORTS MEDIA, the Pollsters, etc, would not give WSU any credit, and would say that WSU just got LUCKY, to TECHNICALLY win.
Its a FREAKING DOUBLE STANDARD.
So until, if UW actually beats, not just technically, luckily win, but beats a GOOD WSU, LEACH TEAM, WITH ITS GOOD STARTING QB, AND WITHOUT 1+ KEY, VITAL TO WINNING PLAYERS BEING INJURED, AND WITHOUT EXTREME BAD WEATHER THAT SHUT DOWN AIR RAID, ETC, FULL STRENGTH, ETC.
UNTIL, IF THAT HAPPENS, UW CAN'T rightly say that BEAT a GOOD WSU LEACH team.
IF, WHEN, IF the Fuskies beat a GOOD Leach, WSU team that win 8 to 11 games that:
1. Not starting 2nd, 3rd string, BENDER like QB, due to a injury of a GOOD STARTING QB
2. The GOOD Starting QB, recovering from a condition like a concussion, injury.
3. A Snowstorm that dump 1/2 foot to 1 and 1/2, 1.5 feet of snow that will stop a AIR RAID OFFENSE, but BENEFIT a UW power running game
UNTIL, IF THAT HAPPENS, ITS LUCK, UNTIL THAT HAPPENS.
And IF that happens, THEN you can rightly say that UW beat a GOOD Leach, WSU team.
Untii then, you can't rightly say that UW beat a GOOD Leach,WSU team during Leach's Tenure at WSU.
Would UW have beaten a GOOD WSU LEACH team if UW had to play without STARTING QB BROWNING, due to injury, if Browning had been injured?
PROBABLY NOT.
And if WSU had technically won against that without Browning UW team, could WSU have rightly claimed it BEAT UW?
NO
And if UW was a AIR RAID team, and WSU was a POWER RUNNING team, and if a Snow storm dumped snow, that shut down a UW AIR RAID, and were to benefit a WSU Power Running game, so that WSU technically won vs UW, could WSU rightly claim that BEAT UW?
No
Not only that, but the SPORTS MEDIA, the Pollsters, etc, would not give WSU any credit, and would say that WSU just got LUCKY, to TECHNICALLY win.
Its a FREAKING DOUBLE STANDARD.
So until, if UW actually beats, not just technically, luckily win, but beats a GOOD WSU, LEACH TEAM, WITH ITS GOOD STARTING QB, AND WITHOUT 1+ KEY, VITAL TO WINNING PLAYERS BEING INJURED, AND WITHOUT EXTREME BAD WEATHER THAT SHUT DOWN AIR RAID, ETC, FULL STRENGTH, ETC.
UNTIL, IF THAT HAPPENS, UW CAN'T rightly say that BEAT a GOOD WSU LEACH team.
IF, WHEN, IF the Fuskies beat a GOOD Leach, WSU team that win 8 to 11 games that:
1. Not starting 2nd, 3rd string, BENDER like QB, due to a injury of a GOOD STARTING QB
2. The GOOD Starting QB, recovering from a condition like a concussion, injury.
3. A Snowstorm that dump 1/2 foot to 1 and 1/2, 1.5 feet of snow that will stop a AIR RAID OFFENSE, but BENEFIT a UW power running game
UNTIL, IF THAT HAPPENS, ITS LUCK, UNTIL THAT HAPPENS.
And IF that happens, THEN you can rightly say that UW beat a GOOD Leach, WSU team.
Untii then, you can't rightly say that UW beat a GOOD Leach,WSU team during Leach's Tenure at WSU.
Would UW have beaten a GOOD WSU LEACH team if UW had to play without STARTING QB BROWNING, due to injury, if Browning had been injured?
PROBABLY NOT.
And if WSU had technically won against that without Browning UW team, could WSU have rightly claimed it BEAT UW?
NO
And if UW was a AIR RAID team, and WSU was a POWER RUNNING team, and if a Snow storm dumped snow, that shut down a UW AIR RAID, and were to benefit a WSU Power Running game, so that WSU technically won vs UW, could WSU rightly claim that BEAT UW?
No
Not only that, but the SPORTS MEDIA, the Pollsters, etc, would not give WSU any credit, and would say that WSU just got LUCKY, to TECHNICALLY win.
Its a FREAKING DOUBLE STANDARD.
So until, if UW actually beats, not just technically, luckily win, but beats a GOOD WSU, LEACH TEAM, WITH ITS GOOD STARTING QB, AND WITHOUT 1+ KEY, VITAL TO WINNING PLAYERS BEING INJURED, AND WITHOUT EXTREME BAD WEATHER THAT SHUT DOWN AIR RAID, ETC, FULL STRENGTH, ETC.
UNTIL, IF THAT HAPPENS, UW CAN'T rightly say that BEAT a GOOD WSU LEACH team.
They can rightly say they TECHNICALLY WON vs WSU.
Holy shit, they're still bringing up the snowstorm as the reason they lost?
Comments
December
JFC, Brink must be drunk already. Not that there's anything wrong with that.
Well fucking done.
1. Not starting 2nd, 3rd string, BENDER like QB, due to a injury of a GOOD STARTING QB
2. The GOOD Starting QB, recovering from a condition like a concussion, injury.
3. A Snowstorm that dump 1/2 foot to 1 and 1/2, 1.5 feet of snow that will stop a AIR RAID OFFENSE, but BENEFIT a UW power running game
UNTIL, IF THAT HAPPENS, ITS LUCK, UNTIL THAT HAPPENS.
And IF that happens, THEN you can rightly say that UW beat a GOOD Leach, WSU team.
Untii then, you can't rightly say that UW beat a GOOD Leach,WSU team during Leach's Tenure at WSU.
Would UW have beaten a GOOD WSU LEACH team if UW had to play without STARTING QB BROWNING, due to injury, if Browning had been injured?
PROBABLY NOT.
And if WSU had technically won against that without Browning UW team, could WSU have rightly claimed it BEAT UW?
NO
And if UW was a AIR RAID team, and WSU was a POWER RUNNING team, and if a Snow storm dumped snow, that shut down a UW AIR RAID, and were to benefit a WSU Power Running game, so that WSU technically won vs UW, could WSU rightly claim that BEAT UW?
No
Not only that, but the SPORTS MEDIA, the Pollsters, etc, would not give WSU any credit, and would say that WSU just got LUCKY, to TECHNICALLY win.
Its a FREAKING DOUBLE STANDARD.
So until, if UW actually beats, not just technically, luckily win, but beats a GOOD WSU, LEACH TEAM, WITH ITS GOOD STARTING QB, AND WITHOUT 1+ KEY, VITAL TO WINNING PLAYERS BEING INJURED, AND WITHOUT EXTREME BAD WEATHER THAT SHUT DOWN AIR RAID, ETC, FULL STRENGTH, ETC.
UNTIL, IF THAT HAPPENS, UW CAN'T rightly say that BEAT a GOOD WSU LEACH team.
They can rightly say they TECHNICALLY WON vs WSU.