BONEM
Comments
-
As a chess piece, you are correct.LawDawg1 said:
Sure they did. They decapitated the Pac 12 and removed the Southern Cal media market and recruits from us. It wasn’t about how great UCLA but rather to fuck over an alliance member.Kaepsknee said:Wow! It’s no wonder why the Big 12 isn’t jumping on the rest of the South. Literally NOC to watch them.
Clearly the B10 didn’t do their Homework on UCLA.
And really, you’re correct any other way that you look at it, upon further review.
It doesn’t really matter what UCLA brings to the table. They were the necessary pawn for this to happen.
They won’t be a factor in Football. Will do well in Baseball. Will be a mid level MensBB team. Will flash in NCAAWB. And probably do well at the Sports that truly NOC about.
I feel we failed with the Kliakov, or however you spell his name hire.
He didn’t have a clue that any of this was going down. And really is left grasping at straws the rest of the way.
And if He did know about it, there should be a helicopter involved with his next career move. -
That was vs. UCLA. Crowd was on fire that day.DerekJohnson said:PurpleBaze said:
Well, there is definitely no shortage of doogs who want to have their time & money tied up in this train wreck of a program.LawDawg1 said:But Oregon claims to have a top 5 national fan base. How’s this possible?
Pretty solid that UW got its third best conference game viewership by playing itself.
Disagree.
Greatest Setting in College Football. -
UCLA? Do you see the 4 fans in red in the foreground?godawgst said:
That was vs. UCLA. Crowd was on fire that day.DerekJohnson said:PurpleBaze said:
Well, there is definitely no shortage of doogs who want to have their time & money tied up in this train wreck of a program.LawDawg1 said:But Oregon claims to have a top 5 national fan base. How’s this possible?
Pretty solid that UW got its third best conference game viewership by playing itself.
Disagree.
Greatest Setting in College Football.
That was against Rutgers. -
Judges also would have accepted Arkansas Statewhatshouldicareabout said:
UCLA? Do you see the 4 fans in red in the foreground?godawgst said:
That was vs. UCLA. Crowd was on fire that day.DerekJohnson said:PurpleBaze said:
Well, there is definitely no shortage of doogs who want to have their time & money tied up in this train wreck of a program.LawDawg1 said:But Oregon claims to have a top 5 national fan base. How’s this possible?
Pretty solid that UW got its third best conference game viewership by playing itself.
Disagree.
Greatest Setting in College Football.
That was against Rutgers. -
There was less people for the Arkansas State game.DerekJohnson said:
Judges also would have accepted Arkansas Statewhatshouldicareabout said:
UCLA? Do you see the 4 fans in red in the foreground?godawgst said:
That was vs. UCLA. Crowd was on fire that day.DerekJohnson said:PurpleBaze said:
Well, there is definitely no shortage of doogs who want to have their time & money tied up in this train wreck of a program.LawDawg1 said:But Oregon claims to have a top 5 national fan base. How’s this possible?
Pretty solid that UW got its third best conference game viewership by playing itself.
Disagree.
Greatest Setting in College Football.
That was against Rutgers. -
I heard the fans were lit for the Ark State game
-
Or the Yutes.DerekJohnson said:
Judges also would have accepted Arkansas Statewhatshouldicareabout said:
UCLA? Do you see the 4 fans in red in the foreground?godawgst said:
That was vs. UCLA. Crowd was on fire that day.DerekJohnson said:PurpleBaze said:
Well, there is definitely no shortage of doogs who want to have their time & money tied up in this train wreck of a program.LawDawg1 said:But Oregon claims to have a top 5 national fan base. How’s this possible?
Pretty solid that UW got its third best conference game viewership by playing itself.
Disagree.
Greatest Setting in College Football.
That was against Rutgers. -
I was lit. Beyond lit.JoeEDangerously said:I heard the fans were lit for the Ark State game
-
Oregon's reputation is purely as an opponent, they have no substantial fan base who follows the team. People like when their team plays Oregon, because the idiots at ESPN think they're good, so if you beat them it's a notch in the belt.LawDawg1 said:But Oregon claims to have a top 5 national fan base. How’s this possible?
Pretty solid that UW got its third best conference game viewership by playing itself. -
So, are you saying it’s not a notch on their belts? That Oregon has not been a good program?TXDawg said:
Oregon's reputation is purely as an opponent, they have no substantial fan base who follows the team. People like when their team plays Oregon, because the idiots at ESPN think they're good, so if you beat them it's a notch in the belt.LawDawg1 said:But Oregon claims to have a top 5 national fan base. How’s this possible?
Pretty solid that UW got its third best conference game viewership by playing itself.
-
If you say IT enough times to yourself. That IT becomes reality. Nevermind the 2 Natty appearances and 6 Major Bowl wins since UW won their last.creepycoug said:
So, are you saying it’s not a notch on their belts? That Oregon has not been a good program?TXDawg said:
Oregon's reputation is purely as an opponent, they have no substantial fan base who follows the team. People like when their team plays Oregon, because the idiots at ESPN think they're good, so if you beat them it's a notch in the belt.LawDawg1 said:But Oregon claims to have a top 5 national fan base. How’s this possible?
Pretty solid that UW got its third best conference game viewership by playing itself. -
Of the schools who have not won a NT in the past 20 years, Oregon has probably been the best program.Kaepsknee said:
If you say IT enough times to yourself. That IT becomes reality. Nevermind the 2 Natty appearances and 6 Major Bowl wins since UW won their last.creepycoug said:
So, are you saying it’s not a notch on their belts? That Oregon has not been a good program?TXDawg said:
Oregon's reputation is purely as an opponent, they have no substantial fan base who follows the team. People like when their team plays Oregon, because the idiots at ESPN think they're good, so if you beat them it's a notch in the belt.LawDawg1 said:But Oregon claims to have a top 5 national fan base. How’s this possible?
Pretty solid that UW got its third best conference game viewership by playing itself. -
Oklahoma.YellowSnow said:
Of the schools who have not won a NT in the past 20 years, Oregon has probably been the best program.Kaepsknee said:
If you say IT enough times to yourself. That IT becomes reality. Nevermind the 2 Natty appearances and 6 Major Bowl wins since UW won their last.creepycoug said:
So, are you saying it’s not a notch on their belts? That Oregon has not been a good program?TXDawg said:
Oregon's reputation is purely as an opponent, they have no substantial fan base who follows the team. People like when their team plays Oregon, because the idiots at ESPN think they're good, so if you beat them it's a notch in the belt.LawDawg1 said:But Oregon claims to have a top 5 national fan base. How’s this possible?
Pretty solid that UW got its third best conference game viewership by playing itself.
The right Stoops winning one in year 2 has now been a looong time ago.
But other than OU, not sure I can come up with a program that’s managed to accomplish as much UO that Georgia nattied.
-
Yeah, I'd probably put OU ahead of UO, but I had 2000 as being good enough for gubmint work as it relates to this exercise.whlinder said:
Oklahoma.YellowSnow said:
Of the schools who have not won a NT in the past 20 years, Oregon has probably been the best program.Kaepsknee said:
If you say IT enough times to yourself. That IT becomes reality. Nevermind the 2 Natty appearances and 6 Major Bowl wins since UW won their last.creepycoug said:
So, are you saying it’s not a notch on their belts? That Oregon has not been a good program?TXDawg said:
Oregon's reputation is purely as an opponent, they have no substantial fan base who follows the team. People like when their team plays Oregon, because the idiots at ESPN think they're good, so if you beat them it's a notch in the belt.LawDawg1 said:But Oregon claims to have a top 5 national fan base. How’s this possible?
Pretty solid that UW got its third best conference game viewership by playing itself.
The right Stoops winning one in year 2 has now been a looong time ago.
But other than OU, not sure I can come up with a program that’s managed to accomplish as much UO that Georgia nattied. -
Winners win and all that. With that said, I don't see that Oklahoma team beating Miami or Washington in a bowl matchup. They had a solid defense and an anemic offense as I recall.whlinder said:
Oklahoma.YellowSnow said:
Of the schools who have not won a NT in the past 20 years, Oregon has probably been the best program.Kaepsknee said:
If you say IT enough times to yourself. That IT becomes reality. Nevermind the 2 Natty appearances and 6 Major Bowl wins since UW won their last.creepycoug said:
So, are you saying it’s not a notch on their belts? That Oregon has not been a good program?TXDawg said:
Oregon's reputation is purely as an opponent, they have no substantial fan base who follows the team. People like when their team plays Oregon, because the idiots at ESPN think they're good, so if you beat them it's a notch in the belt.LawDawg1 said:But Oregon claims to have a top 5 national fan base. How’s this possible?
Pretty solid that UW got its third best conference game viewership by playing itself.
The right Stoops winning one in year 2 has now been a looong time ago.
But other than OU, not sure I can come up with a program that’s managed to accomplish as much UO that Georgia nattied.
Titles are titles, but some are better than others. The OU 2000 title is a little underwhelming IMO. YMMV.
-
Complete understatement here.creepycoug said:
Titties are titties, but some are better than others.whlinder said:
Oklahoma.YellowSnow said:
Of the schools who have not won a NT in the past 20 years, Oregon has probably been the best program.Kaepsknee said:
If you say IT enough times to yourself. That IT becomes reality. Nevermind the 2 Natty appearances and 6 Major Bowl wins since UW won their last.creepycoug said:
So, are you saying it’s not a notch on their belts? That Oregon has not been a good program?TXDawg said:
Oregon's reputation is purely as an opponent, they have no substantial fan base who follows the team. People like when their team plays Oregon, because the idiots at ESPN think they're good, so if you beat them it's a notch in the belt.LawDawg1 said:But Oregon claims to have a top 5 national fan base. How’s this possible?
Pretty solid that UW got its third best conference game viewership by playing itself.
The right Stoops winning one in year 2 has now been a looong time ago.
But other than OU, not sure I can come up with a program that’s managed to accomplish as much UO that Georgia nattied. -
Miamuh would have won the (college football) Super Bowl in 2000, 2001 and 2002. They were clearly the best team in each of those seasons.creepycoug said:
Winners win and all that. With that said, I don't see that Oklahoma team beating Miami or Washington in a bowl matchup. They had a solid defense and an anemic offense as I recall.whlinder said:
Oklahoma.YellowSnow said:
Of the schools who have not won a NT in the past 20 years, Oregon has probably been the best program.Kaepsknee said:
If you say IT enough times to yourself. That IT becomes reality. Nevermind the 2 Natty appearances and 6 Major Bowl wins since UW won their last.creepycoug said:
So, are you saying it’s not a notch on their belts? That Oregon has not been a good program?TXDawg said:
Oregon's reputation is purely as an opponent, they have no substantial fan base who follows the team. People like when their team plays Oregon, because the idiots at ESPN think they're good, so if you beat them it's a notch in the belt.LawDawg1 said:But Oregon claims to have a top 5 national fan base. How’s this possible?
Pretty solid that UW got its third best conference game viewership by playing itself.
The right Stoops winning one in year 2 has now been a looong time ago.
But other than OU, not sure I can come up with a program that’s managed to accomplish as much UO that Georgia nattied.
Titles are titles, but some are better than others. The OU 2000 title is a little underwhelming IMO. YMMV.
But that's not how college football used to work, which is what made it so fun. If it weren't for the gay BCS they would have played OU in the Orange Bowl in 2000 for the usual sodbuster beat down.
"Improvements" were already starting to ruin the game even in 2000. -
That's what I'm missing: the ambiguity, the unanswered "what ifs" and the arguments. Now we have a system that spits out "Bama" every year. Great.YellowSnow said:
Miamuh would have won the (college football) Super Bowl in 2000, 2001 and 2002. They were clearly the best team in each of those seasons.creepycoug said:
Winners win and all that. With that said, I don't see that Oklahoma team beating Miami or Washington in a bowl matchup. They had a solid defense and an anemic offense as I recall.whlinder said:
Oklahoma.YellowSnow said:
Of the schools who have not won a NT in the past 20 years, Oregon has probably been the best program.Kaepsknee said:
If you say IT enough times to yourself. That IT becomes reality. Nevermind the 2 Natty appearances and 6 Major Bowl wins since UW won their last.creepycoug said:
So, are you saying it’s not a notch on their belts? That Oregon has not been a good program?TXDawg said:
Oregon's reputation is purely as an opponent, they have no substantial fan base who follows the team. People like when their team plays Oregon, because the idiots at ESPN think they're good, so if you beat them it's a notch in the belt.LawDawg1 said:But Oregon claims to have a top 5 national fan base. How’s this possible?
Pretty solid that UW got its third best conference game viewership by playing itself.
The right Stoops winning one in year 2 has now been a looong time ago.
But other than OU, not sure I can come up with a program that’s managed to accomplish as much UO that Georgia nattied.
Titles are titles, but some are better than others. The OU 2000 title is a little underwhelming IMO. YMMV.
But that's not how college football used to work, which is what made it so fun. If it weren't for the gay BCS they would have played OU in the Orange Bowl in 2000 for the usual sodbuster beat down.
"Improvements" were already starting to ruin the game even in 2000.