Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
Oregon’s Meathead Mexican
Comments
-
W/o question.RaceBannon said:
It's hard to insult a Husky more than we insult ourselves these days but this is a good onentxduck said:
Looking back, most of UWs Rose bowl victories were against pretty mediocre big ten teams. Awesome wins over some 8-4 Iowa squadsMosster47 said:
Should we throw your RB trophy against Purdue in the lake? For Purdue to win the Big Ten Ohio State, Michigan, and Penn State would have to be .500 teams, which they were that year.Gladstone said:Oregon got fourth best in big ten Wisconsin and we got Urban last game Ohio State. That's it. The end. Go home.
Only a Doog would talk shit about a trophy they haven't won in 20 years.
Our best wasn't the Rose Bowl. It was the Orange Bowl
Tl;dr on its way:
During my formative years in Miami (thank God), I grew up on a steady diet of Orange Bowl national championships, with an occasional Sugar.
Then when I moved up here, I became acquainted with the Rose Bowl, which people in the west always insisted was the only bowl that mattered. I was ready to accept this, but I was also fed a steady diet of the Pac beating the Big in the Rose. This was how I saw the world. We? were better. I missed the prior era of the Big dominating the game.
It formed in me a couple of admittedly odd points of view. First, I fell in love with this conference, a feeling I have to this day. I was so impressed because we? (one of us) beat some of the big-name teams I grew up hearing about so much (OSU/Mich). But it also made me think, "what's the big deal with this bowl? why do they like it so much? it's never best on best.
The fact that the Rose Bowl meant more than the game itself escaped me. The symbolism of fleeing the cold to fly to the west coast paradise to see your team was something that meant nothing to me because one thing we had in abundance in So Fla is great weather during the winter. So I just didn't get it. I always wanted the P10 teams I thought were so cool to be free to play elsewhere and not be tied into this fucking limited game against these big lumbering slow teams that we? always seemed to beat.
It's why one of my favorite memories are those of any P10 team playing OOC and beating some big name program. Which, coincidentally, also marks the source of my aggravation with my alma mater: that being their inability to punch Notre Dame in the mouwf. JFC But I danced around like a Kansas City faggot when we? beat Okie in the Orange.
-
I've never heard even one person ever claim that the Rose Bowl is the only bowl that matters.creepycoug said:
W/o question.RaceBannon said:
It's hard to insult a Husky more than we insult ourselves these days but this is a good onentxduck said:
Looking back, most of UWs Rose bowl victories were against pretty mediocre big ten teams. Awesome wins over some 8-4 Iowa squadsMosster47 said:
Should we throw your RB trophy against Purdue in the lake? For Purdue to win the Big Ten Ohio State, Michigan, and Penn State would have to be .500 teams, which they were that year.Gladstone said:Oregon got fourth best in big ten Wisconsin and we got Urban last game Ohio State. That's it. The end. Go home.
Only a Doog would talk shit about a trophy they haven't won in 20 years.
Our best wasn't the Rose Bowl. It was the Orange Bowl
Tl;dr on its way:
During my formative years in Miami (thank God), I grew up on a steady diet of Orange Bowl national championships, with an occasional Sugar.
Then when I moved up here, I became acquainted with the Rose Bowl, which people in the west always insisted was the only bowl that mattered. I was ready to accept this, but I was also fed a steady diet of the Pac beating the Big in the Rose. This was how I saw the world. We? were better. I missed the prior era of the Big dominating the game.
It formed in me a couple of admittedly odd points of view. First, I fell in love with this conference, a feeling I have to this day. I was so impressed because we? (one of us) beat some of the big-name teams I grew up hearing about so much (OSU/Mich). But it also made me think, "what's the big deal with this bowl? why do they like it so much? it's never best on best.
The fact that the Rose Bowl meant more than the game itself escaped me. The symbolism of fleeing the cold to fly to the west coast paradise to see your team was something that meant nothing to me because one thing we had in abundance in So Fla is great weather during the winter. So I just didn't get it. I always wanted the P10 teams I thought were so cool to be free to play elsewhere and not be tied into this fucking limited game against these big lumbering slow teams that we? always seemed to beat.
It's why one of my favorite memories are those of any P10 team playing OOC and beating some big name program. Which, coincidentally, also marks the source of my aggravation with my alma mater: that being their inability to punch Notre Dame in the mouwf. JFC But I danced around like a Kansas City faggot when we? beat Okie in the Orange. -
If the new Vegas bowl still holds up to be a Pac 12 #2/3 against the SEC it could end up holding a similar clout to the Rose Bowl over time.
New stadium, win over an LSU/Auburn type of program, Vegas. Could actually be really great for the Pac fans. SEC fans might even care. -
I'll love it for the change of pace and varietyhaie said:If the new Vegas bowl still holds up to be a Pac 12 #2/3 against the SEC it could end up holding a similar clout to the Rose Bowl over time.
New stadium, win over an LSU/Auburn type of program, Vegas. Could actually be really great for the Pac fans. SEC fans might even care. -
It is a huge step up for the pac12 over the Alamo, but it’s assinine to say it could have similar clout to the rose bowl.haie said:If the new Vegas bowl still holds up to be a Pac 12 #2/3 against the SEC it could end up holding a similar clout to the Rose Bowl over time.
New stadium, win over an LSU/Auburn type of program, Vegas. Could actually be really great for the Pac fans. SEC fans might even care. -
Supposably.Swaye said:
Cubans really like to start shit, eh?creepycoug said:
@Gladstone ? True?Swaye said:
I'm glad we got this sorted. Race taught me many moons ago not to be one of those fags who diminishes winners. Winners win, and losers talk about why winners shouldn't be winners.MikeSeaver said:
You’re correct. Probably quoted the wrong guy.RaceBannon said:
That's pretty much what he wrote. Thanks for the translation into duckMikeSeaver said:
The last time UW won a Rose Bowl it was in standard definition and you beat #14 AP/coaches, #17 BCS, Purdue.Swaye said:
No doubt. Wisconsin is garbage.This is Tui beating Purdue level stuff here. Thing is I was at the Tui beating shitty ass Purdue Rose Bowel and I don't really ever think about the fact we beat a shitty team to win it. I just think about the feeling of winning it. Nobody ever remembers you beat a shit team. They just remember you are winners.Gladstone said:Oh I'm on board that we've been soft dick losers in every game with a pulse, but the Rose Bowl emo meltdown is a bit much as Wisconsin is a billion orders of magnitude shittier than that Ohio State team.
Sorry kiddos.
Credit to Cristoball. I thought he was going to be a shitbag. Turns out he won a Rose Bowl in year 2 while we were on the 6 year "process plan" to lose one.
Gay ass #FlexFriday works. Who knew?
Nobody cares.
Into the trophy case with a Black XL T-shirt.
Was still fun to write though. -
Oh shit. I heard it all the time Stalin.DerekJohnson said:
I've never heard even one person ever claim that the Rose Bowl is the only bowl that matters.creepycoug said:
W/o question.RaceBannon said:
It's hard to insult a Husky more than we insult ourselves these days but this is a good onentxduck said:
Looking back, most of UWs Rose bowl victories were against pretty mediocre big ten teams. Awesome wins over some 8-4 Iowa squadsMosster47 said:
Should we throw your RB trophy against Purdue in the lake? For Purdue to win the Big Ten Ohio State, Michigan, and Penn State would have to be .500 teams, which they were that year.Gladstone said:Oregon got fourth best in big ten Wisconsin and we got Urban last game Ohio State. That's it. The end. Go home.
Only a Doog would talk shit about a trophy they haven't won in 20 years.
Our best wasn't the Rose Bowl. It was the Orange Bowl
Tl;dr on its way:
During my formative years in Miami (thank God), I grew up on a steady diet of Orange Bowl national championships, with an occasional Sugar.
Then when I moved up here, I became acquainted with the Rose Bowl, which people in the west always insisted was the only bowl that mattered. I was ready to accept this, but I was also fed a steady diet of the Pac beating the Big in the Rose. This was how I saw the world. We? were better. I missed the prior era of the Big dominating the game.
It formed in me a couple of admittedly odd points of view. First, I fell in love with this conference, a feeling I have to this day. I was so impressed because we? (one of us) beat some of the big-name teams I grew up hearing about so much (OSU/Mich). But it also made me think, "what's the big deal with this bowl? why do they like it so much? it's never best on best.
The fact that the Rose Bowl meant more than the game itself escaped me. The symbolism of fleeing the cold to fly to the west coast paradise to see your team was something that meant nothing to me because one thing we had in abundance in So Fla is great weather during the winter. So I just didn't get it. I always wanted the P10 teams I thought were so cool to be free to play elsewhere and not be tied into this fucking limited game against these big lumbering slow teams that we? always seemed to beat.
It's why one of my favorite memories are those of any P10 team playing OOC and beating some big name program. Which, coincidentally, also marks the source of my aggravation with my alma mater: that being their inability to punch Notre Dame in the mouwf. JFC But I danced around like a Kansas City faggot when we? beat Okie in the Orange.
The country was a much more regional place not that many years ago. -
But I was hearing from retards here that ricks rose bowl win didn’t count because Purdue was 9-4Swaye said:
Exactly. Nobody ever cares who you beat, just that you won. Wisconsin is hot garbage. And so was Purdue. And so was Iowa. Etc. NOGAF. Winners win and hoist trophies. Losers diddle themselves in the losers locker room and talk about how TUFF Ohio State was.ntxduck said:
Looking back, most of UWs Rose bowl victories were against pretty mediocre big ten teams. Awesome wins over some 8-4 Iowa squadsMosster47 said:
Should we throw your RB trophy against Purdue in the lake? For Purdue to win the Big Ten Ohio State, Michigan, and Penn State would have to be .500 teams, which they were that year.Gladstone said:Oregon got fourth best in big ten Wisconsin and we got Urban last game Ohio State. That's it. The end. Go home.
Only a Doog would talk shit about a trophy they haven't won in 20 years. -
"Retards" being the operative word.MikeDamone said:
But I was hearing from retards here that ricks rose bowl win didn’t count because Purdue was 9-4Swaye said:
Exactly. Nobody ever cares who you beat, just that you won. Wisconsin is hot garbage. And so was Purdue. And so was Iowa. Etc. NOGAF. Winners win and hoist trophies. Losers diddle themselves in the losers locker room and talk about how TUFF Ohio State was.ntxduck said:
Looking back, most of UWs Rose bowl victories were against pretty mediocre big ten teams. Awesome wins over some 8-4 Iowa squadsMosster47 said:
Should we throw your RB trophy against Purdue in the lake? For Purdue to win the Big Ten Ohio State, Michigan, and Penn State would have to be .500 teams, which they were that year.Gladstone said:Oregon got fourth best in big ten Wisconsin and we got Urban last game Ohio State. That's it. The end. Go home.
Only a Doog would talk shit about a trophy they haven't won in 20 years. -
Can't we? move it to a better place than Vegas though?haie said:If the new Vegas bowl still holds up to be a Pac 12 #2/3 against the SEC it could end up holding a similar clout to the Rose Bowl over time.
New stadium, win over an LSU/Auburn type of program, Vegas. Could actually be really great for the Pac fans. SEC fans might even care.
Part of what makes the Rose Bowl is where it is. So Cal is full of people for a razone. It's paradise.
Can't that game be in San Diego or LA? -
You wouldn't have the Vegas bowl in Vegas? Seems oddcreepycoug said:
Can't we? move it to a better place than Vegas though?haie said:If the new Vegas bowl still holds up to be a Pac 12 #2/3 against the SEC it could end up holding a similar clout to the Rose Bowl over time.
New stadium, win over an LSU/Auburn type of program, Vegas. Could actually be really great for the Pac fans. SEC fans might even care.
Part of what makes the Rose Bowl is where it is. So Cal is full of people for a razone. It's paradise.
Can't that game be in San Diego or LA? -
New Rams Stadium would be great. Need to keep the SEC series going at the beginning of the year too. Get a game with Clemson. Tell Dabo if he wants our recruits to fly his ass out here and show it.creepycoug said:
Can't we? move it to a better place than Vegas though?haie said:If the new Vegas bowl still holds up to be a Pac 12 #2/3 against the SEC it could end up holding a similar clout to the Rose Bowl over time.
New stadium, win over an LSU/Auburn type of program, Vegas. Could actually be really great for the Pac fans. SEC fans might even care.
Part of what makes the Rose Bowl is where it is. So Cal is full of people for a razone. It's paradise.
Can't that game be in San Diego or LA?
The conference perception takes a hit from losing these games (really only if we get blown out) but it takes a bigger hit that at the end of the year you're just playing the Mountain West and Illinois and fucking Iowa. No one on the west coast gives a fuck about playing any of those teams. -
We could rename it. It's hard, but we could try.MikeDamone said:
You wouldn't have the Vegas bowl in Vegas? Seems oddcreepycoug said:
Can't we? move it to a better place than Vegas though?haie said:If the new Vegas bowl still holds up to be a Pac 12 #2/3 against the SEC it could end up holding a similar clout to the Rose Bowl over time.
New stadium, win over an LSU/Auburn type of program, Vegas. Could actually be really great for the Pac fans. SEC fans might even care.
Part of what makes the Rose Bowl is where it is. So Cal is full of people for a razone. It's paradise.
Can't that game be in San Diego or LA?
But it's hard. -
They’re moving the current Vegas (p12 v mwc) to Hollywood Park starting next yearhaie said:
New Rams Stadium would be great. Need to keep the SEC series going at the beginning of the year too. Get a game with Clemson. Tell Dabo if he wants our recruits to fly his ass out here and show it.creepycoug said:
Can't we? move it to a better place than Vegas though?haie said:If the new Vegas bowl still holds up to be a Pac 12 #2/3 against the SEC it could end up holding a similar clout to the Rose Bowl over time.
New stadium, win over an LSU/Auburn type of program, Vegas. Could actually be really great for the Pac fans. SEC fans might even care.
Part of what makes the Rose Bowl is where it is. So Cal is full of people for a razone. It's paradise.
Can't that game be in San Diego or LA?
The conference perception takes a hit from losing these games (really only if we get blown out) but it takes a bigger hit that at the end of the year you're just playing the Mountain West and Illinois and fucking Iowa. No one on the west coast gives a fuck about playing any of those teams. -
Maybe we could call it something like the "Holiday" bowel for people on holiday?creepycoug said:
We could rename it. It's hard, but we could try.MikeDamone said:
You wouldn't have the Vegas bowl in Vegas? Seems oddcreepycoug said:
Can't we? move it to a better place than Vegas though?haie said:If the new Vegas bowl still holds up to be a Pac 12 #2/3 against the SEC it could end up holding a similar clout to the Rose Bowl over time.
New stadium, win over an LSU/Auburn type of program, Vegas. Could actually be really great for the Pac fans. SEC fans might even care.
Part of what makes the Rose Bowl is where it is. So Cal is full of people for a razone. It's paradise.
Can't that game be in San Diego or LA?
But it's hard. -
Bingo!UW_Doog_Bot said:
Maybe we could call it something like the "Holiday" bowel for people on holiday?creepycoug said:
We could rename it. It's hard, but we could try.MikeDamone said:
You wouldn't have the Vegas bowl in Vegas? Seems oddcreepycoug said:
Can't we? move it to a better place than Vegas though?haie said:If the new Vegas bowl still holds up to be a Pac 12 #2/3 against the SEC it could end up holding a similar clout to the Rose Bowl over time.
New stadium, win over an LSU/Auburn type of program, Vegas. Could actually be really great for the Pac fans. SEC fans might even care.
Part of what makes the Rose Bowl is where it is. So Cal is full of people for a razone. It's paradise.
Can't that game be in San Diego or LA?
But it's hard. -
You think Europeans would show up?UW_Doog_Bot said:
Maybe we could call it something like the "Holiday" bowel for people on holiday?creepycoug said:
We could rename it. It's hard, but we could try.MikeDamone said:
You wouldn't have the Vegas bowl in Vegas? Seems oddcreepycoug said:
Can't we? move it to a better place than Vegas though?haie said:If the new Vegas bowl still holds up to be a Pac 12 #2/3 against the SEC it could end up holding a similar clout to the Rose Bowl over time.
New stadium, win over an LSU/Auburn type of program, Vegas. Could actually be really great for the Pac fans. SEC fans might even care.
Part of what makes the Rose Bowl is where it is. So Cal is full of people for a razone. It's paradise.
Can't that game be in San Diego or LA?
But it's hard. -
It doesn’t ultimately matter but when some here say Cristobal did more than Pete, it’s a simplistic statement that is kind of stupid. He hasn’t yet.haie said:
The correct opinion is it doesn't matter who you're playing in the rose bowl. It didn't matter who Oregon played this year.ntxduck said:
Looking back, most of UWs Rose bowl victories were against pretty mediocre big ten teams. Awesome wins over some 8-4 Iowa squadsMosster47 said:
Should we throw your RB trophy against Purdue in the lake? For Purdue to win the Big Ten Ohio State, Michigan, and Penn State would have to be .500 teams, which they were that year.Gladstone said:Oregon got fourth best in big ten Wisconsin and we got Urban last game Ohio State. That's it. The end. Go home.
Only a Doog would talk shit about a trophy they haven't won in 20 years.
It didn't matter who UW played last year.
A playoff game is better than a Rose Bowl win and Ohio State was a lot better than Wisconsin. If we had a beat a Wisconsin type team people would still say Pete hadn’t won a big game against a tough opponent.
Nobody really remembers that tho, so I do get it. Purdue wasn’t anything special in 2000. I still enjoyed it a lot. -
The Temecula Bowl has a nice ring to itcreepycoug said:
We could rename it. It's hard, but we could try.MikeDamone said:
You wouldn't have the Vegas bowl in Vegas? Seems oddcreepycoug said:
Can't we? move it to a better place than Vegas though?haie said:If the new Vegas bowl still holds up to be a Pac 12 #2/3 against the SEC it could end up holding a similar clout to the Rose Bowl over time.
New stadium, win over an LSU/Auburn type of program, Vegas. Could actually be really great for the Pac fans. SEC fans might even care.
Part of what makes the Rose Bowl is where it is. So Cal is full of people for a razone. It's paradise.
Can't that game be in San Diego or LA?
But it's hard. -
It's not simplistic or stupid at all unless you're into "but, but, but" loser excuses. He's certainly done more relative to tenure; that's impossible to dispute.RoadDawg55 said:
It doesn’t ultimately matter but when some here say Cristobal did more than Pete, it’s a simplistic statement that is kind of stupid. He hasn’t yet.haie said:
The correct opinion is it doesn't matter who you're playing in the rose bowl. It didn't matter who Oregon played this year.ntxduck said:
Looking back, most of UWs Rose bowl victories were against pretty mediocre big ten teams. Awesome wins over some 8-4 Iowa squadsMosster47 said:
Should we throw your RB trophy against Purdue in the lake? For Purdue to win the Big Ten Ohio State, Michigan, and Penn State would have to be .500 teams, which they were that year.Gladstone said:Oregon got fourth best in big ten Wisconsin and we got Urban last game Ohio State. That's it. The end. Go home.
Only a Doog would talk shit about a trophy they haven't won in 20 years.
It didn't matter who UW played last year.
A playoff game is better than a Rose Bowl win and Ohio State was a lot better than Wisconsin. If we had a beat a Wisconsin type team people would still say Pete hadn’t won a big game against a tough opponent.
Nobody really remembers that tho, so I do get it. Purdue wasn’t anything special in 2000. I still enjoyed it a lot.
He also walked into a much bigger pile of shit than did Pete. He's also 2-0 vs. Pete, and Pete had a 5-year head start to build his program. And he won both bowls he played in. The Rose Bowl against this Wisky team is very, very comparable to the PSU team that Washington took on in the Fiesta. Mario won and Pete lost. I won't even argue that point anymore because it's fucking retarded to debate otherwise.
Also, the Haskins-led Buckeyes were not the juggernaut people are starting to remember them as being. Look at their schedule and results for 2018. They didn't run through the season beating the shit out of everyone. 2019 OSU was significantly better than 2018 OSU. Was 2018 OSU better than 2019 Wisconsin? Sure, I'll concede that. But they weren't world's a part. This is part 1b of the Doog Oregon Rose Bowl narrative.
Lastly, close games. It's not close. The Oregon Cristobals have been much better in close games.
I used to be somewhat of a fan of Toothy. The more we talk about this, the more I see how overrated he was. He brought an adult presence to the program when they needed it. Not sure he brought much more than that. -
It’s the fact that you’re an asshole ... your comments are beyond inappropriate and have no place on a message boardcreepycoug said:
It's not simplistic or stupid at all unless you're into "but, but, but" loser excuses. He's certainly done more relative to tenure; that's impossible to dispute.RoadDawg55 said:
It doesn’t ultimately matter but when some here say Cristobal did more than Pete, it’s a simplistic statement that is kind of stupid. He hasn’t yet.haie said:
The correct opinion is it doesn't matter who you're playing in the rose bowl. It didn't matter who Oregon played this year.ntxduck said:
Looking back, most of UWs Rose bowl victories were against pretty mediocre big ten teams. Awesome wins over some 8-4 Iowa squadsMosster47 said:
Should we throw your RB trophy against Purdue in the lake? For Purdue to win the Big Ten Ohio State, Michigan, and Penn State would have to be .500 teams, which they were that year.Gladstone said:Oregon got fourth best in big ten Wisconsin and we got Urban last game Ohio State. That's it. The end. Go home.
Only a Doog would talk shit about a trophy they haven't won in 20 years.
It didn't matter who UW played last year.
A playoff game is better than a Rose Bowl win and Ohio State was a lot better than Wisconsin. If we had a beat a Wisconsin type team people would still say Pete hadn’t won a big game against a tough opponent.
Nobody really remembers that tho, so I do get it. Purdue wasn’t anything special in 2000. I still enjoyed it a lot.
He also walked into a much bigger pile of shit than did Pete. He's also 2-0 vs. Pete, and Pete had a 5-year head start to build his program. And he won both bowls he played in. The Rose Bowl against this Wisky team is very, very comparable to the PSU team that Washington took on in the Fiesta. Mario won and Pete lost. I won't even argue that point anymore because it's fucking retarded to debate otherwise.
Also, the Haskins-led Buckeyes were not the juggernaut people are starting to remember them as being. Look at their schedule and results for 2018. They didn't run through the season beating the shit out of everyone. 2019 OSU was significantly better than 2018 OSU. Was 2018 OSU better than 2019 Wisconsin? Sure, I'll concede that. But they weren't world's a part. This is part 1b of the Doog Oregon Rose Bowl narrative.
Lastly, close games. It's not close. The Oregon Cristobals have been much better in close games.
I used to be somewhat of a fan of Toothy. The more we talk about this, the more I see how overrated he was. He brought an adult presence to the program when they needed it. Not sure he brought much more than that. -
I'd beg to differ with you on this point. Mario took over a team that had just had a couple of down years and some corching turmoil BUT was still a nationally relevant program, especially in the eyes of the kids. Oregon was still rich, cool and a mere 4 years removed from playing for a NT. Pete took over a program that hadn't been relevant in 14 years.creepycoug said:
It's not simplistic or stupid at all unless you're into "but, but, but" loser excuses. He's certainly done more relative to tenure; that's impossible to dispute.RoadDawg55 said:
It doesn’t ultimately matter but when some here say Cristobal did more than Pete, it’s a simplistic statement that is kind of stupid. He hasn’t yet.haie said:
The correct opinion is it doesn't matter who you're playing in the rose bowl. It didn't matter who Oregon played this year.ntxduck said:
Looking back, most of UWs Rose bowl victories were against pretty mediocre big ten teams. Awesome wins over some 8-4 Iowa squadsMosster47 said:
Should we throw your RB trophy against Purdue in the lake? For Purdue to win the Big Ten Ohio State, Michigan, and Penn State would have to be .500 teams, which they were that year.Gladstone said:Oregon got fourth best in big ten Wisconsin and we got Urban last game Ohio State. That's it. The end. Go home.
Only a Doog would talk shit about a trophy they haven't won in 20 years.
It didn't matter who UW played last year.
A playoff game is better than a Rose Bowl win and Ohio State was a lot better than Wisconsin. If we had a beat a Wisconsin type team people would still say Pete hadn’t won a big game against a tough opponent.
Nobody really remembers that tho, so I do get it. Purdue wasn’t anything special in 2000. I still enjoyed it a lot.
He also walked into a much bigger pile of shit than did Pete. He's also 2-0 vs. Pete, and Pete had a 5-year head start to build his program. And he won both bowls he played in. The Rose Bowl against this Wisky team is very, very comparable to the PSU team that Washington took on in the Fiesta. Mario won and Pete lost. I won't even argue that point anymore because it's fucking retarded to debate otherwise.
Also, the Haskins-led Buckeyes were not the juggernaut people are starting to remember them as being. Look at their schedule and results for 2018. They didn't run through the season beating the shit out of everyone. 2019 OSU was significantly better than 2018 OSU. Was 2018 OSU better than 2019 Wisconsin? Sure, I'll concede that. But they weren't world's a part. This is part 1b of the Doog Oregon Rose Bowl narrative.
Lastly, close games. It's not close. The Oregon Cristobals have been much better in close games.
I used to be somewhat of a fan of Toothy. The more we talk about this, the more I see how overrated he was. He brought an adult presence to the program when they needed it. Not sure he brought much more than that.
Pete underachieved at Washington. He was too focused on process over winning games. Overall, we're still in a pretty good place right now.
-
Pete made it a bigger shit pile than it really was. He was worried about the cleanliness of the locker room, whether helmets were put on the ground. The discipline was lacking, but some coaches make a bigger deal out of that stuff than others. We sure as fuck shouldn’t have been eeking out a one point win against Hawaii and giving up 52 to Eastern.YellowSnow said:
I'd beg to differ with you on this point. Mario took over a team that had just had a couple of down years and some corching turmoil BUT was still a nationally relevant program, especially in the eyes of the kids. Oregon was still rich, cool and a mere 4 years removed from playing for a NT. Pete took over a program that hadn't been relevant in 14 years.creepycoug said:
It's not simplistic or stupid at all unless you're into "but, but, but" loser excuses. He's certainly done more relative to tenure; that's impossible to dispute.RoadDawg55 said:
It doesn’t ultimately matter but when some here say Cristobal did more than Pete, it’s a simplistic statement that is kind of stupid. He hasn’t yet.haie said:
The correct opinion is it doesn't matter who you're playing in the rose bowl. It didn't matter who Oregon played this year.ntxduck said:
Looking back, most of UWs Rose bowl victories were against pretty mediocre big ten teams. Awesome wins over some 8-4 Iowa squadsMosster47 said:
Should we throw your RB trophy against Purdue in the lake? For Purdue to win the Big Ten Ohio State, Michigan, and Penn State would have to be .500 teams, which they were that year.Gladstone said:Oregon got fourth best in big ten Wisconsin and we got Urban last game Ohio State. That's it. The end. Go home.
Only a Doog would talk shit about a trophy they haven't won in 20 years.
It didn't matter who UW played last year.
A playoff game is better than a Rose Bowl win and Ohio State was a lot better than Wisconsin. If we had a beat a Wisconsin type team people would still say Pete hadn’t won a big game against a tough opponent.
Nobody really remembers that tho, so I do get it. Purdue wasn’t anything special in 2000. I still enjoyed it a lot.
He also walked into a much bigger pile of shit than did Pete. He's also 2-0 vs. Pete, and Pete had a 5-year head start to build his program. And he won both bowls he played in. The Rose Bowl against this Wisky team is very, very comparable to the PSU team that Washington took on in the Fiesta. Mario won and Pete lost. I won't even argue that point anymore because it's fucking retarded to debate otherwise.
Also, the Haskins-led Buckeyes were not the juggernaut people are starting to remember them as being. Look at their schedule and results for 2018. They didn't run through the season beating the shit out of everyone. 2019 OSU was significantly better than 2018 OSU. Was 2018 OSU better than 2019 Wisconsin? Sure, I'll concede that. But they weren't world's a part. This is part 1b of the Doog Oregon Rose Bowl narrative.
Lastly, close games. It's not close. The Oregon Cristobals have been much better in close games.
I used to be somewhat of a fan of Toothy. The more we talk about this, the more I see how overrated he was. He brought an adult presence to the program when they needed it. Not sure he brought much more than that.
Pete underachieved at Washington. He was too focused on process over winning games. Overall, we're still in a pretty good place right now.
He didn’t have a QB but the rest of the roster was pretty good, especially the best 5-10 players on the team. -
Brutally cruel Bazey.PurpleBaze said:
It’s the fact that you’re an asshole ... your comments are beyond inappropriate and have no place on a message boardcreepycoug said:
It's not simplistic or stupid at all unless you're into "but, but, but" loser excuses. He's certainly done more relative to tenure; that's impossible to dispute.RoadDawg55 said:
It doesn’t ultimately matter but when some here say Cristobal did more than Pete, it’s a simplistic statement that is kind of stupid. He hasn’t yet.haie said:
The correct opinion is it doesn't matter who you're playing in the rose bowl. It didn't matter who Oregon played this year.ntxduck said:
Looking back, most of UWs Rose bowl victories were against pretty mediocre big ten teams. Awesome wins over some 8-4 Iowa squadsMosster47 said:
Should we throw your RB trophy against Purdue in the lake? For Purdue to win the Big Ten Ohio State, Michigan, and Penn State would have to be .500 teams, which they were that year.Gladstone said:Oregon got fourth best in big ten Wisconsin and we got Urban last game Ohio State. That's it. The end. Go home.
Only a Doog would talk shit about a trophy they haven't won in 20 years.
It didn't matter who UW played last year.
A playoff game is better than a Rose Bowl win and Ohio State was a lot better than Wisconsin. If we had a beat a Wisconsin type team people would still say Pete hadn’t won a big game against a tough opponent.
Nobody really remembers that tho, so I do get it. Purdue wasn’t anything special in 2000. I still enjoyed it a lot.
He also walked into a much bigger pile of shit than did Pete. He's also 2-0 vs. Pete, and Pete had a 5-year head start to build his program. And he won both bowls he played in. The Rose Bowl against this Wisky team is very, very comparable to the PSU team that Washington took on in the Fiesta. Mario won and Pete lost. I won't even argue that point anymore because it's fucking retarded to debate otherwise.
Also, the Haskins-led Buckeyes were not the juggernaut people are starting to remember them as being. Look at their schedule and results for 2018. They didn't run through the season beating the shit out of everyone. 2019 OSU was significantly better than 2018 OSU. Was 2018 OSU better than 2019 Wisconsin? Sure, I'll concede that. But they weren't world's a part. This is part 1b of the Doog Oregon Rose Bowl narrative.
Lastly, close games. It's not close. The Oregon Cristobals have been much better in close games.
I used to be somewhat of a fan of Toothy. The more we talk about this, the more I see how overrated he was. He brought an adult presence to the program when they needed it. Not sure he brought much more than that. -
Oregon was in the heap pile meng. Washington was coming off Sarkesian Sizzle.YellowSnow said:
I'd beg to differ with you on this point. Mario took over a team that had just had a couple of down years and some corching turmoil BUT was still a nationally relevant program, especially in the eyes of the kids. Oregon was still rich, cool and a mere 4 years removed from playing for a NT. Pete took over a program that hadn't been relevant in 14 years.creepycoug said:
It's not simplistic or stupid at all unless you're into "but, but, but" loser excuses. He's certainly done more relative to tenure; that's impossible to dispute.RoadDawg55 said:
It doesn’t ultimately matter but when some here say Cristobal did more than Pete, it’s a simplistic statement that is kind of stupid. He hasn’t yet.haie said:
The correct opinion is it doesn't matter who you're playing in the rose bowl. It didn't matter who Oregon played this year.ntxduck said:
Looking back, most of UWs Rose bowl victories were against pretty mediocre big ten teams. Awesome wins over some 8-4 Iowa squadsMosster47 said:
Should we throw your RB trophy against Purdue in the lake? For Purdue to win the Big Ten Ohio State, Michigan, and Penn State would have to be .500 teams, which they were that year.Gladstone said:Oregon got fourth best in big ten Wisconsin and we got Urban last game Ohio State. That's it. The end. Go home.
Only a Doog would talk shit about a trophy they haven't won in 20 years.
It didn't matter who UW played last year.
A playoff game is better than a Rose Bowl win and Ohio State was a lot better than Wisconsin. If we had a beat a Wisconsin type team people would still say Pete hadn’t won a big game against a tough opponent.
Nobody really remembers that tho, so I do get it. Purdue wasn’t anything special in 2000. I still enjoyed it a lot.
He also walked into a much bigger pile of shit than did Pete. He's also 2-0 vs. Pete, and Pete had a 5-year head start to build his program. And he won both bowls he played in. The Rose Bowl against this Wisky team is very, very comparable to the PSU team that Washington took on in the Fiesta. Mario won and Pete lost. I won't even argue that point anymore because it's fucking retarded to debate otherwise.
Also, the Haskins-led Buckeyes were not the juggernaut people are starting to remember them as being. Look at their schedule and results for 2018. They didn't run through the season beating the shit out of everyone. 2019 OSU was significantly better than 2018 OSU. Was 2018 OSU better than 2019 Wisconsin? Sure, I'll concede that. But they weren't world's a part. This is part 1b of the Doog Oregon Rose Bowl narrative.
Lastly, close games. It's not close. The Oregon Cristobals have been much better in close games.
I used to be somewhat of a fan of Toothy. The more we talk about this, the more I see how overrated he was. He brought an adult presence to the program when they needed it. Not sure he brought much more than that.
Pete underachieved at Washington. He was too focused on process over winning games. Overall, we're still in a pretty good place right now. -
I like a good copypasta.creepycoug said:
Brutally cruel Bazey.PurpleBaze said:
It’s the fact that you’re an asshole ... your comments are beyond inappropriate and have no place on a message boardcreepycoug said:
It's not simplistic or stupid at all unless you're into "but, but, but" loser excuses. He's certainly done more relative to tenure; that's impossible to dispute.RoadDawg55 said:
It doesn’t ultimately matter but when some here say Cristobal did more than Pete, it’s a simplistic statement that is kind of stupid. He hasn’t yet.haie said:
The correct opinion is it doesn't matter who you're playing in the rose bowl. It didn't matter who Oregon played this year.ntxduck said:
Looking back, most of UWs Rose bowl victories were against pretty mediocre big ten teams. Awesome wins over some 8-4 Iowa squadsMosster47 said:
Should we throw your RB trophy against Purdue in the lake? For Purdue to win the Big Ten Ohio State, Michigan, and Penn State would have to be .500 teams, which they were that year.Gladstone said:Oregon got fourth best in big ten Wisconsin and we got Urban last game Ohio State. That's it. The end. Go home.
Only a Doog would talk shit about a trophy they haven't won in 20 years.
It didn't matter who UW played last year.
A playoff game is better than a Rose Bowl win and Ohio State was a lot better than Wisconsin. If we had a beat a Wisconsin type team people would still say Pete hadn’t won a big game against a tough opponent.
Nobody really remembers that tho, so I do get it. Purdue wasn’t anything special in 2000. I still enjoyed it a lot.
He also walked into a much bigger pile of shit than did Pete. He's also 2-0 vs. Pete, and Pete had a 5-year head start to build his program. And he won both bowls he played in. The Rose Bowl against this Wisky team is very, very comparable to the PSU team that Washington took on in the Fiesta. Mario won and Pete lost. I won't even argue that point anymore because it's fucking retarded to debate otherwise.
Also, the Haskins-led Buckeyes were not the juggernaut people are starting to remember them as being. Look at their schedule and results for 2018. They didn't run through the season beating the shit out of everyone. 2019 OSU was significantly better than 2018 OSU. Was 2018 OSU better than 2019 Wisconsin? Sure, I'll concede that. But they weren't world's a part. This is part 1b of the Doog Oregon Rose Bowl narrative.
Lastly, close games. It's not close. The Oregon Cristobals have been much better in close games.
I used to be somewhat of a fan of Toothy. The more we talk about this, the more I see how overrated he was. He brought an adult presence to the program when they needed it. Not sure he brought much more than that. -
Agree. Objectively, Pete, was a success at UW. 2 Pac titles and 3 NY6 bowls is something any of us would have been happy with in Dec. 2013.RoadDawg55 said:
Pete made it a bigger shit pile than it really was. He was worried about the cleanliness of the locker room, whether helmets were put on the ground. The discipline was lacking, but some coaches make a bigger deal out of that stuff than others. We sure as fuck shouldn’t have been eeking out a one point win against Hawaii and giving up 52 to Eastern.YellowSnow said:
I'd beg to differ with you on this point. Mario took over a team that had just had a couple of down years and some corching turmoil BUT was still a nationally relevant program, especially in the eyes of the kids. Oregon was still rich, cool and a mere 4 years removed from playing for a NT. Pete took over a program that hadn't been relevant in 14 years.creepycoug said:
It's not simplistic or stupid at all unless you're into "but, but, but" loser excuses. He's certainly done more relative to tenure; that's impossible to dispute.RoadDawg55 said:
It doesn’t ultimately matter but when some here say Cristobal did more than Pete, it’s a simplistic statement that is kind of stupid. He hasn’t yet.haie said:
The correct opinion is it doesn't matter who you're playing in the rose bowl. It didn't matter who Oregon played this year.ntxduck said:
Looking back, most of UWs Rose bowl victories were against pretty mediocre big ten teams. Awesome wins over some 8-4 Iowa squadsMosster47 said:
Should we throw your RB trophy against Purdue in the lake? For Purdue to win the Big Ten Ohio State, Michigan, and Penn State would have to be .500 teams, which they were that year.Gladstone said:Oregon got fourth best in big ten Wisconsin and we got Urban last game Ohio State. That's it. The end. Go home.
Only a Doog would talk shit about a trophy they haven't won in 20 years.
It didn't matter who UW played last year.
A playoff game is better than a Rose Bowl win and Ohio State was a lot better than Wisconsin. If we had a beat a Wisconsin type team people would still say Pete hadn’t won a big game against a tough opponent.
Nobody really remembers that tho, so I do get it. Purdue wasn’t anything special in 2000. I still enjoyed it a lot.
He also walked into a much bigger pile of shit than did Pete. He's also 2-0 vs. Pete, and Pete had a 5-year head start to build his program. And he won both bowls he played in. The Rose Bowl against this Wisky team is very, very comparable to the PSU team that Washington took on in the Fiesta. Mario won and Pete lost. I won't even argue that point anymore because it's fucking retarded to debate otherwise.
Also, the Haskins-led Buckeyes were not the juggernaut people are starting to remember them as being. Look at their schedule and results for 2018. They didn't run through the season beating the shit out of everyone. 2019 OSU was significantly better than 2018 OSU. Was 2018 OSU better than 2019 Wisconsin? Sure, I'll concede that. But they weren't world's a part. This is part 1b of the Doog Oregon Rose Bowl narrative.
Lastly, close games. It's not close. The Oregon Cristobals have been much better in close games.
I used to be somewhat of a fan of Toothy. The more we talk about this, the more I see how overrated he was. He brought an adult presence to the program when they needed it. Not sure he brought much more than that.
Pete underachieved at Washington. He was too focused on process over winning games. Overall, we're still in a pretty good place right now.
He didn’t have a QB but the rest of the roster was pretty good, especially the best 5-10 players on the team.
But, there's no doubt his "process" and stubbornness cost us, at least, 6 or 7 games over the course of his tenure here. -
This, right her, is a reasonable basis on which to make the claim that he was not a success, but rather a failure.YellowSnow said:
Agree. Objectively, Pete, was a success at UW. 2 Pac titles and 3 NY6 bowls is something any of us would have been happy with in Dec. 2013.RoadDawg55 said:
Pete made it a bigger shit pile than it really was. He was worried about the cleanliness of the locker room, whether helmets were put on the ground. The discipline was lacking, but some coaches make a bigger deal out of that stuff than others. We sure as fuck shouldn’t have been eeking out a one point win against Hawaii and giving up 52 to Eastern.YellowSnow said:
I'd beg to differ with you on this point. Mario took over a team that had just had a couple of down years and some corching turmoil BUT was still a nationally relevant program, especially in the eyes of the kids. Oregon was still rich, cool and a mere 4 years removed from playing for a NT. Pete took over a program that hadn't been relevant in 14 years.creepycoug said:
It's not simplistic or stupid at all unless you're into "but, but, but" loser excuses. He's certainly done more relative to tenure; that's impossible to dispute.RoadDawg55 said:
It doesn’t ultimately matter but when some here say Cristobal did more than Pete, it’s a simplistic statement that is kind of stupid. He hasn’t yet.haie said:
The correct opinion is it doesn't matter who you're playing in the rose bowl. It didn't matter who Oregon played this year.ntxduck said:
Looking back, most of UWs Rose bowl victories were against pretty mediocre big ten teams. Awesome wins over some 8-4 Iowa squadsMosster47 said:
Should we throw your RB trophy against Purdue in the lake? For Purdue to win the Big Ten Ohio State, Michigan, and Penn State would have to be .500 teams, which they were that year.Gladstone said:Oregon got fourth best in big ten Wisconsin and we got Urban last game Ohio State. That's it. The end. Go home.
Only a Doog would talk shit about a trophy they haven't won in 20 years.
It didn't matter who UW played last year.
A playoff game is better than a Rose Bowl win and Ohio State was a lot better than Wisconsin. If we had a beat a Wisconsin type team people would still say Pete hadn’t won a big game against a tough opponent.
Nobody really remembers that tho, so I do get it. Purdue wasn’t anything special in 2000. I still enjoyed it a lot.
He also walked into a much bigger pile of shit than did Pete. He's also 2-0 vs. Pete, and Pete had a 5-year head start to build his program. And he won both bowls he played in. The Rose Bowl against this Wisky team is very, very comparable to the PSU team that Washington took on in the Fiesta. Mario won and Pete lost. I won't even argue that point anymore because it's fucking retarded to debate otherwise.
Also, the Haskins-led Buckeyes were not the juggernaut people are starting to remember them as being. Look at their schedule and results for 2018. They didn't run through the season beating the shit out of everyone. 2019 OSU was significantly better than 2018 OSU. Was 2018 OSU better than 2019 Wisconsin? Sure, I'll concede that. But they weren't world's a part. This is part 1b of the Doog Oregon Rose Bowl narrative.
Lastly, close games. It's not close. The Oregon Cristobals have been much better in close games.
I used to be somewhat of a fan of Toothy. The more we talk about this, the more I see how overrated he was. He brought an adult presence to the program when they needed it. Not sure he brought much more than that.
Pete underachieved at Washington. He was too focused on process over winning games. Overall, we're still in a pretty good place right now.
He didn’t have a QB but the rest of the roster was pretty good, especially the best 5-10 players on the team.
But, there's no doubt his "process" and stubbornness cost us, at least, 6 or 7 games over the course of his tenure here.
I can tell you this: if someone shows up and takes Miami from where they are now and, 6 or 7 years from now all I? have to show for it are a few shitty league titles in the shitty ACC and zero, 0, ZERO, non-shit-tier bowl wins, I'm going to conclude the hiring was a giant whiff.
Stop stumping for toothy. He's in a boat laffing at you guysms now.
Find yourself a beautiful, strapping, articulate and TUFF Latino if you want to win. Mediocre white guys rising to the top in our society is a thing of the past in this clean country. The Trump Immigration Shit Show is about 20 years too late. We're? already here, we're kicking mother fucking ass and taking mother fucking names, and we are breeding at a pace that makes the Mormons blush. -
Being objective is not stumping, mang. Furthermore, the evidence is clear on hiring TUFF Spaniards. You'll be pretty good, but never great.creepycoug said:
This, right her, is a reasonable basis on which to make the claim that he was not a success, but rather a failure.YellowSnow said:
Agree. Objectively, Pete, was a success at UW. 2 Pac titles and 3 NY6 bowls is something any of us would have been happy with in Dec. 2013.RoadDawg55 said:
Pete made it a bigger shit pile than it really was. He was worried about the cleanliness of the locker room, whether helmets were put on the ground. The discipline was lacking, but some coaches make a bigger deal out of that stuff than others. We sure as fuck shouldn’t have been eeking out a one point win against Hawaii and giving up 52 to Eastern.YellowSnow said:
I'd beg to differ with you on this point. Mario took over a team that had just had a couple of down years and some corching turmoil BUT was still a nationally relevant program, especially in the eyes of the kids. Oregon was still rich, cool and a mere 4 years removed from playing for a NT. Pete took over a program that hadn't been relevant in 14 years.creepycoug said:
It's not simplistic or stupid at all unless you're into "but, but, but" loser excuses. He's certainly done more relative to tenure; that's impossible to dispute.RoadDawg55 said:
It doesn’t ultimately matter but when some here say Cristobal did more than Pete, it’s a simplistic statement that is kind of stupid. He hasn’t yet.haie said:
The correct opinion is it doesn't matter who you're playing in the rose bowl. It didn't matter who Oregon played this year.ntxduck said:
Looking back, most of UWs Rose bowl victories were against pretty mediocre big ten teams. Awesome wins over some 8-4 Iowa squadsMosster47 said:
Should we throw your RB trophy against Purdue in the lake? For Purdue to win the Big Ten Ohio State, Michigan, and Penn State would have to be .500 teams, which they were that year.Gladstone said:Oregon got fourth best in big ten Wisconsin and we got Urban last game Ohio State. That's it. The end. Go home.
Only a Doog would talk shit about a trophy they haven't won in 20 years.
It didn't matter who UW played last year.
A playoff game is better than a Rose Bowl win and Ohio State was a lot better than Wisconsin. If we had a beat a Wisconsin type team people would still say Pete hadn’t won a big game against a tough opponent.
Nobody really remembers that tho, so I do get it. Purdue wasn’t anything special in 2000. I still enjoyed it a lot.
He also walked into a much bigger pile of shit than did Pete. He's also 2-0 vs. Pete, and Pete had a 5-year head start to build his program. And he won both bowls he played in. The Rose Bowl against this Wisky team is very, very comparable to the PSU team that Washington took on in the Fiesta. Mario won and Pete lost. I won't even argue that point anymore because it's fucking retarded to debate otherwise.
Also, the Haskins-led Buckeyes were not the juggernaut people are starting to remember them as being. Look at their schedule and results for 2018. They didn't run through the season beating the shit out of everyone. 2019 OSU was significantly better than 2018 OSU. Was 2018 OSU better than 2019 Wisconsin? Sure, I'll concede that. But they weren't world's a part. This is part 1b of the Doog Oregon Rose Bowl narrative.
Lastly, close games. It's not close. The Oregon Cristobals have been much better in close games.
I used to be somewhat of a fan of Toothy. The more we talk about this, the more I see how overrated he was. He brought an adult presence to the program when they needed it. Not sure he brought much more than that.
Pete underachieved at Washington. He was too focused on process over winning games. Overall, we're still in a pretty good place right now.
He didn’t have a QB but the rest of the roster was pretty good, especially the best 5-10 players on the team.
But, there's no doubt his "process" and stubbornness cost us, at least, 6 or 7 games over the course of his tenure here.
I can tell you this: if someone shows up and takes Miami from where they are now and, 6 or 7 years from now all I? have to show for it are a few shitty league titles in the shitty ACC and zero, 0, ZERO, non-shit-tier bowl wins, I'm going to conclude the hiring was a giant whiff.
Stop stumping for toothy. He's in a boat laffing at you guysms now.
Find yourself a beautiful, strapping, articulate and TUFF Latino if you want to win. Mediocre white guys rising to the top in our society is a thing of the past in this clean country. The Trump Immigration Shit Show is about 20 years too late. We're? already here, we're kicking mother fucking ass and taking mother fucking names, and we are breeding at a pace that makes the Mormons blush.
-
If what Pete did at Washington was a success, then what Barry accomplished at Wisky makes him football Jesus.YellowSnow said:
Being objective is not stumping, mang. Furthermore, the evidence is clear on hiring TUFF Spaniards. You'll be pretty good, but never great.creepycoug said:
This, right her, is a reasonable basis on which to make the claim that he was not a success, but rather a failure.YellowSnow said:
Agree. Objectively, Pete, was a success at UW. 2 Pac titles and 3 NY6 bowls is something any of us would have been happy with in Dec. 2013.RoadDawg55 said:
Pete made it a bigger shit pile than it really was. He was worried about the cleanliness of the locker room, whether helmets were put on the ground. The discipline was lacking, but some coaches make a bigger deal out of that stuff than others. We sure as fuck shouldn’t have been eeking out a one point win against Hawaii and giving up 52 to Eastern.YellowSnow said:
I'd beg to differ with you on this point. Mario took over a team that had just had a couple of down years and some corching turmoil BUT was still a nationally relevant program, especially in the eyes of the kids. Oregon was still rich, cool and a mere 4 years removed from playing for a NT. Pete took over a program that hadn't been relevant in 14 years.creepycoug said:
It's not simplistic or stupid at all unless you're into "but, but, but" loser excuses. He's certainly done more relative to tenure; that's impossible to dispute.RoadDawg55 said:
It doesn’t ultimately matter but when some here say Cristobal did more than Pete, it’s a simplistic statement that is kind of stupid. He hasn’t yet.haie said:
The correct opinion is it doesn't matter who you're playing in the rose bowl. It didn't matter who Oregon played this year.ntxduck said:
Looking back, most of UWs Rose bowl victories were against pretty mediocre big ten teams. Awesome wins over some 8-4 Iowa squadsMosster47 said:
Should we throw your RB trophy against Purdue in the lake? For Purdue to win the Big Ten Ohio State, Michigan, and Penn State would have to be .500 teams, which they were that year.Gladstone said:Oregon got fourth best in big ten Wisconsin and we got Urban last game Ohio State. That's it. The end. Go home.
Only a Doog would talk shit about a trophy they haven't won in 20 years.
It didn't matter who UW played last year.
A playoff game is better than a Rose Bowl win and Ohio State was a lot better than Wisconsin. If we had a beat a Wisconsin type team people would still say Pete hadn’t won a big game against a tough opponent.
Nobody really remembers that tho, so I do get it. Purdue wasn’t anything special in 2000. I still enjoyed it a lot.
He also walked into a much bigger pile of shit than did Pete. He's also 2-0 vs. Pete, and Pete had a 5-year head start to build his program. And he won both bowls he played in. The Rose Bowl against this Wisky team is very, very comparable to the PSU team that Washington took on in the Fiesta. Mario won and Pete lost. I won't even argue that point anymore because it's fucking retarded to debate otherwise.
Also, the Haskins-led Buckeyes were not the juggernaut people are starting to remember them as being. Look at their schedule and results for 2018. They didn't run through the season beating the shit out of everyone. 2019 OSU was significantly better than 2018 OSU. Was 2018 OSU better than 2019 Wisconsin? Sure, I'll concede that. But they weren't world's a part. This is part 1b of the Doog Oregon Rose Bowl narrative.
Lastly, close games. It's not close. The Oregon Cristobals have been much better in close games.
I used to be somewhat of a fan of Toothy. The more we talk about this, the more I see how overrated he was. He brought an adult presence to the program when they needed it. Not sure he brought much more than that.
Pete underachieved at Washington. He was too focused on process over winning games. Overall, we're still in a pretty good place right now.
He didn’t have a QB but the rest of the roster was pretty good, especially the best 5-10 players on the team.
But, there's no doubt his "process" and stubbornness cost us, at least, 6 or 7 games over the course of his tenure here.
I can tell you this: if someone shows up and takes Miami from where they are now and, 6 or 7 years from now all I? have to show for it are a few shitty league titles in the shitty ACC and zero, 0, ZERO, non-shit-tier bowl wins, I'm going to conclude the hiring was a giant whiff.
Stop stumping for toothy. He's in a boat laffing at you guysms now.
Find yourself a beautiful, strapping, articulate and TUFF Latino if you want to win. Mediocre white guys rising to the top in our society is a thing of the past in this clean country. The Trump Immigration Shit Show is about 20 years too late. We're? already here, we're kicking mother fucking ass and taking mother fucking names, and we are breeding at a pace that makes the Mormons blush.
