Oregon Ducks 2016 Football Schedule At A Glance

The Aggies are SECSECSEC tuff, donchaknow

CokeGreaterThanPepsi said:

Mosster47 said:

Oregon with Prukop and the army of scholarship QB's not named Lockie on the roster next year the Ducks are playoff bound.

Plus, Mike Riley gets to lose to Oregon again. They ruined his career in Corvallis and they can be the early death nail in Lincoln.

Should be exciting. I'm especially excited for all of the Doog; "I think we've got them this year" nonsense before Oregon wins number 13 in a row with ease.

Christ.

Not one Oregon fan knew who Prukop was 2 months weeks ago. Get off his sack.

at SC, Furd, and at Utah will be tough

I can't wait to experience Nebraska classy first hand.

Mosster47 said:

ntxduck said:

doogsinparadise said:

UC Davis? Such fag, Oregon.

LOL.

@Nebraska, UVA, UC Davis>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Idaho, Rutgers, Portland State

That being said, Moss is forgetting that Oregon's D will still be awful next year. Unless the Ducks score 40+ every game, they will drop a few.

Oregon's D was awful in 2014. Oregon's D was awful in 2015. Oregon's D will be awful in 2016.

What was the only that stopped Oregon in those three seasons? Not having a healthy QB for a few weeks.

The Duck will drop one somewhere next year. Again, if it's not Stanford they are playoff bound.

And what was the only thing that stopped Oregon from going 4-8?

Prukop better be pretty good or Oregon is in trouble.

Mosster declaring Oregon playoff bound all but wraps up a special 8-5 season for them.

Stick to the whole guitar schtick. Your track record clearly shows football isn't quite your thing.

LOL

Winners win the games that matter.

Runner-ups and Alamo Bowls don't make Oregon a winner.

Considering the loaded Pac 12 N, that's a top 25 schedule and that's all ya need to get to a playoff.

Of course they will lose 3 or 4 games and by November that dream will be distant mammory,

But still.

Mosster47 said:

MakaDawg said:

LOL

Winners win the games that matter.

Runner-ups and Alamo Bowls don't make Oregon a winner.

In the last ten years Oregon and Alabama are tied for the most wins.

Do you have a better definition of winning fuck-O? Is it your half trophy and made up banner from the olden days?

LOL

Like I said, winners win the games that matter. Alabama has done that. Ohio State has done that. Oregon? Not so much.

And, I'm sorry- Did I bring Washington into the discussion? No. They're not winners either, and I was a grunting, shitting, combative "fuck-O" (!!!!!!) of an infant when the Huskies won their Natty (or half a natty- whatever makes you feel better). I don't cling to that raft. You clearly do though.

But you go ahead and hang your hat on the fact that Oregon has won the same amount of games as Alabama in a decade. I guess Oregon is a winner like Alabama by that logic. Or are we breaking it down into tiers? Participation trophies?

sarktastic said:

Mosster47 said:

MakaDawg said:

LOL

Winners win the games that matter.

Runner-ups and Alamo Bowls don't make Oregon a winner.

In the last ten years Oregon and Alabama are tied for the most wins.

Do you have a better definition of winning fuck-O? Is it your half trophy and made up banner from the olden days?

How is the trophy count competition going?

Bearcat47FS would piss all over himself for half a natty.

MakaDawg said:

LOL

Winners win the games that matter.

Runner-ups and Alamo Bowls don't make Oregon a winner.

Do Rose Bowls no longer count now that Oregon wins them for fun?

I Remember when they used to Really, really, really count around here.

Larry Coker, 1, UW 1/2