Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
You had to cheer for Max Headroom's son Bo Nix and still went 9-3 and lost to both your rivals
Comments
-
37-34MikeSeaver said:
We’re tied though. Same record. So no.haie said:
You fucked up our SOS because it turned out you were soft front running pussies. We strengthened yours because we turned out to be the #2 team in the conference.MikeSeaver said:
Your opinion doesn’t matter. There are analytical SOS rankings available.WoolleyDoog said:
North champs again.MikeSeaver said:
Washington had the 6th (maybe 7th, can’t remember) easiest schedule in the conference and you played one more home game than Oregon.WoolleyDoog said:
Also, Oregon got UCLA, UW, and Utah at home. It was very easy to go better than 7-2 in-conference.MikeSeaver said:
You guys had a great season tying the failed Oregon season.hardhat said:
I don't think the big bro thing worked out very well.Fire_Marshall_Bill said:LMAO at 46xyzlgbt claiming Oregon is "big bro"
Oregon played the #1 schedule in the Pac12.
Did any of you actually graduate from UW?
Are you talking overall or in-conference with this toughest schedule bullshit? I respect taking on Georgia. That kind of fucked you and they would have rolled anyone in the Pac-12. In conference you can make the argument Oregon's was tougher than UW's because the Huskies avoided Utah and Oregon didn't, but the Huskies also had UCLA and Oregon on the road.
Several Pac-12 teams clearly had tougher in-conference roads than Oregon:
Some teams had to play all of the top teams (Oregon, UCLA, USC, Utah, Washington) - UCLA, Arizona, and Stanford - Stanford had all of them other then USC on the road too and had to play the mighty Beav. No question Stanford had the toughest in-conference slate. Arizona probably second.
For instance, your opinion that Washington had to play all the top teams is false. You didn’t play Utah or USC. That’s why you’re so low in the SOS rankings vs other conference schedules.
There’s no way you went to UW. Can’t do simple problem solving.
Did you study theater or something?
It was all over the internet
You lost and you get 2nd place
Your NW Champs and North Division Champs thank you for playing -
RaceBannon said:
37-34MikeSeaver said:
We’re tied though. Same record. So no.haie said:
You fucked up our SOS because it turned out you were soft front running pussies. We strengthened yours because we turned out to be the #2 team in the conference.MikeSeaver said:
Your opinion doesn’t matter. There are analytical SOS rankings available.WoolleyDoog said:
North champs again.MikeSeaver said:
Washington had the 6th (maybe 7th, can’t remember) easiest schedule in the conference and you played one more home game than Oregon.WoolleyDoog said:
Also, Oregon got UCLA, UW, and Utah at home. It was very easy to go better than 7-2 in-conference.MikeSeaver said:
You guys had a great season tying the failed Oregon season.hardhat said:
I don't think the big bro thing worked out very well.Fire_Marshall_Bill said:LMAO at 46xyzlgbt claiming Oregon is "big bro"
Oregon played the #1 schedule in the Pac12.
Did any of you actually graduate from UW?
Are you talking overall or in-conference with this toughest schedule bullshit? I respect taking on Georgia. That kind of fucked you and they would have rolled anyone in the Pac-12. In conference you can make the argument Oregon's was tougher than UW's because the Huskies avoided Utah and Oregon didn't, but the Huskies also had UCLA and Oregon on the road.
Several Pac-12 teams clearly had tougher in-conference roads than Oregon:
Some teams had to play all of the top teams (Oregon, UCLA, USC, Utah, Washington) - UCLA, Arizona, and Stanford - Stanford had all of them other then USC on the road too and had to play the mighty Beav. No question Stanford had the toughest in-conference slate. Arizona probably second.
For instance, your opinion that Washington had to play all the top teams is false. You didn’t play Utah or USC. That’s why you’re so low in the SOS rankings vs other conference schedules.
There’s no way you went to UW. Can’t do simple problem solving.
Did you study theater or something?
It was all over the internet
You lost and you get 2nd place
Your NW Champs and North Division Champs thank you for playing
I’m only responding to what’s written on here. I’m not making anything up. You all are.
“Washington played all the top teams.” Is wrong.
“Oregon had the easier schedule.” Is wrong.
“We won a division” Is wrong.
I am saying Oregon failed this year. I am not arguing that.
Our failure of a season equals your 5th? best in the last 20 years? Maybe 8th best in the last 30?
What is the problem here? -
Class of 2010.MikeSeaver said:
We’re tied though. Same record. So no.haie said:
You fucked up our SOS because it turned out you were soft front running pussies. We strengthened yours because we turned out to be the #2 team in the conference.MikeSeaver said:
Your opinion doesn’t matter. There are analytical SOS rankings available.WoolleyDoog said:
North champs again.MikeSeaver said:
Washington had the 6th (maybe 7th, can’t remember) easiest schedule in the conference and you played one more home game than Oregon.WoolleyDoog said:
Also, Oregon got UCLA, UW, and Utah at home. It was very easy to go better than 7-2 in-conference.MikeSeaver said:
You guys had a great season tying the failed Oregon season.hardhat said:
I don't think the big bro thing worked out very well.Fire_Marshall_Bill said:LMAO at 46xyzlgbt claiming Oregon is "big bro"
Oregon played the #1 schedule in the Pac12.
Did any of you actually graduate from UW?
Are you talking overall or in-conference with this toughest schedule bullshit? I respect taking on Georgia. That kind of fucked you and they would have rolled anyone in the Pac-12. In conference you can make the argument Oregon's was tougher than UW's because the Huskies avoided Utah and Oregon didn't, but the Huskies also had UCLA and Oregon on the road.
Several Pac-12 teams clearly had tougher in-conference roads than Oregon:
Some teams had to play all of the top teams (Oregon, UCLA, USC, Utah, Washington) - UCLA, Arizona, and Stanford - Stanford had all of them other then USC on the road too and had to play the mighty Beav. No question Stanford had the toughest in-conference slate. Arizona probably second.
For instance, your opinion that Washington had to play all the top teams is false. You didn’t play Utah or USC. That’s why you’re so low in the SOS rankings vs other conference schedules.
There’s no way you went to UW. Can’t do simple problem solving.
Did you study theater or something?
There's no problem to solve here, you're just pressing and not making any discernable point. Apparently head to head now means nothing to you. That's pretty convenient.
There are no divisions this year but fuck it, you play all your divisional opponents anyways so we may as well crown ourselves. -
As usual…haie said:MikeSeaver said:
We’re tied though. Same record. So no.haie said:
You fucked up our SOS because it turned out you were soft front running pussies. We strengthened yours because we turned out to be the #2 team in the conference.MikeSeaver said:
Your opinion doesn’t matter. There are analytical SOS rankings available.WoolleyDoog said:
North champs again.MikeSeaver said:
Washington had the 6th (maybe 7th, can’t remember) easiest schedule in the conference and you played one more home game than Oregon.WoolleyDoog said:
Also, Oregon got UCLA, UW, and Utah at home. It was very easy to go better than 7-2 in-conference.MikeSeaver said:
You guys had a great season tying the failed Oregon season.hardhat said:
I don't think the big bro thing worked out very well.Fire_Marshall_Bill said:LMAO at 46xyzlgbt claiming Oregon is "big bro"
Oregon played the #1 schedule in the Pac12.
Did any of you actually graduate from UW?
Are you talking overall or in-conference with this toughest schedule bullshit? I respect taking on Georgia. That kind of fucked you and they would have rolled anyone in the Pac-12. In conference you can make the argument Oregon's was tougher than UW's because the Huskies avoided Utah and Oregon didn't, but the Huskies also had UCLA and Oregon on the road.
Several Pac-12 teams clearly had tougher in-conference roads than Oregon:
Some teams had to play all of the top teams (Oregon, UCLA, USC, Utah, Washington) - UCLA, Arizona, and Stanford - Stanford had all of them other then USC on the road too and had to play the mighty Beav. No question Stanford had the toughest in-conference slate. Arizona probably second.
For instance, your opinion that Washington had to play all the top teams is false. You didn’t play Utah or USC. That’s why you’re so low in the SOS rankings vs other conference schedules.
There’s no way you went to UW. Can’t do simple problem solving.
Did you study theater or something?
we may as well crown ourselves.
-
Never said Washington had a tougher schedule. Overall, Oregon's no question was because they played Georgia. In-conference, I think it's close, but I'd say Oregon's was tougher, but not by much.MikeSeaver said:RaceBannon said:
37-34MikeSeaver said:
We’re tied though. Same record. So no.haie said:
You fucked up our SOS because it turned out you were soft front running pussies. We strengthened yours because we turned out to be the #2 team in the conference.MikeSeaver said:
Your opinion doesn’t matter. There are analytical SOS rankings available.WoolleyDoog said:
North champs again.MikeSeaver said:
Washington had the 6th (maybe 7th, can’t remember) easiest schedule in the conference and you played one more home game than Oregon.WoolleyDoog said:
Also, Oregon got UCLA, UW, and Utah at home. It was very easy to go better than 7-2 in-conference.MikeSeaver said:
You guys had a great season tying the failed Oregon season.hardhat said:
I don't think the big bro thing worked out very well.Fire_Marshall_Bill said:LMAO at 46xyzlgbt claiming Oregon is "big bro"
Oregon played the #1 schedule in the Pac12.
Did any of you actually graduate from UW?
Are you talking overall or in-conference with this toughest schedule bullshit? I respect taking on Georgia. That kind of fucked you and they would have rolled anyone in the Pac-12. In conference you can make the argument Oregon's was tougher than UW's because the Huskies avoided Utah and Oregon didn't, but the Huskies also had UCLA and Oregon on the road.
Several Pac-12 teams clearly had tougher in-conference roads than Oregon:
Some teams had to play all of the top teams (Oregon, UCLA, USC, Utah, Washington) - UCLA, Arizona, and Stanford - Stanford had all of them other then USC on the road too and had to play the mighty Beav. No question Stanford had the toughest in-conference slate. Arizona probably second.
For instance, your opinion that Washington had to play all the top teams is false. You didn’t play Utah or USC. That’s why you’re so low in the SOS rankings vs other conference schedules.
There’s no way you went to UW. Can’t do simple problem solving.
Did you study theater or something?
It was all over the internet
You lost and you get 2nd place
Your NW Champs and North Division Champs thank you for playing
I’m only responding to what’s written on here. I’m not making anything up. You all are.
“Washington played all the top teams.” Is wrong.
“Oregon had the easier schedule.” Is wrong.
“We won a division” Is wrong.
I am saying Oregon failed this year. I am not arguing that.
Our failure of a season equals your 5th? best in the last 20 years? Maybe 8th best in the last 30?
What is the problem here?
Oregon's 7-2 is different, because you lost the tie-breaker and Oregon came back from a 10-4 season with a nice chunk of returning experience/talent. Washington came off 4-8 with the only two players who didn't look like ass last year leaving early for the NFL.
There's no fucking way you wouldn't trade say losing at Arizona and to UCLA for beating the Huskies and Beav, especially on the road. -
Facts are pesky things. Little Bro.Fire_Marshall_Bill said:LMAO at 46xyzlgbt claiming Oregon is "big bro"
-
Your wife with the 20lbs of baby fat she can’t shed.haie said:Mike's legit laughing at all of this and not upset in any way.
After the Flyover Cup ended I turned to my wife and said, "Thank God Oregon is a still a national brand. They'll be okay" -
That EPIC 3 point beat down grows by the minute. I’m not sure Oregon should field a team next year. No way they ever beat little bro or baby bro again.MikeSeaver said:
Ffs 😂WoolleyDoog said:
That's the problem. All of Oregon's chest beating and hype and money spent and shit makes it really funny when you can't beat UW and the Beav or gets double shoveled by a Mountain West program like last year.MikeSeaver said:
You guys had a great season tying the failed Oregon season.hardhat said:
I don't think the big bro thing worked out very well.Fire_Marshall_Bill said:LMAO at 46xyzlgbt claiming Oregon is "big bro"
Also, Oregon got UCLA, UW, and Utah at home. It was very easy to go better than 7-2 in-conference.
It's pretty funny, I've recently explained the Oregon = Nike/Phil Knight thing recently to some people who know nothing about college sports and they both immediately wondered how Oregon doesn't win like every game and dominate college football and basketball. Problem is it's still Oregon.
Talking about Phil Knight and Oregon football with people who hates sports?
Yep, Oregon fans are broken.
Legit laughing at this.
“You guys are not going to believe this….”
Fucking idiot. 😂 -
This is embarrassing even for FTJ.FireTheJanitor said:
In fairness Bill, if our pant size was 46x we would probably be this pathetic too.Fire_Marshall_Bill said:LMAO at 46xyzlgbt claiming Oregon is "big bro"
-
There needs to be a stat on your profile for the broken quadruple shitpoast 😆
Devs? -
Me, “Siri who was the PAC-12 North Division football champ for 2022?”RaceBannon said:
37-34MikeSeaver said:
We’re tied though. Same record. So no.haie said:
You fucked up our SOS because it turned out you were soft front running pussies. We strengthened yours because we turned out to be the #2 team in the conference.MikeSeaver said:
Your opinion doesn’t matter. There are analytical SOS rankings available.WoolleyDoog said:
North champs again.MikeSeaver said:
Washington had the 6th (maybe 7th, can’t remember) easiest schedule in the conference and you played one more home game than Oregon.WoolleyDoog said:
Also, Oregon got UCLA, UW, and Utah at home. It was very easy to go better than 7-2 in-conference.MikeSeaver said:
You guys had a great season tying the failed Oregon season.hardhat said:
I don't think the big bro thing worked out very well.Fire_Marshall_Bill said:LMAO at 46xyzlgbt claiming Oregon is "big bro"
Oregon played the #1 schedule in the Pac12.
Did any of you actually graduate from UW?
Are you talking overall or in-conference with this toughest schedule bullshit? I respect taking on Georgia. That kind of fucked you and they would have rolled anyone in the Pac-12. In conference you can make the argument Oregon's was tougher than UW's because the Huskies avoided Utah and Oregon didn't, but the Huskies also had UCLA and Oregon on the road.
Several Pac-12 teams clearly had tougher in-conference roads than Oregon:
Some teams had to play all of the top teams (Oregon, UCLA, USC, Utah, Washington) - UCLA, Arizona, and Stanford - Stanford had all of them other then USC on the road too and had to play the mighty Beav. No question Stanford had the toughest in-conference slate. Arizona probably second.
For instance, your opinion that Washington had to play all the top teams is false. You didn’t play Utah or USC. That’s why you’re so low in the SOS rankings vs other conference schedules.
There’s no way you went to UW. Can’t do simple problem solving.
Did you study theater or something?
It was all over the internet
You lost and you get 2nd place
Your NW Champs and North Division Champs thank you for playing
Siri, “The PAC-12 has no divisions for the 2022 football season. USC and Utah will be playing for the Conference Championship. Utah won the three way tie between themselves, Oregon and Warshington.”
-
No one cares what that chi com bitch says46XiJCAB said:
Me, “Siri who was the PAC-12 North Division football champ for 2022?”RaceBannon said:
37-34MikeSeaver said:
We’re tied though. Same record. So no.haie said:
You fucked up our SOS because it turned out you were soft front running pussies. We strengthened yours because we turned out to be the #2 team in the conference.MikeSeaver said:
Your opinion doesn’t matter. There are analytical SOS rankings available.WoolleyDoog said:
North champs again.MikeSeaver said:
Washington had the 6th (maybe 7th, can’t remember) easiest schedule in the conference and you played one more home game than Oregon.WoolleyDoog said:
Also, Oregon got UCLA, UW, and Utah at home. It was very easy to go better than 7-2 in-conference.MikeSeaver said:
You guys had a great season tying the failed Oregon season.hardhat said:
I don't think the big bro thing worked out very well.Fire_Marshall_Bill said:LMAO at 46xyzlgbt claiming Oregon is "big bro"
Oregon played the #1 schedule in the Pac12.
Did any of you actually graduate from UW?
Are you talking overall or in-conference with this toughest schedule bullshit? I respect taking on Georgia. That kind of fucked you and they would have rolled anyone in the Pac-12. In conference you can make the argument Oregon's was tougher than UW's because the Huskies avoided Utah and Oregon didn't, but the Huskies also had UCLA and Oregon on the road.
Several Pac-12 teams clearly had tougher in-conference roads than Oregon:
Some teams had to play all of the top teams (Oregon, UCLA, USC, Utah, Washington) - UCLA, Arizona, and Stanford - Stanford had all of them other then USC on the road too and had to play the mighty Beav. No question Stanford had the toughest in-conference slate. Arizona probably second.
For instance, your opinion that Washington had to play all the top teams is false. You didn’t play Utah or USC. That’s why you’re so low in the SOS rankings vs other conference schedules.
There’s no way you went to UW. Can’t do simple problem solving.
Did you study theater or something?
It was all over the internet
You lost and you get 2nd place
Your NW Champs and North Division Champs thank you for playing
Siri, “The PAC-12 has no divisions for the 2022 football season. USC and Utah will be playing for the Conference Championship. Utah won the three way tie between themselves, Oregon and Warshington.” -
@MikeSeaver is a broken they/them.
-
Putting a bow on this thread. Duck fans, has it actually felt good to be a Bo Nix fan? 100% if he had the season he had for you as a Husky I'd doog for him, but holy shit, deep down it would feel so weird.
-
46XiJCAB said:
Me, “Siri who was the PAC-12 North Division football champ for 2022?”RaceBannon said:
37-34MikeSeaver said:
We’re tied though. Same record. So no.haie said:
You fucked up our SOS because it turned out you were soft front running pussies. We strengthened yours because we turned out to be the #2 team in the conference.MikeSeaver said:
Your opinion doesn’t matter. There are analytical SOS rankings available.WoolleyDoog said:
North champs again.MikeSeaver said:
Washington had the 6th (maybe 7th, can’t remember) easiest schedule in the conference and you played one more home game than Oregon.WoolleyDoog said:
Also, Oregon got UCLA, UW, and Utah at home. It was very easy to go better than 7-2 in-conference.MikeSeaver said:
You guys had a great season tying the failed Oregon season.hardhat said:
I don't think the big bro thing worked out very well.Fire_Marshall_Bill said:LMAO at 46xyzlgbt claiming Oregon is "big bro"
Oregon played the #1 schedule in the Pac12.
Did any of you actually graduate from UW?
Are you talking overall or in-conference with this toughest schedule bullshit? I respect taking on Georgia. That kind of fucked you and they would have rolled anyone in the Pac-12. In conference you can make the argument Oregon's was tougher than UW's because the Huskies avoided Utah and Oregon didn't, but the Huskies also had UCLA and Oregon on the road.
Several Pac-12 teams clearly had tougher in-conference roads than Oregon:
Some teams had to play all of the top teams (Oregon, UCLA, USC, Utah, Washington) - UCLA, Arizona, and Stanford - Stanford had all of them other then USC on the road too and had to play the mighty Beav. No question Stanford had the toughest in-conference slate. Arizona probably second.
For instance, your opinion that Washington had to play all the top teams is false. You didn’t play Utah or USC. That’s why you’re so low in the SOS rankings vs other conference schedules.
There’s no way you went to UW. Can’t do simple problem solving.
Did you study theater or something?
It was all over the internet
You lost and you get 2nd place
Your NW Champs and North Division Champs thank you for playing
Siri, “Washington. They were the only North team that went undefeated against the other North teams and tied for the best conference record in the North division. Washington has now won the North 2 out of the last 3 seasons.” -
10 equals 9? Vernon Adams duck math rulesMikeSeaver said:
We’re tied though. Same record. So no.haie said:
You fucked up our SOS because it turned out you were soft front running pussies. We strengthened yours because we turned out to be the #2 team in the conference.MikeSeaver said:
Your opinion doesn’t matter. There are analytical SOS rankings available.WoolleyDoog said:
North champs again.MikeSeaver said:
Washington had the 6th (maybe 7th, can’t remember) easiest schedule in the conference and you played one more home game than Oregon.WoolleyDoog said:
Also, Oregon got UCLA, UW, and Utah at home. It was very easy to go better than 7-2 in-conference.MikeSeaver said:
You guys had a great season tying the failed Oregon season.hardhat said:
I don't think the big bro thing worked out very well.Fire_Marshall_Bill said:LMAO at 46xyzlgbt claiming Oregon is "big bro"
Oregon played the #1 schedule in the Pac12.
Did any of you actually graduate from UW?
Are you talking overall or in-conference with this toughest schedule bullshit? I respect taking on Georgia. That kind of fucked you and they would have rolled anyone in the Pac-12. In conference you can make the argument Oregon's was tougher than UW's because the Huskies avoided Utah and Oregon didn't, but the Huskies also had UCLA and Oregon on the road.
Several Pac-12 teams clearly had tougher in-conference roads than Oregon:
Some teams had to play all of the top teams (Oregon, UCLA, USC, Utah, Washington) - UCLA, Arizona, and Stanford - Stanford had all of them other then USC on the road too and had to play the mighty Beav. No question Stanford had the toughest in-conference slate. Arizona probably second.
For instance, your opinion that Washington had to play all the top teams is false. You didn’t play Utah or USC. That’s why you’re so low in the SOS rankings vs other conference schedules.
There’s no way you went to UW. Can’t do simple problem solving.
Did you study theater or something?
-
Embarrassing. There is no North Division Champ. The PAC-12 said so. Utah v SC CCG. Oregon didn’t make it. Either did your best team since 2016.haie said:46XiJCAB said:
Me, “Siri who was the PAC-12 North Division football champ for 2022?”RaceBannon said:
37-34MikeSeaver said:
We’re tied though. Same record. So no.haie said:
You fucked up our SOS because it turned out you were soft front running pussies. We strengthened yours because we turned out to be the #2 team in the conference.MikeSeaver said:
Your opinion doesn’t matter. There are analytical SOS rankings available.WoolleyDoog said:
North champs again.MikeSeaver said:
Washington had the 6th (maybe 7th, can’t remember) easiest schedule in the conference and you played one more home game than Oregon.WoolleyDoog said:
Also, Oregon got UCLA, UW, and Utah at home. It was very easy to go better than 7-2 in-conference.MikeSeaver said:
You guys had a great season tying the failed Oregon season.hardhat said:
I don't think the big bro thing worked out very well.Fire_Marshall_Bill said:LMAO at 46xyzlgbt claiming Oregon is "big bro"
Oregon played the #1 schedule in the Pac12.
Did any of you actually graduate from UW?
Are you talking overall or in-conference with this toughest schedule bullshit? I respect taking on Georgia. That kind of fucked you and they would have rolled anyone in the Pac-12. In conference you can make the argument Oregon's was tougher than UW's because the Huskies avoided Utah and Oregon didn't, but the Huskies also had UCLA and Oregon on the road.
Several Pac-12 teams clearly had tougher in-conference roads than Oregon:
Some teams had to play all of the top teams (Oregon, UCLA, USC, Utah, Washington) - UCLA, Arizona, and Stanford - Stanford had all of them other then USC on the road too and had to play the mighty Beav. No question Stanford had the toughest in-conference slate. Arizona probably second.
For instance, your opinion that Washington had to play all the top teams is false. You didn’t play Utah or USC. That’s why you’re so low in the SOS rankings vs other conference schedules.
There’s no way you went to UW. Can’t do simple problem solving.
Did you study theater or something?
It was all over the internet
You lost and you get 2nd place
Your NW Champs and North Division Champs thank you for playing
Siri, “Washington. They were the only North team that went undefeated against the other North teams and tied for the best conference record in the North division. Washington has now won the North 2 out of the last 3 seasons.”
Here’s to backing your way into a RB. -
I asked Siri. The science is settled.46XiJCAB said:
Embarrassing. There is no North Division Champ. The PAC-12 said so. Utah v SC CCG. Oregon didn’t make it. Either did your best team since 2016.haie said:46XiJCAB said:
Me, “Siri who was the PAC-12 North Division football champ for 2022?”RaceBannon said:
37-34MikeSeaver said:
We’re tied though. Same record. So no.haie said:
You fucked up our SOS because it turned out you were soft front running pussies. We strengthened yours because we turned out to be the #2 team in the conference.MikeSeaver said:
Your opinion doesn’t matter. There are analytical SOS rankings available.WoolleyDoog said:
North champs again.MikeSeaver said:
Washington had the 6th (maybe 7th, can’t remember) easiest schedule in the conference and you played one more home game than Oregon.WoolleyDoog said:
Also, Oregon got UCLA, UW, and Utah at home. It was very easy to go better than 7-2 in-conference.MikeSeaver said:
You guys had a great season tying the failed Oregon season.hardhat said:
I don't think the big bro thing worked out very well.Fire_Marshall_Bill said:LMAO at 46xyzlgbt claiming Oregon is "big bro"
Oregon played the #1 schedule in the Pac12.
Did any of you actually graduate from UW?
Are you talking overall or in-conference with this toughest schedule bullshit? I respect taking on Georgia. That kind of fucked you and they would have rolled anyone in the Pac-12. In conference you can make the argument Oregon's was tougher than UW's because the Huskies avoided Utah and Oregon didn't, but the Huskies also had UCLA and Oregon on the road.
Several Pac-12 teams clearly had tougher in-conference roads than Oregon:
Some teams had to play all of the top teams (Oregon, UCLA, USC, Utah, Washington) - UCLA, Arizona, and Stanford - Stanford had all of them other then USC on the road too and had to play the mighty Beav. No question Stanford had the toughest in-conference slate. Arizona probably second.
For instance, your opinion that Washington had to play all the top teams is false. You didn’t play Utah or USC. That’s why you’re so low in the SOS rankings vs other conference schedules.
There’s no way you went to UW. Can’t do simple problem solving.
Did you study theater or something?
It was all over the internet
You lost and you get 2nd place
Your NW Champs and North Division Champs thank you for playing
Siri, “Washington. They were the only North team that went undefeated against the other North teams and tied for the best conference record in the North division. Washington has now won the North 2 out of the last 3 seasons.”
Here’s to backing your way into a RB. -
I would trade a spot to possibly backdoor into the Rose Bowl. I mean why not? Guess who’d be the first group of long time, generational losers to come over here and remind Oregon fans how they got there? It has nothing to do with who we lost to. I don’t care about “who we lose to” and have made that clear over the years I’ve wasted on here.WoolleyDoog said:
Never said Washington had a tougher schedule. Overall, Oregon's no question was because they played Georgia. In-conference, I think it's close, but I'd say Oregon's was tougher, but not by much.MikeSeaver said:RaceBannon said:
37-34MikeSeaver said:
We’re tied though. Same record. So no.haie said:
You fucked up our SOS because it turned out you were soft front running pussies. We strengthened yours because we turned out to be the #2 team in the conference.MikeSeaver said:
Your opinion doesn’t matter. There are analytical SOS rankings available.WoolleyDoog said:
North champs again.MikeSeaver said:
Washington had the 6th (maybe 7th, can’t remember) easiest schedule in the conference and you played one more home game than Oregon.WoolleyDoog said:
Also, Oregon got UCLA, UW, and Utah at home. It was very easy to go better than 7-2 in-conference.MikeSeaver said:
You guys had a great season tying the failed Oregon season.hardhat said:
I don't think the big bro thing worked out very well.Fire_Marshall_Bill said:LMAO at 46xyzlgbt claiming Oregon is "big bro"
Oregon played the #1 schedule in the Pac12.
Did any of you actually graduate from UW?
Are you talking overall or in-conference with this toughest schedule bullshit? I respect taking on Georgia. That kind of fucked you and they would have rolled anyone in the Pac-12. In conference you can make the argument Oregon's was tougher than UW's because the Huskies avoided Utah and Oregon didn't, but the Huskies also had UCLA and Oregon on the road.
Several Pac-12 teams clearly had tougher in-conference roads than Oregon:
Some teams had to play all of the top teams (Oregon, UCLA, USC, Utah, Washington) - UCLA, Arizona, and Stanford - Stanford had all of them other then USC on the road too and had to play the mighty Beav. No question Stanford had the toughest in-conference slate. Arizona probably second.
For instance, your opinion that Washington had to play all the top teams is false. You didn’t play Utah or USC. That’s why you’re so low in the SOS rankings vs other conference schedules.
There’s no way you went to UW. Can’t do simple problem solving.
Did you study theater or something?
It was all over the internet
You lost and you get 2nd place
Your NW Champs and North Division Champs thank you for playing
I’m only responding to what’s written on here. I’m not making anything up. You all are.
“Washington played all the top teams.” Is wrong.
“Oregon had the easier schedule.” Is wrong.
“We won a division” Is wrong.
I am saying Oregon failed this year. I am not arguing that.
Our failure of a season equals your 5th? best in the last 20 years? Maybe 8th best in the last 30?
What is the problem here?
Oregon's 7-2 is different, because you lost the tie-breaker and Oregon came back from a 10-4 season with a nice chunk of returning experience/talent. Washington came off 4-8 with the only two players who didn't look like ass last year leaving early for the NFL.
There's no fucking way you wouldn't trade say losing at Arizona and to UCLA for beating the Huskies and Beav, especially on the road.
I am a college football atheist. I only care about the end result. Not how we got there.
You all just happen to be here. So, It’s my job, for now, to remind you you’ve done nothing for 30 years except that one time vs 8-3 #14 Purdue, over 20 years ago.
So let’s talk about whom wants to trade places with whom. You can have this year, I’ll take the previous 25. -
So making the College Football Playoff which only two Pac teams have done it (one of a top Oregon teams in school history) doesn't count for doing anything. It's not anyone's fault the current college system is this way.MikeSeaver said:
I would trade a spot to possibly backdoor into the Rose Bowl. I mean why not? Guess who’d be the first group of long time, generational losers to come over here and remind Oregon fans how they got there? It has nothing to do with who we lost to. I don’t care about “who we lose to” and have made that clear over the years I’ve wasted on here.WoolleyDoog said:
Never said Washington had a tougher schedule. Overall, Oregon's no question was because they played Georgia. In-conference, I think it's close, but I'd say Oregon's was tougher, but not by much.MikeSeaver said:RaceBannon said:
37-34MikeSeaver said:
We’re tied though. Same record. So no.haie said:
You fucked up our SOS because it turned out you were soft front running pussies. We strengthened yours because we turned out to be the #2 team in the conference.MikeSeaver said:
Your opinion doesn’t matter. There are analytical SOS rankings available.WoolleyDoog said:
North champs again.MikeSeaver said:
Washington had the 6th (maybe 7th, can’t remember) easiest schedule in the conference and you played one more home game than Oregon.WoolleyDoog said:
Also, Oregon got UCLA, UW, and Utah at home. It was very easy to go better than 7-2 in-conference.MikeSeaver said:
You guys had a great season tying the failed Oregon season.hardhat said:
I don't think the big bro thing worked out very well.Fire_Marshall_Bill said:LMAO at 46xyzlgbt claiming Oregon is "big bro"
Oregon played the #1 schedule in the Pac12.
Did any of you actually graduate from UW?
Are you talking overall or in-conference with this toughest schedule bullshit? I respect taking on Georgia. That kind of fucked you and they would have rolled anyone in the Pac-12. In conference you can make the argument Oregon's was tougher than UW's because the Huskies avoided Utah and Oregon didn't, but the Huskies also had UCLA and Oregon on the road.
Several Pac-12 teams clearly had tougher in-conference roads than Oregon:
Some teams had to play all of the top teams (Oregon, UCLA, USC, Utah, Washington) - UCLA, Arizona, and Stanford - Stanford had all of them other then USC on the road too and had to play the mighty Beav. No question Stanford had the toughest in-conference slate. Arizona probably second.
For instance, your opinion that Washington had to play all the top teams is false. You didn’t play Utah or USC. That’s why you’re so low in the SOS rankings vs other conference schedules.
There’s no way you went to UW. Can’t do simple problem solving.
Did you study theater or something?
It was all over the internet
You lost and you get 2nd place
Your NW Champs and North Division Champs thank you for playing
I’m only responding to what’s written on here. I’m not making anything up. You all are.
“Washington played all the top teams.” Is wrong.
“Oregon had the easier schedule.” Is wrong.
“We won a division” Is wrong.
I am saying Oregon failed this year. I am not arguing that.
Our failure of a season equals your 5th? best in the last 20 years? Maybe 8th best in the last 30?
What is the problem here?
Oregon's 7-2 is different, because you lost the tie-breaker and Oregon came back from a 10-4 season with a nice chunk of returning experience/talent. Washington came off 4-8 with the only two players who didn't look like ass last year leaving early for the NFL.
There's no fucking way you wouldn't trade say losing at Arizona and to UCLA for beating the Huskies and Beav, especially on the road.
I am a college football atheist. I only care about the end result. Not how we got there.
You all just happen to be here. So, It’s my job, for now, to remind you you’ve done nothing for 30 years except that one time vs 8-3 #14 Purdue, over 20 years ago.
So let’s talk about whom wants to trade places with whom. You can have this year, I’ll take the previous 25.
UW and Oregon had the same season to you, UW with more wins and more wins against ranked teams, including one which was #6 in the country on the road, is the same as Oregon's limp dick season with a lone good win over 9 win UCLA. Utah is barely even worth acknowledging. Both at home.
You do you Mike.
Just don't call anyone else a loser fan because you are the epitome of the loser quook serving me beer in Portland. -
It’s god damned astonishing that in the same breath where you try to advocate for a great UW season, you say Utah’s season isn’t worth mentioning.haie said:
So making the College Football Playoff which only two Pac teams have done it (one of a top Oregon teams in school history) doesn't count for doing anything. It's not anyone's fault the current college system is this way.MikeSeaver said:
I would trade a spot to possibly backdoor into the Rose Bowl. I mean why not? Guess who’d be the first group of long time, generational losers to come over here and remind Oregon fans how they got there? It has nothing to do with who we lost to. I don’t care about “who we lose to” and have made that clear over the years I’ve wasted on here.WoolleyDoog said:
Never said Washington had a tougher schedule. Overall, Oregon's no question was because they played Georgia. In-conference, I think it's close, but I'd say Oregon's was tougher, but not by much.MikeSeaver said:RaceBannon said:
37-34MikeSeaver said:
We’re tied though. Same record. So no.haie said:
You fucked up our SOS because it turned out you were soft front running pussies. We strengthened yours because we turned out to be the #2 team in the conference.MikeSeaver said:
Your opinion doesn’t matter. There are analytical SOS rankings available.WoolleyDoog said:
North champs again.MikeSeaver said:
Washington had the 6th (maybe 7th, can’t remember) easiest schedule in the conference and you played one more home game than Oregon.WoolleyDoog said:
Also, Oregon got UCLA, UW, and Utah at home. It was very easy to go better than 7-2 in-conference.MikeSeaver said:
You guys had a great season tying the failed Oregon season.hardhat said:
I don't think the big bro thing worked out very well.Fire_Marshall_Bill said:LMAO at 46xyzlgbt claiming Oregon is "big bro"
Oregon played the #1 schedule in the Pac12.
Did any of you actually graduate from UW?
Are you talking overall or in-conference with this toughest schedule bullshit? I respect taking on Georgia. That kind of fucked you and they would have rolled anyone in the Pac-12. In conference you can make the argument Oregon's was tougher than UW's because the Huskies avoided Utah and Oregon didn't, but the Huskies also had UCLA and Oregon on the road.
Several Pac-12 teams clearly had tougher in-conference roads than Oregon:
Some teams had to play all of the top teams (Oregon, UCLA, USC, Utah, Washington) - UCLA, Arizona, and Stanford - Stanford had all of them other then USC on the road too and had to play the mighty Beav. No question Stanford had the toughest in-conference slate. Arizona probably second.
For instance, your opinion that Washington had to play all the top teams is false. You didn’t play Utah or USC. That’s why you’re so low in the SOS rankings vs other conference schedules.
There’s no way you went to UW. Can’t do simple problem solving.
Did you study theater or something?
It was all over the internet
You lost and you get 2nd place
Your NW Champs and North Division Champs thank you for playing
I’m only responding to what’s written on here. I’m not making anything up. You all are.
“Washington played all the top teams.” Is wrong.
“Oregon had the easier schedule.” Is wrong.
“We won a division” Is wrong.
I am saying Oregon failed this year. I am not arguing that.
Our failure of a season equals your 5th? best in the last 20 years? Maybe 8th best in the last 30?
What is the problem here?
Oregon's 7-2 is different, because you lost the tie-breaker and Oregon came back from a 10-4 season with a nice chunk of returning experience/talent. Washington came off 4-8 with the only two players who didn't look like ass last year leaving early for the NFL.
There's no fucking way you wouldn't trade say losing at Arizona and to UCLA for beating the Huskies and Beav, especially on the road.
I am a college football atheist. I only care about the end result. Not how we got there.
You all just happen to be here. So, It’s my job, for now, to remind you you’ve done nothing for 30 years except that one time vs 8-3 #14 Purdue, over 20 years ago.
So let’s talk about whom wants to trade places with whom. You can have this year, I’ll take the previous 25.
UW and Oregon had the same season to you, UW with more wins and more wins against ranked teams, including one which was #6 in the country on the road, is the same as Oregon's limp dick season with a lone good win over 9 win UCLA. Utah is barely even worth acknowledging. Both at home.
You do you Mike.
Just don't call anyone else a loser fan because you are the epitome of the loser quook serving me beer in Portland.
Once you figure out why you’re saying “Utah isn’t worth mentioning” you’ll figure out why I’m saying it about UW. -
You actually read what this spaz poasts?MikeSeaver said:
It’s god damned astonishing that in the same breath where you try to advocate for a great UW season, you say Utah’s season isn’t worth mentioning.haie said:
So making the College Football Playoff which only two Pac teams have done it (one of a top Oregon teams in school history) doesn't count for doing anything. It's not anyone's fault the current college system is this way.MikeSeaver said:
I would trade a spot to possibly backdoor into the Rose Bowl. I mean why not? Guess who’d be the first group of long time, generational losers to come over here and remind Oregon fans how they got there? It has nothing to do with who we lost to. I don’t care about “who we lose to” and have made that clear over the years I’ve wasted on here.WoolleyDoog said:
Never said Washington had a tougher schedule. Overall, Oregon's no question was because they played Georgia. In-conference, I think it's close, but I'd say Oregon's was tougher, but not by much.MikeSeaver said:RaceBannon said:
37-34MikeSeaver said:
We’re tied though. Same record. So no.haie said:
You fucked up our SOS because it turned out you were soft front running pussies. We strengthened yours because we turned out to be the #2 team in the conference.MikeSeaver said:
Your opinion doesn’t matter. There are analytical SOS rankings available.WoolleyDoog said:
North champs again.MikeSeaver said:
Washington had the 6th (maybe 7th, can’t remember) easiest schedule in the conference and you played one more home game than Oregon.WoolleyDoog said:
Also, Oregon got UCLA, UW, and Utah at home. It was very easy to go better than 7-2 in-conference.MikeSeaver said:
You guys had a great season tying the failed Oregon season.hardhat said:
I don't think the big bro thing worked out very well.Fire_Marshall_Bill said:LMAO at 46xyzlgbt claiming Oregon is "big bro"
Oregon played the #1 schedule in the Pac12.
Did any of you actually graduate from UW?
Are you talking overall or in-conference with this toughest schedule bullshit? I respect taking on Georgia. That kind of fucked you and they would have rolled anyone in the Pac-12. In conference you can make the argument Oregon's was tougher than UW's because the Huskies avoided Utah and Oregon didn't, but the Huskies also had UCLA and Oregon on the road.
Several Pac-12 teams clearly had tougher in-conference roads than Oregon:
Some teams had to play all of the top teams (Oregon, UCLA, USC, Utah, Washington) - UCLA, Arizona, and Stanford - Stanford had all of them other then USC on the road too and had to play the mighty Beav. No question Stanford had the toughest in-conference slate. Arizona probably second.
For instance, your opinion that Washington had to play all the top teams is false. You didn’t play Utah or USC. That’s why you’re so low in the SOS rankings vs other conference schedules.
There’s no way you went to UW. Can’t do simple problem solving.
Did you study theater or something?
It was all over the internet
You lost and you get 2nd place
Your NW Champs and North Division Champs thank you for playing
I’m only responding to what’s written on here. I’m not making anything up. You all are.
“Washington played all the top teams.” Is wrong.
“Oregon had the easier schedule.” Is wrong.
“We won a division” Is wrong.
I am saying Oregon failed this year. I am not arguing that.
Our failure of a season equals your 5th? best in the last 20 years? Maybe 8th best in the last 30?
What is the problem here?
Oregon's 7-2 is different, because you lost the tie-breaker and Oregon came back from a 10-4 season with a nice chunk of returning experience/talent. Washington came off 4-8 with the only two players who didn't look like ass last year leaving early for the NFL.
There's no fucking way you wouldn't trade say losing at Arizona and to UCLA for beating the Huskies and Beav, especially on the road.
I am a college football atheist. I only care about the end result. Not how we got there.
You all just happen to be here. So, It’s my job, for now, to remind you you’ve done nothing for 30 years except that one time vs 8-3 #14 Purdue, over 20 years ago.
So let’s talk about whom wants to trade places with whom. You can have this year, I’ll take the previous 25.
UW and Oregon had the same season to you, UW with more wins and more wins against ranked teams, including one which was #6 in the country on the road, is the same as Oregon's limp dick season with a lone good win over 9 win UCLA. Utah is barely even worth acknowledging. Both at home.
You do you Mike.
Just don't call anyone else a loser fan because you are the epitome of the loser quook serving me beer in Portland.
Once you figure out why you’re saying “Utah isn’t worth mentioning” you’ll figure out why I’m saying it about UW.
-
I posted elsewhere that the only fan bases happy with the fucked up Pac 12 this year are Utah and OregonMikeSeaver said:
It’s god damned astonishing that in the same breath where you try to advocate for a great UW season, you say Utah’s season isn’t worth mentioning.haie said:
So making the College Football Playoff which only two Pac teams have done it (one of a top Oregon teams in school history) doesn't count for doing anything. It's not anyone's fault the current college system is this way.MikeSeaver said:
I would trade a spot to possibly backdoor into the Rose Bowl. I mean why not? Guess who’d be the first group of long time, generational losers to come over here and remind Oregon fans how they got there? It has nothing to do with who we lost to. I don’t care about “who we lose to” and have made that clear over the years I’ve wasted on here.WoolleyDoog said:
Never said Washington had a tougher schedule. Overall, Oregon's no question was because they played Georgia. In-conference, I think it's close, but I'd say Oregon's was tougher, but not by much.MikeSeaver said:RaceBannon said:
37-34MikeSeaver said:
We’re tied though. Same record. So no.haie said:
You fucked up our SOS because it turned out you were soft front running pussies. We strengthened yours because we turned out to be the #2 team in the conference.MikeSeaver said:
Your opinion doesn’t matter. There are analytical SOS rankings available.WoolleyDoog said:
North champs again.MikeSeaver said:
Washington had the 6th (maybe 7th, can’t remember) easiest schedule in the conference and you played one more home game than Oregon.WoolleyDoog said:
Also, Oregon got UCLA, UW, and Utah at home. It was very easy to go better than 7-2 in-conference.MikeSeaver said:
You guys had a great season tying the failed Oregon season.hardhat said:
I don't think the big bro thing worked out very well.Fire_Marshall_Bill said:LMAO at 46xyzlgbt claiming Oregon is "big bro"
Oregon played the #1 schedule in the Pac12.
Did any of you actually graduate from UW?
Are you talking overall or in-conference with this toughest schedule bullshit? I respect taking on Georgia. That kind of fucked you and they would have rolled anyone in the Pac-12. In conference you can make the argument Oregon's was tougher than UW's because the Huskies avoided Utah and Oregon didn't, but the Huskies also had UCLA and Oregon on the road.
Several Pac-12 teams clearly had tougher in-conference roads than Oregon:
Some teams had to play all of the top teams (Oregon, UCLA, USC, Utah, Washington) - UCLA, Arizona, and Stanford - Stanford had all of them other then USC on the road too and had to play the mighty Beav. No question Stanford had the toughest in-conference slate. Arizona probably second.
For instance, your opinion that Washington had to play all the top teams is false. You didn’t play Utah or USC. That’s why you’re so low in the SOS rankings vs other conference schedules.
There’s no way you went to UW. Can’t do simple problem solving.
Did you study theater or something?
It was all over the internet
You lost and you get 2nd place
Your NW Champs and North Division Champs thank you for playing
I’m only responding to what’s written on here. I’m not making anything up. You all are.
“Washington played all the top teams.” Is wrong.
“Oregon had the easier schedule.” Is wrong.
“We won a division” Is wrong.
I am saying Oregon failed this year. I am not arguing that.
Our failure of a season equals your 5th? best in the last 20 years? Maybe 8th best in the last 30?
What is the problem here?
Oregon's 7-2 is different, because you lost the tie-breaker and Oregon came back from a 10-4 season with a nice chunk of returning experience/talent. Washington came off 4-8 with the only two players who didn't look like ass last year leaving early for the NFL.
There's no fucking way you wouldn't trade say losing at Arizona and to UCLA for beating the Huskies and Beav, especially on the road.
I am a college football atheist. I only care about the end result. Not how we got there.
You all just happen to be here. So, It’s my job, for now, to remind you you’ve done nothing for 30 years except that one time vs 8-3 #14 Purdue, over 20 years ago.
So let’s talk about whom wants to trade places with whom. You can have this year, I’ll take the previous 25.
UW and Oregon had the same season to you, UW with more wins and more wins against ranked teams, including one which was #6 in the country on the road, is the same as Oregon's limp dick season with a lone good win over 9 win UCLA. Utah is barely even worth acknowledging. Both at home.
You do you Mike.
Just don't call anyone else a loser fan because you are the epitome of the loser quook serving me beer in Portland.
Once you figure out why you’re saying “Utah isn’t worth mentioning” you’ll figure out why I’m saying it about UW.
Considering how I feel about both that could be an insult
USC - UW is the people's choice and how the league actually played out on the field -
Not even close to true. You’re only applying your “Beat Oregon, nothing else matters” criteria.RaceBannon said:
I posted elsewhere that the only fan bases happy with the fucked up Pac 12 this year are Utah and OregonMikeSeaver said:
It’s god damned astonishing that in the same breath where you try to advocate for a great UW season, you say Utah’s season isn’t worth mentioning.haie said:
So making the College Football Playoff which only two Pac teams have done it (one of a top Oregon teams in school history) doesn't count for doing anything. It's not anyone's fault the current college system is this way.MikeSeaver said:
I would trade a spot to possibly backdoor into the Rose Bowl. I mean why not? Guess who’d be the first group of long time, generational losers to come over here and remind Oregon fans how they got there? It has nothing to do with who we lost to. I don’t care about “who we lose to” and have made that clear over the years I’ve wasted on here.WoolleyDoog said:
Never said Washington had a tougher schedule. Overall, Oregon's no question was because they played Georgia. In-conference, I think it's close, but I'd say Oregon's was tougher, but not by much.MikeSeaver said:RaceBannon said:
37-34MikeSeaver said:
We’re tied though. Same record. So no.haie said:
You fucked up our SOS because it turned out you were soft front running pussies. We strengthened yours because we turned out to be the #2 team in the conference.MikeSeaver said:
Your opinion doesn’t matter. There are analytical SOS rankings available.WoolleyDoog said:
North champs again.MikeSeaver said:
Washington had the 6th (maybe 7th, can’t remember) easiest schedule in the conference and you played one more home game than Oregon.WoolleyDoog said:
Also, Oregon got UCLA, UW, and Utah at home. It was very easy to go better than 7-2 in-conference.MikeSeaver said:
You guys had a great season tying the failed Oregon season.hardhat said:
I don't think the big bro thing worked out very well.Fire_Marshall_Bill said:LMAO at 46xyzlgbt claiming Oregon is "big bro"
Oregon played the #1 schedule in the Pac12.
Did any of you actually graduate from UW?
Are you talking overall or in-conference with this toughest schedule bullshit? I respect taking on Georgia. That kind of fucked you and they would have rolled anyone in the Pac-12. In conference you can make the argument Oregon's was tougher than UW's because the Huskies avoided Utah and Oregon didn't, but the Huskies also had UCLA and Oregon on the road.
Several Pac-12 teams clearly had tougher in-conference roads than Oregon:
Some teams had to play all of the top teams (Oregon, UCLA, USC, Utah, Washington) - UCLA, Arizona, and Stanford - Stanford had all of them other then USC on the road too and had to play the mighty Beav. No question Stanford had the toughest in-conference slate. Arizona probably second.
For instance, your opinion that Washington had to play all the top teams is false. You didn’t play Utah or USC. That’s why you’re so low in the SOS rankings vs other conference schedules.
There’s no way you went to UW. Can’t do simple problem solving.
Did you study theater or something?
It was all over the internet
You lost and you get 2nd place
Your NW Champs and North Division Champs thank you for playing
I’m only responding to what’s written on here. I’m not making anything up. You all are.
“Washington played all the top teams.” Is wrong.
“Oregon had the easier schedule.” Is wrong.
“We won a division” Is wrong.
I am saying Oregon failed this year. I am not arguing that.
Our failure of a season equals your 5th? best in the last 20 years? Maybe 8th best in the last 30?
What is the problem here?
Oregon's 7-2 is different, because you lost the tie-breaker and Oregon came back from a 10-4 season with a nice chunk of returning experience/talent. Washington came off 4-8 with the only two players who didn't look like ass last year leaving early for the NFL.
There's no fucking way you wouldn't trade say losing at Arizona and to UCLA for beating the Huskies and Beav, especially on the road.
I am a college football atheist. I only care about the end result. Not how we got there.
You all just happen to be here. So, It’s my job, for now, to remind you you’ve done nothing for 30 years except that one time vs 8-3 #14 Purdue, over 20 years ago.
So let’s talk about whom wants to trade places with whom. You can have this year, I’ll take the previous 25.
UW and Oregon had the same season to you, UW with more wins and more wins against ranked teams, including one which was #6 in the country on the road, is the same as Oregon's limp dick season with a lone good win over 9 win UCLA. Utah is barely even worth acknowledging. Both at home.
You do you Mike.
Just don't call anyone else a loser fan because you are the epitome of the loser quook serving me beer in Portland.
Once you figure out why you’re saying “Utah isn’t worth mentioning” you’ll figure out why I’m saying it about UW.
Considering how I feel about both that could be an insult
USC - UW is the people's choice and how the league actually played out on the field
Same league record. You both lost to UCLA. You both beat OSU, You split ASU, you split Oregon, they beat USC.
They had by far the tougher SOS. They are only behind USC, by 1 pt., for avg. margin of victory (8th in the county). UW is 3rd league and 17th country (with a much easier schedule)
Nobody outside of Cambridge, WA gives a single fuck about UW not being in it. -
Embarrassing.RaceBannon said:
I posted elsewhere that the only fan bases happy with the fucked up Pac 12 this year are Utah and OregonMikeSeaver said:
It’s god damned astonishing that in the same breath where you try to advocate for a great UW season, you say Utah’s season isn’t worth mentioning.haie said:
So making the College Football Playoff which only two Pac teams have done it (one of a top Oregon teams in school history) doesn't count for doing anything. It's not anyone's fault the current college system is this way.MikeSeaver said:
I would trade a spot to possibly backdoor into the Rose Bowl. I mean why not? Guess who’d be the first group of long time, generational losers to come over here and remind Oregon fans how they got there? It has nothing to do with who we lost to. I don’t care about “who we lose to” and have made that clear over the years I’ve wasted on here.WoolleyDoog said:
Never said Washington had a tougher schedule. Overall, Oregon's no question was because they played Georgia. In-conference, I think it's close, but I'd say Oregon's was tougher, but not by much.MikeSeaver said:RaceBannon said:
37-34MikeSeaver said:
We’re tied though. Same record. So no.haie said:
You fucked up our SOS because it turned out you were soft front running pussies. We strengthened yours because we turned out to be the #2 team in the conference.MikeSeaver said:
Your opinion doesn’t matter. There are analytical SOS rankings available.WoolleyDoog said:
North champs again.MikeSeaver said:
Washington had the 6th (maybe 7th, can’t remember) easiest schedule in the conference and you played one more home game than Oregon.WoolleyDoog said:
Also, Oregon got UCLA, UW, and Utah at home. It was very easy to go better than 7-2 in-conference.MikeSeaver said:
You guys had a great season tying the failed Oregon season.hardhat said:
I don't think the big bro thing worked out very well.Fire_Marshall_Bill said:LMAO at 46xyzlgbt claiming Oregon is "big bro"
Oregon played the #1 schedule in the Pac12.
Did any of you actually graduate from UW?
Are you talking overall or in-conference with this toughest schedule bullshit? I respect taking on Georgia. That kind of fucked you and they would have rolled anyone in the Pac-12. In conference you can make the argument Oregon's was tougher than UW's because the Huskies avoided Utah and Oregon didn't, but the Huskies also had UCLA and Oregon on the road.
Several Pac-12 teams clearly had tougher in-conference roads than Oregon:
Some teams had to play all of the top teams (Oregon, UCLA, USC, Utah, Washington) - UCLA, Arizona, and Stanford - Stanford had all of them other then USC on the road too and had to play the mighty Beav. No question Stanford had the toughest in-conference slate. Arizona probably second.
For instance, your opinion that Washington had to play all the top teams is false. You didn’t play Utah or USC. That’s why you’re so low in the SOS rankings vs other conference schedules.
There’s no way you went to UW. Can’t do simple problem solving.
Did you study theater or something?
It was all over the internet
You lost and you get 2nd place
Your NW Champs and North Division Champs thank you for playing
I’m only responding to what’s written on here. I’m not making anything up. You all are.
“Washington played all the top teams.” Is wrong.
“Oregon had the easier schedule.” Is wrong.
“We won a division” Is wrong.
I am saying Oregon failed this year. I am not arguing that.
Our failure of a season equals your 5th? best in the last 20 years? Maybe 8th best in the last 30?
What is the problem here?
Oregon's 7-2 is different, because you lost the tie-breaker and Oregon came back from a 10-4 season with a nice chunk of returning experience/talent. Washington came off 4-8 with the only two players who didn't look like ass last year leaving early for the NFL.
There's no fucking way you wouldn't trade say losing at Arizona and to UCLA for beating the Huskies and Beav, especially on the road.
I am a college football atheist. I only care about the end result. Not how we got there.
You all just happen to be here. So, It’s my job, for now, to remind you you’ve done nothing for 30 years except that one time vs 8-3 #14 Purdue, over 20 years ago.
So let’s talk about whom wants to trade places with whom. You can have this year, I’ll take the previous 25.
UW and Oregon had the same season to you, UW with more wins and more wins against ranked teams, including one which was #6 in the country on the road, is the same as Oregon's limp dick season with a lone good win over 9 win UCLA. Utah is barely even worth acknowledging. Both at home.
You do you Mike.
Just don't call anyone else a loser fan because you are the epitome of the loser quook serving me beer in Portland.
Once you figure out why you’re saying “Utah isn’t worth mentioning” you’ll figure out why I’m saying it about UW.
Considering how I feel about both that could be an insult
USC - UW is the people's choice and how the league actually played out on the field
Whittingham said it best about people crying that they "backed into" the CCG. 'We beat the people we needed to beat.' Your dogs shit the bed at 2-7 ASU. uw fans like to pretend that didn't happen. Utah beat SC. uw doesn't deserve to be there. Go enjoy the RB, your team wasn't beating SC. That takes a team that plays D.
LOL...................................... -
The league played division schedules and UW won one and Utah finished 2nd in oneMikeSeaver said:
Not even close to true. You’re only applying your “Beat Oregon, nothing else matters” criteria.RaceBannon said:
I posted elsewhere that the only fan bases happy with the fucked up Pac 12 this year are Utah and OregonMikeSeaver said:
It’s god damned astonishing that in the same breath where you try to advocate for a great UW season, you say Utah’s season isn’t worth mentioning.haie said:
So making the College Football Playoff which only two Pac teams have done it (one of a top Oregon teams in school history) doesn't count for doing anything. It's not anyone's fault the current college system is this way.MikeSeaver said:
I would trade a spot to possibly backdoor into the Rose Bowl. I mean why not? Guess who’d be the first group of long time, generational losers to come over here and remind Oregon fans how they got there? It has nothing to do with who we lost to. I don’t care about “who we lose to” and have made that clear over the years I’ve wasted on here.WoolleyDoog said:
Never said Washington had a tougher schedule. Overall, Oregon's no question was because they played Georgia. In-conference, I think it's close, but I'd say Oregon's was tougher, but not by much.MikeSeaver said:RaceBannon said:
37-34MikeSeaver said:
We’re tied though. Same record. So no.haie said:
You fucked up our SOS because it turned out you were soft front running pussies. We strengthened yours because we turned out to be the #2 team in the conference.MikeSeaver said:
Your opinion doesn’t matter. There are analytical SOS rankings available.WoolleyDoog said:
North champs again.MikeSeaver said:
Washington had the 6th (maybe 7th, can’t remember) easiest schedule in the conference and you played one more home game than Oregon.WoolleyDoog said:
Also, Oregon got UCLA, UW, and Utah at home. It was very easy to go better than 7-2 in-conference.MikeSeaver said:
You guys had a great season tying the failed Oregon season.hardhat said:
I don't think the big bro thing worked out very well.Fire_Marshall_Bill said:LMAO at 46xyzlgbt claiming Oregon is "big bro"
Oregon played the #1 schedule in the Pac12.
Did any of you actually graduate from UW?
Are you talking overall or in-conference with this toughest schedule bullshit? I respect taking on Georgia. That kind of fucked you and they would have rolled anyone in the Pac-12. In conference you can make the argument Oregon's was tougher than UW's because the Huskies avoided Utah and Oregon didn't, but the Huskies also had UCLA and Oregon on the road.
Several Pac-12 teams clearly had tougher in-conference roads than Oregon:
Some teams had to play all of the top teams (Oregon, UCLA, USC, Utah, Washington) - UCLA, Arizona, and Stanford - Stanford had all of them other then USC on the road too and had to play the mighty Beav. No question Stanford had the toughest in-conference slate. Arizona probably second.
For instance, your opinion that Washington had to play all the top teams is false. You didn’t play Utah or USC. That’s why you’re so low in the SOS rankings vs other conference schedules.
There’s no way you went to UW. Can’t do simple problem solving.
Did you study theater or something?
It was all over the internet
You lost and you get 2nd place
Your NW Champs and North Division Champs thank you for playing
I’m only responding to what’s written on here. I’m not making anything up. You all are.
“Washington played all the top teams.” Is wrong.
“Oregon had the easier schedule.” Is wrong.
“We won a division” Is wrong.
I am saying Oregon failed this year. I am not arguing that.
Our failure of a season equals your 5th? best in the last 20 years? Maybe 8th best in the last 30?
What is the problem here?
Oregon's 7-2 is different, because you lost the tie-breaker and Oregon came back from a 10-4 season with a nice chunk of returning experience/talent. Washington came off 4-8 with the only two players who didn't look like ass last year leaving early for the NFL.
There's no fucking way you wouldn't trade say losing at Arizona and to UCLA for beating the Huskies and Beav, especially on the road.
I am a college football atheist. I only care about the end result. Not how we got there.
You all just happen to be here. So, It’s my job, for now, to remind you you’ve done nothing for 30 years except that one time vs 8-3 #14 Purdue, over 20 years ago.
So let’s talk about whom wants to trade places with whom. You can have this year, I’ll take the previous 25.
UW and Oregon had the same season to you, UW with more wins and more wins against ranked teams, including one which was #6 in the country on the road, is the same as Oregon's limp dick season with a lone good win over 9 win UCLA. Utah is barely even worth acknowledging. Both at home.
You do you Mike.
Just don't call anyone else a loser fan because you are the epitome of the loser quook serving me beer in Portland.
Once you figure out why you’re saying “Utah isn’t worth mentioning” you’ll figure out why I’m saying it about UW.
Considering how I feel about both that could be an insult
USC - UW is the people's choice and how the league actually played out on the field
Same league record. You both lost to UCLA. You both beat OSU, You split ASU, you split Oregon, they beat USC.
They had by far the tougher SOS. They are only behind USC, by 1 pt., for avg. margin of victory (8th in the county). UW is 3rd league and 17th country (with a much easier schedule)
Nobody outside of Cambridge, WA gives a single fuck about UW not being in it.
UW did win at Autzen and Utah couldn't beat a crippled Blo Nix
And of course 10-2 is better than 9-3
UW belongs in the game and you know it, I know it and the American people know it
The nation wants Williams v Penix. Not some MWC reject
But thanks for proving my point that duck fans are united with utes in an axis of evil -
“Everyone says so” post of the day.RaceBannon said:
The league played division schedules and UW won one and Utah finished 2nd in oneMikeSeaver said:
Not even close to true. You’re only applying your “Beat Oregon, nothing else matters” criteria.RaceBannon said:
I posted elsewhere that the only fan bases happy with the fucked up Pac 12 this year are Utah and OregonMikeSeaver said:
It’s god damned astonishing that in the same breath where you try to advocate for a great UW season, you say Utah’s season isn’t worth mentioning.haie said:
So making the College Football Playoff which only two Pac teams have done it (one of a top Oregon teams in school history) doesn't count for doing anything. It's not anyone's fault the current college system is this way.MikeSeaver said:
I would trade a spot to possibly backdoor into the Rose Bowl. I mean why not? Guess who’d be the first group of long time, generational losers to come over here and remind Oregon fans how they got there? It has nothing to do with who we lost to. I don’t care about “who we lose to” and have made that clear over the years I’ve wasted on here.WoolleyDoog said:
Never said Washington had a tougher schedule. Overall, Oregon's no question was because they played Georgia. In-conference, I think it's close, but I'd say Oregon's was tougher, but not by much.MikeSeaver said:RaceBannon said:
37-34MikeSeaver said:
We’re tied though. Same record. So no.haie said:
You fucked up our SOS because it turned out you were soft front running pussies. We strengthened yours because we turned out to be the #2 team in the conference.MikeSeaver said:
Your opinion doesn’t matter. There are analytical SOS rankings available.WoolleyDoog said:
North champs again.MikeSeaver said:
Washington had the 6th (maybe 7th, can’t remember) easiest schedule in the conference and you played one more home game than Oregon.WoolleyDoog said:
Also, Oregon got UCLA, UW, and Utah at home. It was very easy to go better than 7-2 in-conference.MikeSeaver said:
You guys had a great season tying the failed Oregon season.hardhat said:
I don't think the big bro thing worked out very well.Fire_Marshall_Bill said:LMAO at 46xyzlgbt claiming Oregon is "big bro"
Oregon played the #1 schedule in the Pac12.
Did any of you actually graduate from UW?
Are you talking overall or in-conference with this toughest schedule bullshit? I respect taking on Georgia. That kind of fucked you and they would have rolled anyone in the Pac-12. In conference you can make the argument Oregon's was tougher than UW's because the Huskies avoided Utah and Oregon didn't, but the Huskies also had UCLA and Oregon on the road.
Several Pac-12 teams clearly had tougher in-conference roads than Oregon:
Some teams had to play all of the top teams (Oregon, UCLA, USC, Utah, Washington) - UCLA, Arizona, and Stanford - Stanford had all of them other then USC on the road too and had to play the mighty Beav. No question Stanford had the toughest in-conference slate. Arizona probably second.
For instance, your opinion that Washington had to play all the top teams is false. You didn’t play Utah or USC. That’s why you’re so low in the SOS rankings vs other conference schedules.
There’s no way you went to UW. Can’t do simple problem solving.
Did you study theater or something?
It was all over the internet
You lost and you get 2nd place
Your NW Champs and North Division Champs thank you for playing
I’m only responding to what’s written on here. I’m not making anything up. You all are.
“Washington played all the top teams.” Is wrong.
“Oregon had the easier schedule.” Is wrong.
“We won a division” Is wrong.
I am saying Oregon failed this year. I am not arguing that.
Our failure of a season equals your 5th? best in the last 20 years? Maybe 8th best in the last 30?
What is the problem here?
Oregon's 7-2 is different, because you lost the tie-breaker and Oregon came back from a 10-4 season with a nice chunk of returning experience/talent. Washington came off 4-8 with the only two players who didn't look like ass last year leaving early for the NFL.
There's no fucking way you wouldn't trade say losing at Arizona and to UCLA for beating the Huskies and Beav, especially on the road.
I am a college football atheist. I only care about the end result. Not how we got there.
You all just happen to be here. So, It’s my job, for now, to remind you you’ve done nothing for 30 years except that one time vs 8-3 #14 Purdue, over 20 years ago.
So let’s talk about whom wants to trade places with whom. You can have this year, I’ll take the previous 25.
UW and Oregon had the same season to you, UW with more wins and more wins against ranked teams, including one which was #6 in the country on the road, is the same as Oregon's limp dick season with a lone good win over 9 win UCLA. Utah is barely even worth acknowledging. Both at home.
You do you Mike.
Just don't call anyone else a loser fan because you are the epitome of the loser quook serving me beer in Portland.
Once you figure out why you’re saying “Utah isn’t worth mentioning” you’ll figure out why I’m saying it about UW.
Considering how I feel about both that could be an insult
USC - UW is the people's choice and how the league actually played out on the field
Same league record. You both lost to UCLA. You both beat OSU, You split ASU, you split Oregon, they beat USC.
They had by far the tougher SOS. They are only behind USC, by 1 pt., for avg. margin of victory (8th in the county). UW is 3rd league and 17th country (with a much easier schedule)
Nobody outside of Cambridge, WA gives a single fuck about UW not being in it.
UW did win at Autzen and Utah couldn't beat a crippled Blo Nix
And of course 10-2 is better than 9-3
UW belongs in the game and you know it, I know it and the American people know it
The nation wants Williams v Penix. Not some MWC reject
But thanks for proving my point that duck fans are united with utes in an axis of evil
You’ve been rooting for everyone else besides Oregon for 30 years. I get to be a #myutes fan for 1. -
UW beat the teams they needed to beat as well46XiJCAB said:
Embarrassing.RaceBannon said:
I posted elsewhere that the only fan bases happy with the fucked up Pac 12 this year are Utah and OregonMikeSeaver said:
It’s god damned astonishing that in the same breath where you try to advocate for a great UW season, you say Utah’s season isn’t worth mentioning.haie said:
So making the College Football Playoff which only two Pac teams have done it (one of a top Oregon teams in school history) doesn't count for doing anything. It's not anyone's fault the current college system is this way.MikeSeaver said:
I would trade a spot to possibly backdoor into the Rose Bowl. I mean why not? Guess who’d be the first group of long time, generational losers to come over here and remind Oregon fans how they got there? It has nothing to do with who we lost to. I don’t care about “who we lose to” and have made that clear over the years I’ve wasted on here.WoolleyDoog said:
Never said Washington had a tougher schedule. Overall, Oregon's no question was because they played Georgia. In-conference, I think it's close, but I'd say Oregon's was tougher, but not by much.MikeSeaver said:RaceBannon said:
37-34MikeSeaver said:
We’re tied though. Same record. So no.haie said:
You fucked up our SOS because it turned out you were soft front running pussies. We strengthened yours because we turned out to be the #2 team in the conference.MikeSeaver said:
Your opinion doesn’t matter. There are analytical SOS rankings available.WoolleyDoog said:
North champs again.MikeSeaver said:
Washington had the 6th (maybe 7th, can’t remember) easiest schedule in the conference and you played one more home game than Oregon.WoolleyDoog said:
Also, Oregon got UCLA, UW, and Utah at home. It was very easy to go better than 7-2 in-conference.MikeSeaver said:
You guys had a great season tying the failed Oregon season.hardhat said:
I don't think the big bro thing worked out very well.Fire_Marshall_Bill said:LMAO at 46xyzlgbt claiming Oregon is "big bro"
Oregon played the #1 schedule in the Pac12.
Did any of you actually graduate from UW?
Are you talking overall or in-conference with this toughest schedule bullshit? I respect taking on Georgia. That kind of fucked you and they would have rolled anyone in the Pac-12. In conference you can make the argument Oregon's was tougher than UW's because the Huskies avoided Utah and Oregon didn't, but the Huskies also had UCLA and Oregon on the road.
Several Pac-12 teams clearly had tougher in-conference roads than Oregon:
Some teams had to play all of the top teams (Oregon, UCLA, USC, Utah, Washington) - UCLA, Arizona, and Stanford - Stanford had all of them other then USC on the road too and had to play the mighty Beav. No question Stanford had the toughest in-conference slate. Arizona probably second.
For instance, your opinion that Washington had to play all the top teams is false. You didn’t play Utah or USC. That’s why you’re so low in the SOS rankings vs other conference schedules.
There’s no way you went to UW. Can’t do simple problem solving.
Did you study theater or something?
It was all over the internet
You lost and you get 2nd place
Your NW Champs and North Division Champs thank you for playing
I’m only responding to what’s written on here. I’m not making anything up. You all are.
“Washington played all the top teams.” Is wrong.
“Oregon had the easier schedule.” Is wrong.
“We won a division” Is wrong.
I am saying Oregon failed this year. I am not arguing that.
Our failure of a season equals your 5th? best in the last 20 years? Maybe 8th best in the last 30?
What is the problem here?
Oregon's 7-2 is different, because you lost the tie-breaker and Oregon came back from a 10-4 season with a nice chunk of returning experience/talent. Washington came off 4-8 with the only two players who didn't look like ass last year leaving early for the NFL.
There's no fucking way you wouldn't trade say losing at Arizona and to UCLA for beating the Huskies and Beav, especially on the road.
I am a college football atheist. I only care about the end result. Not how we got there.
You all just happen to be here. So, It’s my job, for now, to remind you you’ve done nothing for 30 years except that one time vs 8-3 #14 Purdue, over 20 years ago.
So let’s talk about whom wants to trade places with whom. You can have this year, I’ll take the previous 25.
UW and Oregon had the same season to you, UW with more wins and more wins against ranked teams, including one which was #6 in the country on the road, is the same as Oregon's limp dick season with a lone good win over 9 win UCLA. Utah is barely even worth acknowledging. Both at home.
You do you Mike.
Just don't call anyone else a loser fan because you are the epitome of the loser quook serving me beer in Portland.
Once you figure out why you’re saying “Utah isn’t worth mentioning” you’ll figure out why I’m saying it about UW.
Considering how I feel about both that could be an insult
USC - UW is the people's choice and how the league actually played out on the field
Whittingham said it best about people crying that they "backed into" the CCG. 'We beat the people we needed to beat.' Your dogs shit the bed at 2-7 ASU. uw fans like to pretend that didn't happen. Utah beat SC. uw doesn't deserve to be there. Go enjoy the RB, your team wasn't beating SC. That takes a team that plays D.
LOL......................................
Whitlessham can suck dick -
The nation doesn't knows who uw is. HTH.RaceBannon said:
The league played division schedules and UW won one and Utah finished 2nd in oneMikeSeaver said:
Not even close to true. You’re only applying your “Beat Oregon, nothing else matters” criteria.RaceBannon said:
I posted elsewhere that the only fan bases happy with the fucked up Pac 12 this year are Utah and OregonMikeSeaver said:
It’s god damned astonishing that in the same breath where you try to advocate for a great UW season, you say Utah’s season isn’t worth mentioning.haie said:
So making the College Football Playoff which only two Pac teams have done it (one of a top Oregon teams in school history) doesn't count for doing anything. It's not anyone's fault the current college system is this way.MikeSeaver said:
I would trade a spot to possibly backdoor into the Rose Bowl. I mean why not? Guess who’d be the first group of long time, generational losers to come over here and remind Oregon fans how they got there? It has nothing to do with who we lost to. I don’t care about “who we lose to” and have made that clear over the years I’ve wasted on here.WoolleyDoog said:
Never said Washington had a tougher schedule. Overall, Oregon's no question was because they played Georgia. In-conference, I think it's close, but I'd say Oregon's was tougher, but not by much.MikeSeaver said:RaceBannon said:
37-34MikeSeaver said:
We’re tied though. Same record. So no.haie said:
You fucked up our SOS because it turned out you were soft front running pussies. We strengthened yours because we turned out to be the #2 team in the conference.MikeSeaver said:
Your opinion doesn’t matter. There are analytical SOS rankings available.WoolleyDoog said:
North champs again.MikeSeaver said:
Washington had the 6th (maybe 7th, can’t remember) easiest schedule in the conference and you played one more home game than Oregon.WoolleyDoog said:
Also, Oregon got UCLA, UW, and Utah at home. It was very easy to go better than 7-2 in-conference.MikeSeaver said:
You guys had a great season tying the failed Oregon season.hardhat said:
I don't think the big bro thing worked out very well.Fire_Marshall_Bill said:LMAO at 46xyzlgbt claiming Oregon is "big bro"
Oregon played the #1 schedule in the Pac12.
Did any of you actually graduate from UW?
Are you talking overall or in-conference with this toughest schedule bullshit? I respect taking on Georgia. That kind of fucked you and they would have rolled anyone in the Pac-12. In conference you can make the argument Oregon's was tougher than UW's because the Huskies avoided Utah and Oregon didn't, but the Huskies also had UCLA and Oregon on the road.
Several Pac-12 teams clearly had tougher in-conference roads than Oregon:
Some teams had to play all of the top teams (Oregon, UCLA, USC, Utah, Washington) - UCLA, Arizona, and Stanford - Stanford had all of them other then USC on the road too and had to play the mighty Beav. No question Stanford had the toughest in-conference slate. Arizona probably second.
For instance, your opinion that Washington had to play all the top teams is false. You didn’t play Utah or USC. That’s why you’re so low in the SOS rankings vs other conference schedules.
There’s no way you went to UW. Can’t do simple problem solving.
Did you study theater or something?
It was all over the internet
You lost and you get 2nd place
Your NW Champs and North Division Champs thank you for playing
I’m only responding to what’s written on here. I’m not making anything up. You all are.
“Washington played all the top teams.” Is wrong.
“Oregon had the easier schedule.” Is wrong.
“We won a division” Is wrong.
I am saying Oregon failed this year. I am not arguing that.
Our failure of a season equals your 5th? best in the last 20 years? Maybe 8th best in the last 30?
What is the problem here?
Oregon's 7-2 is different, because you lost the tie-breaker and Oregon came back from a 10-4 season with a nice chunk of returning experience/talent. Washington came off 4-8 with the only two players who didn't look like ass last year leaving early for the NFL.
There's no fucking way you wouldn't trade say losing at Arizona and to UCLA for beating the Huskies and Beav, especially on the road.
I am a college football atheist. I only care about the end result. Not how we got there.
You all just happen to be here. So, It’s my job, for now, to remind you you’ve done nothing for 30 years except that one time vs 8-3 #14 Purdue, over 20 years ago.
So let’s talk about whom wants to trade places with whom. You can have this year, I’ll take the previous 25.
UW and Oregon had the same season to you, UW with more wins and more wins against ranked teams, including one which was #6 in the country on the road, is the same as Oregon's limp dick season with a lone good win over 9 win UCLA. Utah is barely even worth acknowledging. Both at home.
You do you Mike.
Just don't call anyone else a loser fan because you are the epitome of the loser quook serving me beer in Portland.
Once you figure out why you’re saying “Utah isn’t worth mentioning” you’ll figure out why I’m saying it about UW.
Considering how I feel about both that could be an insult
USC - UW is the people's choice and how the league actually played out on the field
Same league record. You both lost to UCLA. You both beat OSU, You split ASU, you split Oregon, they beat USC.
They had by far the tougher SOS. They are only behind USC, by 1 pt., for avg. margin of victory (8th in the county). UW is 3rd league and 17th country (with a much easier schedule)
Nobody outside of Cambridge, WA gives a single fuck about UW not being in it.
UW did win at Autzen and Utah couldn't beat a crippled Blo Nix
And of course 10-2 is better than 9-3
UW belongs in the game and you know it, I know it and the American people know it
The nation wants Williams v Penix. Not some MWC reject
But thanks for proving my point that duck fans are united with utes in an axis of evil
Me: Siri, "what two PAC-12 schools did ASU defeat this year?"
Siri: "Colorado and uw."
Me: LOLOLOLOLOLO...............................
-
RaceBannon said:
UW beat the teams they needed to beat as well46XiJCAB said:
Embarrassing.RaceBannon said:
I posted elsewhere that the only fan bases happy with the fucked up Pac 12 this year are Utah and OregonMikeSeaver said:
It’s god damned astonishing that in the same breath where you try to advocate for a great UW season, you say Utah’s season isn’t worth mentioning.haie said:
So making the College Football Playoff which only two Pac teams have done it (one of a top Oregon teams in school history) doesn't count for doing anything. It's not anyone's fault the current college system is this way.MikeSeaver said:
I would trade a spot to possibly backdoor into the Rose Bowl. I mean why not? Guess who’d be the first group of long time, generational losers to come over here and remind Oregon fans how they got there? It has nothing to do with who we lost to. I don’t care about “who we lose to” and have made that clear over the years I’ve wasted on here.WoolleyDoog said:
Never said Washington had a tougher schedule. Overall, Oregon's no question was because they played Georgia. In-conference, I think it's close, but I'd say Oregon's was tougher, but not by much.MikeSeaver said:RaceBannon said:
37-34MikeSeaver said:
We’re tied though. Same record. So no.haie said:
You fucked up our SOS because it turned out you were soft front running pussies. We strengthened yours because we turned out to be the #2 team in the conference.MikeSeaver said:
Your opinion doesn’t matter. There are analytical SOS rankings available.WoolleyDoog said:
North champs again.MikeSeaver said:
Washington had the 6th (maybe 7th, can’t remember) easiest schedule in the conference and you played one more home game than Oregon.WoolleyDoog said:
Also, Oregon got UCLA, UW, and Utah at home. It was very easy to go better than 7-2 in-conference.MikeSeaver said:
You guys had a great season tying the failed Oregon season.hardhat said:
I don't think the big bro thing worked out very well.Fire_Marshall_Bill said:LMAO at 46xyzlgbt claiming Oregon is "big bro"
Oregon played the #1 schedule in the Pac12.
Did any of you actually graduate from UW?
Are you talking overall or in-conference with this toughest schedule bullshit? I respect taking on Georgia. That kind of fucked you and they would have rolled anyone in the Pac-12. In conference you can make the argument Oregon's was tougher than UW's because the Huskies avoided Utah and Oregon didn't, but the Huskies also had UCLA and Oregon on the road.
Several Pac-12 teams clearly had tougher in-conference roads than Oregon:
Some teams had to play all of the top teams (Oregon, UCLA, USC, Utah, Washington) - UCLA, Arizona, and Stanford - Stanford had all of them other then USC on the road too and had to play the mighty Beav. No question Stanford had the toughest in-conference slate. Arizona probably second.
For instance, your opinion that Washington had to play all the top teams is false. You didn’t play Utah or USC. That’s why you’re so low in the SOS rankings vs other conference schedules.
There’s no way you went to UW. Can’t do simple problem solving.
Did you study theater or something?
It was all over the internet
You lost and you get 2nd place
Your NW Champs and North Division Champs thank you for playing
I’m only responding to what’s written on here. I’m not making anything up. You all are.
“Washington played all the top teams.” Is wrong.
“Oregon had the easier schedule.” Is wrong.
“We won a division” Is wrong.
I am saying Oregon failed this year. I am not arguing that.
Our failure of a season equals your 5th? best in the last 20 years? Maybe 8th best in the last 30?
What is the problem here?
Oregon's 7-2 is different, because you lost the tie-breaker and Oregon came back from a 10-4 season with a nice chunk of returning experience/talent. Washington came off 4-8 with the only two players who didn't look like ass last year leaving early for the NFL.
There's no fucking way you wouldn't trade say losing at Arizona and to UCLA for beating the Huskies and Beav, especially on the road.
I am a college football atheist. I only care about the end result. Not how we got there.
You all just happen to be here. So, It’s my job, for now, to remind you you’ve done nothing for 30 years except that one time vs 8-3 #14 Purdue, over 20 years ago.
So let’s talk about whom wants to trade places with whom. You can have this year, I’ll take the previous 25.
UW and Oregon had the same season to you, UW with more wins and more wins against ranked teams, including one which was #6 in the country on the road, is the same as Oregon's limp dick season with a lone good win over 9 win UCLA. Utah is barely even worth acknowledging. Both at home.
You do you Mike.
Just don't call anyone else a loser fan because you are the epitome of the loser quook serving me beer in Portland.
Once you figure out why you’re saying “Utah isn’t worth mentioning” you’ll figure out why I’m saying it about UW.
Considering how I feel about both that could be an insult
USC - UW is the people's choice and how the league actually played out on the field
Whittingham said it best about people crying that they "backed into" the CCG. 'We beat the people we needed to beat.' Your dogs shit the bed at 2-7 ASU. uw fans like to pretend that didn't happen. Utah beat SC. uw doesn't deserve to be there. Go enjoy the RB, your team wasn't beating SC. That takes a team that plays D.
LOL......................................
