TE Devin Asiasi

BallSacked said:

Dennis_DeYoung said:

BallSacked said:

Dennis_DeYoung said:

IDGAF about Asiasi. He's fine, but whatever. His teammate Tagaloa? Holy F that guy is good.

Bruin.

I know... the consolation for me is that everyone who goes to UCLA ends up being inconsistent and soft. So, there's that.

The one thing they have been consistent at is beating UW. Even Terry Donahue had a winning record vs Don James. Lulz.

It doesn't strike you as funny, though, that every year during that period UCLA was hauling in top-10 recruiting classes and we couldn't get half your players to visit here and he was 1 game over .500 (I believe) during that time?

I mean... that's my point. You guys always get Boss Tagaloa's and turn it into teams that are only slightly better than teams that get mid-tier guys.

It's like saying 'yeah, but we are 50/50 with WSU!!!' - uh, yeah, we should beat them every year and when we don't it's a colossal failure.

Dennis_DeYoung said:

BallSacked said:

Dennis_DeYoung said:

BallSacked said:

Dennis_DeYoung said:

IDGAF about Asiasi. He's fine, but whatever. His teammate Tagaloa? Holy F that guy is good.

Bruin.

I know... the consolation for me is that everyone who goes to UCLA ends up being inconsistent and soft. So, there's that.

The one thing they have been consistent at is beating UW. Even Terry Donahue had a winning record vs Don James. Lulz.

It doesn't strike you as funny, though, that every year during that period UCLA was hauling in top-10 recruiting classes and we couldn't get half your players to visit here and he was 1 game over .500 (I believe) during that time?

I mean... that's my point. You guys always get Boss Tagaloa's and turn it into teams that are only slightly better than teams that get mid-tier guys.

It's like saying 'yeah, but we are 50/50 with WSU!!!' - uh, yeah, we should beat them every year and when we don't it's a colossal failure.

You made me look it up: 7-4-1 against Don James.

You're just mad it's not 1991 anymore, and you're mad that you're fat. So it's a coping mechanism. I get it. Most of your narratives about the sport are clearly stuck in 80s. Underachieving (Donahue) or overachieving (Don James) is indicative of the coach, not the program. It actually gives me hope about the programs potential, Donahue & Tolardo made 5 rosebowls. An even slightly above average coach is capable of more in my opinion.

RoadDawg55 said:

BallSacked said:

Dennis_DeYoung said:

BallSacked said:

Dennis_DeYoung said:

BallSacked said:

Dennis_DeYoung said:

IDGAF about Asiasi. He's fine, but whatever. His teammate Tagaloa? Holy F that guy is good.

Bruin.

I know... the consolation for me is that everyone who goes to UCLA ends up being inconsistent and soft. So, there's that.

The one thing they have been consistent at is beating UW. Even Terry Donahue had a winning record vs Don James. Lulz.

It doesn't strike you as funny, though, that every year during that period UCLA was hauling in top-10 recruiting classes and we couldn't get half your players to visit here and he was 1 game over .500 (I believe) during that time?

I mean... that's my point. You guys always get Boss Tagaloa's and turn it into teams that are only slightly better than teams that get mid-tier guys.

It's like saying 'yeah, but we are 50/50 with WSU!!!' - uh, yeah, we should beat them every year and when we don't it's a colossal failure.

You made me look it up: 7-4-1 against Don James.

You're just mad it's not 1991 anymore, and you're mad that you're fat. So it's a coping mechanism. I get it. Most of your narratives about the sport are clearly stuck in 80s. Underachieving (Donahue) or overachieving (Don James) is indicative of the coach, not the program. It actually gives me hope about the programs potential, Donahue & Tolardo made 5 rosebowls. An even slightly above average coach is capable of more in my opinion.

Last Rose Bowl Season: UW 2000 UCLA 1998

Obviously UCLA didn't reach the depths of UW since then, but UCLA has been pretty damn bad since their last Rose Bowl. Both programs suck.

No doubt, but that's not the question. It's why they've sucked. Both programs have underachieved because they have made horrible coaching hires - Dorrell Gilby Ty Neu Sark. Fudge! (No swear bored).

They haven't sucked because the program is inherently predisposed to underacheive.

I guess you could say maybe both our schools administrations are predisposed to making bad decisions and being pussys which leads to underachieving. I could see the merit in that argument, but that's not DDYs argument.

Dennis_DeYoung said:

UCLA has 1 National Championship and has had a billion 25 star recruits and is in Beverly Hills.

Cal has 5 Nattys. Sleeping Giant quite honestly.

DennisDeYoungFS (f stands for fat).

And I don't think Terry Donahue was an underachiever. Every UCLA coach since him, no question. But Donahue was a damn good coach.