Just Passing Along What I'm Hearing (NERD EDITION)

CokeGreaterThanPepsi said:

dnc said:

FPI is shit and you're all fags

If you notice the tag, I specifically said, "Bitch don't kill my vibe".... ASSHOLE

Tags are for fags " "

dnc said:

Tequilla said:

RoadDawg55 said:

Damn. Can't lie, I'm surprised.

I'm not surprised that you're surprised since you are the ultimate nega doog.

You have to be carrying a lot of scar tissue and pessimism to not see where this team has a chance to be really good next year.

If you're not carrying a lot of scar tissue at this point you either a) haven't been a UW fan for the past 15 years or b) you're too stupid to realize how this program has been raped year after year by it's own malicious administrative incompetence.

I agree there are some reasons to be optimistic. But we suck until we don't. Right now we suck.

Or c) I'm looking at this objectively and see the pieces in place.

I said going back to last year that I saw a lot of similarities between 2012-2013 TCU and 2014-2015 UW.

I expect a very sizable breakout in the 2016 season.

Tequilla said:

PurpleJ said:

I always found it interesting how metrics said we had a GREAT defense last year. Well, we still went 7-6 so that right there is an argument that the coach sucks and isn't who we thought.

If you are holding teams to 18-19 points a game in today's world of college football, you are going to win a lot of football games.

We lost a number of close games last year due to youth on offense, lack of outside playmakers on offense, and Smith sucking for large portions of the season.

The defense wasn't the problem.

We had a good defense last year. I've admitted it. Not great. Good. I started trolling Chest and a few others last year when they told me that advanced metrics said our defense was GREAT after we lost at home to Cal.

The point is that if you can't do better than 4-5 in conference with that defense, you might have the wrong coach.

Tequilla said:

PurpleJ said:

I'm calling 8-5 (4-5). PROVE me wrong.

LIPO ... you'll be proven wrong barring a major injury to Browning.

Okay. I hope they prove me wrong. It will be interesting either way. That's why we play the games.

PurpleJ said:

Tequilla said:

PurpleJ said:

I always found it interesting how metrics said we had a GREAT defense last year. Well, we still went 7-6 so that right there is an argument that the coach sucks and isn't who we thought.

If you are holding teams to 18-19 points a game in today's world of college football, you are going to win a lot of football games.

We lost a number of close games last year due to youth on offense, lack of outside playmakers on offense, and Smith sucking for large portions of the season.

The defense wasn't the problem.

We had a good defense last year. I've admitted it. Not great. Good. I started trolling Chest and a few others last year when they told me that advanced metrics said our defense was GREAT after we lost at home to Cal.

The point is that if you can't do better than 4-5 in conference with that defense, you might have the wrong coach.

Mostly. You actually started trolling at halftime in the Cal game thread response to everyone who said how lucky we were that our defense showed up in the first half since our offense tried to put us down by 50.